ML20148B036

Answers to Applicants First Set of Interrogatories & to NRC Interrogatories & Request for Documents.Presents Concerns Re FBI Investigation & Commissioner Bradford Remarks on Intervention.Supporting Documents & Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20148B036
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	12/26/1979
From:	Sinkin L Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Power, INC.
To:	HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO.
References
NUDOCS 8001160677
Download: ML20148B036 (70)

Text

..

i -

ij

,j on.o cam *D" .  ;;

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA i~' '4 I' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD g0 gvg =

In the Matter of c([

HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER Docket Nos. 50-498 y COMPANY, ET. AL. 50-499 %.s 4". ,

6 - '

(South Texas Project $

Y .

Units 1 and 2) { ']

ANSWERS OF CITIZENS CONCERNED ABOUT NUCLEAR POWER, INC. TO FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES FROM HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER ,.

COMPANY, ET. AL., APPLICANTS AND TO NRC STAFF INTERROGATORIES 4 AND REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS 3 Preface L

-2 On Sunday, December 16, 1979 Citizens Concerned About J Nuclear Power, Inc. (CCANP) received a bundle of documents .'

pertaining to various contentions previously submitted. The , ;{*

analysis of these documents in an effort to understand their P import delayed these answers beyond December 21, 1979. CCANP  ; !,

has done its best to provide these answers as promptly as possible. On December 21, 1979 CCANP notified Ms. Marjorie i

.( i Rothchild at the NRC and the office of Mr. Melbert Schwarz "c that the answers would be delayed. j Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Power, Inc. (CCANP) S received interrogatories from both the Applicants and the  : i Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff. Each set of interrogato- - O ries requests essentially the same information. Therefore, 1 CCANP submits the following answers to both sets of interro-gatories.

l The numbering of answers conforms to the numbering of ,f the interrogatories submitted by Applicants. Should the Nu. s clear Regulatory Commission staff find this procedure unac- j ceptable and so inform CCANP, CCANP will resubmit answers in 5 conformance with the form of the NRC interrogatories. t Before answering the interrogatories, CCANP presents the $

following conerns.

CCANP is disturbed by recent developments which call .

'j into question the entire intervention process in which CCANP  ; .

is now engaged, including the answering of these interrogato- -

ries. .

First of all, CCANP received a copy of Southwest Energy _(

and Utility Watch; November, 1979; Vol.4, No. 11 attached i hereto as Exhibit A. In this document, the following remarks  ;

appear on page 3:  !

The essential element, it seems to me, in any l regulatory system that reassures more than it regulates 1 is that it have an immense capacity for self-delusion. I Let me describe s o m,e of the elements of that capacity i -e and leave it to you to determine whether they look j familiar.  :  ?

First, the agency's role must be heavily reactive  ! I and defined largely in terms of cases brought to it by those whom it regulates. ]3 -i'

. Second, the agency's budget must be a tiny fraction (less than one percent) of the gross revenues of those whom it regulates. l Third, regulation should be on an ' audit' basis,

examining only a small fraction of the total number of l accounts or plant designs or operating practices of the .,

regulated entities.  : 4 N

y hh\ _

8001160 [ t

Fourth, the system should deal with its critics more of less the way the tar baby dealt with B'rer Rabbit. It

' should have have an almost infinite capacity for repres-sive tolerance, the extending of exquisite procedural courtesy to participants who are never, in fact, allowed to get their hands on anything vital.

Fifth, almost a corollary of the preceding point, intervenor funding of any substantial sort is to be

, avoided like the plague. Discovery and cross-examination must, of course, be allowed on some occasions, but the "

occasions can be limited and the examining board must be constantly reminded of the need to keep the issues - .

narrowly defined and the proceedings moving along. ).

Sixth, the enforcement system must be a relatively L.

benign one with only the most distant possibility of a g truly severe penalty. ,e Seventh, though it is not essential, it is very d helpful to have the system reenforced by courts which p

' defer copiously to agency expertise in the face of F challenges from citizens groups.' 3 The disturbing part of these remarks is that the person 3

a A. Bradford, United States (

Quoted is Commissioner Peter Nuclear Regulatory Commission. We hope that in the instance

. 7 of this licensing hearing CCANP is not receiving " repressive t tolerance".sbut rather that our ef forts to exp_ose the collapse 8 of the qbatity assurance program at the South Texas Nuclear d Project are respected as a contribution to the protection'of the public interest.

These remarks are not intended by CCANP to offend the members of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board or the staff ,

of the NRC. CCANP trusts that our being disturbed by these ' '

remarks is understandable considering their source.

i i

' Secondly, CCANP cooperated in an investigation conducted  ;  ;

by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. CCANP s understanding ,

is that this investigation was rather extensive, involving as j c many as nine agents in the field. Newspaper articles attached 1 as Exhibit B give some particulars of this investigation. i CCANP takes note that on November 12, 1979, Mr. Lanny '

Sinkin, on behalf of CCANP and Citizens for Equitable Utilities *

(CEU) filed a supplement to the First Set of Interrogatories of CCANP and CEU which requested from the Nuclear Regulatory '

Commission'(NRC) "to provide all documents developed as a result of the investigations of the South Texas Nuclear ,

Project carried out by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, delivered to United States Attorney Anthony Canales, and subsequently turned over to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission *.

This request was also submitted pursuant to the Freedom of '

Information Act.

The Freedom of Information Act provides ten (10) days for a response to a request submitted pursuant to the act. On December 13, 1979, thirty (30) days after the request was _,

8 submitted, Mr. Lanny Sinpin received the first response from 7 the NRC. This response took the form of a telephone call from 1.l Ms. Carol Ann Reed of the NRC. Ms. Reed informed Mr. Sinkin 1

. that the NRC was aware that the time had lapsed for a response to the request, that the person working on the request had ,,

left the employ of the NRC, that the request was being ,

\

forwarded to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for response, ' I and that a letter was being sent to Mr. Sinkin from the NRC ,

regarding the request. As of December 21, 1979, Mr. Sinkin l had not received CCANP said letter.

had hoped to have the documents from what CCANP knows to have been an extensive and lengthy investigation by Fl

\

l n

! r

.I t Page 2 90026159r 1

s ~ ,

f j l O l

l

.I a

4 4

i the Federal Bureau of Investigation available prior to a n-swering these interrogatories as CCANP believes this investi-gation developed information supporting various contentions 2 submitted by CCANP. Unfortunately, due to no fault on the ,

part of CCANP, these documents are not avialable to CCANP in answering these interrogatories.

As Applicant's attorney, Mr. Robert H. Culp, submitted a similar Freedom of Information Act request to the NRC on November 30, 1979, the Applicant presumably will receive the i ',j ,

information when CCANP does. .4 Additionally, CCANP is given to understand that a four member team from the NRC is currently at the construction }] 4 site conducting an investigation which has already consumed ;J more than three weeks. CCANP awaits the results of this inves- y tigation as CCANP is further given to understand that the @

contentions of CCANP in part prompted the investigation. '1 .

Returning to the FBI investigation, CCANP initiated its ;9 own investigation to determine why the United States Attorney d decided not to present his findings to a federal grand jury rather than turning the investigation results over to the NRC.

To summarize the results of CCANP's investigation, CCANP ))

1' believes the FBI, among other things, found extensive evidence u it of false documentation of cadweld inspections. In discussions '1 with the NRC, however, the FBI was told that the inspection  : W, of cadwelds was part of the quality assurance program submitted ji by Brown and Root to the NRC prior to construction and accepted d; by the NRC as in compliance with the provisions of 10 CFR, tl Part 50, but that cadweld inspection inspection was not 4 required by the NRC. If it were shown, then, that personneT jl at the South Texas Nuclear Project f alsified documents related to cadweld inspections, these falsifications would not be a D violation of federal laws prohibiting the forging of official documents submitted to the federal government. The NRC told

[4 ;

=

the FBI that Brown and Root could submit a letter to the NRC j saying they no longer planned to inspect cadwelds and the J NRC would then no longer require cadweld inspection. Further, j; the FBI was led to believe that these assertions on the part 4, of the hRC would be the position of the NRC in any legal 3 proceeding resulting from the FBI investigation. Given this W position on the part of the NRC, the FBI turned their findings - ),

over to the NRC rather than presenting them to a federal 11 grand jury. 0 10 CFR 50.110 titled " Violations" states: iy An injunction or other court order may be obtained a prohibiting any violation of any provision of the d, l Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or Title !! l of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, or any ,

regulation or order issued thereunder. A court order < l may be obtained for the payment of a civil penalty l imposed pursuant to section 234 of the Act for .

violation of section 52, 57, 62, 63, 81, 101, 103, 104, 107, or 109 of the Act, or section 206 of the -

. l Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, or any rule, regulation, or $rder issued thereunder, or Jan term, 1 condition, or lfwitation of am license issued there-under, or Tor any violaTjon for which a license may be revoked under section 186 of the Act. Any person who willfully violates gan provision of Tte r l' Act or Q regulation g order issued thereundU $ [

s W gut 1ty of a crime and, upon conviction, uma be

'j punished _by71ne or imprisonment or both, as provided

{

l by 1,aw." (emphasis added)

! NRC personnel seem to have interpreted a quality assurance program submitted by Applicants and accepted by the NRC as a =

requirement of the construction license as not being a term, i  ;

j i

@026u0

} Page 3

I.

t L4 condition, limitation, or regulation pursuant to 10 CFRQ50.110.

' It is not clear from CCANP's investigation what basis '

the NRC personnel had f or communicating the above interpreta-tion to the FBI. CCANP notes that 10 CFRj50.3 titled " Inter- -

pretations" states:

"Except as specifically authorized by the Commission in writing, no interpretation of the meaning of the vl

, regulations in this part by any of ficer or employee 9l of the Commission other than a written interpretation ' I by the General Counsel will be recognized to be l binding upon the Commission." 4 CCANP is unaware of any such authorized interpretation by the  ; 'g l Commission or of any opinion in this regard by the General ei Counsel of the NRC which would justify the position taken by a NRC personnel in response to the findings of the FBI. j Furthermore, CCANP is at a loss to understand the position- y, of the NRC. If a quality assurance program is accepted by , AI the NRC under 10 CFR, Part 50, CCANP would assume that com- 4l pliance with that program would then be required by federal I law and that the sanctions of federal law would be applied _ t for willful and knowing violations of the accepted program.

Additionally, the NRC assertion that inspection of cadwelds

- mechanical splices of reinforcing bars in critical areas

':lj .l of the nuclear plant - is not required raises a serious '

l question as to just what the NRC believes quality assurance I under 10 CFR, Part 50 really means. A Given the position of the NRC in regard to enforcement of 10 CFR, Part 50, the only true enforcement available is /1

~l the denial of an operating license for failure to effectively i' implement a quality assurance program. Not to deny the license would be to make a mockery of " quality assurance". Such a 5 denial of license is precisely what CCANP will ask of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. * ,

. If such a denial is warranted for extensive, pervasive, and willful violations of 10 CFR, Part 50 and if the cur' rent  %

NRC investigations confirm such violations, as have past NRC 4!

investigations of this plant, CCANP would hope the NRC would gI issue a stop work order so the Applicants and their rate '

payers will not continue to spend money on a power plant whose license to deliver power may well be denied. .

In answering questions related to documents, CCANP notes that Applicants interrogatories usually requested documents w "other than communication between Applicants and the Nuclear y Regulatory Commission". CCANP assumes that the Atomic and k Safety and Licensing Board will be reviewing the communications between Applicant and the NRC as there are numerous investiga- u tions of allegations related to almost all CCANP contentions.

Finally, the rules of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission do not provide job security for personnel at a nuclear plant _

construction site during the period of construction. Speci-fically, the Nuclear Re ulatory Commission cannot prevent ]i the firing of personnel iving adverse information about the jg construction of the plan and cannot regain the job of any 1 e person fired under such conditions. As a result, the efforts j "

of CCANP to secure corroboration of information contained in j?

these answers has been hampered by a climate of fear at the i

, construction site. Persons believed to have knowledge of  !

e value to these proceedings are reluctant to provide such information for fear of losing their job. Mr. Karl Seyfrit, Regional Director of the NRC specifically recognized this pro-

.l 1 blem in an interview broadcast by CBS News on their October [1 Magazine program aired Thursday, October 4,1979. A transcript b).

, a.

I 9602016i Page 4 1

i l- "

t ' '

s. i *

.{ .

e.

',,.k.  !

s: r ';

of this broadcast is attached heretdas Exhibit C. Mr. Seyf rit's

'p' rot ect i on for inspectors contribution regarding lack of (

begins on page 18. ,'

!. I f , .

j D e f i n i t 'i o n s

, In responding to interrogat'o' ries on Contentions 1 and 2, i CCANP's only witness is Mr. Daniel E. Swayze whose address is Route 3 Box 5, Port Lavaca, Texas 77979. Mr. Swayze's i current employment is unknown. Mr.. Swayze was employed by 4 Brown and Root as a Quality Control Inspector /Sub-Contract j CoorJinator from December, 1975 to June, 1976; as a Quality .i Control Inspector from June, 197,6 to January, 1977; and as a  ?

Senior Quality Control Civil Inspector / Coordinator from f January, 1977 to September, 1977. Hereinafter, all references to "Mr. Swayze" relate to the a,bove described Mr. Daniel E.

Swayze. ,  ;

II. g Withholding of Documents jl CCANP is withholding from 'these answers documents sup- f<

porting CCANP's contention regarding falsification of cadweld records. '

If the NRC does not require inspection of cadwelds, the j contentions related thereto may need no further elaboration i than what is provided herein unless the NRC intends to consider I violations of the accepted quality a'ssurance program as grounds i for denying the operating license.

More importantly, CCANP believes the documents in CCANP's

(

possession provide a means by 'w h'i c h some cadweld records f )

previously f alsified can be identified. The rules provide CCANP can attempt to examine these records through discovery but i) 3 i

that the Applicants are allowed thirty days to respond to such a request.

Since CCANP's contention wduid' be that these records I were knowingly and willfully created, corrected, or completed k long af ter the event documented took place, CCANP is concerned

• that identifying these records with any specificity or reveal- )

ing the method by which CCANP believes these documents can i be identified will lead to further alteration or destruction .

of the falsified records. '?  !

CCAMP is willing to release its information if the integrity of t h e ' r e c o r d s i n t h e;'vla'ul t can be assured. CCANP #l proposes that CCANP reveal i t s 'i n'f o'rma t i o n t o t h e NRC staff with the understanding that the *NRC will take protective possession of any vault records identified pursuant to CCANP's information, hold these records for the thirty days provided 4 for Applicants to express objectives to their release, and then t

release these records to CCANP if the Applicants do not 2 ,

express accepted objecti ns.  ; "

CCANP will continue to withhold its information until , 4 advised of the acceptabi ity of CCANP's suggested procedure Tl

. for dealing with this information.  ;

!y'

!!!. . lq ,

i Answers 1.

l

The following answers of Citizens Concerned About Nuclear  :

Power, Inc. (CCANP) to the First' Set of Interrogatories f rom l Houston Lighting and Power Compan,y,,et. al Applicants and to  ! -

/,  ;

90026Q2 l, 3

Page 5 g-l t

(

l i

.L ,

}

[

-l N 4

kl

.1

?!

'l l

NRC Staff Interrogatories is a good faith effort to provide ,!

complete information regarding the contentions of Citizens 'l Concerned About Nuclear Power to the Applicants for the l

! operating license for the South Texas Nuclear Project. Units >l 4 1 and 2.

CONTENTION 1

1. CCANP relies on no other documents than communications between Applicants and the NRC to support its assertion that - i the South Texas Nuclear Project Unit 2 Mechanical Electrical 4 Auxiliary Building is being constructed one foot short on .

the east side of the building.  :.

2. The construction error resulted from survey calculations which were not properly checked by the Field Engineering g Supervision. Such failure to check survey calculations is L considered to f all under the provisions of 10 CFR Part 50, d Appendix B,Section X in that inspection of an activity ,

affecting quality was not executed.

f

3. The only communications between Applicant and the NRC in CCANP's possession which support the assertion that because of " field construction error ... extensive voids exist in the concrete wall enclosing the STP containment building"  ! *;

are the November 20, 1978; July 16, 1979; and August 15, 1979 Ji reports by Applicants to the NRC. W' Additionally, CCANP has the transcript of the December }

14, 1978 meeting of the City Council of San Antonio wherein &

Mr. Jack Spruce and Mr. Jesse Poston of the City Public Service Board of San Antonio discusses the voids. Mr. Spruce's [ -

testimony related to voids begins on page 15 and continues on page 16. The pages containing Mr. Spruce's testimony are f

, attached hereto as Exhibit D. Mr. Poston's testimony on voids I begins on page 19 and continues on page 20. The pages containing *'

Mr. Poston's testimony are attached hereto as Exhibit E. While i the voids referenced in the communications between Applicants and the NRC in the reports noted above in this answer refer 4

~

to voids in the eighth lift of Unit 1 the voids under discussion before the City Council on December 14, 1978 were  !

the voids in the fifteenth lift of Unit 1. CCANP has alsc A been told that voids have been found in other parts of the  :

plant, but the confirmation of these voids is not currently '4 in CCANP's possession. -1 The CBS television broadcast transcript (Exhibit C) -

contains further confirmation of the existence of voids ,

beginning on page 21 of the transcipt.

In addition to documents, CCANP relies on conversations with Mr. Swayze. As developed from those conversations, CCANP's understanding of the inspection process is that there -

is no uniform, continuous process of testing for voids. Usual- y ly, voids are detected by the presence of a surface void .i visible to an inspector When such a void is found, the design engineering staff decides to what extent that pour 1 needs to be tested for vo ds which do not show on the surf ace. g

4. The ' field construction error" referred to in CCANP's contention is the improper pouring of concrete. The most

.i ?

, specific example is given in Mr. Poston's testimony noted in i

answer 3 above and attached as Exhibit E, In that testimony, j Mr. Poston said: -

"If you would permit me I would like to give one l

, little thirty second human interest story on these j voids that have gotten so much attention. When we '

visited the sites, last time we went up a hundred 1

4 A

[

Pagep026b 9 3 i

t

i I.i I i

I and some odd feet up on the scaf fold and viewed this pour where these honeycombing occurances took place.

I asked the construction manager on the entire project, '

~g how did this happen, why was this pour allowed to proceed. He explained that he had two concrete pumps and one had broken down and so he continued with the other one measuring the slump constantly but feeling that he could get the concrete through the f orms Mr.

Spruce was talking about. But as it turned out he wasn't able to completely fill the voids of the form, j and so he got these honeycombing. I said 'well, what - -

who is this fellow.' He said, 'he is my best concrete 5 4 man, he's been with Brown and Root 14 years and he's  ; ,

FuTit 2 other nuclear power plants for me and several fossil plants.' I said 'What did you do with him?' 'I .

fired hin, yesterday.'" (emphasis added) q

5. The construction errors noted in 4 above are a violation Il of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B. Sections I, IX, and X. The {

repeated discovery of surface voids and subsequent discovery  ;

of hidden voids demonstrates the "need for special controls, j processes, test equipment, tools, and skills to attain the .

I required quality, and the need for verification of quality by inspection and test." (Section I) Such special controls should include " nondestructive testing ... controlled and accomplished ,

by qualified personnel using qualified procedures in accordance with arplicable codes, standards, specifications, criteria, l ',

and other special requirements." (Section IX) As there is no j '.

uniform, continuous inspection process for the location of hidden voids, there is an absence of a testing program "to assure that all testing required to demonstrate that structures

...will perform satisf actorily in service ...." (Section XI).

The large number of voids discovered to date suggests i strongly that a uniform, continuous process of testing for

, hidden volds would have uncovered other voids and that more [

extensive testing for voids was required than was actually a conducted. The presence of voids is a f ailure to comply with (

the design specifications for concrete work and raises doubts as to the structural integrity of the buildings, i >

6. Investigation by Mssrs. R. E. Hall and A. B. Rosenberg of 1 the N9C staff during the period September 11, 1978 through j September 14,1978 (NRC report 78-15) confirmed the allegation #

that: "Cadwell location field sketch No. FSQ 030 had been  ;

lost and was no longer available."

7. see 6 above

8. 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B.Section VI provides that

" Measures shall be established to control the issuance of documents ...." The loss of a document is a breakdown in the  ;

control of issuance of that document.Section XVII providos _

that " Sufficient records shall be maintained to furnish '

evidence of activities affecting quality."Section XVII fur-ther provides that "Recogds shall be identifiable and retrie-vable." The location field sketch shows the location of the

)

i

.; particular cadwelds. If the sketch is lost it would be impos- I

l sible to relocate the cadweld to verify the quality of the j l work done on the cadweld. A lost document is, of course, not i g " retrievable".

9. The only document currently in CCANP's possession to l support the contention that " membrane seals in the containment structure" have been " damaged" is a newspaper article from I(

the October 6,1979 Houston Post written by Mr. Harold Scarlett.

]: i 1

i

.i 1

1 x ;1

'1  :

pa,e 7 90026164 a o

i.

l .

I i.i

% . 1 s .

A copy of this article is attached ~ as Exhibit F. In this i

. articleMr. Ka rl Seyfrit, identified 'above, raises the possibility that membrane inspections were not properly con-i ducted on the Unit I reactor building and the Units 1 and 2 fuel handling buildings.

CCANP also relies upon conversations with Mr. Swayze for this contention. ,

10. The membrane seals or waterproof membranes are installed on the exterior vertical surfaces of buildings from the seal  ;

slab to the reglet. The ground water level at the site after a constrw:* ion is estimated to be about five feet below ground t level. The aree is kept dry during construction through the -

use of de-watering wells. k.

Construction of walls below ground in the Unit I contain-ment building, the Unit 1 fuel handling building, the Unit 1 f Q

mechanical electrical auxiliary building, and the Units 1 and P 2 fuel handling buildings all required waterproof membranes to be placed on the exterior vertical surfaces from the seal slab to the reglet. These walls were constructed using taper .

ties rather than break-back ties. The difference is that I after a wall is poured with a taper tie, the tie, or metal l reinforcing bar, is removed from the wall leaving a hole. . I After a wall is poured with a break-back tie, the ends of the tie are broken off and the reinforcing bar is lef t in the wall.

Since taper ties were used in the walls of the building i referred to above, the removal of these ties left hundreds of holes in the wall, each hole being approximately two (2) '

inches in diameter and running completely through the wall. 3 The use of taper ties 'in this type of construction is believed by CCANP to be a violation of standard construction practices.

When the holes were discovered, the design engineer or-

-( -*

dered all the holes to be filled. (See Exhibit F) To date to the best of our knowledge all of these holes have not been l

filled, a few of the holes were partially filled.

On one occasion, the exact date of which he does not ,

recall, Mr. Swayze found workmen filling one of these holes i y to a' depth of only two or.three inches, the hole being two to 1 three feet in length. Furthermore, Mr. Swayze found that the '_ .

_ grout being used was mixed with impure sand containing dirt  !:'

and crumbled under his fingernail. The grout is supposed to  : ,

withstand significant pounds per square inch of pressure, the ' '

exact level of which CCANP does not know. l1 Once Mr. Swayze discovered the partial filling of holes. .i -

he and another inspector, believed to be Mr. Sam Horton, used  ;

blunt steel rods to test the filling of other holes. The rod '

was slid gently down the taper tie hole to check for grout at l the other end. On at least one occasion, there was no grout at the other end and the rod passed through the waterproof ,

membrane. Water began to enter the building through the hole. ,

A second part of this contention if that on at least _.

one occasion Mr. Swayze learned that waterproof membranes ,

were put on at night and never inspected. The area of these -j membranes was backfilled before any inspection could take a place. Mr. Swayze attempted to have the back fill removed 50 i

. that inspection could take place but this request was refused j by persons believed to be Mr. Tom Schraeder and Mr. Tom Warnick.

l3

11. The acts set forth in answer 10 are a violation of 10 CFR i Part 50, Appendix 8 Sections I, II, 111, V, X, XV, XVI, and i XVII. Specifically,Section I states: "The quality assurance I functions are those of (a) assuring that an appropriate  !

quality assurance program is established and effectively executed and (b) verifying, such as by checking, auditing, ,

. t

{

f

~

~

9som 65

' l 9

i J

and inspection, that ~ activities affecting the safety-related functions have been' correctly performed." The absence of

.I inspections att night of the waterproof membranes and their subsequent covering with backfill before inspection could take place is a violation of both functions set forth in Section I.

Section !! states: "The quality assurance program shall provide control over activities affecting the quality of the p identified structures, systems, and components, to an extent y consistent with their importance to safety. Activities affec-ting quality shall be accomplished under suitably controlled conditions." Absence of inspections at night, the subsequent

covering of the membranes prior to inspection, and the use '

of taper ties show an absence of control over activities ,

affecting quality and that the installation of the membranes was not carried out under suitably controlled conditions. 4 Section III states: " Measures shall also be established for the selection and review of suitability of application of :5 materiais, parts, equipment, and processes that are essential J to the safety-related functions of the structures, systems A and couponents." The selection of taper ties instead of break- @

back ties was obviously unsuitable. Had there been any review { t of this selection, the unsuitability of such ties would have i l been equally obvious. We therefore assume that no such review ,'

tock place. The poor selection and the absence of review violete Section III. y

'l m Section V states: " Instructions, procedures, or drawings shall include appropriate quantitative or qualitative accep- I tance criteria for determining that important activities

• have been satisf actorily accomplished." Either (1) there was - '

a procedure which set forth that the use of taper ties in a below grade construction was qualitatively acceptable or (2) [

there was an absence of any procedure setting forth what type of ties were acceptable in below grade construction or 1 ,

(3) there was a procedure which set forth that the use of '

break-back ties in below grade construction was acceptable.  !

In case (1), the procedure was obviously inappropriate as 4 taper ties leave holes and therefore Section V was violated. 3 In case (2), the absence of a procedure violatesSection V. I 3

In case (3), the use of taper ties violated the criteria f established under Section V. , g Section X states: "A program for inspection of activities y affecting quality shall be " established and executed by and 1 for the organization perf orming the activity to verify con- j *  ;

formance with the documented instructions, procedures, and j drawings for accomplishing the activity." The absence of inspections at night and the subsequent back filling prior to

j r 'l inspection is a violation of Section X. I Section XV states

" Measures shall be established to

{1 l

control materials, parts, or components which do not conform s to requirements in order to prevent their inadvertent use or installation." The use of taper ties is not in conformance - *

?'

with standard construction practice for below grade walls. l Apparently, there were tot measures established to control 1 -!

the use of such materials bnd therefore Section XV was violated. " tl Section XVI states: " Measures shall be established to 3 1

assure that conditions adverse to quality, such as failures, malfunctions, deviations, defective material and equipment, 9l j '

and non-conformances are promptly identified and corrected." , ,1 s The holes were first reported to the NRO in December 1977 '

fl

'l .

according to Mr. Seyfrit (See Exhibit F). Tw'o years later, the holes are still not filled. The non-conf ormance has not

' .: 1

! been promptly corrected and therefore Section XV has been }j violated.

t 1 i

i

. 1 i

90026166 1, Page 9 l

1 J

l 1 1 .

f Section XVII itates: " Sufficient records shall be main-tained to furnish evidence of activities affecting quality."

CCANP assumes and intends to prove through discovery that the absence of inspection at night on the installation of the waterproof membranes and the back filling prior to in-spection produces an absence of inspection records which is a violation of Section XVII.

Appitcants face four serious problems in any attempt to 4 correct the effects of using taper ties and the absence.of inspections at night. First of all, since the back fill is in place. the filling of the holes will have to be done f rom the inside only. There will be no method for assuring that ,

the grout has completely filled the hole.  ;

Second, to pack the grout will require pressure be 1 applied to the grout from the inside. That pressure will be j transmitted to the waterproof membrane and could cause a f rupture of the membrane.  ?

Third, with the back fill in place, there is no method  :

for inspecting the waterproof membranes to determine if they '

are damaged by the corrective action.

Fourth, with the back fill in place, there is no method  ?

for inspection to assure the waterproof membranes for which no inspection records exist are actually in place.

The holes in the walls pose serious safety-related '

threats. There is the possibility of intrusion of water into buildings housing electrical equipment critical to the proper operation of the plant. Such intrusion could short out the equipment causing failures with safety implications. i Similarly, if waterproof membranes were left off of exterior walls, water could move through the concrete and into the buildings housing electrical equipment.

An accident within the plant could produce conditions of high pressure and radioactivity. The pressure would force

• radioactivity through the holes, spreading it through areas t adjacent to the holes. Mr. Seyf rit's _ contention in the article >

attached as Exhibit F that "not much radiation would get {

through the hole" is perhaps correct if there were only one i hole. When there are hundreds of holes with a diameter of {'

approximately two (2) inches, high pressures could force substantial amounts of radioactivity out of the building and  ;

into adjacent areas. j

12. The " equipment door" in question is a round hole in the reactor containment building. Perhaps it is more commonly referred to as an equipment hatch. The concrete work around this hole was poured in two or three tiers.

This is as complete a description of the hatch as we have developed based on our conversations with'Mr. Swayze. If this description is insufficient, we will attempt to provide '

a more precise description. .

13. The " equipment door' in question is in Unit I reactor 1 containment building. ,

j 14.Thereisnodocumentktionthat we know of regarding the ..]

• missing steel reinforcement bars. Mr. Swayze states that the v Inspectors who discovered the missing bars were intimidated  ;

into not reporting the omission. As the omission was not t reported, we do not expect there to be any documentation. Mr.  !

s Swayze further states that this is not an isolated instance of failure by inspectors to report steel reinforcing bars i being left out. Intimidation of inspectors produced other such instances.

15. The steel reinforcing bars left out around the equipment hatch are a violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix D, Sections i

I

. 90026\b7 -

Page 10 =l r . $

i 1

1 E l l i t  ; ,

.l '

l I, II, !!!, X, XVI, and XVII. -

~ Specifically, the intimidation of inspectors into not ."

reporting steel left out is not part of "an appropriate quality assurance program" being " established and effectively executed" and therefore violatesSection I.

Intimidation of inspectors prevents a " quality assurance program" providing " control over activities affecting the j quality of the identified structures ...." and therefore ^; j ,

violates Section !!. l Leaving out steel reinforcing bars is not a " procedure"  ; I for correctly translating " applicable regulatory requirements 4 and the design basis" and therefore violates Section !!!. - 3 Intimidation of inspectors into not reporting steel left 4 out is not part of executing "a program for inspection" and 1 therefore violatesSection X. J Intimidation of inspectors into not reporting steel left  ;

out means that deficiencies are not reported and therefore ,

cannot be corrected in compliance with Section XVI. l Inspectors intimidated into not writing deficiency re-  ?

ports cannot be keeping " sufficient records ... to furnish ',

evidence of activities affecting quality" in compliance with <

Section XVII.

(l 1

16. In answering this interrogatory, CCANP will break down its i answer into nine (9) dif ferent parts, all relating to cadwelds.

To avoid any difficulty ir referencing back to answers to 16, the answers to interrogator) 18 explaining how each item ,

constitutes a violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, will i i be answered for each item as it is presented.

l In answering this interrogatory, CCANP uses documents which came to CCAMP from persons unknown who apparently

{j I

previously worked or currently work at the construction site 'l of the South Texas Nuclear Project. CCANP believes these !j

. documents to be authentic.

Many of the documents are field notes of cadwell inspec-tors. Often the findings of the field inspectors were

)3 '

al transferred to a form titled " Brown and Root Quality Assurance l Department Examination Check". This latter document was then placed in the document vault and the field notes on which the f' i

Examination Check was based were thrown away. CCANP considers l it fortunate the attached copies of field notes are still  ?,

avialable as they show a disturbing pattern elaborated below. ',

, Mr. Swayze has assisted us in understanding what the 1 documents contain.

(1) For a period of time which copies of documents attached as Exhibit G show to have been at least from November 10, 1978 to November 14, 1978, cadwelds were shot with staggered witness marks, the marks placed on the steel reinforcing bars prior to shooting the cadweld and used to determine that the sleeve into which the bars are inserted is properly centered _

after the weld is completed. j Exhibit G-1 is a Brown and Root, Inc. Quality Assurance a a Department Cadweld Inspegtion Book which shows in a chart ,

that the witness marks are to be placed 12 inches from the )

. end of the bar. The manufacturer's prescribed method, to 1 the best of our knowledge, is to place witness marks at 12 i inches from the end of the bar. The total distance between -'

witness marks will then be something close to 24 inches. We  !

believe Brown and Root adopted the standard. of the manuf acturer as their own standard. To our knowledge, this standard has never been changed.

Exhibit G-2 dated 11/2/78 shows that cadweld 36V524 was i found unsatisfactory because the witness mark was at seventeen i

inches ("l'5"") rather than 24 inches. (Note: the mark l

\

} #

90026168 Page 11 i

-l 4

i

1 i l l' . )

2 t

surrounding the words "No upper witness" appear on the original in red. This is the only red appearing on the document. Based on examination of other documents, CCCANP believes this mark was placed on the document at a later date to highlight these words.)

Exhibit G-3 dated 11-10-78 shows three cadwelds - 164, .

16 5, a nd 16 7, with staggered witness marks found acceptable.

(Note: the words " staggered wit marks

• appear in red on the - 1 original and are the only red appearing on the document.

. These words are assumed to have been written at a later date than the original.) 1 Exhibit G-4 dated 11-14-78 shows two cadwelds - 27V1165 '

and 27H731 - where the witness marks were at 6 inches rather than 12 inches. Both were f ound satisf actory. Cadweld 36H463 i shows staggered witness marks and was found acceptable. (Note: A the words "Ck on proc can wit marks be staggered" is another 4 notation in red and considered similarly to the ones noted 4 above.)

These documents show that staggered witness marks were i accepted at distances less than the distance prescribed by I the manufacturer and Brown and Roots own procedures. They 3' also show confusion on the part of Brown and Root personnel as to what was acceptable. Only a review of other cadweld records, if such records exist, will show how extensive the ',!

staggered witness marks problems is.

10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Section is violated in that

(

activities af fecting quality were not accomplished in accor-dance with prescribed procedures. I Section IX is violated in that cadwelding was not ,

accomplished using applicable codes. ;l Section X was violated in that inspectors did not verify conformance with procedures. ,

Section XVI was violated in that corrective measures were not taken. j 1

(2) On at least two occasions, the decision by a field .

inspector to reject a cadweld was overriden by the person [I  !

preparing the Examination Check document without that rejection , ,

being noted on the final report. 21 Exhibit H-1 dated 11/11/78 is a copy of the Examination Check of various cadwelds. Attention is directed to the

]l '

notation that 42V151 through 42V160 are marked "S" or satis- ll~.

factory.

Exhibit H-2 dated 11/11/78 with the notation "From 11/9 ;l M.H. Log" is the report on each of the welds summarized in Exhibit F-1. Attention is directed to 42V157 which shows the  !: I final inspection resulted in a "U" for unsatisfactory and . -l remarks "Rej due to centering". The "U" is marked through and replaced by an "S" and the remarks are also marked through.

Cadweld 42V158 also shows the final inspection resulted in a "U" and remarks "Rej due to centering". Again the "U" and the remarks are scratched through with the "U" replaced by an "S". -

Additionally, in the remarks area, the following appears "AES -

11/10/78 Measurements mape at night. Re-measurement shows -

high side of sleeve in tolerance". - ;!

Further in the remarks area of 42V158, the "Rej" has been written in a second time. On the original, the "U" on  ;

42V158 appears to have been marked "U" again after being '

scratched and replaced with "S".

The appearance of 42V158 suggests that the original inspector disagreed with the override and therefore marked the 'U" again and wrote "Rej" again. Nevertheless, Exhibit F-1 shows 42V158 as "S".

The violation of 10 CFR 50 noted here is that while the t

.i 7

i 'a 4

90026169 i Page 12 l

h r l

J team leader, which AES may have been, has the authority to override the inspection judgement of the field inspector, he '

cannot delete the judgement of the field inspector from the official record. In this example, Exhibit F-1 would show the ,

field inspector rejected 42V157 and 42V158. This omission is even more serious if the field inspector actually objected to the override as the rewritten "U" and "Rej" suggest. (Note: ,

The wavy line on Exhibit H-2 at 42V155 appears in red on the 3 original and is considered similar to other red marks as  ;

L noted above.)

• A similar incident is show in Exhibit I. In Exhibit I-1,

• the Examination Check shows 27V1139 and 27V1140 as "S".

In Exhibit 1-2, 27V1140 shows a "U" scratched through and replaced by an "S" and "Rej" marked through. The notation "Due to no marking" appears in the remarks column.

d[

/

Again, there is an override of a field inspector's d judgement which is not reflected on the official record. N (Note: The open end box around remarks noted above, the h underlining of remarks at 35V98,'and the circle on the star  ?

I sppear in red on the original and,are considered similarly to the red marks noted above.) .

)

The deletion of the remarks of the field inspector from A the official records is a violation of Section XVII which I states in part: " Inspection and test records shall, as a f minimum, 1dentify the inspector or data recorder, the type of observation, the results, the acceptability, and the action taken in connection with deficiencies noted". j (3) On at least one occasion, a cadweld was approved .)

despite its being in violation of quality assurance standards. =

Exhibit J dated 3-22-78 is a cadweld record showing that j 278V418, a #18 bar cadweld, was rejected. Below the cadweld  :

record is the notation "Re 27BV418 (reject) checked by Civil  ;

Engineer Alfred Long came up with void area of 3.3. Shot is .

OK." To the original is stapled a piede of paper saying i

" Allowable Void Area 2.64." (Note: there is nothing on the cadweld report beneath the stapled paper.) -{ {

Exhibit G-4, the cadweld inspection book, shows the maxi- l/

mum allowable void for a #18 bar cadweld is 3.00. The stapled ~ '

piece of paper seems to indicate that 278V418 was a #18 RBC-

{

1876(-H) or RBT-1876(-H) (referring to the cadweld inspection 6 book numbers) with a maximum void of 2.64. y The approval of the rejected void was done by a civil f engineer, apparently not an inspector. Even had it been done 7 by an inspector, the void exceeds any allowable area for a 'p

1. 18 bar.  !

A related problem was identified by the NRC in its e investigative report 78-15 dated October 6,1978 in which the ,

NRC investigators found that a piece of wire had been forced j into a cadweld sleeve "such that it concealed a rejectable '

void". (Note: Examination of this report in its entirety is  !

very revealing concerning violations of cadweld procedures.) -

The approval of a void in excess of specifications -

violatesSection I in that an appropriate quality assurance -{

program was not effective'.ly executed. j y Section II is violated in that the civil engineer referred ,

to is. CCANP assumes, not an inspector and therefore not

[

Oharged with the responsibility nor given the authority to fY provide control over activities affecting the quality of the  ! (

. plant.

Section X is violated in that an inspector did not verify i conformance of the void to documented procedures. l .

Section XVI is violated in that corrective action was i.

not taken. f l (4) Based on conversations with Mr. Swayze, CCANP contends [;

\

l .P i

}

v 900?6170 Page 13 1

bl

>l 8

that numerous cadwelds placed in the base mat of Unit 1 l containment building were taken from a lay down yard where 4, they had been shot and stored months before.

During the time the cadwelds were stored, the numbers '

identifying the welds wore off. When these welds were placed +

! in the base mat, numbers were randomly assigned from the cadweld shooters log until a sufficient number were assigned to correspond with the total number of cadwelds placed in the <'

base mat. . 4 j Section I is violated in that an appropriate quality '

assurance program was not effectively executed.

Section !! is violated in that the quality assurance 'l '

program did not prov;de control over activities affecting the quality of the identified structure.

1 Section X was violated in that quality assurance did not I verify conformance with procedures. "

Section XI!! was violated in that measures were not e established to assure storage of material to prevent damage "

or deterioration. 4 Section XVI was violated in that no corrective action i

• l was taken when the numbers were found to be missing.

Section XVII was violated in that the records made of .

i the cadweld numbers were knowingly inaccurate. ,

(5) On numerous occasions, the person preparing the 1

Examination Check for the official record changed almost the i entire report of the field inspector. Exhibit H-1 shows that '

preparation of all cadwelds reported was "S" or satisfactory.

Exhibit H-2 shows that the field inspector did not inspect "N" - preparation of any of the 31 cadwelds recorded  ;

on that page. .

Exhibit !1 shows that preparation of all cadwelds '

reported was "S". Exhibit G-2 shows that the field inspector did not inspect preparation of 19 out of 20 cadwelds recorded. is The Examination Check is prepared after cadwelds are i .,

shot. There would thus be no method for the person preparing such a repgrt to check the preparation and state the preparation was satisfactory.

l!

i l

Section XVI is violated in that rather than take correc-  :

tive action regarding the absence of preparation inspections, i these inspections were reported as satisfactory, i Section XVII is violated in that the quality assurance records f alsely reflect satisf actory inspections when in f act {

none were done. 'k l !.

(6) In (5) above, it was noted that in Exhibit F-2 and G-2 the field inspector almost never inspected preparation of the

~

's cadwelds. Exhibits K-1, K-3, and K-4 show a similar pattern of not inspecting preparation of cadwelds. Such inspections l s

would normally include the fit-up, alignment, packing, and ' '

designation of the cadweld. i Failure to inspect cadweld preparation is a violation of H Section I in that an appropriate quality assurance program ~t was not executed. 1 i Section !! was violated in that quality assurance did

{

not provide control over activities affecting the quality of L the structures into which the cadwelds were placed.

I Section IX was violated in the control of cadwelding did not take place as the preparation of the cadwelds was not i

s inspected. li Section X was violated in that no program of inspection !i

. of preparation of cadwelds was carried out.  !

Section XVI was violated in that the report that cadwelds inspections were satisfactory was false.

! Section XVI was violated in that no efforts were made to i

i 9002617i  !

j Page 14

I j' ,

e

.. j correct' the lack of ' inspection rif c'adweld preparation.

Section XV11 was violar.e6 in that the quality assurance records falsely record the results of the inspection.

The procedures set forth In Appendix A, Brown and Root Quality Construction Procedure A040KPCCP-11 were also not f ol-lowed.

(We note in passing that Exhibits K-2, K-3, and K-4 contain the initials of "JFf" which comparison with K-1 show to have been written by someone else. There is a strong p indication that AES wrote in JFE's initials.) , ,

(7) Witness marks are the' marks placed on steel bars prior ,

to being inserted in a sleeve and then shot (cadweld). When J the cadweld is shot, the smoke and powder spread out along i the pipe and smudge the witness marks. l L' Mr. Sway 2e recounts that he used to go over to the plant 7:

at night when not on duty. He would examine witness marks on *i cadwelds already shot and find them to be bright and shiny. I,-

an indication the marks were placed on the bars after the 4 weld was shot. The advantage of such a procedure is that the .

witness marks would be the proper distance out every time and  !

thereby show the sleeve to be centered whether the sleeve was I  ;

centered or not. e t j

This observations of Mr. Swayze were confirmed by an i n v e s t i g a t i o n e c:u't"; t ed Dy M e s s r s'. R . E . Ha l l a n d A . B . R o s e n- '

berg of the NRC staff in Rpt. 78-15 dated October 6, 1978 wherein the following appears: "The allegation regarding l application of centering marks to rebar after firing was substantiated by direct observation". (emphasis added) This 1 confirmation came months after Mr. Swayze had witnessed i similar actfvities. , i CCANP is unaware ' of any NRC efforts to determine how i long such false marking had gone on or how many bars had been {

so marked. '

Section X requires a program for inspection of activities el affecting quality .be established and executed to verify *I conformance'with instructions,' procedures, and drawings. The '

f alsification of witness marks is a violation of this section. *l (8) According to Mr. Swayze, no cadwelds were inspected at night during a substantial period of time.

The CBS transcript (Exhibit C) at page 20 addresses this  ;

question. In that transcipt, Mr. Tom Gammon of Brown and Root says:

j ],

"[ Inspectors] weren't inspecting Cadwelds. It is sim- l ply that they chose to do other work than night that they were supposed to do rather than Cadwelds."

[CBS): "Those nights."

• Gammon: "Those rights."

In the NRC investigation report 78-15 referenced above, the following appears: "The allegation regarding lack of ~

l second shif t Quality Control inspection coverage of Cadwelding i i" And further: " Review of the records '

operations and discussions was confirmed.hned with assi Brown and Root Cadweld inspectors j] l

, confirmed that during the period August I through September 1 10 [1978] essentially no second shift inspection of in-process

Cadwelding operations had been performed." '

, Based on figures in this NRC report, CCANP concludes

\

that the minimum number of cadwelds not inspected each day

,l -

was 4 and the maximum number not inspected each day was 25, i j During the forty-one days from August I through September 10, then, a minimum of 164 cadwelds were not inspected and a

,' maximum of 1.025. ;_

^

Section X was violated in..that a program for inspection l of activities affecting quality was not established and 1

90026172 L p

Y "~

, . .Page.15. .

}

l.

,- l executed to verify conformance with the documented instruc-tions, procedures, and drawings for accomplishing an activity ,

affecting quality. ,

(9) Mr. Swayze states that the abuses of the required inspection process increased as the project fell further and further behind schedule. As pressure increased to get things done, there were more and more instances of shoddy workmanship, !a inspections not done, and records created on a false basis.  ! t

. Section X was violated in that a program for inspectioh of activities affecting quality was not established and ,4 executed to verify conformance with the documented instruc-tions, procedures, and drawings for accomplishing an activity .

affecting quality. js

17. The cadwelds not capable of being veri fied are all over  ;

the plant. They cannot be verified because they are buried ~q under tons of concrete. V

18. Answered in 16.

)

19. NRC report 78-12 dated August 12, 1978 concludes that , Jl

"[t]he allegation of inaccessability to upper management was  : " '

expressed by a majority of the QC inspectors".  !. '

The only document, other than communication between  !

Applicants and NRC, which CCANP currently has access to supporting CCANP's contention that "[e]fforts by quality  ;

control inspectors to verify that design changes were executed  ; .

in accordance with the purposes of the original design were j repeatedly and syttematically thwarted" is a copy of a - i Brown and Root handwritten memorandum by C. M. Singleton,  !<

Civil Quality Control Engineer, dated 4-1-79 attached as  :

b Exhibit L. The text of the memorandum is: l "As of this date, all communication between Civil j Q.C. and Design Engrs. and/or their site representa- l tives, will be handled at a level no lower than the  ! ,

deviations from lf, Lead Inspectors.

this memo There willbybethe unless approved no-Civil Q.C. Supv. I E only." (emphasis in original) - ll '

Mr. Swayze has stated that during the period of his employment with Crown and Root, Inc., the policy was evolved

', il' '

that where construction work varied from the requirements of 7, design engineering, the construction personnel would explain i!

to design engineering the nature and extent of the variance. jl Based on communications f rom construction personnel, design '

engineering would determine what corrective action, if any, would be necessary. =

Subsequent conversations between quality control inspec-  ! '

tors and the design engineers, however, revealed that the i design engineers were being lied to by the construction l3; personnel. For example, where eight rebar were missing, the l design engineers might have been told that only two were 9 -

missing. J Rather than encoura ing the inspectors to communicate directly with the desig engineers to ensure that design ]'

engineering would have an accurate description of the problem, l Brown and Root. Inc. directed that inspectors not communicate with design engineers. Thus, the quality control inspectors J could not verify that the engineering action taken in response to the field request for engineering action was based on the actual problem as it existed in the field.

Furthermore, Mr. Swayze states that as construction work  ;

fell further behind, the contractor permitted site representa-tives of the design engineering department to accept design changes without submitting the changes to Houston. Such f{

3 3

?

90026173 Page 16 I

1

[ , )I

-)

7 field requests for engineering action due to deviations from ,

design specifications ofter were handled verbally with the  ;

paper work to follow later. 4

20. CCANP does not have specific names, dates, and incidents confirmed to sufficient specificity to provide as an answer to this interrogatory. CCANP recognizes these interrogatories as continuing and will provide more information as developed.

21. See 20,

22. Yes. Quality control inspectors are supposed to have , ,

confidence that design changes are made by qualified people in conformance with accepted procedures. Quality control  ;

inspectors, when they deem it necessary, should verify that i the design change approved by the design engineers was approved 1 based on accurate information on what was happening at the $

construction site. 'i

23. Yes. To the extent that design is done to achieve a j purpose, changes in design should achieve that same purpose. .d Additionally, the changes in the field should conform to the ^

as-built drawings.  ; )

24. Exhibit L, the memorandum quoted above, shows a clear violation of Section I which states in part: " Irrespective of  :

the organizational structure, the individual (s) assigned the  !

responsibility for assuring ef fective execution of any portion c.,

of the quality assurance program at any location where '

activities subject to this Appendix are being performed shall ,

to such levels of management as uma be have directM access necessary perform ~ this function C (emphasis ab ed) TG decision on what level of management an inspector may find ,

necessary to communicate with is clearly in the hands of the quality control inspectors, not Mr. Singleton.

Section !!! is violated in that " design changes, including '

field changes," were not " subject to design control measures [,

commensurate with those applied to the original design". 1 Specifically, verbal approval by on site personnel is not ,l subject to design control measures commensurate with those applied to the original design. 7'

.i Section XVI is violated in that there is no assurance !I the design changes authorized were an adequate corrective '

action relating to the original deficiency. ,

25. CCANP relies on the statements of Mr. Swayze regarding ,

design changes made by personnel with no first hand knowledge of the original design. Again specific instances are yet to be confirmed with sufficient specificity to be provided at this time.

26. see 25.

27. see 24.

I ,

28. On site approvals of! design changes violate Section !!!

in that " design changes, including field changes," were not I,

" subject to design control measures commensurate with those 3 applied to the original design". Specifically, verbal approval ji by on site personnel is not subject to design control measures /'

commensurate with those applied to the original design.

29. The only specific information CCANP has to support its contention that design changes were approved by personnel unqualified in the type of design where the changes were made is the information that on site, verbal approvals of design  ;

M k

J  :

90026174 i

'4 Phge 17

1 i

l. ' '

.[

I t ,

7 chaages were made by Mr. Doug Robertson, on site representative z I

of design engineering. I CCANP's information is that Mr. Robertson was a geo- l' technical engineer, sometimes called a " dirt engineer", not qualified in design involving concrete and steel, t CCANP does not have specific instances sufficiently documented to present at this time. CCANP contends that all  ;

design changes outside his expertise authorized by Mr. Robert- J. )

son are improper. 2 i

.i 1

30. See 29. -1l

%l

31. Section !!! is violated in that " design changes, including I:

field changes," were not " subject to design control measures jl commensurate with those applied to the original design". J Specifically, approval by unqualifiede personnel is not sub- ij ject to design control measures commensurate with those ,

applied to the original de'st'gn. >

j Section XVI is violated in that there is no assurance  : i the design changes authorized were an adequate corrective action relating to the original deficiency. j

[l

32. Mr. Swayze has stated that as a result of extensive intimidation of inspectors, the inspectors voted to play cards rather than risk their safety on the site. During the -

four month period of the card game, civil quality control inspectors went through the motions of inspecting, in some cases, and, in other cases, merely signed off on pour cards ,

without doing any inspection. In either case, they noted no deviations from design engineering requirements. They either ignored what they saw or did not inspect. Thus, except for instances where construction wanted a field request for  !.

engineering action or a design deficiency report, no exceptions

, were taken by these inspect' ors to the quality of the construc-tion. The construction personnel would want an FREA or DDR ,-

where there was an obvious defect in the work which could ->i not go uncorrected. g The participants in the card game, to the best of CCANP's s knowledge, were: Mr. Rocky Crisp, Mr. Ja-2 Duke, Mr. Roger Forte, Mr. Allen Hammons, Mr. Sam Horton, M6 : ti. N. Ke s a ri na th , (s Mr. Carl King, Mr. Bill Lazear, Mr. Paul Pelingaris, Mr. jj Suresh H. Shah, and Mr. Daniel E. Swayze. ti

' J '

33. As noted in 32, the falsification consisted of inspectors signing off on concrete pours as if a true inspection had taken place when in fact the inspection was cursory or not -) 1 done at all.

1

34. CCANP has no documents to support this contention other than printed or broadcast reports of Mr. Swayze's statements, such as the CBS broadcast transcripts referred to above.

CCANP has reason to believe that the FBI succeeded where the

~

NRC investigators had failed in securing corroborating tes- '{

timony from other partic ' pants in the card game. CCANP awaits l

[

the response of the FBI the Freedom of Information request '

, submitted by CCANP and referred to in the preface to these answers.

35. (a) In July, 1977, Mr. James Marshall was hospitalized

\ after being assaulted by a craft concrete foreman.

Mr. Jert v lacey was assaulted in the spring of 1979.

CCANP has raison to belit the NRC regional office can provide the names tf other ins ctors assaulted while working at the South Texas t'uclear Pro, act. .11 (b) Mr. Swayze's lif e was threatened by Mr. Ron Ferguson, _

-l 1

l ll Page 18 ;l l

\ '. (

s l P

l

{

i a concrete foreman, in July, 1977' Mr. Swayze states that the NRC investigation confirmed the threat and NRC investigators t

.l so informed Mr. Swayze. As best Mr. Swayze can recall, the NRC personnel giving him this information were Mr. Bob Taylor t and Mr. Bob Foster. The official NRC report, however, stated that the allegation was not confirmed. (Number unavailable at this time. See Exhibit M.)

In the CBS transcript Exhibit C, pages 16 through 18, the !4 topic of assaults and harrassment are discussed. , t (c) Mr. Swayze was fired in August, 1978. {

Mr. Larry Perry was fired after calling in the NRC on. l ,

among other things, the falsification of witness marks on

• cadwelds. (NRC 78-15, October 6, 1978)

(d) Intimidation was endemis at the plant and experienced M by almost every inspector. The assault on Mr. Marshall and

• the death threat agairst Mr. Swayze both took place at the a same time, culminating a long series of abuses and precipita- '

ting the vote which led to the card game. 4 3

36. CCANP can only identify the inspections which were not  ?

carried out as those inspections made in the time period of .y the card game, which to the best of CCANP's knowledge extended for a period of four or five months beginning in July, 1977. j CCANP believes the buildings under construction at that time '

were Reactor Containment Building Unit 1 Mechanical Electrical i Auxiliary Building Unit 1, Fuel Handling Building Unit 1, i Fuel Handling Building Unit 2, and Reactor Containment Building Unit 2. [ Note: CCANP disagrees very strongly with the remarks >

of Mr. Karl Seyfrit, Regional Director, NRC as recorded in ',

the newspaper articles (Exhibit B) in which Mr. Seyf rit states l that the work going on at thestime of the alleged card game was not " critical".] '

37. NRC reports 78-12 dated August 22, 1978 and 78-13 dated '

August 25, 1978 discuss the problems faced by inspectors at . i the South Texas Nuclear Project. j i Documents relied on, other than NRC reports, are Brown d I

and Root, Inc. Interof fice Memo dated July 27, 1977 from Mr. 4j T. P. Gardner attached as Exhibit N; Brown and Root, Inc. l; Interoffice Memo dated August 8, 1978 from L. A. Watkins ;I attached as Exnibit 0; and assorted " punch lists" attached as  ;

Exhibit P.

• Exhibit N clearly shows that Brown and Root, Inc. was aware of at least one instance of assault and that t 4

while investigating this assault Brown and Root, Inc. found l "that there existed an inordinate amount of friction between Construction Concrete craft and Civil QC". J CCANP is not certain, but it appears from the Q. A.

Records Routing box stamped on the second page of this  ;

memorandum that someone with the initials TKH short circuited -

the filing and circulation of this document.  !

Exhibits 0 and P show that pervasive construction errors 1 produced much of the tension between construction workers and inspectors. A close read ng of Exhibit 0 provides a fairly j a i

clear picture of the att tudes and opinions which led to the tension between construction and inspection and the subsequent 4 breakdown of the quality assurance prog-am.

1

38. Mr. Daniel E. Swayze.

z CONTENTION 2

[

1. through 4 Except as answered above, CCANP's information 4

t Page9002617 6 L . -~

l ,

i

. ,h . .

l r

' ~

I related to falsification of construction records is subject ~

to the withholding of document.s ' set f orth in section !! above.

CONTENTION 3 ,

1. None of the overpressurizations referenced have occured  ;

since 1976, t j

2. As no instances of overpressurization are listed in 1,  ;

this question is not applicable.

3. CCANP does not suggest and does not consider itself required to suggest any specific designs and procedures for the South .1 Texas Nuclear Project. Correction of this safety related $?

deficiency is the task of the Applicants. CCANP does contend that corrections acceptable to.the NRC should be in place 1 prior to granting of an operating license. j w

4. If the pressure increased above specified limits and was 3 allowed to go unchecked, fracture or rupture of the vessel would ensue. ..

• 4 i OTHER I

1. Mr. Lanny Alan Sinkin Co-coordinator  !

116 Villita l San Antonio, Texas 78205 1

2. Ms. Sydney Janak Co-coordinator l 307 Brettonwood i San Antonio, Texas 78218 i

1.

3. Ms. Florence Miller Treasurer 534 Kayton 3

San Antonio, Texas 78210 Respectfully submitted. .  !

a CITIZENS CONCERNED ABOUT NUCLE AR POWER, INC. '$

116 Villita San Antanio, Texas 78205 !f By: %b*  ;

LannyApnSinkin,Co-coordinator  ;

STATE OF TEXAS l

[ l COUNTY OF BEXAR I '

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in l' l 1

and for Bexar County, Texas on this day personally appeared -l )

LANNY ALAN SINKIN, knownlto me to be a credible person, who '

on his oath says that he is the co-coordinator of Citizens  : !

Concerned About Nuclear Power, Inc. and that he has read the foregoing Answers of Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Power, jl Inc. to First Set of Interrogatories from Houston Lighting '

, and Power, et. al. and to NRC Staff Interrogatories and Request for Documents and knows the same to be true and correct.

D4% . A u %s

', f <a Lanny Alay Sinkin, Co-coordinator :l SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to bef ore me by LANNY AL AN SINKIN on" $'

this 5 ( 7/ day of December, 1979.

& d $bd ll.

{.

52 /iG Notary Publpt in and for Berar .-z.

County, Texas  ;

4 My CommissicDapm4r s.97 7 +, i t,

/3 V d k/5// e? l Y  :} 4

/

Page 20 i

l

I l

c.

- ,f 1

kWMW a

L L-. -J

" " " i g Q L a

- 6 .

f"l. Vo 0 .

(c) PART, Inc. BOX 13052 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 ,,

NATIONAL ENERGY ACT II ONE FRAGILE REGIME /  ;

Congress has passed and sent to Pres. It is no wonder ths brited States l Carter a bill containing the major parts of regards the Amb/Parefei Ch!f as a  !! I the energy legisistion he requested in scourity problem second only to that ,*,

April. Only the windfall profits tax posed by the Soviet Union. The nzzesius remains to be enacted. dependenes of the industrial vorid on ne latest legisistion establishes an one fragils regims is a frightening iM' Energy Fobilisation Board and program to reality of e dern life.

expand existing and alternative energy sup- --Stobaugh 4 Yorgin, Energy Future.  :

l'l lies. The 5-member Board will spend $19 ,, f illion to establish and subsidize a syn-thetic fuel industry during the next five pon for political purposes is neither the I' I

first nor the last time it will be used by 1' years. The money is expected to come from '

a tax on part of the windfall profits the W desce Wncv W. l oi,1 industry has been enjoying.

n e countries learned it from the oil ': I Congress retained an important feature companies and their history, from John D. 1 in the bill only after a close vote; it Rockefeller tc John J. McCloy. As Iran's -

permits a federal Energy Security Corp. to revolution shows, when countries use the be established that would build and operate weapon, like the Sorcerer's Apprentice, it can take its own course, with unforseeable -

the processing plants if private industry consquences, fails to cooperate in the program. Adding to revolution to make world oil ne amount of synthetic fue that the

. bill proposes to provide will nave a small supplies more unstable is the Palestinian-impact on the nation's dependence on for- Israeli conflict. As John Connelly has eign crude oil; it calls for a supply of a t sM tW u uy _' b only 1.5 million barrels per day by 1995. other such volitile issue for their advan- '

nat would be less than 10% of the total tage. If politicians use it who have liquid fuel requirement. ##8 relatively 4ttli to gain, every loudmouth l .l '

with any leadership ambition in every OPEC i-BELL GETS $139 MILLION country will use it.  !")

The PUC has granted Southwestern Bell ne $10-12 billion Iran holds could have l , l Telephone $139 million of a $144 million caused some disruption on withdrrwal from '

request. The increase is the third for the U.S. banking and economic system; but Bell in 3 years, the $45 billion CPEC holds certainly would pl ,

It will be the first increase in local have. Hardly anyone of those countries-- j (basic service) rates since the PUC assumed certainly not Saudi Arabia, or Kuwait--have ;

authority for setting telephone rates in a stable political system. One- Lybia-- -

1976. The charge for 1 or 2 party service offers an example of how hostile the rest 8"A C will increase 10 to 12% to reflect the 15% 's increase in local service revenues granted. cod W We ~

Pay phones will increase from 204 to 25#, Decade because of American preoceupation installation charges will incre se 12%. with Southeast Asia; the 1980's will surely ;

(Con't . p. 3) be the Mid East Decade. It has started early. E e0 b--.. , _

~

,i

• i l I

l l

I

! i I

f

. l

• {

!4 EXHIBIT A

. 90026H8 ll$

in i'

t

-- [% 6,$:%, $ _

l

i L. i I

' NNE A2 l@ENNG THE P U BLIC AD VOC AT E'S P AGE  !

HIGHW$i SOE THINGS OEA ONGE losats la Ir.a underscor undnien in U.s. su ne .e the oraunstab,le unoe MN8 WSIFLIDG The,e ste e, is be s.a. ining 3,,e.isi .

IRCet with energy..its dependence og ,,,ay ,og e,orms are su tu eur n a .un ner ser unm

., sinddle gaat On!, surplus petro dollars place utste Brews 41948 projects are h& ghways . Tehe the (sed Reaks..re As ses &enau.

drittag up Central Teas Oaty a month af ter Lt m.e enestric rates. eson's bleed. brother relas kenskap alth

, sad est.aaduced ta fla tasa. These sonda. s seapleted, Ete Governer, sad through him, tne Laes's

! Lasse are ne Dans for to hauersamg Ferette no. I genersting plant evoke share of state saa mener. The emir tese

• 1et la Paul Irdeaa's The Crash of 't news f or a monta. Austna and LCAA mere that ever stirred Delph 8tissee oss more hile GG a!Illary evealGp&s ted la'a Iersed to speed $1 B&nten te replass highWe Fa . I Crash hav sees to 6.e.* notright accurred, the occaeaAss its gas coal + fired Legislaters att!! tell stories eheut sa soedule.

f tred. Thatonestristly estra costwith basinsespenalveto his bend,ing thest lyeryeste agrees sa the need to reduce flow through en the fuel adjusteest La to loch .p ha!! theears and erse s tate'4 la neH

$4 billion es taperted et1 h U.S.

ne unen, dependen.ce. hoe ou u m ,Despite ,.g u e s OstCu teher ,a un u,e eu,,a o a,.

a ru-u.L surplus,e,for de u highesyse , ,,hsne eu, e m met,even a,,o,etking, nan un u,s.de.s. nu Du, s , ,a ,s .ea . e ,,,,,,,e, ne nsu,u .heisee a nue

,,,,,d.,,,. ,o,Ce, li,,a,n,s,,

to ,,,,, s s n u n pravuio, o m.m.se, uu n su,u.e . tC u ,,r i,en.!,,,r,,i,n,e be,n,e,e e

o,

, ,, ne ,.,,i r m,,,e r

,,e,.w e.e G,ov,e. C u,ye na. us i.,d.uout e m.n., ,ee u.ed mad. was i. euch .se unies esa the elei se per s.lieo is gr.duaiad i

'"Un'R"'.;j"Hmiry produstaan aleae sali not re n afeweunsur nu oli LCAA projasts. The second was to rate that would allow the state to fund . ,g but bae t t saether C .. su.rge.of h,ighway dependense the - e r ,ua tseo,n de t e.rn.u m.aieu o.f The iurd .ldees, LCR,A long tsee sanager. fire SLe Ant to

. ni::e aer, as.iime wbui.lding.

.g te ,e,4.se uid deas. ,

preits out of this criels het led the G L de en , the H4ghway Departaant's incase. Thank <

Charles Herring brought 84A ba of all the PAC moter sad other brates na crmna su rod buw*a htck,and j

.Ladus.try

.u. i te .rseverti.r

.m oppose .say se.r,ious u, t ha t ta **uid provide the caad ***** .*

They and their .oins.o. ho.rten ve nie.s.u h.d the 'si e t - is 8Ia*1 r re uited >= ihe ten- ==**r' 'e sea t ri ha's *e * *e* "' aa a r

• 0 enano.m es an anunu prograu. au'a armt te seaf' ira reira init *

• iae a*a r *

• T**** r Ceaservetten is sa laeust goes for spring, sad Clements replacas him. W'h'o wi n need t 'hese'new road ** t I t i'n*aa's-ga rj but the industry has in sentrast, Aust ka has always had a gets to 82f that questlea now.s ewhe gets .

Energy Elinstancy$e Cassept. il succe sated because la Tesse its more tapertaat dieserted the whe fully eeustes senservatten with escri.se Pirweed.

indivi s ib layerle .re.lattenship Th t's the ressen with S&R: why to build than to us.. ,

f ace; its prepassadists aste sted it to Aus sia, despite the overwhelstag evndance enerbe cities like Austis, wuch is l;

• ae. growth " to unaaptoyeest, loss of agatant, ha debating a new $120 bil nes s&rport , saa tace , and to essa. mas dtsester is way to the s.stttayed la the STN,, all the lait sees el these highways *te.aewhere g

gg,a,e,g , sencrete velds,oa ). of the rathele (or and vae thee for runners. -

Stace oil, utility, and nuclear ser. The Stevne and their henchmen ore 888 '

persta.as wi part of the State Aus t le ,

ts!! profles,th ansees gove rnaen d.rnt ved f ree stng sostdies an ty of Tesas polttlsal sad andseacoa WabwerS!* s [N00GH TO Gu A Mf407 es tabli.shment, and they laflue.nc.e. pon.tc.y ok sos

,u n io t pl.us redustlea t ea .tolulo.t progr.as see

, have a . did te,n.i There has ie , m.ui ja 84:

ate.

.ve.tise.Ie ad iheir usinar .dsne t ben , , A,., ,,,8,4., ,,74, ., ,,. W 1,. , ,. l.. d ( . .,i d, . . e

,,n,,,

p, been hard1F any goverase.d.t support for Normally, a sil1Los d.

would 1.ed to a daasgo s.11st breakde.n

,,,,,,g,,,,,,m,,,,,a,,,,g,,,,3,,,

, g, p g ,, , , ,, , ,, ,,,, 3 g , , gh,,g

,,,g , .

+ taprovnag th t tlement er a seuatry use,eenergy. ef fislessy m&th uttsh &&la la.sult. But gives the Brown lanuense, .,,,i, ,s e,,4,., ,,,s 4,,,,s ,g t,ig n,s g g,t e, . g, ..d,g, ,s 4.,6, fg .,e,.,s,N.,=

here se are, thr.e praa te.n ts .ad Les s ,g, f,,g gg ,, ,,,,,,,g,,, ,g t..se,o ud .e isuprise ramr,etiaer ,that met.h6ag has been iace 46 us <.uit .

p g , f,.,;,

. ,, u ,

m,u n au.u men.,e,.,nu

, o,, u.. m.a

-t ne. n.n, n .a.e.. to.., aum .ra a, n. m :; u;no. -d.n. . , .

. .. m. a ...3,o. , au,n. . .ne..,n. . , ,f. ,

,io.o, .mh - u,eams aueo.. u. . . . . . , ., , ,

ooe n nc. s.m

.a. .. ,...m

. .a.~<a.,,.~,n .... u.n..a.

u..

,u,.,u . f, .u u. .

e m0 a ms

.i ..u uc .u. a-~ . ,. ,

a n , mmu-,ETm oo . ha.T iT T.,, 2,m fth n u*.the9..N mn, ie' O "u. a.

7 U U M T,U...*C m ~a u,-A -

~ ~a .55 15 "

m. u,...a....u, c ou. net.,.e o , a.o.u omnn,o u,c,oun . -

a. aa... ~. a a,e u. '

e n

io,re.no o u,.a

...g a oaa.ie. un u,.

.e i aa

. a-

,a re n.u.., a.n, de

.. ,.e,u u.,en,.u.,, m,m,,eu c. ,-a~.u ee;g.e .. itr ~ -

n .,a. , i . n, c

.a n,..

to ,.e, t~ -

m. gj.":. .a.~m,u ..m m,m.

.,~~~

. ~n..aa ~

l.oru .m.mm... ". , , > ~de. ~

a u

.emo.m..

um , h.co.m.

o ,u. , .

T .m.In.,eo..u,,a. m.

s m. , a c..,a.a,,.m.. n. ,e.,

o.u d

e e cu, , .ane a.a a

,.e eeu.nn,n e, u c __

n-~. . ~ .. ..

u.. gn .

e.e.a. un a..ut n ...n..u...,,,,....,<a...,, , s u.

o.e. .,a um c ,, .u a. uu.un n.u , n.

a re3n

. . ., e , m a,t,.,,edm u

, ,e , d ..

em u..

...a..,....u....u.

,m n,.a. .. .... .,

a una u. ,n .

um.,l.n-a n aun te uma.

no m,, ua -. ,,,T.e..aa.u.e.,.

mu m ca.,, ,m ,.,n n a .m ,o,uc, , e,

, , . h,Ja ,.a ,

ov.a. ,a u m.c.

,m i

. ,e.m a. C c.ha ,.a.u u, n. m.. o n .u.a.

. . on ae n,

..a

.. , ..e. .u.e

.a ,a.

, , , . .u

.a.,.....u....,........u,.,.e,..,u

, u . ..u m .. u. . j mee .ea. au saam. .u... . deu,eu, u,.uu.4. ,ea .

a , ... . .. . f,. . ,. ... ..,e,, u .. ,,.a u 4, ,

.a.n.mu n. T,h, o. um.u,m.o

,.e ,un u m,.., a, n,, . . . n.. u.

unn ne u . . ,,

..e...

o n e,as,,aon e., , .us .o t, m, .g s. un ,...n.m......,..,,,m,..ue.f,...,

....f.  ;

m,.u es ao.

nm u s ,,,aaf r a,us.,u,u

u. u. a.o.,..a.H

.a

,m,.h as a ,,n.a.ac i,u.

m ,a s

as, ..

o.,, , u.,. . ,.o ,,,, u . . .  ;

uu ago , o.d a

m ,n m in u.,a u m d. . a on.m, eu. a , oe m ne, u.u.d u ..u .f . ,,uf .,, r ., o,muum

<na y a.na. t, u.u.

• • as u.u.n. u,e,, ..,. , un.n.e..e.., ,

,u.m.

m .e

,nu u ,o.a . ~ .,.u.. ..a.,

in .u.. s;i um an~ Tu n a ..

~1un.n u .nou

.a. ne . a. aaa.um, u

e saumsm a a a a. a u aun"m*-am.e.m u u a.u~, r . s . e ~.

~

du.u,~n a'.". -u ,m u.. aua m u,a~u.

u. . 4, .. ,u u u. ,. ,. ..,,f

,u, n s. a,e, ,v. .a,.

n, cu.,.,

.,,.a nd . . , u, .

u.uu n.u.u.,.,n. ,

u o..

.. ,4 ue r.u ou.,c,om., u, ac.um u ae .u.u u u.houm. .r.n u.n md unnu,n umn s t-

<,s u.a.s.

.,u .

n dm .m. n mud ... . u,mu.. . .u..

amm a cu, suu...

. o ,,, .f e u.u.a.

unnu. aim .e.u.

.u e . . . . . .. e . . e . e e . . . . m . . . . e . . . . . . . e . . e e

. . u n o ,,om , ,m,e.e. . i Tus sp n ne u&enstes

tens you two tungs vunno

. fen een Imry 4 Utild.I aum The l neu o ed.i t o ri.a,s,u. {

an .m.h.uo.n w ,,n e. ,.,D.11.s , ,e , .

o.ratas,liews ,

com . .un

m. . ma n .a ua. *un,a.r, e

h num a.a. uam.. a. e n.e. . u.n nn .ta a.re. . u, n,ua a an.,ein .

o,en. acaun .m n a m . <= u,nn m ua m a,,au- u. .}

a

.in. m...,e,n,csu..a

,,e L u ne me u,

au. ., nit o.

aeo.u .

2 . ,n..m,,e..mn i a=.~ana u .-u na u i e a aan a u -n ui u n....ud,m.e.u c,.,n.u. .

a

u. .ae,n

, , , od u m .

un d uim.u -. a u

. ese.. .. ..e...ees.e..s o. . .e.e.m...e...e... .

b = .-ee -

,a fi EXHIBIT A PAGE 2 s

i

• f

\,

• P l

I

! l a < ,

f a

WCLEAA BLITZ uses,,n es. u sas.o..su . no eso SOUND FAMILIAR? unnuu meuunneueauneneeeen '

, adme a ur re..u.u aury suuu.. synea au seses is s,e, re.sure lfu~ u as", uma au suuuu, vu,o of nuen. ned e re sad fue ude eenffe,su,effnu,,.mu.eu se fs,4 s . . . ,u u n f rn more than at,eu,see r n ,se u un e=*a'a. =8 ad uno aeorou=Ju. ze, *.

e sa e enu deets.e is an lesense se .e.suluu a ihet

&ty for sels-delusion.

.u'r *e*

• 8r resenroes. e pesue,unfe.dnu, she aasuued ausa.r ** "m**

(

udmu , u uu u u.aen u

ut thuse des <rsude luu sapestty neae 1: etef the you elements te de of.ee8 '"* /e* * * ** * *4* s

• s'*in in *lended bu **

• e '

• era fs aeass es an,e,d .e,ueu.s uso a,eres,, suapuu=<n.s vs:s fee!! '***e ad eu, sa u

a.i ues s e u su. n. ee c!de nut, whether.ther n

tir rusttu u de s taed looke euuur'serue hea-.ie r. e H"~ au's 'nua'**u'~e n, u m.

a esares ,se,'es ta **= eh*

udu s,,n u,s u.se u,ueo u of suu nroosu u il 6,larau.r.hos u.s in uras a e.aa"* ade =nu~ 8 dmn8erm-

• unuou, as uu.uu noe ne .4efues ,en.uu. re s.u t u . "1/ we dea 's ee

's. 's s'a s em u e

.e/ne su u.

-d' ese'ae sua 88 e vena e ed si s e un a,o ne tu e of effe.n u use u.n,,.a s ,uuse n,,uu, uno t!=r f rutiu uen u'n susund, ne esacy s uden ercao o muu 6. ae"

• aa'u a* nu .~

e fus.us seen a usu ,,su ne s.rus revuun es new n a a res,f

• who,e.su s . rni uuu.s nem,e uu ud teu u. un leie .

rhird, re.uisiten she.id i. on ..

e"$em'

. und c"a-su"a nee". "o au rne fir pu.ameles,eseenpas e sspe of she a ,

ede a,le= enund en seps. 3, "sudia bests, essaans saly a small f rec.

Lion of the tea! ava6er of assounts or MW HM A SM , -

the e4streme e van she Assese Jadnesual # erne enness. Plant designe of eve rs t!*a prestices of 83 offstre remens/see enesesomae <

se,4, eau.,

ud she eseenn a the usulated saattles. aev ovascenesee fer ree.ee,ne,Jepsag o ge,, e,ssff uued se nny seest semed

• se parene Fevrt4, the system should deal with sendes and,reue,e/

and she ds u,eu seuwhos she cured a fu seensede seeeerny fcriu, en, sesin its srltass a more seneff or ses the way the t.t beer dealt eith I'rer asbas e. It should seseen*rne peefee et t sa de serne ss,d.4,1 seis 6 peak,gle of Aep.

s4seBeamte essi, e seen e ee of ge,

s. ve,,se the semed sessiese of dandre Eenfer, siers sa almos t 1sfiat te sapest ty (or Sesma/ ele, se6d f ope p 4e en esadopeedene eenselsens* v4e hee repressive setersace the estendtag of esse ens tev er es=pe we,een '.s eu,s,eg i vested es se ametees eenpenise sa re sse. essenette procedursi,courteer to partic. u s f ee e sesd , 6.,  ; $,i

, 6 e,4. onen vousse nnes and s# 4eu 1 peace she are never, in f act, allowed we 8eet'e em presses shee tu

- eerperese emetese ed etessee, sad K. una to get their hands on earthing vital, semed an free se onetense,eeepensee,e e s sa, su 4

proper, she seensisel ase6ssene se 04e ra f th, alaces a carellery of the pre. eersees 6ese4ee and edleptt see s eg s gsnes gg, e s.tante.ss e

ge ,dger. esse _(

,9 eheirmen veglistes ca..

af see 6eard of Goif #sesse sedtag potat, latervener f undtag of any faase 846e enamer. ,,'

fee sedse tidse de espeesed se essend suss taattal eart is to 6e avended 11he ' *Iiallas flees He re t i-

• the pasgue. 01esavery and stess easana+  ;

! f.ree11 Deseter se aspe4, chard Pellesh, Jud.

Critical Hese Jovenal, sties sce namust,butof seurse, be elle=ed en eene N f3 t ene , the essestens can be 11atted and the essaastag 40erde swet be Mounten L4P has not shown the espondia tures taCluded 1 A CBIP te be reasonagle'

.l}

I line one werd lo463 ..(s's nes a c on s tan tly ressaded of as heed to keep diesy weed se es. r46e indnesty hee the issues serremly def tsed and the pre. d esse steeped es. I wee hered se FearmePy seedings aeving sleng,

,la

,gpa g r,t g ic,a,l,s,a,,

,, E,Ae,a,ss,e,l g ,g g ve)d,e,f,ec tes,c

, p, ] a, i ve en a mensese se eessee a me,e effee. 31s t4, the enfersement systes must be raise 1*ewee 46 to the shele ef f aceCy of "i

' the sens tructica manegeamat process there.

stee presense se ree4tepson, e relatavely teal a one with saly the 1-We '!! 4 eve eJens au people and one mos t statant poes tuity of a truly The applicant saa aver that Stown 6 i gese see.rseems affaire de.

promp siens v6H 4 eve seeeve penalty. hos t , lac. decel ed their soapsar, or 11 smelly nespip Sevast4, though 11 La act essentist. that HHP ls not tetelly responenble for

• I

, la see peere er se we eenid eene up H is ver help tui to beve the sys tes re. the seet 1st re sse s , tut that does s J she growed 8ees as Three at te leiend, saforsed y courts whtsh defer septeuely sean the ratepayer should be reopen.et es e um6 e see 34seges ene , s4e s me.. Le agency espertise la the f ace of shal* sinne fee these ptablems, it mee the lessee f ree s&ttaeas groups. app!!saat and not the rateperors who #

{ peld seeste ene and Amerisen sadneswe, pue36e, se, s4es signe..ednesse 84e sadme . "Coas. Peter A. Bradford, U.S. Nustear was respeasible for shoestag the l sep i une.s.self peepeal, respeeds se she suned fn. ru.

Reguistory Cassier tos.

a,rchitec t/engtseer of $TNP.

res PI AG brpi u, F,UC, h 476. # # #

]

t i hun no sf w un e se c a et nur our eressss,is s,ess e..e gggg

< .a.n i

..lan.s.,

. .s ria o ne u n a u se.e.a se us.,

e e*<,

vu aa s red 84.fuen e se=s4.e.erpreseaece.

s , esease ersne,s..

re e

""*"ce*.".a,=

• • *e=*=~ese==e** ~ ensee

• 2 ,"46Ass .,v.,de : 4,,,e s r

• flute uner, ooe vr ad1 e s!* sir e se,4. e seen, eats 8 une sa as afouse sue u n4r u une e onau.,na, u a sun. 4s e.ssas,,e e,e,4e,,fs es,e,,e e4usen enae she uaeru, ru cu.e e 5%E118 slll3US Do@TS Afses sure of prefel.g emeleep power, ***'a'".*,,

e,,.mup,,

• ="1 ". . r r'"ne' e *-"

. **, e."4"de.,"4i ".e "en e

e su sele aef r.au,e s. .

.u.,non~. nenn u.u ea pene ,

e et e I

, .a.s, ~ ~ ~ ru n, .

Se e

-,u.e,ue s .um . n.e e e.e,-~vu

.ee of . .e ~ ~ *r-e,a 8,

fu eee.,o,,e

,, o*u.e .,e,,o ,res .,e.a,e.s,u.,o,,ee eve., a,,1u,.,,lf dafos4 s,<ing ,b.,eeeme,s

,e,, ,,,,ee ,,,ue e,,

l - u .e sa ee.e f ee,

,4e ,.,o. #/fe

, , , e sa,ea o, ,,,,s,he

,, e, , e ,.e,,,e.

e e 3,,,,,,,,,,,,,c,a ,.,u,, , ,

=7u!"a~'*"~~"'",",'*"'",*,

,,,,,, e

"" '2*~*:"Me:"e%:C'*i. useev *

""4e e * .ene.,ca. s u s e.e.

"r~sg; ae, ,e ,o > eg;, ,e ,, ou ou.4~~

/n ,~ .e.e.ueu.e

/ su u e- s .s,aa su no!

, eaa. fuu,,e u ,o,, ,a,s,,uJ,

, ue,,,,,,,n,,, u,,,, a ..e.,,

egge,g;gg,a";;4g,..u u an an'~8 ~aa ar,a ~~e e

.lL;";.i.'J"J.d...'J.:en".!';J:"::e!".*.

e n- e nee usu, r. e. u a

u'"..!.~.

e

. "~,".* ", ". e' ~er"e *,e s . 'r.""n""".

n ="e .~e

" "" " I,""na , , ~u ' "m""""""~" ""e -

• ~ L, . ' 8 . u leland as e ye s geog. Intrastete leas. distance rates viu set i

ne ee n, ssta une asee sann seen e.s pt e

eenue un oai,g,ae chan ne .

e4*P 8 8 8 H ed e8 ese t.* Prepared se the PUC raised the este of return en GI.NE AAtlhG C0515 POR hly shie p$ee, un/ngmag seen. h U.S. POIrl1 PLANf6 G10GAAPil1 GAL CC0(POSitt ,se[Q e fg,agg, d e{u a e sa t e

, ,,,g, g, ,, , g , gg , t t

l .maen ou,,,4ee s. se.,e,eme s, The se==les taaers oput en the de<!-

,a c.,n.n,~

f,,

u.if.tp Ejb. muu non a sue n.e.s au s euusa..eaa

.er,eeeme.fl.wes,.

s, she 81 2 r

< ,,e .sles a no.

c.,e n sun

- no a n u,e e,..,.4e, no.u .s..ce=

.,u -m,e denn sad a, un, naulas ss ,

vettas,c ter.

na . suimv . ,n,e , , e ,e, .

,,, ,;e , . ru ,e

m. ,c.

,uu ue. con.e.ane

c. n..n.aw

.u. i n. u.

m .. ,,,

o,eu t ,. u,e,n du s eso,mame s,e o,ea ses ,

m m ,n m u ,.,a, m,no ,s de.t..a tass us..e

m. g"m. u,. ;;fa. ;;, a. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, o,e,e.e c,eer

-t u .n,,.

onen,4 u a .u, as m  !

r

.J: G.a . - n.u. u. n .n. . n. '"r :':":!,"em.,g;;"':"M;;i c '""

1 m.

,en ,an, c.i cos m u u ,a,3;,g g;<;ggr;;;g ;ga,,e;ygg, j ca.t. um im a. ime u. u,~o,e e s~. m~u n a e 1

, , a,. s

,te,su,,ue.

ca.,

oe., .,co,,o, u na t ne ,oc v.o.n

r. . can m, m n . ..u . m.

i

>. a.

,,,gn;{~ su a m~.;;,,ag;,e;p,g,;,.;;,;,g;da .,e.,.eden e u.n.e 1e

,,c,a,,en de,u,uu ul asm mnuma, asseau

.e.n.te, , , o _

auu o n um. nu

.n. a n.n .u e s a"n"" "* m m.

i e4,.uus/

,,so.. uo ,s .,e,.s ~ sun o.ue e.o, us,u..,e in u u s u-a,--n , .4.n.

e, e e.

e evs.a..,u ,u. ea mu ..

n. ,u. nar

~

se 1mun e , me.e , imur u, ur,.

e, seesu. saee.um. . c eed 6e uaeuc ~ to aaorder

-a aa ae "erias c.a.

-u.us , ,, u wm -u a j un,u,u u.n , n nemon uan n~dnu un m

a. .

I s

s

~) I I

EXHIRI A ,,

l PACE 3 I

l

. J l

. i l

kl

a 90026180 L I

l $

1 i

a.

'l ,

.; * -)

........u..e ..........u...............

1 PAY PHONES: 25c + R. .i & SUN .

rhen n .e masonary pusotate .

Ma Bell is putting a Double Whaany on  :

• a N Iationship between e ney spent on

• a its pay phone customers. Not only is the exploration and the amunt of gas (and*' , ;

i

,' price going up, but the quality is going

• crill discopend.

• down. * *-Stobaugh 6 Yorgin,1%"v Mun - *

~_

l If you have tried to use a pay phone "*""""*""*""*"*"*"""*""" ~f recently, you may have noticed how hard it has become to find one that gives you even " booths;" so as far as I'm concerned, any - '

a little privacy or shelter. That's no change that ollainate booths is illegal. It accident--its a deliberate effort Ma Bell certainly lowers the quality of service,  !

is making to eliminate the phone booth. and should receive PUC approval.

The day when you can make a pay call The PVC supervises and opproves changes ' -

protected from the elements is fast disap- in telephone service--when it knows about pearing. You must make your call from them; but don't expect the PUC to pay any unprotected " posts"--(Bell has no name for attention to such insignificant matters. '

them) at the side of the road, diesel en- PUC policy runs on the assumption that Bell Ih gines drowning out all conversation, the knows dat is but for it's ustws. p' sun in your eyes, the wind howling, and tie Besides, "apparently the public doesn't rain dripping in your face. There s no- see these changes as a decline in service," 9 ~~y thing like sharing intiaste secrets with says PUC's telephone engineer Otarles Land. "

the world as you screas to be heard over "No one has complained." And if anyone did, the PUC would pay little attention to If.

0 h 0 ay phones in Texas, only 15,000 are in booths, and those will be I n '

gone as soon as Bell can get around to 1his may be " frivolous" to the PUC, but their removal, to thousands of poor people without tele-According to Southwestern Bell's Carlin Brandt, "the booths have a very high main-phones and to travelers, its just another arbitrary Bell decision. Bell seems deter- M[

b tenance cost due to broken glass, inoper. mined to take an example from another of 3I ative lights, fans, etc." Carlin claims our sensitive, customer-concetud indus- 4 pay phone customers don't mind: "We tries--the railroads--on How To Drive Away 1 recently utilized an independent marketing Customers.

research study to determine that over 75% Raising prices and reducing quality of O of the people questioned had no preference service, as Bell knows, is self defeating. L as to the type of coin telephone enclosura People will use pay telephones less and I ,

It's primarily a matter of cost!' less; Bell will ask and get higher rates  ?'I until the PUC raises pay phone rates to Notice the Bell sequence: they decide  ;

to cut costs by eliminating booths, then unreasonable heights. It's also self- 1 they justified the decision with an "inde- fulfilling: like passenger train service, C pendent" survey. I don't know about any- Bell can then say: "We told you nobody wants Il p

body else, but I like shelter when I phone to use the service." It's a cinch that l 'C and I believe more than 2% of the public when the booths are all gone, and Bell has }

caused pay-phoning to reach its maximus level discos it, People will use the j r ay phones bring Bell $7.8 million P8Y P h one only in dire circumstances.

a year in revenues; so there's not a reason in this world why Bell Laboratories, But there's one place you can still go 4(

AT&T's gold-plated, custaer-financed t ma e a Pay call in comfort in one d de research giant, could not covelop a simple old style, plush, glass-and-chrome, fan- 4, shelter to replace the booth, cooled, brightly lighted, insulated phone 1 The tariff under which Bell operates booths 4 it's pay phones specifically uses the word Whe e7 Not by the side of any road, but (Con't. next col.) right outside the main door of the PUC's j, .

offices at 7800 Shoal Creek in Austin.--J.H. l hl i e 1979 PUBUC ADVOCAY2 REM # CF TEXAS NON PROFIT h aox a 1.anny Sinkin U.S. POSTA2 PD. 7 AUSTIN, TEXAS 4a-AUSTN, TEXAS 78711 [ 8382 E. Magnolia PERMIT N0. 50  ;) -

{ San Antonio, Tx. 78212 a;

\ 1 l l.

l i

i u

O l I

EXHIDIT A PAGE 4 90026181  ;

i..

1 I

i

p r y ;j,,Irpg , ,_

1 :e ,q;, ., ,o  !

,: i

J h. ';

D -g A

4 Il.s1 g$

h lev s l'1$]i Ji" s

{ . , li t{ j iaI

,f 4L';i j

I S '

h .1 8,l']iP]Jgi,8,3j>

8 em I h((}i ;d . uP Milj

% )i O i th 3}l. f. $I N e y . . .

fl Il h8 -

fb  !

b !! i!!.I!!i 8N lllIf,) !1[ IIt 1i g;l e llji d a

.i uymyggiylIIIkiilliIIlh-flh!flkl } ll .

1@ E  !!llI!! lil ii } 1  !  ! ! I I I ]. j [!

(3 4 ,,

! l .! k P ! f i l l j $ i i g$3D ! ! h !!I[d}![] 3 ll,k[;I !l }

ga m ! u rijgg le c k;!$jl :1qp!!!dNf!!!

rW 4i;)114;,:,Q .; 1 l.d inutlidDiplli!!ij x ep otilgy!hi

t. i i4 tg :he . si d :

ilp i CO m

i. g(

v l l"jjii, 4

ri y m pe i

3 Ihlididl!$E :} j!jlI5blplj#p $  :

@M l [l [j l i l I ! bhl - ' :ll l *! !!

. c %< l , !gaI i t El; l wl 45an}{$ltl

i 4 *

)

.......s...w...4.... o..r . r '. .q

?

...... n T.y "I 7 " .g , q j $ l '*. '. h ? l lhh M Y. S y

8

- dL -

', s M. NRC: NoN A

O, i

< 's .

MITOPS' ..p}'.

ye . ., .,..y  ;

.{

d f.,' ' '. , , , ' *u , oa Y5, # ..

^

gj A T ,

I pI

• '( W j' .. The HF tae* W igaues, i j r' I j'

e -7 4allegauona of record faisaficauose tg  ; .j;1

. the constructico of the South Tesap .

• F'

; Nuclear Projeft for the paat'three

(-

f.

e saanthe..hed appar8AtlX h4a hm4 l 1 l f notblog irregutaa. the reglocaj, ) i i '* admlaistrator o( tha bluclear Reguner' i r .:. 5m -

tory Comagg' on . c o n f ir spe's*

1 i

5 - , Wednesday. . . .

. I w r . I ' Karl Seyfrit. NRC regional head. e i i

1 W ,,

5 aaid from Aritngton he undernaoud '

n W HA *

• I the FBI has found "eusenGally noth, ~

i , '

\*aH

• 5

• 0: -

"=

2

'd ing" wrong la the construcuon of the nuclear power plant at Bay Cit 4 l

C, r W -

which is months behind schednae '

M '*

1. L

= k  ! and $1 bt116oo over budget. San L t..

• Antotuo has a 38 percent (qtarost l3 I l-EE h-7, t , , the nuclear propct.

I

' Q4I z =

l . m otncals would nather coi 2 '

-) cf ,

,firin nor dog there was any levees). I 2  ; I SAD 00-Seyfrit first disclosed the lavest6 j y . 3 .* e. -4 gation wblie commentsag on tkt

\ O >. . , r. . p, r- ".  : ' charge of a former STNP construci' U

• tion inspector that there was aq

'M ,,,

quality control over concrete pout , ,

4 2 flig for five months at the construct '

d X Q *a' . e! '

i

• tion alte. The man's chargne will be I y h ' I j .'. I. ?

....'s, alred durina the pronuere of CBS:;

• Magazine" 9a Channel 6 at 9 a.ac I

I

! Z ." C " ,.

'~

1 Thursday, . .

i While Seyfrit aald'the insesugai i

gg S tion was inaugsted at the request of i U.S. Rep. Henry IL haw the

- ,. congressman tand The I.lgnt that 4 Seyfrit must be referring to requesta

[ a .. , _

,) -

f

....+8 (.'. ^  ;

i Gonaales nude for larentlaations in April to the Department c( Emergy. I i' I' '

and the Juance DepartmenL . ,

p . , ' *i .-

Gonzales. In San Antoep durtag  ;

= , 3- ,*.

[

- .- a brook to House work.. asad he <

s aked the Energy Department to I 4

look into allegauana of soostruction.

record alterauona, and 6f the @l I

i I'

m' ~

4-

.I was invesugauas it muss to at the subnequeng requena of the f.norgy

, Department.

' Brown & Root lac the construst

(* , tion contractor, decened Ameesd6 ate

}

comnwat. -. [! ,

'  !. J .4  % ' !P Gonales and Seyfrit an6d the NL lovestigauce had no econectione i

i , , ,

' ,,' {

. .. with allega!nona roado hy ene loruner

~

A * % , i< cunalrecuon leapecter, i g.

,;.,' , .,.ej a' * *-% ,

y c [or*W W M M b , g i

[ 6 . _k _ _ &. , _ . c .s . , " x2n s k L _, , , ,

l l

g j g3 numr n-2

\ '

l .

s. .

lI I

,c

! lg i ,

t I '

l.

i >

I i

e 5

y.d Wednesday. Oct. 3.1979

... . 4 e

f , sty.

:t aM l!vProbe

. at.4 *.J - kw m' . v .* s sa M V'.

E,l 61

(Coetlaned frees Page44 *Naj. sbout this so called, alleerd pertodi,  ;

.. s. of time when they were ,not dojag ' P

ftarged c

during the TV lataeview ?.any inspections.

• y'c. d

• Djat a construction foreman'best a ""We haven't gone back and* llo i hty control inspector .ts Jely a specifically tried to prove er das.i ,I l' . and that subsequently.' Sway $ prtwe (the allegaucas), whica.: #

. epd.6tx other inspectorsWd to ~4his point, probably would.ba.ak ,

4 App doing anything except sign sp= imposaidbility anyway. However, we pal turmaa.,.t .e*Atwem%sas.dhsa..hwa checked the recenta and eartog 4 f 9For five months, we did no in, that period not much ac4vity wag . f' doecuon whatacever," Swayse is going on la critical areas." d - ;( ,

it9cted as stating in a transcript of Swayze sald the lapse was not QLo' telecast. *We wat*tt cen-offleer. feported becanne Nr dide1 L havel We had radios, When they wanted a any faith in the NRC And didn't I e6epreta pour signed off, we went know what to do." He also disputed f hNu. The mas assigned to, that Seyfrtt's maneenment that the lapse . l gees went down, signed the pour was s not certous, saying the ignored gard, came back and played pros structures were " Class I safety. .

ldtthe rest of the day? ,.

1 related striactures. I don't know how ,

f. Geyfrit said the NRC had veriped much mort ertucal you can get."' --]

' t$st a supervisor had struck pa la- .m o -

tor March 7. and that the saper. '""'****' d

. f had been fired. He said bodid 4 Is gig cona6dar the five-month tapes la ' I tieections described by Swayze as)

{ 6:

g@2aus because. "very' little workj snes going eig critical on at the tisap, work." . i;.and if wap2 f

.YSwayze also charged that he was -  ?

. doetinually harassed when he".n14 C )

! biQab, that his life was once ttgests j aped, that the company did act gaat )

Ogaat to do anything except fut ous ;f

i

1. gpers and that he was fired on thej jl gtetext that he solicited a bribe to.f 4 agprove faulty eserk.a.>'J sW W "

' g3eyfrit said that Sweyse had i sende ayumber of allegations, of

, e' ch only the assaul) was mil al@ibled. He said 6wayas had neverharam j 9 .

{tiviously infornied the NBC aboutl y;li%eyfrit rfve-month lapes also said the NRCto didinspections.

tgveedgata the alleged lapse )s 14- -

l gearties because the chargpo prob-qNy could nos he proupd, ,ec. diev .

, ppwd.w wf g . <

j Me ras into a situallon where it.

yies sts6ctly one taan's word againat g 480ther and couldg't find witseases l t;$ carroborate one way or the ! -l other." sand Seyfrit. "More recently:: t

' i b(c Swayza sitt some had aand lawyers long conversation,!

that conver. I seOon was recorded on tape and f  !

chatually a copy was gtven 84 us."] [

6erfrit aand. "We have asytt luokadj l lalo that peruse of the albsgadena..

,J B:cas ,

a,ne to ,,us rather Isse T. hat was.a l i I

i EXHIBIT B-3  ;

I h

4002M M l

i\ '

I e%

s

!t OCTODER MAGAZINE l

f43 TO AIR: THURSDAY, OCT. 4, 1979 10:00AM to 11:00AM EDT I

n a

4; y

HOW OLD IS TOO OLD7 PRODUCED DY JUDITH HOLE '

s THE NUCLEAR WATCHDOGS PRODUCED DY ESTHER XARTIGANER '

THE "NEW GIRL" NEWORX PRODUCED DY BARDARA J. TLACX '

I EXECUTIVE PRODUCER: GRACE DIEXHAUS

' I DIRECTED DY: ALLEN MACK CORRESPONDENT: SHARRON LOVEJOY 3

• i i

?

I i

E, All copyright and right of copyright in this transcript and in the broadcast are owned by CDS. Newspapers and periodicals <

' are permitted to reprint up to 250 words of this transcript for the purpose of reference, discussion, or review. For permission to reprint more than this, contact Director, CDS News Information Services, 524 West 57th Street, NYC., N.Y.

10019 (212) 975-5461 ,

I <

e i L

EX11IDIT C i

s I k

90026185, .?

i 13 J t "THE NUCLEAR WATCHDOGS"

}

d STUDIO INTRO (TIRST DRAFT) l, t

LOVEJOY: (0.C.) [

a Ever since the near-miss at Three Mile Island, j attention has been focused on the issue of L nuclear safety. But almost everyone -- the

[

congressional committees, the Nuclear L Regulatory Commission panels, the presidential 3 commissions d the public has been concentrating on operating nuclear power plants, i But there are 91 new nuclear reactore under  ;

construction and hardly anyone is paying attention to the question of how safely they are being built.

So HAGAZINE decided to go to a nuclear power plant under construction to take a look.

George Crile is the reporter.

?

e h

K

(

. M I.

c

. - s

- 90026186

!j

\

[

,  ? .-

l .

.^.-

't \ - '

I 14 i I .. ,

s ' ,

1 '

CRILE: (V.0.)

-! Dis is the South Texas Nuclear Project.

[ Once completed it will supply electricity to

' the cities of Houston, San Antonio and Austin.

. Decause the potential for a nuclear accident at 1

these plants is always preeent, every piece .

• l of construction considered safety related is guided by a federal regulation. And at every' step of the way there is an inspector to certify 1 the work is being done correctly.

his story is about those inspectors, our nuclear watchdogs, and whether the system that's [g!

designed to guarantee safe construction at these plants, actually works. 3; s

SWAYZE: (SOT) - O 4

p If they ever get a license to' operate, it is criminal, because it is structurally unsound. [

CRILE: (V.O.) N For two years, Dan Swayze was a quality control h'

. inspector at the South Texas Nuclear plant.

i SWAYZE (SOF)

I have engineers that work for me and it is ,

htructurally unsound, period.

[

. CRILE: (SOF) I

, s We came here to the South Texas Nuclear Project l 6 because of a series of disturbing allegations about the plant's safety. The charge was that  !'

safety standards were being compromised, '

inspectors intimidated into looking the other way. ,

1' We wanted to find out if the safety of this  !

particular plant was being put in jeopardy. , ,- , ,T * * - i Instead, we found ourselves examining the .

entire system the federal government has adopted to insure that its safety standards are obeyed. It is the story of one nuclear power plant. But it applies to them all.

( .

. . l

%. r, . . .

s

- .960261BP j p 1 l

I t

4

. ,T(i' "

r t

gg i k CRILE: (V.O.)

Tederal ins {

Ccmmission.pectcre from the Nuclear Regulatory .!

• They were at the plant on one of the days we were there. But according to a Government Accounting Office study, the NRC spends only 16 days a year conducting on site inspections.

• - This is the principal way our federal regulators ,

make sure nuclear power plants are safe: by inspecting the written reports of inspections g carried out by other insectors. ,N; The ones really watching over the thousands of '

men working round the clock here are these men W.

in the gold hats known ao quality control inspectors. 4v They're on the job when basic reinforcing bars are joined. They are always 'S present when concrete is poured. The problem is,'those quality control inspectors are recruited, trained and paid by the company l' building the plant. In this case, that company, t Brown and Root, has already fallen four yeare behind schedule and gone one and a half billion ,

dollars over budget. d 1i

, ,jf.i.',u. 4,

• Dan Swayze told us what it tras like when he'

, -wette& constructio&Y1614tions and tried tog ,,

I get his company to spend'the time and meney to correct them.

SWAYZE: (sot)

So$you can go down there in a few hours and

' you donecan in acita eyprything week. wrong You're imme withsurrounded lately what they've -

?j by the s'uperintendant, the general foreman, i' the foreman and the c' raft foreman for each'

• individual craft participa, ting in that pour.'

CRILE: (SOT)

That's not intimidation is it?

,- i f -

l i >

{ x 3

a 96026188 )

I b

i i

. . . . , ~~ ~ ., g,,s :sev = *..,.,, .. . .*. . .~.s. sort ** a"'" "**~

w ,' il C.

1

• S~%C.5 t 16 ,

1 l r!.;.y3 eey,#;;tt aye.,.

byt ee> re c. %!..g5, .y ye.9 se '.s

!  : e.,A y: .m e,r :.e r<l.. ' ..,sWA. ..v.

p* e r' ': :.t** 'i . W '!:*r. (W'e.'

! e .> :. -*/ *r

• t;' .

g

' YEII'1',

and most of the 'OMIn 'e'fghtdf them are huddled around

! because they've.p,ar,g.in p,ppsty good shape.

, , of t ir 1 ves. "been' do'ing manual labor most

, -QnF. .d'.:t,o,'

k ..

.. ; . .:a.yf.  ;.e ,. t.x.derl 4.t Q, ,.:.Andthey4..well..pha,td

. .s .ay7. y -

i g .

,.CRILI8

'l .. . r. v . s> . ,

'r: Y**h.*:

sa t < r?.? s.e e;. . : .

. . . t ~.s . . v=s

i. l

. . . . .. . . .. . .". r. .- e :. j W< 8 ' '

w'.AYZ,(:  ? *

"; .,C.. N *""

i  ;<

• .t '' 'h i They' sign the shy', basta*Yob son of a bitch, if you don't h kick your ass.rge.t;s e M i

"" Is thighto' clock, we're gonna p MMH:8.v.m.;,%,t,hpy

• • " g. ,aay,. af.y1that

. <t *:.1 n.-

3 ,,,..,.,,.,, , . , , , you

, , want? 'p g$

(

.r.:r:. p ;s: . Qom,f ~0.Ti.'t w..'#

'.. '.;,. 7.e..,.:. < :

' lTh'e] pilbfic#sYodd ; h'd6 es"H1 gh" bonf Ed en c'ef in the safer construction of the plant ,

)h

'tRI1Es'W b. )

"D Tom' *Gan m ort %s'Jchief oT' dali g f$ro l)4 Dro'Urf ah'd' Root

.Lbet'Wein th'sTon/*Se iitsuctich %*o'p'iohaik' 'thedproblems outd'inspecthh Mm ab'an'g, rain j 1 e on 'the~ Job aita. {' '

GAMMON: (SOT) .

i performance of anotherWhen one of thesee groups of'{ peo there is a natural  !'

might for spending. have with the policeman when he's t b ,

{;g CRIII: (SOT)

All citizen rightwho's nowcatu if you use the analogy of the }6 sympathize with t speeding, it's hard to ,i

. policeman. m if he wants to beat up the I

)

l !

'l' t

. .a

./i i-

.. v .. ., g  ?

i 7.b' ..'o - ll

.- . . . . . . . . . .. ........ ,..... ..,, . . ,, ....... , ...,,,,,,........... k f,.,........,...-.... .............,,,,,,..,,,,.. .

1 l

.....a..' t w . .. .

<i .

. . i 5

• *- 't.'?T.s o ",, : J .

l 4

%. (

. .. , W.,7e.s .+i 4

. .:. t: r. . rs .n .. e .X. .' , , , , ,, "~' . D . !&M ~~~. ...e . . . . 4

) . . . -

j -

t ..

} A

• 17 4 , g -. ~- *

• . ..a.

. }me,*, .

i

. GAMMON:

j

.That.. and we don't necessarily sympathite

. with the construction worker if he wants to beat up the inspector. I think that. . the point is. . .

} ...,,. .

CRILE:.(Overlapping)

And that's happened hasn't it?

h

' GAMMON:

4, -

To extremely limited extent. There,have been some cases... l' SWAYZE:

g" It wentabuse.

verbal frca verbal, continuous harassment, in '77 of July that we attemIt finally reached a point pour for major deficiencies.pted The-to stop a to kill me. That nig,ht, they assa/ threatened u of my inspectore. The next day ...ulted one ' . .)

C (HORE) -

d 1

1 t

11 l

! ,l I' l l ,i il I

u k' '

l l l

. I J

l f

9002610,.0 ...: -

n :. .E

?. ';

f

, . M i

( ,

• t, .

} -

g'n -

l-I l' '!

l , l. . ' ' , - ,

l l

\ 4. - ,

l - .

18 t 3 I

CRILE:

Physically? A :~* ' !.-':. '  ;

I 1

! EWAYZE I

the hospital for doing his job.

took a vote. It was 100%

mb ay we The next d s decided obviously they wa. All of the inspectors s

nothing but fill paper out.nted us to do exactly

! started filling paper out, and we did it for 5We took a vote, months. '

' a i CRILE: ii

$i Are you saying that' for 5 months you did g nothin ?

SWAYZEs ,

[4 We sat in our office. We hadeyradios. Wh r.

1 6

wanted cerd a pour signed off, we went down i r

day., came back and played cards the rest of the s CRILE:

4

.<.- l All of the papers that bear your signature from >\

that time are based on... ,

SWAYZE Absolutely nothing. They are based ong.nothin 3 CRILE:

f How could you have done that? {

SWAYZE . . .

k to kill you and they startWheny you threaten are hired to do 3:

the people who work for youbeating the hell out of );

what would you do? '~

CRILE: (V.O.) {.

i have been intimidated thats portions ere of thi i:

have never been proper,ly inspected. These plant allegations Commission were passed on to the Nuclear R _ ,

about. So y,e went to the NRC's regional chiefb .

Karl Seyfrgt, to tak if his men had c1 ack d ..

i g.

story with the other inspectors who e out the work ze. with Swa j

.&,..T.*"***"* ,

'P***"

T7h**" .._,../~ q

'i . ,

\ . . ',. , , , ,: ..-

> , s 90026191 .

)

. 5. ~

1 * '

, - - s  :;

g,

• __ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ - -__

....t.,

.s . .r . . .- . . ,..

. . c. - . y~ - + <

f *

l. '. 19 f

,I j - . . .: .. . ... .

.. ,^ .. .. .

,e

..'SEYTRIT:JSOT) .,

3 . .j ~,.. .;

j

.( Yam'informedthatwe.didinct. interview.the.other men that he named and I ' understand that some .' ,. i number site.

of those at least are no longer at the L

i CRILE:

But how did you go about deciding wh, ether his

• allegations were valid or not?

4 SEYTRIT:

There were interviews made with supervisory . 't,

,2 personnel who would have had some knowledge of 4 t '-

these activities and there was a review of records 2 made and there was nothing in the records or in If the interviews with the other people -that would 'i !.,

substantiate in this M gard. the allegation that Mr. Swayze made lj;

CRILE: .. , . .

[_

But in this case the man said he was feeding you documents that wem unrealiable. They went and they may have gone on the acene. y y;

),

a.4 %. e. . . .. a s.**.." . t. 4 ,1 ,

SEYTRIT: '

I just told you Sir'that we did more than look at records. Wo.did. talk to other people and these ,. !

are people' who would have some knowledge of whether or not these actions have taken place. We couldn't 'r,

. get to all of the inspectors that he named. s cygg, '

You didn't get to any of them, apparently. ,

5 SEYTRIT: > g-@

, That mey be true. I am not willing to concede that 1

9e that is .R.n absolute fact at this point.

l?i el CRILE:

l But it is definitely a possibility.  ! ', !

1 SEYTRIT Sure, I will agree to that.

we did not talk to any of them.It is a possibility that

-l

. ~ . . .. .= -

)',

.a e

• g $ >

t. . . i J.

t,

• - :-- - - - 4 1

e c

, . ... ..e

....n v. .

u -

} - *- * .

i j

. .f . . . e My...

4 , . . -

'av ~n' ame . .

3 ... . ,

.{

g ,

"..*..gg.,

I 7

CRILE: (VO)

'Just such. reliance on the company's sel f *. .

-(

I

} . a government accounting office study. Itsevalu conclusion j

cannot independently assure that nuclear powerwas plants are constructed adequately.

This is an example of how the system enn go awry We're looking at a routine cadwelding operation-- .

a method used strengthen concrete to join the reinforcing bars that walls

• is being tested here -- ar. Cadwelds -- one of which e used only in

-structurwe that might be subjected to the greatest possible chocks.

~

Brown and Root had promised to inspect all of them.

But for a period of time the cadwelds weren't being 2

. inspected on the nighttime shift and nothing was 11.:

k donesecretly went about it,tountil the aNRC.

Brown and Root inspector Again Brown and Root's Tom Gammon. .

CRILE: (SOF) have begun inspecting that cadweld operatio night if you had not been caught?

GAMHON:

l

'It was intended to be done at night and we had inspectors on inspections and the- shift who performed the l i

CRILE:  ! 4

.! )

~

Inspectors who were not inspectind.

'i CAMHON: Ii Weren't inspecting Cadwelds . ' ', ; !

It is simply that . .i were supposed to do rather thanthey chose to da l'l othe s

{

Cadwelds. g CRILE: l ,

Those nights.

GAMHON: [

Those nights. }

k I,' ~! -

. I.

. _ . . I s.------ -

f.

i

.. ~

90026193 .

s

.i ~

,']

')

}.

0 e

[ '

. i .,y ~- ~ .

' : qm e s :; ' . o .1.

~vsv ** ' ' ' & * .?

• <'":? ,*

. qQ U >- ,

n.  ! *.t **

• .s ,' *

,=

., , ~? r . nr,,, *;g *,, '

.s , ,

', * ' . .o.* ge . s .: ,

• t

". < . > . . . ... . , ~ ., , . . ,e : ,~, . s . , , ,

.. s CRI M :

+ . . . . - - :~. v- ..:.~. . < *:. . o.:. 7, :. .- ' .

r..? <:e: w o.<

s And>they ultimately-began, inspecting the' Cadwelds because the ~NRCidiscovered' it, embarrassed you...

GAMMON - - ' ' '

That's right'.:

,.s..

. e, CRIM: (VO)  ;

1 A far greater embarrassment for Brown and Root involved this containment building, the building >

q; that houses the nuclear mactor. 7ts containment wall goes is,the wrong. last lina of defense in case something j

• i g

By the time we arrived, all pouring of consrete 4:

on the containment scarthing had*already walls gone had wren been' halted because - p

,l 9

That hollow sound' indicates air bubbles known as voids in the concrete wall. Ac in the case of the Cadwelds operation, the voids were only discovered and steps taken to correct them when yet another -

3 man from quality control went over the head of ,

Brown'and Root'to report the problem. ,

• CRI M: (SOT)

f l

Don't you see a, pattern here?

GAMMON 2 - .a

• • .r -

.. ~ , .

I see some instances that are... disturbing and

.\

unfortunate things and toand we have strived to avoid these encoura "I

]!

our own organization.ge our people. to work through ,

j,

%,., e. . ..r.

CRIM: .

i

'i But we have just heard about a concrete containment 't I .

wall which was poured and had voids in it and your ,

own qualit" control inspector sensing there were d

voids there didn't dare go to Drown and Root. p GAMHON: '

I feel that he could have and should have and we have case . ,,tried .. to encourage them to and I know of no j1 /

3.q CRIM: I-But it ans that he didn't believe he could.

i ..

1

! t

. .; y t .i N'; .

.v'.'.',.

4

- , , j

\ i 1

i p

, .y 90J)21,194 c weq.

m , . . e s a . . . ,r .

~

,,,,._,,n, ."yy w,' ' , NShi .... **. .. . '

, ~ '-

t

g .

k ,

.j . ,

.,,+& ,

,4,. .e.

.,',<a: *. .

• t m

e .

• r:.

s, . . 2 d

< a; . .

.~; . -

GAMMON: .

didn 't,I don't know what it means '

. It only means that he ,

g CRILE: (V.O.) i to build this plant. Brown and Root was hired b '

the utilities'must get But a lionce it is finisheda group of utilitie the federal government leaving cense to operate that It.iThey're y must convince

' the ^

t's safe ).

Lighting,and Power, Dave Darkewe r of Houston went to the pro concemed at the plant. by , the history of constr- to ask if he was .}(

ruction problems ,'

n

. CRILE:

j i Is it safe? '

BARXER:

so far to data is safe,ng that we haveevYes, done I can te 7 made so to carry far thmugh the quality standard thery effort hasi b to completion at we have had V CRILEs, ',

And nothing in the process wo  ?

- rries you.  ;

BARKER:

Nothing in the process worri ..

\>\

top executive management su es me. And it has the j!I as well as Dmwn andpport Root. of my own company  :'

CRILEi (V.O.)-

And so we are told averythin Texas Nuclear Project. They'rg is fine at the South t in the being containment wall e pouring concrete inspected i the v I inspector fromthere's the even NRCa resident. on dutpart of aj n I

y. And as  !

Dan Swayze? He ontrol says that aftDut inspectors like what abo j

$ob. He was fired erby looking Brown the other and Rway for .f

\

for soliciting .!

tried to do his ( ;1 he was doing hi@s job toooot, well they say  !

he had also reported violationribes. He claim I

can't say for sure there is . During this time i

Seyfrit admits that ther s to the NR l +* ,

a connection. C. DutWe Karl ~ ,

nuclear whistle blowers.e are few protections for t

-N ,, .' . . . . .

.,(

< \'

! .e.

W .

i

\ _

1 i

,,e 23 (

, 3, , . .

. . e

. 'SEYTRITt .i

,~

We are not able.to.' completely protect identity, I >

and there is nothing in the legal process that permits us 'to provide the kind of prutection that you're suggesting would be nice to have. ,

CRILE: <

1 Don't we need to have some way to protect them? *

~

i SEYTRIT: I 4

1 i Philosophically, I don't disagree that such  ;

i protection is' desirable. But we simply do not have the authority to provide that kind of protection '3 at the moment. It's not... not there,  :

~

f 3 CRILE:

j ,

In your opinion, is the South Texas Nuclear Project _

any better or worse in terms of its safety record 4 :

,' l so far, than other nuclear plants?  ;

SEYTRIT:

s I don't think that it's significantly different.

1 3

CRILE: >

E Like most of the rest of them, hm?

{ .. 1 SEYTRIT I' Pretty much the same. f

{l t

1

' i

?

?

l t

i l

t i,

I t

'l k

'Q. --

, _ _ _ _ . . - ~ ~

= - - ~ - - - - -

. . . ~.*,r.,,**~<.*- ,

l, .

.~ . w. . .-

90026196 4

0 I '

3

.i .

,, ,. .,n. q

a. . . ..  ! .. .. .

e

' ~

.m er --

9I l

/ ..

t j RECCLAR MEETING'0F THE CITY COUNCIL e

CF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER,. CITY HALL, CN ,

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1978.

ee e e 1 t '

'l The meeting was called to order at 1:00 P.M. by the presiding l officer, Mayor Lila Cockrell, with the following members present CISNEROS , ~

I WEBB, DUTHER, WING, EURESTE, ORTIZ, ALDERETE , PYNDUS, HARTMAN, STEEN, -

l

~l CCCKRELL; Absents NONE. I, 78-56 The invocation was given by The . Reverend James Pucketit, Harlandale f'l Southern Baptist Church. , . - ,

/,l y3l 78-56 Members of the City Council and the audience joined in the Pledge i of Allegiance to the flag of the United States. { j[

_ :_ , - r-78-56 CONSENT AGENDA ["

Councilman Pyndus moved that' Items 4-22, constituting the "

consent agenda be approved with the exception of No. 9, which was requested by Councilwoman Dutmer to be pulled for separate consideration. Mr. Steen (g seconded the motion.

-{

l On roll call, the motion, carrying with it the passage of the  :

following ordinances and Resolution, prevailed by the following' vote:

AYES: Webb, Dutmer, Wing, Eureste, Ortiz,,Pyndus, Hartman, Steen, Cockrell; ,

NAYS Nones ABSENTS Cisneros, Alderaite. '

AN ORDINANCE 50,154 . .

ACCEPTING THE I,0W QUALIFILD BID OF R.A. d-i BAYLOR Co., IN THE SUM OF $44,818.00 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF URSULINE LANDING AND SOUTH-WEST CRAFT CENTER RIVER ENTRANCE; AUTHORIZING .

EXECUTION OF A STANDARD PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT;  ; '

AND. AUTHORIZING PAYMENT FROM FUND 27-008 CF 1 S44,818.00 FOR SAID WORK AND $2,069.00 FOR .

CONTINGENT CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES. ~

ee e e > ,

-AN ORDINANCE 50,155 ACCEPTING THE LOW CUALIFIED BID CF JOE F.

MORALES CONSTRUCTION Co. , IN THE SUM OF ,

$76,157.00 FOR CAKHAVEN PARK CONSTRUCTION; '

AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A STANDARD PUBLIC l WORKS CONTRACT; AND APPROPRIATING $80,000 1 FROM 1970 PAPS BOND FUND FOR SAID WORK AND 1 CONSTRUCTION {0NTINGENCYEXPENSES.

]

e e . e l i

AN ORDINANCE 50,156 ACCEPTING THE QUALIFIED BID Cf INDEPENDENT ROAD BORING AND TUNNELING, INC. , FOR CASTLE HUNT RECONSTRUCTION AND S ANITARY SEWER OUTFALL- l RAILROAD CROSSING IN THE SUM OF $14,630.00; AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A STANDARD PUBLIC WORKS . L CONTRACT AND APPROPRIATING $15,500.00 OUT OF FUND,,,,

l 52-008 FOR SAID WORK AND CONTINGENT CONSTRUCTION * "~~

EXPENSES.

! . e . .

i

. 9002619.)

4 4 December 14, 1978

~

' EXHIBIT D '

"i md

),

I- .

.g  !

- 'l i,8l al channels to attempt to delay and stop the last bond issue. Those 5 l

}

ott of things can happen. I for one, am not comfortable with the delay but hope the Council tees see fit to go ahead and adhere to the time l schedule that has been preposed in this issue.  !

>l f Going on 'to the other questions. There is a lot of talk about the cost plus contract and the impression is lef t that the contractor g is more or less on his own to do whatever he sets out with no regard

• for due diligence or professional workmanship or care and so on. There I are some two hundred inspectors of different categories on this job. l

• Many of these are required by law, by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. {f They have a quality assurance and quality control section, whose sole  ;

job is to monitor quality construction, that proper accounting records are kept. A nuclear plant if anything, is probably the most over inspected 3-'

or lets say thoroughly inspected major construction activity in the world, at least in the United States. <3 I ,

?

There are people from the Houston Lighting and power also on the L,8 project. They being the project manager. Thosa people review the invoices 7 ;

and charges that are brought in by Brown and Root and recommend them to the l p.

Project Management Committee for final approval. So there are always -

d. ,

delays between billings and when they're paid. Tl Brown and Root is limited by the contract to a profit of $12 4\

3I million. It doesn't make any difference if the job lasts two years or f L' l

seven years the way the contract is written. There are incentives in there ,

fI for them to complete the project with a lower then estimated number of 1, {lI man hours and there are penalties imposed for the exceeding of a certain  :

number of man hours. l I

With the approval of invoices by the project manager of Houston f,'

' Lighting and Power and by the project management committee, control can  ?

be exercised for recovery of anything that would be of negligence on the .j job. I don't think it's possible on that job to identify every minute or L.

hour that might be lost due to an employee going of f in the wrong direction. l Anything that involves a work authorization for something in addition to i

the scope of the original contract, certain1v would show up. We would hope that in reviewing the issues that have been brought forth publicly that ,

we could begin to be specific about them. There seems to be a lot of general allegations. We feel that a lot of this is generated by the 3

fact that a nuclear power plant is an emotional thing to begin with.

We know that there are many active forces at work that would like to A ate the project completely stopped. Most of you, no doubt know that there ,

t is a telephone number, a toll free number in Fort Worth, that is administered l '

- by the Nuc1bar Regulatory Commission, where anybody can pick up the g telephone and call them and make anonymous complaints that such and such y e

happened or so and so occurred or you'd better look into this. The y Nuclear Regulatory Commission will send someone to investigate. They will make a report. The reports are on public file in Bay City, Texas. Both  ; ,

the allegation and the investigative report. Some things have been brought forth that are of substance. Many things have been brought forth that are not of substance. i t The three specific items that keep coming up of late and have been reported in the press are the fact that a building was staked out one f9 foot over from where it shou 1 I building was substantially ad@vanced before this particular constructionhave been  !

'an error was torn out.

caught. That doesn't mean that the building was going to be '

It means that there will have to be some make-up and modifica- l tions to accomodate the equipment that will go in that building. That could involve a fair amount of cost. It is a substantial item. We don't quarrel with that.

I f

In the so called honeycombing in the reactor building or in the l i

j containment building. What that is, is where concrete is poured from up above and had to filter down through this very massive re-enforcing ,

l steel. It is so interwined and massive that is very difficult, to first of all work. It's also dif ficult to get the concrete to move down j

December 14, 1978 9002M98 1 1

dd

• s-s I

I

l 4 ^

r [

l If the concrete is too soft, it falls and loses some of its j through it.

'j strength. And if it's too heavy or too thick, it has difficulty in .7 filtering down through the interwined re-enforcing steel. This was i discovered after'it was poured. I'm told by our people who have been '

talking about this particular problem that none of the boys in the shell i exceedsd a volume of approximately two cubic feet which is very miniscule considering the size of the containment vessel which is built with a very heavy safety factor. There have been numerous other allega-tions some responsible, some irresponsibic. Another one concerns cadwelding of reinforcing steel. Because of the difficulty in being able l to tie all that steel in the space that's provided some of the steel  ;

q joints are secured by a process called cadwelding. It merely is there i to hold the steel together until the concrete is poured. We don't regard that as a major problem.

We believe that the major contributors to the so-called overruns 't 1 I and additional cost on the project are certainly much greater. We believe we can demonstrate to you - caused by regulategy requirement and changes )l in the scope of the project rather than slip shod workmanship or a carelessness. There has nothing been reported to us that the inspection ,

has not already been aware of. We would hope that we could filter out ,

responsible reports from so-called irresponsible + reports and not be required .n to answer everything that comes along most of which is already known about.

We certainly do want to provide you with the answers. There is , 'i; '

! no intent on our part to withhold anything or hold anything back from the (

l

< Council.

i ii I have some people here today that, it might be better to permit  ! p ooTagle them*'some-questions if you want to about some of the ellegations I

~~ O hpt have been made onl ti s, predettMir. Poston is our Asuistant General dl Manager for operations. He serves as Chairman of the Project Management Committee. On this Committee are representatives of the four nuclear ,

power plant participants. WA,have Mr. Mike Hart here who is a nuclear .l engineer and who has been one of Jesse's assistants and working on the project. He is familiar with the contract. He is familiar with inspection

• forces. He is f amiliar with the NRC proceedings and with these various

, discrepancies that have been reported and maybe I would do better to let  ;

4 you ask some questions and us try to provide answers along that line.

• y r ,

MAYOR COC1 GELL All right, let me just ask, we've had a lot of the {

Council persons waiting an.d let me go through this list and cl, ear the j s

board right now of the Council person's information and we'll come back s to staff, E

a. . ,

I have a series of questions for Mr. Spruce and I'd DR. CISNEROS :

like to tick off very little quickly and get a yes or no answer. What I would like to do is try to basically summarize for my information what 4 '

I've understood to be the most salient points about the financial aspects and financial implications of the delay that might be proposed. But before ,

I do that, I would like to compliment you first of all, on all the staff ,

i that you have, particularly I've had the opportunity to work with Mr. Hart I lately, and I!ve found him to be a most knowledgeable and mest candid individual. I want to compliment Mr. Hart for his knowledge of the nuclear project. It's just the best pinpoint information I've found on the subject. _

Question no. one, is it my(understanding from your comment and also from .

Mr. Freeman earlier that ttfere is a loss of advantageous pcsition by

- slipping the sale of the bonds beyond the start of the new year?  !

MR. SPRUCE: That's my opinion. l DR. CISNEROS: Okay, I just wanted to clarify that. It really requires just a yes or no answer but there is a less of advantage in slipping the ,

sale date beyond the first of the year. Is that correct? j MR. SP RUCE : In my opinion, it is dangerous to slip the sale date f or a num-i ber of reasons to begin with, we can't predict the interest rate. I'm uncomfortable with the slipping the sale date.

90026J99 i.  ?

December 14, 1978 . h Cy

\,q[.?O}

, , i M

%.c.;*.n.*

M ,4,

~

^

1 c

. ~

3 I

MR. SPRUCE:

Well, I would say that a lot of th'is is a degree thing.

You cansooner minutes decidethan if thishe welder did. Maybe should have finished this weld four .'. l one worker finished it too f ast I or maybe he finished it in record time and then had to redo it. When I you begin,to get down to measure productivity, you get down to the sort

} of workhuman behavior and has performed, just the as any skills of of usthe crafts and the rate in which have. 2

{ If you have a lump sum contract, you can be sure that that contractor is protecting himself against difficulties in productivity and wasted material that he has to furnish, for etc. This in contingencies particular there,' contract, the contractor has no provision does not have a betterment fund.he does not have a contingency fund, he '-

On almost all lump sum contracts, there are usually extras that come along, engineering changes, or other dif fi-culties that are encountered on the job. We don't know of any case where ,.

anybody bid in recentpower for a nuclear years plant.

at least has been able to negotiate a lump sum ',

involved. There are too many other things that are

. i; MR. HARTMAN: I recognize that. '

"l MR. SPRUCE:

But, unquestionably there are everyday, on every job in '

~

CPSB, City of San Antonio, in any business, there are productivity angles ]

where people could have done a job quicker and better and savo money for '

the employer or for whoever is paying for it. [',

MR. HARTMAN:

I don't doubt that. All I'm saying is very simply that .I what I'm looking for, and this is all I'm looking for, is an opportunity '

for us to sit down and for you to tell us every instance where there has What overrun been was theand howofmuch nature it costs and what was the cause of the overrun.

the incident. That is not with the idea that thisi will kill the project or not anything else. It's just simply knowing what is the nauure of these overruns and is there negligence involved  !

a or apparent negligence or whatever? Can we recover? Those are the questions that I have. ,

MR. SPRUCE: I think it's goin .,

that out - it's a degree thing. g to bewe're

.I think mostgoingdifficult to trytoto to have extract decide 4 how we measure this. What I would like to try to develop would be a 3 relationship of how much of this reworking there is as opposed to what's brought about by scope changes. 1.

I think we're going to find that it is "

3 relatively small, I think we're going to find that it is very small. ji MR..HARTMAN I'm asking. That's what I want to know, those are the questions f',

MAYOR COCKRELL: ,4 I

• how would we get a picture of this as to the scope.He'd Fine, likeintoorder knowto get at what how much of it overall is related to the changes in requirements let's say, from the National Energy Regulatory Cosmnission. Really, we are not '

, trying to get the bottom answer. We are just trying to get a feel for how i, soon you can address this question. i .

MR. SPRUCE:

Ij The job down there is broken up into thousands of work -

3 tunctions and, of course, these show various degrees of completion and

• that's what the project comp 1,etion reports are based on. In some instances ~

a I'm sure we issue additional York authorizations for scope changes and i, j others, I'm sure we vill have to issue some to correct deficiencies where they're measured. i a going to be identifiable.I think there are probably a lot of them that are just  ;

I'd like to ask Mr. Poston if he can add to that.  ! %,

4 MAYOR COCKRELL: Is there just any way that we can just get the feel of

-.what-Mr. Hartman-is asking? , d MR. JESSE POSTON: 4 Yes, yes and I was talking to Mike over there when the '

3 questions were developing and we are going to strive to set up a mechanism 0 l

to be able to report and to be able to get definitive handles on casen >

where there have been construction or planning malfeasances which have 3

December 14, 1978

'md J

f O ..D h.

' )'

2 -

.. .a

• EXHIBIT E L.

t ..

6 i I

Lf"* 6c ;< . .

4

) l'

m. .. .. .

. : . - . . .. . . ... n: . . . ; *. . .o casioned or will. occasion or haye..the prospect of causing. cgat . overrun.

. . . . . . .z . .

'# k * .

If you would, pe'r:n.it' me Inwould like to gLve one .little thirty a4.cond hyman interest story'on these voids that have gotten so much attention. When we visited the sites, last time we went up a hundred i!

i and some odd feet up on the scaffold and viewed this pour-where these honeycombing occurances took place. I asked the construction manager I' on the entire project, how did this happen, why was this pour allowed  !

to proceed. He explained that he had two concrete pumps and one had broken down and so he continued with the other one measuring the slump l i '

constantly but feeling that he could get the concrete through the foms  !,

Mr. Spruce was talking about. But as it turned out he wasn't able to I

I completely fill the volds of the form, and so he got these honeycombing.

I said 'well, what .- who.is this fellow.." He said, "he is my best- (5,

fl j

concrete man, he's been with Brown and Root 14. years and he's built-2  : I other nuclear power plants for me and several fossil plants." I said l oi m

"What did. you do with him?" "I fired him yesterday." ,And I thought, j j it doesn't make anyone very happy, but it shows jpu, I think the spirit j 9, that Brown and Root has to assure the owners that we can get continued  ::  ;

good work. -

El We will try to identify 'in our future, and set up mechanisms .' Fi 1 l to identify, cost excursions by virture of scope change, and cost i 4l excursions by virtue let's say construction goof-ups or what have you. i Jl we also want to stress to the Council that we will pursue to the end, f* '

cost recovery procedures on any goof-ups by any contractor, vendor, y q supplier or other service agency which is cost impacting the project. ,

'1 MAYOR COCXRELL4 Thank you, let ma just advise Council we got seven  ?

Council people ready, we've got at least, e citizens I-know who want to l l speak and so . . . -

l

' t MR. HARTMAN The statement was made by Mr. Poston, we will strive to J set up the mechanism. That is not what'I'm asking for, I'm asking for l an cpportunity to actually be given an incident by incident review of what ';

has happened, why it happened, what it cost and who paid for it and is  !!

there any chance for recovery. That's all I'm looking for, that is it,

- 1 ,

l I'm not looking for anybody to strive to set up a mechanism because'we l l

have strived to' set mechanisms b4 fore and we have strived,-for example, l to change cur

• load forecasting technique. We have strived to do other h l th.ings, and cver voltage, we never seem to get there. .- ~

l 1

MR. RUDY ORTIZ: Mr. Spruce, I' don't want to be fighting CPSB every time that you come here for your bond issues. It's not good for CPSB. y It's not good for this Council, not good for the communityi- I'd like to see if we could sit down as reasonable people and try to see if we tl . lt could. find some kind of middle ground on which to negotiate on this thing. '

Between the extreme of just dropping out completely which as I review '

more and more of the f acts and figures and the arguements, I see that it ~~t '

comes highly unlikely, improbable simply because of the investment we have made. At the same time, though I do have a very grave concern and I'm g sure it's your concern, Mr. Spruce, as well as the concern of the other members of the Council, as f ar as the cost overrun that is pushing the 3 cost to the citizens of San Antonio, the .ratap payers .of San Anteio higher and higher and higher. What I'm basically asking is that we have -

to do something specific, something concrete, that will shew cur <

citizens, that will show this Council that we are taking steps to bring the cgst of the project more in line with our means here in San Antenio.

i l' l So I urge you to come in for this session. I spoke with Mr. j Eloy Centeno on the phone and~he volunteered to come down here perscnally i

p d give me the assurance I wanted but I felt this project is. worth.- I L l took his word over the phone - that he gave me his comitment that he would i I give serious consideration to reducing half of our share in the South o Texas Nuclear Project by half,.50% Mr. Spruce, from 28% down to 14% . +

I He didn't commit himself to do it, but to give very serious consideration,,, l

',I '

• 'very serious studying.to'that possibility, that's important in the future.  ;

l So, what I'm going to ask you, Mr. Spruce, are you as the general manager i j also willing to give very serious consideration to a possible reduction in i

our 284 share down to 14t? Are you willing to give that serious considera- ,

j ytion?

, , . . , w., ; . . r, ~ . . . . . . . . g. i .r. .x ,.... ..  ;..

}.l l

pp,$ il t

t

.I December 14, 1978 -

md' . . .- < .i '

4 -

g .c . '

P.

F%

f' G* ' ' . ' ' , 'l l . . .

• M

. . . .. .O 9 , ;.m '.'.. .

_ i l

j .. .

h a3'55.1 11 8i p *i ]lH :t iDgg' I alp qfill ]{ i >

3 :!' jP h }j d lt "i 'li }p{i  ;

I. }  !!l 1111!1!hlinflatill!!!!!i41f u j { pill 11itill/ lit y!ill

- 81-jf- a !!e i

.M .I]4 O [Q:llir lk! ljl si d' jl la I.

3 !I Nap ln.itig inf aislij,.,1lIfji hi. An i I N up J

s;!y!!sunanl!nir;pi e n M 011 q

. # Mi Il l;I:ii' lei d!du ' upl

'* qll

!!P l!l had!it HHl!!

l},$IllldWIll!lllifilliDl'il

~

i .

ug 4 ._

tllqq:! n  ;

i 94 dm

' IfifIs5"11l I

31 4 FG-l! jh!'h!-ilt 1

h. billi'iblIll-a= EXHIBIT F r

l l

Ji t

' ~

90026f02

1 l

.( -

F i

i s i

- i l .-

1 _. ..... .. . . . . _ . . . .

l ,

5. .. A .

g3 g . .f g

..j ,

, , 4 ,. -

, .i i f

I = .

i s

i -

S  ; i1 g #  !  !

g a

[j -

t a i

1. , ss u 8

.I 1 .

,  : l 8 .

g 5 g !y s t 3t :

8 c 3

m s

7 e

3 8 .'.c. 3 .t 's 2

4,-

! 'e  !  !

.5 's *

..E . 52 . 5555 . le .. '

t .

i' E :: 5'  !!:  ! ii 5;  !!" 555:* 55 ;;;; !!5.Wii!! 1 l 2 5 5 . . 55 55 gggi 51 h

g g)g .j

!.-j:. n,!: l3y s,3g a!

~

55,53534::533 .. I' '

. 3 .

sg 23 g3 3833 .g g33g

~

. s u3, 8.5888

~

J . ,!

, g

.q 3:

g . . . . -

gg li! 5

_ -! .-I -I .to

. 1

.: ji si -3 if il il ji ji es fifigs

s..;;; -3i*5 lifil_h o t l'

2- s, :. E f,' e te a*

' :3 8 #ii3-; ' i i 5 - . s;; as - ;;;-.

.-  :.as 3 '

g 53 ~~ ,3 -2 ",I ,64 * --- -- --- ----- -

g .:

I* *t II . *I:. 2. 2: .2 ... *W:W 2:: - t... 22.::::-

22:::

l'_ .

a j : j. j

. . 1

.j gj .$ .5 .5 .5 .1 .s

• • === * = =

= / .ssl j{j. s. .

.i .l c _. .

, . r:

- .. ._ i ,

! //

,.,...,,o,,. .,,,,, I j '

c.o ito

.t.

tot

v. .,o....

tot se,.s ow6 o.. i. g;

. 5 5

2: g  : og .i. .l . : e'_  :

)

"- "- *- "- - .a  : 1 g;c 22 i gt  ::

M t,< .,

I '

, . t .

- l j ,

1 i

~5 8g .'

l t s .I ( .?)

i  ;

902620h .

w - 8

, .- c ~ 3 L

(h[II 'i'

} a~ w u_,---+ ,M----- -

.o .

- : me. "._

. I i i

j. . .

i .

. ! I{ 1 N

4

' '1 l

.- , r

~. ,

i [

4

+

I.

i

.

• 1

$ l$

i ~

y ,.

r< e V t E.W E p By- -

T m #

i g 2 o D' REpARKS LOCATION $ d'i w k -

h*uonau L AD ll $ f ,) \dat L ; h sr (t WI)

' C A D W EL.D jb' hl

%uiugVu POWDER h 0- C 0- W I-C" I M" 3 w 3i' ,

M o. lot L of. F50 C $ I

• k k .I v W O' N o. N o. @ Q- E 5 F'mitale de N el

%3 d71 ' 3is usr6 l ', A' 5 rf M --

-l5 '

'&Y 613 #

Il N O!N fy Mo opast wfTKsri A /1'o* EsN r u e, h y,W (1.4 Il N Ufdl I S- Eww~, t'r L 4 d An 'o" Gd YN -

M Wl Q{ n

^

FAQ E%nt A E l l

3 W sta lt u S el "4 As ih" E&s V2Y #d e- .'

%V $21 Il N 5M N B & ' Md iis CY J

% y f.ti 11 H T @) '$ -

0 = n9" = nY . e. $ a M.V fio -

It u I @l 6 s i st'7' 3t'd ,, 4 [ 1,f e . 1

.1 r=  :,

m s-  :-_ y ,

t i

l ')'

)'

. l .

-)

1 n' ..

I p

l l

~

can w u 4 4

l <

-,.. s

. _i . 1 i 1 ExnInIT c-2 4 l l

... ._ ..p..- .. m i

s

i

. r.

,t -

r-h .

s.

1 T

' t's V l E.w E P BY:

i (D

^

l M,.Me,, [Q l.')

u :: O.

REMARKS LOCATION

_Accasr

'[ h, i I II lIEN) y ,

f j s y _

_ArentM e etMr 7My  ;; ,"j l

,C A DWELD S t.u.r.V a Powo c.g' y C 0-41 0 lot F50 < $ % $ h D. 9 MH Q ' [ 5ll1

. L OT'. st-e.-7f-N o. @ 0. 5:fi d l ba o. N o. ,i e

ar t V l(12, lycf Z l21(O Go*L O H H $ M.% A n 1'o E2 ' ! T '2 " *

• n -

I- >&% ( (. II U $ ;44 *lro .

A s 3'7 " Ets/3'z' zr v

. l i 154 l / tt 0 $ us %'NeN u.m.. a . 2 '1 EL = it 'e " rp ,

I g 14 5 l ) ' II G S IM % $ ,"4, w;I,,ess As 2 'l " - & = /!'t " o r' h j (, (, 1 \ It S $ #14% .

A = z '1 " El = 1 s 'I ' of' l1

t,'1 /2 51 1Iu0 l l( f) IlbYCI%"WrT*IEE"# As l 'd" EL'// '3 oe ,  ;

mu.caa q_

w ,;- M A &M If $

=a u-or

, H i

. 4

s

!i '.

p <

a

. l h'*:l l  ; ;

b I

l 9002620"3 ,

yjr i '

j i 1

w. .

1 .. i . j ',

3 exhibit c-3 U"// jI 4 j

_ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - -_ - - - . - - . - -- l

i -

.e.

.1 . . . - . - . .

.s .

~'

.. ;> . y .u .. ,. .

i . .

,1 .

.i r-  ; - y ft G V L E.W EP Sy: 7 m .

8/&ffoM u 5 u 3 y

REMARKS LOCATION .

[4 4

' F ttht/tr ,

n y 3 , g- f;g ,y c roweto saa %ou , y c. e o.

5 2 *

,3 vo m.s ,

u o- t.o t Lor, pso e .

's M o. O k d h M O* N o. #!* ~

g .

97Vll b 5 l0081 jyN$ymq,:fjc%)s sq$ r- 9, goy a y,a 3g gy, a w w. n. ,

iA7HT2I 00L1 is N 3% d+~uee"$5104" Ad-3* Elev %'loY I wri;rv _ ._

g

- \ w+ x .

3t>H4163 otsv ' t,, y$  %%W M* M ><a Mrcha,.es/ Aur W m i.. 1 ekon Pace - :

e n w,.,-

MetK1 AC $

%Aurasn- -- - - " -

)

s ,<

js>

, .e i

l .

'). '

i - 1 e

t r

t l

.' ' ' ' 'w - I_;

I. p -

4 e n ,

. .i l i

ExsisIT c6 3.I @ //-(T-W. . _) ?

- u. -- _c . - .

I. l

} . . y . . .; . . .. ]:

.(

3

~

[ i, -

Q. A. RECOI } -

R uTiNo _l 1 I i }f@

Og

. NO ACTION 2..d.b' I AMA i i

REQUIRED s  :

BrownffRoottnc. M I aos : !; '

. QUALITY'ASSUR ANCE DEPARTMENT * " 6 // 3 g.jj EXAMINATION CHECK .E. u gCP eff$ 4 l

PROJE CT: SOUTH TEX As' JOG NO: 3%1197 UNIT: '2 PACE l 0F I

$ QU6PMEN I/COMPON Est TJ k1A1 kit 4Au N/A .

i APPL &CA86E TD A&ME; PROCf 64/ACTaviTV LOCATsON; ;a l YEs &&$$ CAD'.lELDING [HUU. 61[/K<. Em w% fo# '

onc. No. v E NDOH/F C. u4. t40.

• l 1 -C - /J23 h P LAN.PC.MK.AO.cc P-rt. A N/A ' '

P.Qp. OTHEIP Ffo- codV  ;.3 ;

DETAILS OF EXA1.11NdTION'

' - - lj b i.

ITEM, DESCRIP110N OF ITEMS - j; M NO. INSPECTED.SURVEILLED OR REVIEWED RESullS REMARK $' <

a l N 00 CEliERAL

$ C&mt (to . bl N g7 y ffpp. rn,w 27 y //67, {;

PRIPARATION 10 E 39 V f71 ** 39 V 5~49 i 4.t v /St ~ #4 IG o

) O

• [' il]V h'1- ~

t(1V SVo

. LLurr,p ns-7E g

v R ed VHDo ,

ke[d Art IS8 co N

p k

. y k

o

- 4,

' o f 1

• s.1 EXAM 4NEDUV: DA] &;

s a,e 5. . (( II fl$ l l

IF hSCREPANCY IS FOUND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION CATEGCHY Of Q4SCHEPANGY; j 8

/

• I .,

MAJOR (SEE DDRif I I NOT MAJOR.(SEE RESOLUTION BELOW1 {  ;

HE SQLUIlON; .g i* , g,

u. . .

(

v ..

t t

. .. , . u

- h i y

\ k f -

i

'f .

i,; ':; e.;.

o .

CHAP T 5UPtHyl50ft QUAkil Y CONIMOL; OATE: j j h

/ / a i i l.. .

EXHIBIT H-1 . ,, [

s ,

\ 1 f L.) e 5

.,' , "y , s

?

C) )b l,,.

I i

-c i

. ..a,..... . .....

~. , .

1 ' - - - - ' '

.s .

y .

., , 3 r

'{

l 'gpf g 4 - - -

g g &

V ret 4 ARKS ,

. h 211 LOCATiOE.',.,, .y l *

'I

~

if/* /78

>8 *C E j uNir m.a W,nLL L.

- ']

@ d. p' gem H4 .. ,, $ ,

~

ll: A DW5L.D s.r.ws M o d ~ ~ ~, p 0. C 0. tj "n4. * ' # T* l .

W o. L.o T L of. F5c- C $ 3 M k " ' '" 3 -*

I W o. N o. N o.' O Q. U- fi b (

g:

,l 'Z1 VIIC'4- l 2.Sl 21210 (DOW ll y S bi "4 ^>=1R&#D'D*W3 '00

' ~

w t t SS .> \\ N S M 'Y< 4ehfr* se' u-d vre I iif(, '

li s s# % v. M !r w ' u w o a 12 It.f1 \ II A 6 M % ^"M"'""" ..

. ;gSt \> \t a S ef % Am: ss s *sz'et- sn's zt )

gggp g,so

\' n a a a

$ M 'l4 sd '4 w sso*2 set = sa'fre s, ne a ec ww

]'lli 1

. . gesi -

ll 9 s.d% aa arr*a' n. so'ne 'Qj II62 - ll H S M% n.su %'at- sa's " rs 'i ""

--; ; q - 4 m 'Y __ _ _ -}!

34 V S3 2. 1250 20110 il D $M 'V9 A r= s 45to' n-W s M i xna N A) $ efVr Ar- ut*a' n-ahow

'cu a D s not  % Am sWW m.co'r" l' 535 Il N 5 68ef% h N2*et Eterdr"zr h S$4 11 Q $ nyt% -

u 14t oe s 'Ar , c.,r ,,"n SST // M $ Af % 4:390*oe' n=ca'3t.F 1

?,

i SSt ll N s' MX Am.'MI ro's" vr V II v ;d "A '

S.S 9 s er- siz*24 'm's n c S40 Il e s ont "A -

A.u n4tzs'a se's"vr i S4I l' 30 S M % M* 148%' n W3"ZP' h

$42 II at S ;&f  % -

A,. yy*3grgg ag,rygg  !.

SA3 It Al s gy ')4 4,,ggo 4o'es,co f7m a e  !

SA4 @) 'If ,ses 'jsp Pkg.,

. it u T hg s g(2* gg* gj , g's g}F'f k k \' ' ' :  ! C' ~~: M  %/ ( ' .r '

V $

'o  : \ \ .- -

\ )

, I (

414 ssu I V su u s me  % s,.:erys 'u so i rni

. r st. \ / s a s we 'A an. soc *a s'a ro*a"re i s Is3 \ os a s au % Aus smWa co'3"tr

. os+ \ / .1 as e a n - u . w a 'n so m, .

nss t 1 11 y s m M,.a _ \ s,noe.a'n.es,tr i

) M % k W.bT M AssSof* W D'C0'3"JF Isk >l N S s ll Ah ptRWQ 'Ch'%2I*k2

• B II*d 2 ' El e co 's !!

IG7  % l  !

154 (

Il N8'M5 % & W M&w As . SI2 *Wilm Go's it,, l, .

m I39 I 2Tl 20l97 QMY

}} W 3 &h .,

A'b'2G'G1 E 'Wl'If __

. . . . . . s EXHIBIT H-2

• s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i, s . ..t. '

m e g D

• . . * , =' .

• 'N ,. , *

' " ' ' m* ' . ; . .

s. .

.....;1rq. ,.e....

7

,, A . ,. ..,. ..,. ,. .,.

., . .. *Wri i

i

I g ,

~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ._

. i ,

a v m. sa a eet wis e

, 1 t

SW 4 F 664 MO.e g'

' l

. B:Utm&Roct.inc. s._p i OUALITY ASSURMICE DEPARTMENT h h ,e EXAMifJATION CHECK CP Il- M d '

PROJE CTr SOU'H TE X AS' JOB NO: 351197 UNIT: l PACE .$r. 0F_dM'"

EuulPM EN T /C.OMPON Eld is MA16s taAL; 1 N/A .

APPLiGAd6E TO A&ME4 PROCES&/AcievlTY Lout sold.

vis His cAo m otwc sureAL ReFu uwe r o o t.,

DWG. NO. l P LAN,PC.M K.NO. V E NDOR/PC. MK. NO.

l- e - o .<ts' / s -c-ISIG l c c p - e t - A. ulk ,

P9fe oisER. i Fs o - co s3 l 4 DETAILS OF EXA!.11N ATION -

l A ITEM OESCHIPTIOtJ OF ITEMS N O. INSPECTED, Sur.VEILLED ON REVIEWED RFSULT S REM AR KS i l.i on cgngggy SvsSb9 inAU GVaS4 o d eq 6 27vst s9 se E 7vst + o iJh 3 3 V I## "

~ 10 PILEPARATION s .. ,~ 3, ", , , . , ,, ,, 4.x/./ ' I Sb V # W " VM 0 20 FINAL .

hf 5 4,v,, u ", ev o i 7'1 00 4pVSo 49vtf .a s .

y a flH23 II $1HE$

SS V 18' g M [M k p MJ M IIM jMM .

W ' , ',

.m.

I I

1 3

i o

I

. l E X Amah E D B Y .

DATE; a (df)}}nh 4-E H/G l79

[ (F DISCREPANCY IS FOUNO. COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION ,

CATEbORY Of DiaCHaPANGY:

l I

MAJOR (SEE DORif ) I . NOT MAJOR (SEE RESOLUTION BELO.V)

AE&OLtfiiON:

. 1 l

CfMF T SUPtHvi50ft QUALii) CON T ROL: DAT EI

~. .. . . . . .

/ / \

E'XHIBIT I-1 s

1 90026209 .

j g

^

f -4

-eI'

,'[} , '

l 1

v 1 g .. , .

F f" - y . 1

$l

}g 0 REMARhs ,

(

lrdir.VtE.W gp,fpp4Eb BY : ~ u u .c

,0, LOCATION CeAsrnAL 67

\

. $ /t l8l18 f f 3 y turonn a al M r. ll '

C A DWELD %Lrwu Powoc.g 0- C 0- " *# 8 7 '" 8

. k I O .,-

i -

' 4 0. L.o T Lof. F5o C $ $ h i u o. N o. N o. O 0 8 b M' II * . Ii' 8 e

' SV 85aL I2 4s t1047 l rves et 4 3 Ver. '% ' "" Pr* l?r% e ' *k'

• u . <fk ' * * * ** >

...sv #54 0 12 9 f 2Id+7 af M $ # % '.8W,., wt "r 7EE,, "* "* # " b:

y s.++ , GL l.21 V ll 3 9

3 t-5 214 2 t if M5  ; age [v %., s ,g ,

c=y sz.*e euy0a

• s * -

I: .

• 37 V,8i 4 O IE98 284 2 & !It A Y N N* m% C e/O'l ' Eta do'3 YT , .i

',4r y se ia4t 2oz 73 ll r & Ti 5%fMT- P" m,@f Er4 et 4rvioo 1342 zoz7s it .4 r-M % .

• NWMW k= -o'4' o r'lW Lv e6 ll d s W %

~

4s v ton is4 t. zoers do'a " MW'br > % l

,49 y 4 s 13 Z 3 af424 -

if it T 02 9 "h N[* #Essr0 hi 49V+9 3323 zi42t . If. g p @ '% 7pl 1, (j

• 49

. VSO 8t?f 2:370 if A) S M "/p c 4',i" u r ga, zF g

• * * " "'ff,"& )-

• 3 2 V t,4 5 '5323 28 A E-l Il Q 5' f) 'h es t. V 114 I S L*b 114 z t. I f' M T ]} 'f1 **G*" "J'., %Q ,. ,

• s a. Vif/ 7 129 ( -ir4t+ '

is N SM ",4 c.2'3 El 40'o " %:T [

'ss, r*u*r's'+ '"su s e ***#'**" '*~*'

89lV6*l + s i3 C b 20352 i1 N 5 9R. 'in

' - sI . F. s."r a Q. 4 l i39V5lf I.32*.5 2056'E If M 3 9n. %e *;, *'s;;;%a,,,

' ' ' ' ~,,* "

• y + * *- ***h, -

gst 'ji " ''** C $y 39 V514 I274 11390 If u s / r y'4,*m EL* 10'< ',

! 3 ' 26'" '

ll %' .' T *'  ; = ,

f:1

. gs u n r at o n-> s um es ,

!!"'::; - - ' " a i54.5 -

il 1

? .-; c ' > l' f= zem o

'CIH2% I329 2 on's II Al S &% u. ass- Isar e,y;.* gts 42 y *,y,,7,,,

• CIHLA 1328 2en3 It Al 54% unr rr p y'o* g nor ,= ;R. y} $'

> So ifz S~ 1_qzt sozn 11 N $ g 54 vec ry lpp9 'g . 47 '3 ~ j',yyh

• SCV'I8 1218 205F* n s sM  %*ll Midi l"*"2.s'e' go ss'H",Th ll

.-  ; n, L'fev of A, cft. : lt 'C  !

^

1. l .I; e

a

( ,

I' N N IT f i

l c

4 e

< ljnes perf Has on aJu= ara - l ua - I f as , .t e M.+ if h r Wisdo </ e , 4/, .% ,' r 4 L, W b _

u% }-h.% n. e e- CooflB _

L. r- +Le A , s n} bee., wofed C*e x exhibit I-2 I s .

94'026210 r .

4 . ..

I

l I

r Q ~~~~

.._,,(- '

i J y

(

4 6

\

I M t

Jo J of 4y i  ;

5 d Ji  !'

a C Es b '#

I y, :2 . i i

te Q ,

I 3u 1 j

23 L .-

g {$

f - -

-. j!

j S I W MO h .a

{ 441s 22 g4 .

4 - t

. >1 N l j

$ W s4 ~. . .

,, _q ,.4 ,a.,.e --

o , ,

gj.N s.

,, - l 1- t- ,

4i

+1 L r% ,l

! Nli -

OS m, 9 3 e

a .> .

D. .I <

W  ; Q -

~

N 3 N sg e;i om y M >

E 0 4 d I io ) @

i c $' E (

o as e a I

k P t1 w

!! ==

d et 4 'u e e

>N e U d y I $ h *

, $ =3 m x w A i 3 is os}s ge"h aeg C4 ~' ~

{ @ j ,

3 t. , ED&O \ '  :

l$

O# C7 ,5 $

UTw Eqe T.

2 o  %,

o ',

O m - g l 3.2 *o *4 e e e e

• 1 O k IL.*( . _ _ . . -

9 O 4 Ce _ _ . _ _ _ _

t E

EXHIDI'T J i

,e 7 ,

<9 5

' i f -

3 4

i

l -

[ ,

. . , r niE.c- -

Pur J af *s. .

a*E./ L E W EI A - S Y : .. ._.l gjpd } m --

- e-

}

1:3 ; Q 4"'C lif M <../ c m ..,

t ///f /h 7 ll/f/J'77 W <g J *Y

$ A**f k k<s*/6 S a. M/7. I ~

CA D WELD %umvs Powoe.4 D wr,/h Q C

.1 (L

// p '-

/0A*4 4 *'rrt t y /5 34vrwm *

'} lot l., oT'. F5o C $ IO uRE h A ks Le cq ygog

^ MO. h M0 N o. N o. @ 4 d h b f- **

(L H //Tk jStt 2.I1,3efco/A /) n i fat) .o ,**-

M /44 *et. fx su'1 T n Y

.hw/1 ht

~' -

s N vpq Ffs epo ay n"'Q __~,- ,

(51Han l'1%1 %I11/ N$ &', /44'0! EL. / s!'s ' \

L ts w is, 't

..< vs **

f /sy.'o r. s ize 2 ~ ,'l YfN/L/ Al S '

//v'**

• i, /is 's '

t-t 19i l

)  ?,

\

gs.usg I3s.1 *! N3 ): Y 'o r it.sso 's ' f f Vf& 14, , 9- v 1., , I N S"' /a & * " "*41"'O /t $4n es 11> r *

\) 974/40 AlS l " **

/41 - Ts Et /s s 'f

• kN yppfd 4/ S

/l1 23 t. / 59 't ' I yty);y N$

J1pp% /L i S

/41-11 fo !Wt

• i b 5 '

/ty as A /s/1* T VT/r JL1  %/1,9 '

N S Ask/2 1 S /n D Cr./17'r' h l Inu /< n/r

• i,

~32N4 tf /hf /s./ tyr 0 8 5'/. N 3 *

/ 3o . se //p'i '

l' 1 pt119 ' '

N$

kl l

/3o-oe 54 /10 'F * 'N'

• f a ///13 t/t79 # 3 ,

f

• T 2, // /,1f

/J+ ** /s /11// *

// I

• 1sHi>> " /30 40 la /1 M g

'At f ** l

% A%9 " /1o- _Zs/1lis col 9 At f (9}//L I3 %%

ho -os f.s /11'o

• g

'1-/ L1 l f i IV f

$"fk/1 / Jo -oe & lyo'e" l $ V $

% HH M./ l ' /3o m rs nn'o' ]!

Wv L

'h klL e +/n/ oc gg, y 7

/ yo .,, - .

-ij

$t Md/f *

,332,4 ,;,,, y, ,  ?

f I $

/IPIs4 A //9 'o '  ;

% ftiLY l i L'l%74 h /Y$

M kM48d  ; /19.LL h /13 fo h*

l f Nh ,

/19#14 [(,,/3('ra*

\

_ St N (1)

/ 0069 #S l

%4L1 t/Ut /2.f 21. 4 /13's

• I o8 9C if S

$1y )5 ' /Si so is /utr * .

R S. S A

'ft tr l't' lC114 fins'2 * $

) S' 5 la )_. ' y ' d S1 H 11h l $1ht$' /k.Yo _ e*snir'o-

{fS b ( */

\ j)L.fe TL131'o

./ *

] '

ean l i

j j'y

._ l .

,J..>

t i

EXHIBIT K-1

': s s , .i 4

9002.6.2i2 . -

.4 s 8

.

• c..

'g,

• 4

t . . _.

{ h$v

, 4 ':s V t E.W E n ey : ' ' ~'~ ' 1 $ .--

. I

, t f))Afd u $

w 1; I ilh1/7f -

u c A owai o W o.

nagy, %og ggj {d [o u PW Rks lot L of. F5o < gZ L o c q rieg . ,

M D' N o. N o. O c. dh na Y G H /T3 /M u 6 To r o At a y,. u ,.c,y ,,

ITY f j_. gy 4g y , uorw <s g

21 ti il nw noiis a par i

/2 _I A -

• _ IJ Jfd m %,< l ,

ej

'fY Jfd REh. sw i ) )

'U

• /6" /A' MfMW ($ , , , ,,,. : j.!

I b ' AE e ( so* e' stw i3:'ogd Y 61- H /3 6'3LF" t.Lil yg, 1. l g

{

' ~

JM f 1 U$tsi 1 3- :

dM ) TTe, st ,  !

Ip g '

i l l I y ,

lif I '

y f -

l, l .

4 l

?

=

I.

f

\

. e i

l>?

l ?

l l'

( 1-i l..

msn l

g L. _m.L . _ . _ , ._  ;

exhibit K-2 s I 9002621'3  !>

i n

. .U

. ,. -p-

• ,, r, i

4

.! !l

i: '

[ .

_ _ . _ _ _ . _# J. . - _ _ _ _ . ,

1 J;

\ /L.sI & - '

l  % 3 j- * - - - - - -

f ..

il /ti/1Y .h l

Aowet.o suva I

powoca owof u "5

$ c 3

tL g, g_ y[_) lg ,

w 5

-f u o. t.o v t. o, . pso e g 2o REM A$ks L.e c a rio s g w o. N O' M Ca @ Q- C ""

,, g, 126618 (314 otH Ico f6 LNe P w4 ' 13o*oe' ti v' 3 IIE '

cit (se < ti s' m' d' L  !:

Glo JFo ,

6>< __ { lJR k) -j ' !

- syv l' lJkJ l Q3 u tYi 'J K _f 1 Y. p ctv 16:  ;;

62r JE A 624 y6 IIh GL7 #e  ! i!

611 coc9 'We cair \ _h 6&V (W

l m o49 '#4 %

I ids,) E w

(fdl(

3'hl ff4 k6kl% 0o13 IR 6g 17 .1160' t g)* 1;*lo'Odf

&Y t 'htv 14t11' oeB H f MN **

IT/ /(,' ' q 4g's' 7f.'/M 486 (M (W Ut'll o c/d 'J/d T- Ye7 od" g i

.'j g.g  %  % f '

lb f JR l l 64- b1lT JFE l I

l13 J62 L i i

%4- \

g of;- p -

4'tVff @ 14vil 'oet3 u  !<g/f% *"0 .

ttgg' gp'3 3gf,'({q a

l rk i kr MJ 't sw a .a <g F7 WT #f t tv er - I T j, N I A N IN k 28t *fi. =a

@ i rSHis3 13 9 u k1! wm 'I n se ua W M9

- - - IO 1 M4ai y< I

u. er

@ j Af '

Jee 'M i i

IG w 1 (67 we l 16f I  ! se ( .i M I { #e I 1

l. . . . 17e w  ; 1 171 1 M ..i i e

i L 17v i i i Me 4;c WJ i

.. . $. Y . , - w I'.

h

, exhibit K-3 n

i 9002621,4 3,

e, .

.,  :' 'y ]

, %,;7, e

I  %

f

• _f , - -m-- == : -

\

l- .

l fis**v I,VIELED' CY -

GLE dAA)$ Y /1-r-7f I ,

LccAT3 u;;

.&=

.k ,

Z.

s 80

[ *  % Cf 3 o y

' M_.'t T

[

' LDLT.LD SLEEVE POWDER

• } h s4 CA!MSLD 43 DATE ((-11 =HATERIAL( g' ' g/ h

. in c j No. LOT LOT FSQ g} g h i

E0. H0. .

NO. so u a m h

o 8*{* ,

• \ *

. ' - Au I.a et f~PKJ 8  ! .

wk_--u c, A--

lJV69

'h INv in.as ~ ocA+ ll W T q

! H T ti-w 7 n'a'a' /2PJ a r ,.*

tL% 7 ll1's1' sa'ti l 9;: h 7( K f SM i

't //f4 fB'/ W

'lv U T

. 11 gh. .

7 liffl .tflo'  ;

)

'l3 h h I

& ~1 IION$ .18/( f 1+ H 3 l 1

1. *1 sc,hd %L l dn rus 1m t. nue '

H S $ -

L ntd Mf.L 1 1

L 1iru 4 3" #EI

, b1133b w

6 ! 3t %\4' %'2']_

I 2t M E ilm . _.5 2f 178 lo Q$L.  %'a '.

l Iw .' ,

K i ,L ,..4 4Wim 4 Infld NI'I 23 ed6 14 tLK 3142/< S' loL'd+' d(. _

S

, __ M bo k 3 FL hW8h F hM__lb' ..

'fV N 1.t t W ocW K S TfE lidt swn 6 le1'24' N/

E '

• N I N 1"T(Si k ( d it'to' '

N N I N _

S'Y M3 h fcM_, it'6' ,

31 l I

R _; _64f ff b_Jg6*Kl ._,.BlY #]ng l .,

j -

Tj .

yt:1115',NN ) --

)

3,0h

, on *?? U /

ji

-) '? 9 .

t jl

' p G10i f I3M G l

'q) - ggggg - ( -

,d

+

y._ppicc'4eNMO

r. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a I l EXHIBIT K 4 .I

i

I l

k I a '

.90026213 .

c I

}- ~ ' '

. .u.: .. y. m...,

? -

' . ' ' ' F5

, .c3. . . W P.T g.. "s.'",~

,...,s,.',

• e T ' *

,.. p,A te train.ro ._ e,se osy. . Ts.t# 12 .

4 yt..~

,i ,1

, ., . r.a.un en . p er.nnu nu .

i g'

_ _ _ ~

y -

c 172 T. R @ $4 @ 13 .

t

,L 003@E: 0 -_

• To I"_'Ae fms_).C 'Z~cfJecreb ="

I gwCom,nvaursou m n beswM t --

. . c. .e M.(ia/M M AICar

'j' _ _.

4- t 8-7*n "- ' '

__ . - l l ,

.)MS DV_..*Th)E_ % ._bL.L- . . . _ _ .

f

_CQlW!n4A[LC.ATio4. ~d3TMe.4. d __biuIL _- " _ ___ _._ _~.

.Q.C _MD _'DeswLh9S Aub/_d.

• rbtst...*o LTiE'. Rqo A.t.5BMTATWiFS j._t.ctL.L._

j

.bE HP*ct.ED .AY A .L4 Net. No. L.Qtwi!A..

.,y s.

'E Q . ._ W' . h. . .t

, . _ . .W $hhMS ,]?%. .-+ N_- ..-_i .l..s ,.,s .

g., 'OR,.

', *,,m. .

QM14.. Gl'. @ D W lATLQCS _Et D . Y LT # " '

int.mo L.W L4.M AppROVLD *$y ..Thd __ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . . . _ . . .

6 69 L.L... Q .C.3 v e v. o N g . .. _. . . _ _ _

i)

O M , ,j 3Y

a' wo {

. . .#. ....M.....

r . . ' %.. ' . . . . .M . '.d i

l * . .. i J. , ,

s J

l

. 1 "J '

i

. l

' l l

• e p

,{i

~

I

]1l

.* l,., )

'i

.. ~n.... . ,

t

, ,, g .,. .

s i . ,

r i i

EXHIBIT L ,

I F 5 .- 4 8 \'

s

, l j

-i 1 l

-}--- " ' - "

c l ,

' :E .,

2l292006 l j .

5

{

W .IIEIrlX3 r  %

l e

r. y .

s

. s.. . %. 4 ., ,

j

. . i_.: i

~

.. . u t

1

..,.mI j ' .- ,)

F . , p s

, 1-s '

d .

} , ,g ' J. ,3 '- ,

W * ' '

.,, g' p'

c

=e, a .II.g .

! u , !It i!!n!np:

a 5 m  :

n .

o ,*.

z $ l' ll5$b55 . El

- l(

" s a QfM:'?i.M t .. , 5 8J ,, -

. . <qh. y,a m 5 l,! .~.: . v ,eu.n m:g&. .. g. sr.; n r p. m..:,g e g1

.; e' mn: .j, ,

8 g,

e a 4 , . . .

g e .iw!.y.;

.p  :::

V r

2 f l 5

= 15:::!c* :*4 .Jeg I ' .* I :s 's. i U

g IIj. ;*.ff igF #

W i

tt '. .I.b,g :s b i,s hh 'Ebt.ih ? n ,,

.,i jy fE l;, Iliysfi!a englijlj.h5.

(. 5I ,g t ..t l g; ,,; og - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , , ---------________ -----

. r z l' O *

.L I- .l g o' ..

c -

{

a ,,  : w I. .

9

,,j . Q .

a

.1w

• i >

j.

l

>ll'p 4

e

,i *

,!e i

,t

. z -

!), ,'

\,, I f' h i? a ,

f c '

j

. l ., w ,

.1.l

, ;i.n . ,! - -

t .. b. I i

i 1

,y ,

w m c .- ..

.. .  ? .f,h%XA.hC. ' '

t

. I,N T E 1 0 F F I C E REMO -

}

. To: C. W. Vincent .*'* MII: August I, 1973 .. ,

, .% } ,

, FRiat L. A. Watkins CORRES. Nos' STQ-3129 - '

SUBJECT:

Validity of Inspection " Punch Lists" and '

Civil Quality Control Inspection Interface ' +'

Belationship with Other Disciplines I The week of July 31 thru August 4 was spont on the South Texas Project !i

• te determine the validity of Civil QC Inspection " punch lists" and ,

l I~." ' ' *

.to observe'the interface of the Civil QC group p th QA and the 4 Construction Department (Crafts; Hanagement and' Field D gineers).

}

Time wee spent in the field.with six of the seven QC inspectors 4 which were doing preplacesant inspections that week. All of the

" punch lists" attached to the pour cards were reviewed. It was

~[

determined that all The items identified byitems id6atified the inspectors were onaddressed the punchbyliststhe were valid.NO gy{QN i 2

'l specifications or procedures.

Coskstruction had no basis to complain R. .EQu 1 i',

I about the items addressed. 4 L

.( {

I ettended the Monday morning Civil QC Constr'uction Engineering meeting. '> . ,?

The Chief Construction Engineer made two statements which were very i

.soccerning. They were as follove 'a * -  : .

hh 1- ~~,,p.y $bt'e'nMe'M%*dbedt%$8a'duMrst'ateDd.EsQid- ,bound m'= existin&ent*ee"'/ een? *-'"~* ))11ohhe

• * ~ ?wm l ry Statement ~#2 "Some of our foremen canf t read orjgig very we Q o it y1 .

g is up to the field engineers and QC to keep these. people c informed of the problems and QC to make sure they are right".

It was apparent in'the field that this attitude was prevailant and followed

• by construction crafts. It was noted that the construction craf ts were 4

, heavily relaint upon QC for direction and instruction. Many items identified + 7

.by the QC, inspector could have just as asei.ly been found by the craf t i foreman. *'

,, t 9

16 a meeting with the Assistant Project Manager and the Chiaf Construction t Engineer I asked if there existed any major probisms between Civil QC ..

1 preplacement inspectors and construction. The Assistant Project Manager j , l stated that the inspectors had bad attitudes. ' He tried to ju tify ~this , ,

t1 by stating they (inspectors) would hold up concrete placementa intensionally ,_

by not identifying items until immediately prior to the concrete p%acopast. . 1

• Be stated that the majority of the items on'the punch lists wars '

"Mit Picky". It was the feelics of the Assistant Project han.iger that t

{!sy i the QC Inspectors should approve an area if te had the general configuration ,

of the representative design drawing. He also stated that the QC Inspectors j ggggggMCE ROUTING mv, l1 8tT N. OA REVIEW 58

. Y dr No.

2. 7h' I g' 7b.) ,

R9 ora

. -su_s n o o. 4 AY .

4 x

' 5: -

?

L- -_- *

n. - ,

.s

, N' , I

, i exhibit N N ,,

\ '

o r

'l J

' 1# -

I

/ -

i

, , make more engineering type decisions.were working for ths wrong depart 3

.Enginear did not differ with the opinion of the APM.The Chief Construction Construction Hanagement felt that the inspectors should overlook " minor" epancies discr i

.{ '

because structure. in their opinion, these items would have no adverse n the affect o ,

for the inspector but for the design engineer.The APM fails to see that .

Design Engineering staff.APM that the project was bahind schedule because

• .}

ouston I

STP is causing a great deal of uncooperationat betvetI person and the Civil QC inspectors.

aI construction crafts  ;

There vera numerous cises of construction 9) j supervisors acting unprofessional toward the QC inspectors during n discussi 1

of the specification presented by construction. because the inspectors would notretation accept the intarp 3

l j In all cases speech and attitude.witnessed, the Inspectors remained very professional s in hi by construction to get a FRIA to clarify a problem.In many cases, the QC4ii type,of besitation on specification disagreement majority of the delays. using the

. This could be cdi$l of the field engineers. This point was addressed and discussed with one @i staff could possibly offset and prevent scue of these delsys.He agre $l V

~ The Cay staff,.. Jtms 11 gaiers,117 QC in.pactora felt tydid not seg to have.ponfidgnce in the sit e QA M,ykseeneceugh'about TGir 'f1eid'acti Azwfps! tors.tMg tjf-QA Staff 'did udt * *.y,'* ; ;; .'} ,, l $

• gequired.

' ies co* provide the no3essary support "

This confidence needs to be >

established through good communication .

Another area of interest was the support given to the sQC the QC Supervisor. by inspector s

. the ideas of the QC Manager to the inspectors.In my opinion, the QC' Supervi I

. will make e decision without proper explanation to the inspectorAlso, the QC Su .

appears to the inspector that the supervisor is willfully viciating .

'e aThin g t specification o1r procedurai to progress 4th the construction This point

- was discussed witty the QC Supervisor.1 " .

u.

, e . ,

d , ./

q It is' recommended thatan outside person involved to make suggestions ou possible trass of i n s.'

on also be '

representin ,

?

I mprovement. ~ N

~

All itsas on the punch lists were legitimate and procedures. es. in regards toIn specifications

" d' " " " '

S d

attitude toward the A sajor areaand QC staff of concern was Construction Managements' their purpose. 't the QC Supervisor and inspectors will possibly improve o ccaditions.

the j bBetter commun The QA staff function needs to be redefined to the .

fieldrs. inspecto M[ W -

i L. A.

QA Vatkins.

Specialist III ...- ~~ "

./

a IR/cir {

ces ,

P. L. Bussolini _

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

.I \

l

. )

k 4

I 9002620 ,

i ,

s

• d .

./ 8

• '35-1197 -7 t -

BfDWnCTRoot.lnc.

(. . O. 7-27-77 V ~

f ,

' ~

.j INTEEOFFICE MEMO'

'i TO: All QA/QC Personnel DATE: July 27, 1977 FRQ4: T. P. Cardner JOB NO: 35-1197

SUBJECT:

Construction / Quality Assurance Interfacing Recently we experienced an unfortunate incident in which one of our people was hurt.

This occurred during a confrontation between a craf t concrete foreman and a Civil '

inspector over the support of a concrete pump slick 11ne. Heated words were ex-changed and the craft foreman grabbed the inspector's shirt and forced his down on the reinforcing mat. The concrete foreman no longer works on the job and the in- i spector has now returned to work. As a result, an extensive investigation was L conducted by B&R into the matter. In addition, the Nuclear Reguistory Commission ij became involved in a separate investigatJon of the ins ident. 3 ;

g (D ,

It was discovered during both investigations that there existed an inordinate amount i:

t j.

4 of friction between the Construction Concrete craft and Civil QC. The NRC described IP the friction as a two-way street and ~ boca groups were at f ault for'the friction. Our l'1 ,,

main concern and the NRC's is inspector intimidation and whether because of intimida- ' '

g tion that the inspectors would overlook quality aspects of the job. It Was determined through interviews with the inspectors that they do not accept any unacceptable con- '

h. wg . dirious,- -

g it is felt that it could  ; '3

{c;. v .V efieet Me,I( lualtty p, f r(etJoe$llowed d e..tt..e*wo.r_M..g,. .. .,to'./.centiny,

. however g

a . .~ .

gl The steps that follows have been'taken to eliminate the friction between the two

, groups: ,

e s

1. Requiring all personnel (Construction and QA/QC) to assume a professional  !

b. and businesslike approach when in contact with each other. ,

,  ! 4D

• 2. If it is apparent that either party is,becoming angry or beligerent in his O attitude the other party shall immediately leave the area and report the 1

' problem to his supervisor. The supervisor shall immediately rep Jrt the in-cident to the Site QC Supervisor'ot the Project QA Manager.

. I

3. Explain to both groups what each others responsibilities are, i.e. , Construc-tion is responsible for providing production, meeting schedules, and maintain-ing qualityg QA/QC is responsible for ensuring quality is maintained and is obligated to report any deficiencias discovered during construction for 4.

proper disposition, j

Stressing that whatever the circumstances, physical contact or verbal abuse is never a solution and shall not be condoned. .

The following practical considerations will be found helpful in maintaining a profes-sional attitude on your part and in securing and maintaining a working relationship j with interfacing organizations and individuals:

as

1. Attempt to tell Construction when they have donc a good job. A continuous d negativeapproachtendsloprecipitateanegativeattitude. -

j t

a l EXHIBIT O y

i 4 90026220 k

• g i ,

' l 3 ,,. ,e .

33-1197 ' I i'

BrownCTRoot.tnc.

{ @. . 7-27-77 q,l L

I '

t

, gl, .

2. The approach to problems or discrepancies should be with the attitude l

'g that it ta a B&R problem, not a Construction, Engineering, and/or QA

, problem. As such, it is a shated concern. Use of the word, "WE" will

) '

be found helpful in promoting this attitude.

i

3. Try to avoid an impression of arrogance. The person (s) with whom you are dealing should be assumed to be competent and in any case is entitled to '

his own dignity as a human being. talking down to him will not contribute s to the problem solution. Use of the words, "MR.", "PLEASE", and "THANK YOU",

• )

• as appropriate,will assist you in this ef fort. Use of such words does not

detract from your own position. .h 4

' a

4. Try to take advantage of any opportunity to improve your own technical com- -(;

potence.

pl All of the above items shall be used as guidelines fo-c all QA/QC personnel in their i W y y 0, association with Construction or any interfacing organization. g e

1!

O

---y '.i

~

n = __; qq 'O' c'

$t /W e -, ., i

~

t. L.

i T. Cardner - -/ v -

Il!

f

,a',',. $. d '"" .S., N"dk*h.4

. g. , . . . , ./' h g . , g . es Fl;f .t*

• TPC/ TBS /cla N 'l '

' > ".a"

--t l"

.. s m cci P. J. Karnoski ON 9 l N C. L. Crane  !

J. R. Monroe

'k O R. A. Sanford .

, ' O S. A. Visclovsky (HL&P)

F. D. Asbeck (KL&P) 3 All QA/QC Personnel ,l{i .

\ FII.El A450Q - General .e j 1

i  ;

}; .

i

(

L _ . . _ . . . _ _ _ _._ _ r - -

s '

L li n

i 90d26221 0 1 i t

i e

r s

8 - '

1

' \

. ~ . . . . .

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

e==*'""" .=t....___.

^^

$ *M W

• 1. !!t.5 .~-. . . . a

. yw g . ,_ -_ $ {I

• • • • • • • .n=w~~

i ,

,:g - '_ -

l

>-- u- - D g h h [- [rc'tC.gf ad.{- --P Ph

---

M "

[ . t= - ..- I 0 R

,I

. s-- W '- <

! ~ ( /W.

l

'*** T. ..Ml,%#W, pari 4Ip_ . 4hht . f2.R.JhsC1,0jtc.:.F!"...'.'*.%._

I. . .

. . . . b.

. . . . . ...O ,.

. .I.Oh O 6.. ., k. ,_ ,= , .-

+sa 6. .. OI M f6 .. OrP.,.. A . ..fr,0r*far % l#i. ( All._ ,

. :. " ~ . . . {gutom) ..'.,.

-.- +1 '

e. . ....$.{

• -... . n.

, .e __ . . . _ _ . _ _ _ . _

[ ,

y

' . y* . 7 Mood c.hipii ard oftw.r ffash tias ._.{, ~

l ,

j

_._.a cc uniulated direcily be.f cw +nc. '

, ..[;, ,

• I

_.$ "2.1-

• s .s - .

i

.. 6ul u. .

Khebd..r.... 64 ihe. .,..

Gcntfrualicil-n...

op.eniq. . . y.,

P j1 h? 7" h " .)ocated in . the ..boHcm . Of ths .. -Q $q(g1 T; .. pour' . af approW mo/ely . 200'ae mu1h. M. ,

$;I 1

.. 1 - . .

~~'

4,,., . x nl'

-n '

1. A+ all . butt resses, the' l k " de sign ~ $ l h*

_d cinenSon .'toL+be. :frun_1pe+ ' ' cbp e is: .. .._t_

T _, _.. __:.'Os;' ,

_ki:n .. a ___n.o!._ T. D3Eji main f r.g.' +ained ;@ . . ..__, Mlw=.=- e[l  ? l

.. ... i .-

w s ... A+.@yoi $benn.gsegsiva csy,,new . __:- . +;eia y

'M * . :do not L.n\cIn+oin .k ".n%imoin. ekbrance .

Ii 1 4 .

_%_ .outside.. .cf .fortn s. . .

. . .:.$1. 1  ;

.. .~ . ..

c:. .,

?! .- . . b. OltOn.up h intorn pleic }<0n1' bi * ' . $ b ll l

.._ . lbut+rtsS l s . t o... A. tho

• a i!-intuth. ' ._

l 1 I

'.... . . . .u . .

.. . 1 1 q 3

}.  ! 7. .A . bolt'and a nut in +h'e. bof fem <I , l

. ..I2 of f'.,

+he 64# buff re15, .

l J4 b'l r  ! I. . 6. Shear fiss at 4 60* o$lmutA do

_ . I. '

i

. not rnbenialn 'N" minimurn eltarence.

i i.l

',#l

l

,y.]

9. Minimum -4 "' O.o ver requiren1<n'6 nel. " -

l' l L .; OlaiMbine'l af 4 C0' .

f 6 7.iniufh, . 1 1' t .' ,.

• h

. . .,3 . . . . . . j 'l

A L .

1!1 s.,

\. l

.i,

.- s

r. . f N.. . .

t

.,L., w., e l

L4.h.._ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . ..'-.

.j

_.4 _. , i i

i +

! EXHIBIT P 9.007d22 i

. s.

4 j .

• 5 . s ,

e . -_

l J

i

q

. f . ., - . - , ,,

i

'l '

) .

l -

i l

ktnAM SK16Lb(7[l0l78b 1

.l '

I. 16 , Il bORitcMTAL bAM STce AT TH6 Fact oc Visstl buP70RY, f

' 'ThEt EAtuW cocttpuf DTJ. TIM. LufPORT.' (NCR)

2. O PAIRS #ll buuuS Gpt.$ 'tAGED. Fot tatou est;t,, suPeoAY (56c.f.f.-E,1r.13552)AT TOD suppobs. bT rtso '5uPPORT4,c4I.1 T00 PAllti Ptxt . bou TLab tTMii, BuMbLtt 6AE5 STo# At 7ti6 PAcli, c5 Suer 0RT, igt.tEAb c6 uAri 8 4844 56 Lod. ()T.R) . i S.

NeoEcoTAt "ll C LAA 19 5A647 DP \$1141, SL4P90tt, */ TO 4" h'

Bttod G,Abbs M Cb "

f1

4. btL *[HKtt. U ll hotodTAL. %'t1 It3 T AbAT 05 V($Mik SuPPt4T5 6 suffertn\ pts (.C:b 64 Loc ciAAM., TCP ' bat 10"-11" wrek mLod

?Yj$. .uwver #eo ,, .!?$$$$O%. rd'?p J. -

a om AT .

qLotpTsod T II" RArsitu FActn k filer. fog m45iW.. ,

etAL Surecs MLugo.

l J L Int.AAnct. cr PUGftm Ef. ,s ~ '

. 7. 9suu.r. c.s 3r Tut eos os M.'s atamo m sne. u ami9s. *

.s .

6

• lI RAblAL 4 An Sod ad Sr.cr. L-l. ou l-C* 1534 2.Tieb 4"1.04. '

1. 8 16 boutLL.. BETLs%4 t*et.EG Bt.ocr twra eA Acarn F Ma ,P w .En rweat. TAA entti.b %P, i A Tanet 8.om.bc t-C 1%i 2 " y to, hiieA K K U c.-1549 tat.Ls Foc f11D 10 m m m *i 18 get,e e .

~ '

hot'f cotb ta o e 9c4. L itteb wi s,9ge '"111 Her W44 19s 5t:Lb4 pot. Tilt Hot I(bl.h (4G cetAt963. b C (A '

i*AbbWt,tt.b Tb a La. diAciests ca sirx-e side. os.est Ms Lt-G cetr -

u.0 It T l,' '

Nrth5 e io Efm CNMdkb M ALb tim 6Pt: alp 4$.

l(441 vasset )

, 11.ll O Bus se.rugo me tret.m Fon v% BAcces Ago t.ntesat

$ ;swrear pat Ptacts $c rat sArts u9t As THf. trwo Anbac o

} js*li-n ,-, suws.G.,- arm -m_we t- w .wTbn. . .zwo t-i s

i

! 90026223 c.

l

,i N

! . gg .

i 1

.i '

4 .

t IS T#Y l #

lc t S 3'7'S JC /f294 , ,

I Sount 75t1._ Peet. /ktp.

talt l'Is . ~.

! . En __ 2 4 *1'...T' W ".

- i o Verhcal construchon jo,nt. on 4, .

EL . 1. 4'-t

• : c isnt bekem J and st'-z' within .secordry shoeld u. kit ^

. . . . Sholled Ahrth . Need . Poten E, b @)

fra sit verkJ sarr aface J h %d . ride

.. ..:, stainku sid . .bner pale Y reissing.

'O G: <*anklerer bars (_.1: O E- kl. 'fe et.2s'

\ .

... lappey "not placad ' "at paper running eleshan . $lso , needt a 00

. . h he sinced and hed properg/ .

@. Eg. 1- s - tesi , .sedion H+ \W show.s embed.

referring h de/ ail s2 on dy . I- s-1s ' can . nd \h 6e * *und. Q

9. West face of Idd 4)all

. , , , ,i,.,. i1 meds /d'laplum&  ?;

@: a // bars for hdhre

'. . d, [

rnc& sf .v' slah have

,,,;,,,,,...,,,. l T

-. (i) 4&f y,gc, , en4edme.d gh te/Ain ' fpilinq*,r#.Gisi .2 '

p p k ;;y ' g;,, ,,a g

],

af ha peet area - noved > s. . Guda .tvez , ' 9 9 .* 4 % pecs (D sheau- .Lks ,

J one

.re g a d % g .

• p. ece. n3 thur ku, ifaeds t w -. '

' . v. d 6 .#.9

/w, psa shay .4a yI ,

• med

'

• 4. ou pak. thaar %. tvaa.de inskJ f poca. .

, 9 'Pam. omhet holk lep d at ho & krok \ L, Tape ne.eds b he remonq'.

@ Antfrutbo' n inl Zbcon in

,fechon fi'H d40g.l-LIDC Nd (L.nihn

/iA4 beM Sr.cordag 'hs/d L$all) j

'77?oved . A'eA44 A 4.A 'l[

@ 'jI, fft e. condeler firt shove G Sec. hon &A, cL. 2 t ' r.' in j'

. $4li A--. oLs3. >-c-trn a etern:rujaa!, eeeJI, h Yethcs/ CAndrychss d Sbeich & b' born '

l

(

kied face of k.ed Lfb.eE*l (dq 1-c.oroy . o) ha bron

• ynoredy.~. Weede Fren

\ .

kA ,

, t 4 i

J

? j i

900262M /

e

(

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - ^-^

5

,...,,v. v v eycisog.-j v '- --

nv. = - ,

Y ' - l l <

fff.ro 1-1 . . . . .

? .

IN PRocass Zasps crie^t; .

s-/to l7s' j-

.I ~ .

,i .  ;

't

FIL L _

JLB S.

I

.w -

( . ,

t >

l

'e. .N-E section . 53& S 537 ., behm 'lay er-

. . . -- , .. .no & . . b u n dle d. '.- . .. ..

... l,l i .,

+ e , b + j

{

.,,. .g

.- . . . .. $l ... . . E - 4 2. .. ... at . surnp 'need h go ^ ba'l . -l insIea d...a A Ito'...bek..

7 G. ;g

. c'

.W , .... Alorrna.l.. . tunp " ' '

^' l' O k fN-E ~ Sealion) l to'll reinf. . . mf locokd a per dug.1c-ICn ,.

0l

~.  : ,

M seC iort

. . . nisso,na . . --

,T. ...,._..__..i..._'-

. ..p J . ,- l, ,

.. . .DL.-....# ti... sphce C td a 4 6ai) in " Ne! saako n

' ) ll L

s hort .. sykce. .& k0 .

. i' J ,i.. ,.. l

$.: E17, E2L2 p_29 tr . 10. 5 seckon , {i l l K bwndung bau b mnie . sog% ' k 'ik' (jap R '

l[ {

+

- d, . bet.) . . . .

.. a.

l.?

O .. . ($,,$ N $

Grwny .beaGD .

~

@ _ Top w2.1 ..bwncilec) 'missiny . .

.( .

i 1 - -+. ...w.

I l.

I 90026225  !.

n . '

. d, 3 j b

i

=

a

. ,; j

• lL/5 e l

, , Illi l ,

M s

l -

v.) neagn_gos __?WMLA._kiPI ! s' / - '9 W h 91 Lt ., \-i 1

- ~ -(~ s i LJ )-_ _ _  :

$. . Elahs.. Qf A$s[" . $sorr' W.f.Ma.. da;Jued-.b.9E Plate on onude ines J Eak s.s. a , s Ls ' sou A l

~

cf $ Secke , gaj behJec o' $ctria card pb5. ,

IL$ b e en,

D) f)c e ~ localeo' l

<t* W f.10 daplaced byI'y Plate 'on ol'* o f N-u U.u (I'l'Som WP.*L'b

. hol occorcling lb 'droung (drawng chow; conhnuou j  : , psfe) .

l

. Shear ties not . . placed incorre% <r.1- $ bom

^

w). 1. *2 on N-w ssu. '

@ .7 Af. WR IJ Shear hu bacbin; . . ..Arrr2 )hf{

form and pla% al- 4' Acm

. O 1'gaf 9 be.lwes.,, .

' w/ I4 . , i

. . @' 1(. g .be % formt 6d.pbk *U C Lg' {com k, I tl

, we n -

@ ., w heal .l, I e il de ve) ' 4. mbt } cut bdf

,, '.. ' ..,L.

• M on wet sw .

[

,- q !%

• 8 ; ghgy. *?% ndo&yth *Q:near. ~ *

. w:f. n . ?l

' insv5cied .cw er.

T' @ . Af* WA 13 . . . .' l

.,A ' N6ap . bek.. faien .. .md f<n t". $J-b*. sasdL.. I

' '*' .. I

.- . .. Hcm.)

& .f:$St.ac.cos(4y.&...be9 .. hetaew. Arru..

' ~

U h' I,, ( ~ lf 4 .

3 Ab $ .fa u fr~t, ( G q . d o Q... .

& ,1 .' .

17

. . be}uess. '#rmt a d. pied 6.I$lo J s5 . t l I. .of f. A4Ad . . . . . . . . . . ... ,

'.~.,.....@ .Wed ss.u1 clos > sit G eD. for ' wau s>J. saw

G

' ' _ . '...# ' S 3.no. Chould be ' perpeedicda< G atender3

.......... . shiaJ eas. .t

. 1......@;. ., o e J.weh kr s<nat an , Som M 1 l 3 n'. s seconday Skeid att shoJJ be pain dcJar

);

• }. *2 .

d secondary l ' :9 . . . .) :" ' i shr.R L.hu. . . . . . . I l  :. ' }

.. In Work ssp. e* pipe steed 'by a eseb.

@I J 6f 1C lvpe tMa . nes4 aaVikond wbcJ .

_l

\

A O. . . . . . . ... '... . . . . .

., '*_f .; ..". . . ' .l. y

~. . . . . . . ..

'l .

}

.y

• - - * * * - - ~ ~

• 96026226 0

e 4

'5 g

- - i l I

l ##D 7 v.c:n2 -

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA d V*. . . - l

. h.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ,, *: l

_BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD h '

i In the Matter of

, Y' f.' _

HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER Docket Nos. 50-498 . _ .

COMPANY, ET. AL.  % 50-499 '

Q (South Texas Project j Units 1 and 2) j , 4 I hereby certify that copies of " ANSWERS OF CITIZENS CONCERNED ,

ABOUT NUCLEAR POWER, INC. TO FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES y, FROM HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY, ET. AL., APPLICANTS l 1 AND TO NRC STAFF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS" in the above captioned proceeding have been served on the following 9 by deposit in the United States clail, first class, this 26th Lg day of December, 1979:  ;

Charles Bechhoefer, Esq., Chairman Richard W. Lowerre Esq.

• Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Assistant Attorney General (

Panel Environmental Protection Div. [\l' U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 12548 W Washington, D.C. 20555 Austin, Texas 78711

]

W Dr. James C. Lamb, !!! Jack R. Newman, Esq.

313 Woodhaven Road Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, i Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Axelrad and Toll 1025 Connecticut Avenue Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke Washington, D.C. 20036 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing Board '

. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Panel ,

Washington, D.C. 20555 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm. t I

Washington, D.C. 20555 Henry J. McGurren. Esq. i Lounsel for NRC Staff Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal  ;

Officw of Executive Legal Director Panel '

Washington, D.C. 20555 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm. 's Washington, D.C. 20555 i Melbert Schwarz, Jr., Esq.

. Baker and Botts Docketing and Service Section (4) i One Shell Plaza Office of the Secretary .

Houston, Texas 77002 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm. l[

Mrs. Peggy Buchorn Executive Director Citizens for Equitable Utilities Route 1. Box 432 Brazoria, Texas 77422 _

s 6

( / P -

.se ja k w Lanny Apan Sinkin i

Co-coopdinator

! Citizens Concerned About Nuclear

, Power, Inc. l i i 90026227 /

?

'i l

l l

400 North Akard Street Dall.as, Texas 75201 Telephone 214 742-1941 January 14, 1980 Mr. Jerome Saltzman, Chief Office of Antitrust & Indemnity Nuclear Reactor Regulation Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 i

l E.

. M&M h E

~

Const l : ants Tennessee Valley Authority Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant ANI Facility Policy #NF-198 Endorsement #50 CERTIFIED COPIES

Dear Mr. Saltzman:

Enclosed for your records are eight certified copies of Endorsement

1. 50 to ANI's Facility Policy NF-198 on Tennessee Valley Authority's -

Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant. This is the endorsement showing the list of Subscribing Companies.

Sincerely, l '< f y" v

i Jean Fielder (Mrs.)

l l

l C. R. Dodson ..

cc: W. Smythe -

Jf Enclosures 8001170 3 +F #00/

5

///

95026228

e Nuclear Energy Liability insurance NUCLEAR ENERGY LIABILITY INSURANCE ASSOCIATION CHANGES IN SUBSCRIBING COMPANIES AND IN THEIR PROP 0RTIONATE LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT Calendar Year 1980

1. It is agreed that with respect to bodily injury or property damage caused, during the effective period of this endorsement, by the nuclear energy hazard: e

a. The word " companies" wherever used in the policy means the subscribing companies  ;

listed below,

b. The policy shall be binding on such companies only.

c. Each such company shall be liable for its proportion of any obligation assumed or expense incurred under the policy because of such bodily injury or property damage as designated below.

2. It is agreed that the effective period of this endorsement is from the beginning of the .

effective date of this endorsement stated below to the close of D 9cember 31, 1980, or to I the time of of the termination or cancellation of the policy, it gocner. .

5085 CRIB!nG COMPAN!!5

$t PROPORTION OF 1001 Aetna Casualty and Surety Co.. The.151 Farmington Ave.. Hartford. CT 06156 Aetna insurance Company. 55 C1m St.. Hartford. CT 06115 yC 0 $ 10.067410 2.516852 Affiliated FM Insurance Co., Allendale Park. P.O. Bos 7500. Johnston. R! 02919 .251685 Allians Insurance Company 6420 Wilshire Blvd. Sutte 500. Los Angeles CA 90048 AMstate Insurance Co., Allstate Pleas. Northbrook. !L 60062 to l *h as 4 11 0 o .

1.342321 4.194754 American Hosne Assurance Co. 102 Maiden La.. New York. NY 10005 O C C., 4 .880898 American Motorists Insurance Co.. Long Grove. !L 60049

• O o .419475 Bituminous casualty Corporation. 32018th St.. Reck Island. IL 61201 Centenntal Insurance Co. 45 Wall St.. New York. NY 10005 ,c j [*

.g o y .419a75

.576779 Connercial Union Insurance Co.. One Beacon St., 80ston. MA 02108 t 3.020223 Connecticut Indemnity Continental Casualty Co..Company,Plaas.

ChA Chicago. !LThe.1000 Asylum Ave., Hartford, CT 06101 60685

$C,eo d oe 4 419475 4,)ga754 Continental Insurance Co., The. 80 Malden La.. New York. NY 10038

>. 4 4 .c 7.508610 Federal Insurance Co. 51 John F. Kennedy Pkwy.. Short Hills, NJ 07078 Oe e Is* 1.510112 Firemen's Fund Insurance Co. 3333 California St.. San Francisco CA 94119 0 6eneral Accident Fire and L1fe Assurance Corp., Ltd.. Fourth and Walnut Streets. Philadelphia, PA 19105 U E' 4*3 5.033705 D Great American Insurance Co., 580 Walnut St.. Cincinnati. OH 45201 Hanover Insurance Co.. The. 440 Lincoln St. borcester. MA 01605 oU Ne4 pdU 1.342321 1.342321 *W h

O .503371 Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co. Hartford Pleas. Hartford, CT 06115  %

Hartford Steam Boiler Insp. & Ins. Co. The. 56 Prospect St.. Hartford. CT 06102 Hignlands Insurance Co. 600 Jefferson Street. Houston. TX 77002 44*%

4 co 4

7.131082

.503371 Home indemnity Co.. The. 59 Maiden La. New York, NY 10038 d o '4 *% 03 .419415 Insurance Co. of North America,1600 Arch Street. Philadelphia. PA 19101 3.691384 e d' 'M Monarch Insarance Co. of Ohio. The.19 Rector St.. New York. NY 10006 m$ t 4 1.677902 +8 National Casualty Company. 28333 Telegraph Road Southfield. Mt 48034 9 o .335580 horthern Insurance Company of New York. 59 John Street. New York. NY 10038 o .335580 Nortnwestern Mattonal Ins. Co. 731 No. Jackson Street. Milwaukee, WI 53201 Hto tcO2:[ C

• C 1.845692

• d Chio Casualty insurance Company. The.136 North Third Street. Hamilton CH 45025 Pactfic Indemnity Co., 3200 Wilshire Blvd. Los Angeles. CA 90010

• O .d 43 . 3 4 .671161

.167790 l Peerless Insurance Co. 62 Maple Ave.. Keene. NH 0343) .335580 =

Protective Insurance Co. 3100 No. Meridian St., Indianapolis. IN 46208 cd .o JI .125843 g Providence Washington Insurance Co. 20 Washington Place. Providence. At 02903 * * .d.c h m

• .251685 A tc 4 Puritan Insurance Company,1515 Susmer St., Stamford. CT 06905 .104869 oO 8e11ance Insurance Company. 4 Penn Center Plaas. Philadelphia, PA 19103 . c2 .251685 1,484943 $> '".'

6 Royal Globe Insurance Company.150 W111 tam Street. New Yort. NY 10038 St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. 385 hashington St., St. Paul. MN 55102

% .e C4 3.355803 $

Seaboard Surety Co. 90 William St., New York, NY 10038 5 tate Farm Fire & Casualty Company.112 Cast Washington St., 81ocain9 ton. !L 61701 Transe* erica Insurare Co. 1150 So. Olive 5t.. Los Angeles. CA 90015

(>d g .G op oO d 4 C O 4.751817 4lg475

.g33951

~

"b Z

Travelers Indemnity Company. The. One Tower Square. Hartford. CT 06115 United 5tates Fidelity and Guaranty Co.,100 Light Street. Saltimore. MD 21202 O

g e=t o 02 .c$

.838951 10.906361 g

• El 10.067410 United States Fire Insurance Co.. Madison Ave. at Canf teld Rd.. Morristown. NJ 07960 C 2.684643 zurich Insurance Co.,111 W. Jackson Blvd.. Chicago. !L 60604 NE.80 c3(0E0 ,0

'r4 1.258426 g; o7g

-t c Effective Date of d 4 *i; .$

this Endofsement January 1, 1980 To form a part of Policy No NF-198 12:01 A.M. Standard Time issued to Tennessee Valley Authority Date of Issue .la n t ' A Y'y l E - 10An For the su scribing co panies By O

/#~ General Manager Endorsernent No 50 countersioned by ~.:.-~,-,m (1/80)

NU20dd7

o Nuclear Energy Liability insurance NUCLEAR ENERGY LIABILITY INSURANCE ASSOCIATION CHANGES IN SUBSCRIBING COMPANIES AND IN THEIR PROPORTIONATE LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT Calendar Year 1980

1. It is agreed that with respect to bodily injury or property damage caused, during the effective period of this endorsements by the nuclear energy hazard: .

a. The word " companies" wherever used in the policy means the subscribing companies listed below.

b. The policy shall be binding on such companies only. , ,

c. Each such company shall be liable for its proportion of any obligation assumed or expense incurred under the policy because of such bodily injury or property damage as designated below.

2. It is agreed that the effective period of this endorsement is from the beginning of the effective date of this endorsement stated below to the close o', December 31s 1980, or to the time of of the termination or cancellation of the policy, W hooner.

SUBSCRf 8tNG COMPaNf($ s PROPORTION OF 1001 Aetna Casualty and Surety Co.. The.151 Farmington Ave., Hartford. CT 06156 Aetna Insurance Company 55 flm St.. Hartford. CT 06115 C$

• d-10.067410 2.516852 Affiliated FM Insurance Co.. A11eneale Park. P.O. Boa 7500. Johnston. RI 02919 Alliana Insurance Company. 6420 W11 shire 81vd.. Suite 500. Los Angeles. CA 90048 M dE .251685 Allstate Insurance Co.. Allstate Plata. Northbrook. IL 60062 Eg 4C . 1.342321 O C g 4.194754 American Home Assurance Co. 102 Maiden La.. New York. NY 10005 American Motorists Insurance Co., Lon Grove. !L 600a9 O w

e h ac E* g .880e98 419475 g

Situminous Casualty Corporation. 320 f8th St.. Rock Island. IL 61201 .C c .O

.419475 Centenntal Insurance Co. 45 Wall St.. New York, NY 10005 # .4 #5

,,3 W .576719 l Comercial Union Insurance Co.. One 8eacon St.. Boston. MA 02108 Connecticut Indemnity Company. The 1000 Asylum Ave.. Hartford, CT 06101 %e"O Od00 M 3.020223 419475

' ' i Continental Casualty Co.. ChA Plata. Chicago. !L 60685 4,194754 Continental Insurance Co. The 80 Maiden La.. New York. NY 10038 M 7.508610 Federal Insurance Co. 51 John F. kannedy Pkwy.. Short Hills. NJ 07078 Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., 3333 California St., San Francisco. CA 94119 D bj $ a:

5'  %.,

C 3 1.510112 Q i

I General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corp.. Ltd.. Fourth and Walnut Streets. Philadelphia, PA 19105 y g 5.033705 i D

hc N]

Great American Insurance Co., 580 Walnut St. Cincinnatt. OH 45201 s 0 1.342321 I 0 1.342321 Hanover Insurance Co.. The. 440 Lincoln St.. Worcester. MA 01605 4y ,u .503371 i

Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co.. Hartford Plata. Hartford CT 06115 p ow 1 Hartford 5 team Boiler Insp. & Ins. Co.. The. 56 Prospect St.. Hartford CT 06102 7.131082 Highlands Insurance Co. 600 Jefferson Streirt. Houston. TX 77002 d E 3 A (0 .503371 419475 ,

Home Indemnity Co.. The 59 Maiden La.. New York. NY 10038 Insuranca Co. of North America,1600 Arch Street. Philadelphia. PA 19101 co o ,) w 3.691384 e w '/3 ,,. 1.677902 G Monarch Insurance Co. of Ohio. The.19 Rector St.. New York. NY 10006 :D ,33gggo g National Casualty Company. 28333 Telegrapn Road Southfield MI 48034 .m O ,e,e O

.335580 Northern Insurance Company of New York. 59 John Street. New York. NY 10038 Northwestern Mattonal Ins. Co. 731 No. Jackson Street. Milwaukee, WI 53201 ,c ] 4d h 1.845692 l

1 Ohio Casualty Insurance Company. The 136 North Third Street. Hamilton. OH 45025 9 o W .671161 p ,167190 Pactfic Indemnity Co. 3200 W11thtre 81vd.. Los Angeles. CA 90010 Peerless Insurance Co. 62 Maole Ave. Keene, NH 03431 p

m O]M

,c y N c

.335580 ."

- g u e

.125843 Protective insurance Co. 3100 No. Meridian St.. Indianapolis. IN 46208 w MM .251685 Provtoence Washington Insurance Co. 20 Washington Place. Providence. R! 02903 60 4 o 104869  % *c' Puritan Insurance Company,1515 Sumer St.. Stamford CT 06905 C $ 12; 8eltance Insurance Company. 4 Penn Center Plata. Ph11adelphta. PA 19103 .251685 e' Royal Globe Insurance Company.150 W1111am Street. New York. NY 10038 St. Paul Fire a Marine Ins. Co. 385 Wasnington St.. St. Paul. MN 55102 h,,,

w "hy g3 4

1.484943 3.355803 O

vt l

1 4 4.751817 5 Seaboard Surety Co. 90 William St., New York, NY 10038 O ,g d e o State Farm Fire & Casualty Company 112 East Washington St., $1oomington. IL 61701 OM 0, 4 419475

,838951 .

g Transamerica Insurance Co.. 1150 50. 01tve St.. Los Angeles CA 70015 Travelers Indenmity Company. The. One Tower Square. Hartford CT 06115 wo $ ,0m .c 0 .838951 dC United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co.,100 Light Street. Saltimore. MD 21202 g a) g la; ,5 10.906361 10.067410 8

United States Fire Insurance Co. Madtson Ave, at Canfield Rd.. Morristown, NJ 07960 at O e c) 2.684643 4 h Insurance Co.,111 W. Jackson Blvd.. Chicago. !L 60604 ,g j 1.258426 6 we c  %

4 Effective Date of ** 5 %0-60 this Endorsement January 1e 1980 To form a part of Policy No NF-198 12:o1 A.M. Standard Time issued to Tennessee Valley Authority Date of issue m m m r y 11;. loan For the su scribing co panies By A

/F General Manager Endorsement No 50 Countersigned by W72 l (1/8M _ - _ - .

Nuclear Energy Liability Insurance NUCLEAR ENERGY LIABILITY INSURANCE ASSOCIATION CHANGES IN SUBSCRIBING COMPANIES AND IN THEIR PROPORTIONATE LIABILITY ENDORSEM Calendar Year 1980

1. It is agreed that with respect to bodily injury or property damage causeds during the effective period of this endorsement, by the nuclear energy hazard: e

a. The word " companies" wherever used in the policy means the subscribing companies listed below,

b. The policy shall be binding on such companies only.

c. Each such company shall be liable for its proportion of any obligation assumed or expense incurred under the policy because of such bodily injury or property damage as designated below.

l

2. It is agreed that the effective period of this endorsement is from the beginning of the effective date of this endorsement stated below to the close of, December 31, 1980, or to the time of of the termination or cancellation of the policy, if? sooner.

SU85Clif 8!NG COMPSNf C5 3. '

PROP 0ef f 0N OF 1005

1 Aetna Casualty and Surety Co.. The.151 Farwington Ave.. Hartford. CT 06156 Aetna insurance Company. 55 (1m St.. Hartford. CT 06115 N$d

• M .--

10.067410 2.516852 Af filia ted FN Insurance Co.. Allendale Park. P.O. Bon 7500. Johnston. R! 02919 kJ L1 "! .251685 A111anz Insurance Company 6420 kilshire 81vd.. Suite 500. Los An9eles. CA 90048

• Allstate Insuraree Co.. Allstate Plata. Northbrook. IL 60062 u 4 . 1.342321 I94II4 American Home Aswrance Co. 102 Maiden La.. New York, NY 10005 O C 4 4 a American Motorists Insurance Co., Long Grove. !L 60049 o 4'880898

. g Bituminous Casualty Corporation. 32018th St.. Rock Island. !L 61201 9@ he

~ .O a c:

419475 .:;

Centennial Insurance Co. 45 Wall St.. New York. NY 10005 .419475 .~::

Comercial Union Insurance Co.. One 8eacon St. 80ston. MA 02108 #

% i-

.y "*" '3 .576779  %

Connecticut !ademnity Company. The.1000 Asylum Ave. Martford. CT 06101 '? 3.020223 3 Continental Casualty Co.. ChA Plaza. Chicago !L 60685 O 419415 1 '

Continental Insurance Co.. The. 80 Maiden La.. New York. NY 10038 gL -*

,c5 "y9

• • • 4.194754 at Federal Insurance Co. 51 John F. Kannedy Pkwy.. Short Hills. NJ 07078 7.508610  :

Fireman's Fund Insurance Co. 3333 California St. San Francisco, CA 94119 3'7S3 ~5

J 1.510112 C Ceneral Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corp.. Ltd.. Fourta and Walnut Streets. Philadelonia. PA 19105 5.033705

. - 3 J 1.34g321 .D Great Arerican Insurance Co. 580 halnut St.. Cincinnati. OH 45201 Hanover insurance Co.. The. 440 Lincoln St.. Worcester MA 01605 d :.; d I

~ 1.342321 *. ::

Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co. Martford Plata. Hartford. CT 06115  :

u , ; w

.d .503371

'Js Hartford 5 team Boiler Insp. & Ins. Co.. The. 56 Prospect St., Hartford. CT 06102 7.131082 Mignlands Insurance Co. 600 Jefferson Street. Houston. TX 17002 -

.i A. 4 .503371 *1 Home Indemnity'Co.. The. 59 Maiden La. New York NY 10038 lesurance Co. of North AmPrtCa.1600 Arch Street. Philadelphia. PA 19101 ti 9

. . g

• 2e 419475 3.691384

• f a

Monarth insurance Co. of Chto. The 19 Aector St.. New York NY 10006 1.677902 hattonal Casualty Company, 28333 Telegrson Acad. Southf feld. M! 48034 Nortnern Insurance Company of how York. 59 Joan Street, hew York, NY 1C038 g

wq2*d

.* ? .335580

.335580 h3

.~

g Nortnwestern National Ins. Co., 731 No. Jackson Street. Milwaukee W! 53201 Ohio casualty Insurance Company. The,136 North Third Street. Hastiton. OH 45025 4> 3 "71 "

".q 1.845692

,671161 ]"

Pacific Indemnity Co. 3200 Wilshire 81rd., Los An9eles. CA 90010 n 2, ** :c1s y .167790 4 2 Peerless insurance Co. 62 Maole Ave.. Keene. NH 03431 .335580 m .i Protective Insurance Co. 3100 No. Meridian St.. Indf anapolis. !N 46208 Provioence hashington Insurance Co. 20 hasnington Place. Providence. R! 02903 gj %O w bl* 125843 O U '

,$ IJ Puritan Insurance Company 1515 Suemer 5t.. Stamford. CT 06905 23 A U ',3' o .251685m \

.104869 Reitance lasurance Company, 4 Penn Center Plaza. Philadelphta, PA 19103 .25168 A ai w

.) y /j %

Royal Globe Insuranca Company,150 W1111am Street. New York. NY 10038 ,,,

1.484943 Q / 4 St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. 385 Washington St.. St. Paul. NN 55102 Seacoard Surety Co., 90 William St.. hew fort. NV 10038 y

4 nL y 3.355803 4.751817 3"2 -- 4 State Farm Ftre & Casualty Company 112 (ast Washington St.. Bloomington !L 61701 11 ** *oo 419475 O :l' l

Transamerica !nsurance Co.,1150 So. Oltve 5t.. Los Angeles. CA 90015 OyM4 .83895(~ .

Travelers Indemntty Company. The. One Tower Souare. Hartford, CT 06115 ogoO .838951 b1~

United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co.,100 Light Street. Saltimore. MO 21202 g :: 4. 10.906361 :n United States Fire insurance Co.. Madison Ave. at Canf teld Rd., Morristown, NJ 07960 lj.

o2- 10.067414 0* ^

gegh Insurance Co. til W. Jackson 81vd.. Chicago, IL 60604 o3 2.684643 7

, g'3 gj 1.25842iN j  ;

-, = -

Effective Date of this Endorserfient January 1, 1980 d5IO To form a part of Policy No NF-198 12:o1 A.M. Standard Time issued to Tennessee Valley AuthoM ty Date of Issue hntrary 19- 10Rn For the su scribing corapanies

• By

/f~ G Endorsernent No 50 900 2 6 Mfter i Manager ,

countersigned by l (1/RM

{

Nuclear Energy Liability insurance NUCLEAR ENERGY LIABILITY INSURANCE ASSOCIATION CHANGES IN SUBSCRIBING COMPANIES AND IN THEIR PROPORTIONATE LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT Calendar Year 1980

1. It is agreed that with respect to bodily injury or property damage caused, during the effective period of this endorsement, by the nuclear energy hazard: .

a. The word " companies" wherever used in the policy means the subscribing companies l listed below,

b. The policy shall be binding on such companies only.

c. Each such company shall be liable for its proportion of any obligation assumed or expense incurred under the policy because of such bodily injury or property damage as designated below.

2. It is agreed that the effective period of this endorsement is from the beginning of the effective date of this endorsement stated below to the close of, D,ecember 31, 1980, or to the time of of the termination or cancellation of the policy, if 3coner.

SUBSCR18tNG COMPaNf t$ - i. D PROP 0eT10N OF 100%

Aetna Casualty and Surety Co.. The.151 Farmington Ave., Hartford. CT 06156 d r ,3 M c 4 10.067410 Aetna Insurance Company. 55 Elm St.. Nartford, CT 06115 y :31-Affiltated FN Insurance Co.. Allendale Park, P.O. Box 7500. Johnston. At 02919 2.516852 Alliang Insurance Company, 6420 Wllshire Blvd.. Suite 500. Los Angeles. CA 90048

• 3 fl C3 .251685 3 O h . 1.342321 Allstate Insurance Co.. Allstate Plaza. Morthbrook. IL 60062 4.194754 g .e.

e 4 g4 American Home Assurance Co. 102 Maiden La.. New York. NY 10005 American Motorists Insurance Co. Long Grove. IL 60049 0 to b a.5 o .880898 419475 j,

Situminous Casualty Corporation. 32018th St.. Rock Island. !L 61201 -4a c Centenntal Insurance Co. 45 Wall St.. New York. NY 10005 * .419475 .3" g: - 3 4

Comerctal Union Insurance Co.. One Beacon St.. Boston, MA 02108 .576779 w i

$]? 0 i

Connecticut Indemnity Company 3.C?c223 continental Casualty Co. CNA.Pf The,1000 Asylum ara. Chicago. Ave.. Hartford CT 06101

!L 60685 0 **

419475 '

D Continental Insurance Co.. The. 80 palden La.. New York. AY 10038 g- ,- -y '9 4.194754 m Federal Insurance Co. 51 John F. Kennedy Pkwy.. Short Hills. NJ 07078 7.508610 4 Ff reman's Fund Insurance Co., 3333 California St., San Franctsco. CA 94119 3'

,; 3 C' C -J~ J 1.510112 O General Accident fire and Life Assurance Corp., Ltd.. Fourth and Walnut Streets. Philadelphia. PA 19105 5.033705 .

? ;N; >,j~J 1,342321 Great Arecican Insurance Co. 580 h41aut St.. Cincinnati. CH 45201 ..

Hanover Insurance Co.. The. 440 Lincoln St.. Worcester. MA 01605 t 1.342321 ."?

• 'll Hartford Accident and f adermity Co.. Hartford Plata. Hartford. CT 06115 w

? .,,,

oW 4 .5C3371 j Hartford Steam Boiler Insp. & Ins. Co.. The. 56 Prospect St.. Hartford. CT 06102 7.131082 j Highlands Insurance Co. 600 Jefferson Street. Houston. TX 77002 "

3A d .503371 Home Indemnity Co.. The. 59 Maiden La.. how York. NY 10038 4 . n .419475 Insurance Co. of North America.1600 Arch 5treet. Philadelphia, PA 19101 .n a ) w

~ *S .-

3.691384 1.677902 de 4

Monarch Insurance Co. of Ohio. The.19 Rector 5t.. New York. NY 10006 , .~ ~ Q National Casualty Company 28333 Telegrapn Road. Southfleld, MI 48034 .335580 Northern Insurance Company of how York. 59 John Street, kew York NY 10038 L) -'

3 .335580 . f.

4

,.;; ; O g Northwestern National Ins. Co. 131 No. Jackson Street. Milwaukee, wt 53201 +, "j *d*;

1.845692 3 Ohio Casualty insurance Company. The.136 North Third Street. Mastiton. OH 45025 e .671161

• Pacific Indemnity Co. 3200 Wilsntre 81vd.. Los Angeles. CA 90010 Peerless Insurance Co. 62 Maple Ave.. Keene. NH 03431 y

g 1 *** O a .167790 T=. ".

.335580 ea Protective Insurance Co. 3100 No. Meridian St., Indianapolts. IN 46208 Providence hashington Insurance Co. 20 Washington Place, Providence. RI 02903 u 7%0 MM .125843 O O "

5 *f.

.251685 m \

Purttan Insurance Company, till Sverer 5t,. Stamford. CT 06905 Reitance insurance Company. 4 Penn Center Plata. Phtladelphf a. PA 19103 )Gt1Lkl4o

_ ,yd

.104869

.251685s l

ds =.

Royal Globe insurance Company.150 William Street. New York. NY 10038 p g

• 1.484943 v " ~

St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. 385 bashington St. St. Paul, MN 55102 5eaboard Surety Co., 90 William St.. hew York. NY 10038 4g L' 3

3.355803 4.751817 34 -s J 3 q3 ,419475 O .g State Fars Fire & Casualty Company.112 Cast Washington St.. Bloomington. !L 61701 O g ,],,,  ;

Transamerica insurance Co.,1150 So, Olive St.. Los Angeles. CA 90015 .838957 " ' . . . '~

Travelers Indemnity Company. The. One Tower Souare. Martford. CT 06115 o5oO .838951 *d I United States Fidelf ty and Guaranty Co. 100 Light Street Baltimore. MD 21202 s a m4 10.906361 si 10.C67410 5 *-

United States Fire insurance Co.. Madison Ave. at Canf teld Rd. Morristown. NJ 07960 d. 3M ;ty .:3 W 2.684643 7 gh Insurance Co. til W. Jackson slud.. Chicago, !L 60604

.g

-,gj 1.25842 y; EffectWe Date of mis Endorsement January 1, 1980 dEIO 12:o1 A.M. Standard Time To form a part of Policy No Uf-l98 issued to Tennessee Valley AuthoM ty m y , f ry } }

Dale of issue -. .lamta ry 14 - lopn For the su scr!bing co panies ') V u r v c-By

/f General Manager Endorsement No 50 countersigned by (1/RM

Nuclear Energy Liability insurance NUCLEAR ENERGY LIABILITY INSURANCE ASSOCIATION CHANGES IN SUBSCRIBING COMPANIES AND IN THEIR PROP 0RTIONATE LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT Calendar Year 1980

1. It is agreed that with respect to bodily injury or property damage causede during the effective period of this endorsement, by the nuclear energy hazard: e

a. The word " companies" wherever used in the policy means the subscribing companies listed below,

b. The policy shall be binding on such companies only. -

c. Each such company shall be liable for its proportion of any obligation assumed or expense incurred under the policy because of such bodily injury or property damage as designated below.

2. It is agreed that the effective period of this endorsement is from the beginning of the effective date of this endorsement stated below to the close of December 31, 1980, or to the time of of the termination or cancellation of the policy, ff " sooner.

$UBSCRl81NG COMPaNf($ h. P90POR7f 0N OF 100%

Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. The.151 Farmington Ave.. Hartford, CT 06156 d n 0 Aetna InsureSce Company. 55 Elm St.. Hartford, CT 06115 cu d 10.067410 Affiltated FH Insurance Co., Allendale Park. P.O. Bos 7500. Johnston. At 02919 74 1'.1t-9 2.516852 Alliana Insurance Company 6420 klishtre Blvd., Sutte 500. Los Angeles CA 90048 .251685 Allstate insurance Co.. Altstate Plaza, Northbrook. IL 60062 {e b O

, 1.342321 American Home Assurance Co. 102 Maiden La.. New York, NY 10005 American Motorists Insurance Co.. Long Grove. !L 60049 O C I2 4o 4

4.194754

.880898 $,

Bituminous Casualty Corporation. 32018th 5t.. Rock Island. !L 61201 0 mhy 419475 .=

Centennial Insurance Co., 45 Wall St.. New York NY 10005 *4aw C

~

,.3

• 1

.419475

.576779 Coriaercial Union Insurance Co. One Beacon St.. Boston. MA 02108  % M '

3.020223 ~5 Connec ticut indemnity Cor'pany. The.1000 Asylum Ave.. Hartford. CT C6101 Continental Casualty Co.. CMA Plata. Chicago. IL 60685 O 5 ** d 419475 *J 4,194754 -n Continental Insurance Co.. The. 80 Maiden La.. New York, NY 10038 Federal Insurance Co.. El John F. Kanhedy Pkwy.. Short Hills. NJ 07078

'g:.

3'

• d "3' O m ~J 7.508610 .*

Firsaan's Fund Insurance Co., 3333 California St., San Francisco. CA 94119 1.510112 D Genera) Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corp., Ltd.. Fourth and Walnut Streets. Philanalpnta. PA 19105 Great American Insurance Co., 580 kalnut St.. Cincinnati. CH 45201

+;

3,31 J 5.033705 1.342321 .D Hanover Insurance Co.. TPe. 440 Lincoln St.. Worcester. MA 01605

7. = ;,' 3 1.342321 '.~4 Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co.. Hartford P14sa. Hartford. CT 06115 w

[

+ '0W

-W .503371 31 hartford 5 team Boller insp. 6 Ins. Co.. The. 56 Prospect St.. Hartford. CT 06102 7.131082 Highlands Insurance Co. 600 Jefferson Street. Houston. TX 77007 , ;d .503311 '1 419475 Home Indermity Co.. The. 59 Maiden La.. New York. NY 10038 o j a$

Insurance Co. of North America.1600 Arch 5treet. Philadelphta. PA 19101 -

c)

,1 3.691384 "1 Monarch Insurance Co. of Ohio. The.19 Rector St.. New York. NY 10006

- 1.677902 4 g - .- "J National Casualty Company, 28333 Telegracn Road. Southf teld MI 48034 .335580 Northern Insurance Company of New York. 59 Jonn Street. New York. NY 10038 , d .~, T 3 .335580 M.4 =

horthwestern National Ins. Co. 131 No. Jackson Street. Milwaukee, WI 53201 1.845692 3 9 Chto Casualty insurance company, The 136 North Third Street. Hamttton OH 45025 u }Lj ".~i -*$

,c 4 .671161 w Pactric indemntty Co. 3200 Wilshire Blvd.. Los Angeles CA 90010 g .' s .167790 4 .!

Peerless Insurance Co. 62 Maole Ave. Keene. NH 03431 g 2 "' O .335580 ca T Protective Insurance Co. 3100 No. Meridian St.. Indlapepolis. !N 46208 47NO w '1*

.125843 Providence kannington Insurance Co. 20 kasnington Place. Providence R! 02903 5"  ::l

.251685m\

i 23 h o 3 Puritan lasurance Company.1515 Sunwer St.. Stamford. CT 06905 Reliance Insurance Company. 4 Penn Center Plaza. Philadelanta. PA 19103 Royal Globe Insurance Company 150 William Street. New York, NY 10038 . ,

) "C* y -M

.104869

.25168 L

),484943 ( /

' / dJg'a b

i 5t. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. 385 Washington St., St. Paul, MN 55102 p h -. 3.355803 Seaboard Surety Co., 90 William St.. New York. NY 10038 4 k9 3m 4.751817 %d cs 1

i 5 tate Farm Fire a Casualty Company.112 East Washington St.. Bloomington. !L 61701 Transamerica insurance Co., 1150 50. Olive 5t.. Los Angeles. CA 90015 Travelers Indennity Company, The. One Tower Souare. Hartford, CT 06115 0*3L O i'.

o5oO

.419475

.83895

.838951

~ . . -

OG M7

.~

l United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co.,100 Light Street. 6altimore. M0 21202 s g.; 9 4 10.906361 .o ?  !

united States rire !.iurance Co.. Madtson Ave. at Canf teld Rd.. Morristown. NJ 07960 3 a,,,u .1 10.067410 -

2.684643 7

• • l gh Insurance Co.,111 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago IL 60604 3 a l 1.25842 Effective Date of this Endorsernent January 1, 1980 dSD3 To form a part of PoHey No UI-I98 12:o1 A.M. Standard Time issued to Tennessee Valley Authority Octe of issue __ hmmy 19. ICAn s a- 026235' By

/r General Manager Endorsement No 50 l countersigned by (1/8M

O Nuclear Energy Liability insurance NUCLEAR ENERGY LIABILITY INSURANCE ASSOCIATION CHANGES IN SUBSCRIBING COMPANIES AND IN THEIR PROP 0RTIONATE LIABILITY ENDORSEM Calendar Year 1980

1. It is agreed that with respect to bodily injury or property damage caused, during the effective period of this endorsement, by the nuclear energy hazard: .

a. The word " companies" wherever used in the policy means the subscribing companies listed below,

b. The policy shall be binding on such companies only.

c. Each such company shall be liable for its proportion of any obligation assumed or expense incurred under the policy because of such bodily injury or property damage as designated below.

2. It is agreed that the effective period of this endorsement is from the beginning of the effective date of this endorsement stated below to the close of, December 31, 1980, or to the time of of the termination or cancellation of the policy, i_f ' sooner.

SU85CRf 8tNG C0uPantCS

- ED peopcef(ON OF 1001 y M Aetna Casualty and Surety Co.. The.151 Farmington Ava.. Hartford. CT 06156 Aetna Insurance Cocoany. 55 (1m St.. Hartford. CT 06115 Af filiated FM Insurance C4.. Allendale Park, P,0. Box 7500. Johnston. R! 02919

• $d h:

10.067410 2.516852 A11tana insurance Company. 6420 Wilshire 81vd., Suite 500. Los Angeles. "A 90048 OU1 .251685 Allstate Insurance Co., Allstate Plaza. Northbrook. !L 60062 Ey 4O . 1.342321 OC Ag 4.194754 American Home Assurance Co. 102 Maiden La.. New York. NY 10005 American Motorists insurance Co., Long Grove. IL 60049 0 mb5 c

.880898 j.

Bituminous Casualty Corporation. 32318th St. Rock Island. IL 61201 419475 .:;

Centennial Insurance Co. 45 Wall St.. New York, NV 10005 -. O a C

.419475 7:

Cocenercial Union insurance Co.. One Beacon St.. Boston. MA 02108

1. y*

% :. M 3 .576779

• 3.020223  ?

60685 !LThe.1000 Asylum Ave. . Hartford, CT C6101 8 *~' ?

0

• Connecticut Indeamity Continental Casualty Company.Plata. Chicago.

Co. CNA 419415

• Continental Insurance Co. The. 80 Maiden La.. New York. NY 10038 g.*

U9

.~3 4.194754 q Feceral Insurance Co., 51 John F. Kennedy Pkwy. Short Hills. NJ 07078 7.508610 Fireean's Fund Insurance Co. 3333 California 5t.. San Francisco, CA 94119 F 2 C ""

.,; 1 1

J 1.510112 D General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corp., Ltd.. Fourth and halnut Streets. Philadelphia. PA 19105 , .i % "J 5.033705 Great American Insurance Co. 580 Walnut St.. Cincinnati. OH 45201 1.342321 I?

Hanover Insurance Co.. The. 440 Lincoln St. Worcester. MA 01605 50 .d

, t.3 1.342321 'a Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co.. Martford Plaza. Hartford. CT 06115 Hartford 5 team Boilee Inc. & Ins. Co.. The 56 Prospect St., Hartford. CT 06102 w . Ow

.a .503371 7.131082

• i Higniands Insurance Co. 600 Jefferson Street. Houston. TX 17002 0,

.; .:., 4 ,$o3371 *].

Home lademnity Co.. The 59 Maiden La. New York NY 10038 _

.419475 Insurance Co. of North America,1600 Arch Street. Phf14delphia. PA 19101 .O

-* ?D. .s? g4 3.691384 1.677902 T.

4 Monarch insurance Co. of Ohte The.19 Rector St.. New York. NV 10006 g ~

hational Casualty Company, 28333 Telegrapn Road. Southfield. MI 48034 y: # .* 13

3 .335580

)"

Nortnern Insurance Company of New York. 59 John Street. New York. NY 10038 .335580 J-horthwestern National Ins. Co.,131 No. Jackson Street. Milwaukee, WI 53201 g 1.845692 p ~$

Ohio Casualty losurance Company. The.136 North Third Street. Hamilton. OH 45025 3 '."$"'4 .671161 =

b Pacific Indemnity Co. 3200 Wilshire 81vd.. Los Angeles. CA 90010 Peertels Insurance Co. , 62 Maple Ave. . Keene. NH 03431 n 2 '", O3~.; .167790

.335580 c .-'

Protective Insurance Co. 3100 No. Meridtan St.. Indianapolis. IN 46208 ay ; p'l '""'

125843

.251685 M*

Providence hashington Insurance Co. 20 Washington Place. Providence. R! 02903 M 4'  % t.;

Puritan Insurance Company.1515 Svemer 5t., Stamford. CT 06905 .h 0. o 104869 I -

De11ance Insurance Company. 4 Penn Center Plaza. Philadelphia. PA 19103 9n .25168 5 /. d "6 Royal Globe insurance Company,150 WII11am Street. New York, NY 10038 . 9[gy , 1.484943 V' 2 5t. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. 385 Washington St.. St. Paul MN 55102 Seaboard Surety Co. 90 William St.. how fors. NY 10038 4 - L gg o

3.355803 4.751817 d4 3 L 5 tate f arm Ftre & C4sualty Comoany.112 East Washington St.. Bloomington. !L 61701 fransame*1ca insurance Co. 1150 So. Olive St.. Los Angeles. CA 90015 0

• j'l' Ot m

s 419415

,83895(~ ~ .

O =#

.~

Travelers Indemntty Company. The. One Tower Souare. Martford. CT 06115 oo o .838951 .M ~

Untted States Fideltty and Guaranty Co. 100 L19 nt Street. Baltimore MD 21202 w $ == ,4 10.906361  ?

United States Fire Insurance Co.. Madison Ave. at Canf teld Rd.. Morristown. NJ 07960 3 a 10.06741Q 2*-

grgn insuranca Co., til W. Jackson 81 d.. Chicago, IL 60604 2.l 0 e c 2.684643 =

, ggj i .25842ew J

-, a v Ellective Date of this Endorsement January 1s 1980 ddI3 To form a part of Policy No UI-198 12:o1 A.M. Standard Time issuedio Tennessee Valley Authority Date of issue .la men ry 14. 1oAn For the su scribing ce panies *i By I y- c.n.,. m .n...,

Endorsement No 50 countersigned by (1/RM 1

1 1

l Nuclear Energy Liability Insurance NUCLEAR ENERGY LIABILITY INSURANCE ASSOCIATION l CHANGES IN SUBSCRIBING COMPANIES AND IN THEIR PROP 0RTIONATE LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT Calendar Year 1980

1. It is agreed that with respect to bodily injury or property damage causeds during the effective period of this endorsement, by the nuclear energy hazard: ,

a. The word " companies" wherever used in the policy means the subscribing companies listed below. .

b. The policy shall be binding on such companies only. -

c. Each such company shall be liable for its proportion of any obligation assumed or expense incurred under the policy because of such bodily injury or property damage as designated below.

2. It is agreed that the' effective period of this endorsement is from the beginning of the effective date of this endorsement stated below to the close of December 31,1980e or to the time of of the termination or cancellation of the policy, {f'Tsooner.

SUBSCpl8tNG COMPANf E5

, M. D PROP 0ef f 0N OF 1001 C3 Aetna Casualty and Surety Co.. The.151 Farmington Ave.. Hartford, CT 06156 Aetna Insurance Company, 55 Elm St.. Hartford CT 06115

• c$N 10.067410 2.516852 Afflitated FN lasurance Co. Allendale Park. P,0. Boa 7500, Johnston, it 07919 - 3 Li .M4.-

Allians insurance Company, 6420 Wtisntre Blvd.. Suite 500 Los Angeles. J 90t48 * .251685 Allstate Insurance Co.. Allstate Plaza. Northbrook. IL 60062 gC4 ,

g.,

1.342321 4.194754 Aaartcan Home Assurance Co.,102 Malden La.. New York. NY 10005 o e. 4 American Motorists Insurance Co., Long Grove !L 60049 .880898 9 Bituminous Casualty Corcoration. 32018tn St.. Rock Island. !L 61206 0

~ .; a C mWo3 419475

, r, Centenntal Insurance Co., 45 Wall St.. New York, NV 10005 3 419475 .::

Comercial Union Insurance Co. One 8eacon St., Boston. MA 02108 # ..$

% '- "* ?

.576779 =

3 Connecticut Indemnity Cepany, The 1000 Asylum Ave.. Hartford CT 06101 3.020223 0 -*

419475

• Continental Casualty Co., ChA Plata, Chicago. IL 60685 9 *U 2 1 Continental Insurance Co.. The. 80 Maiden La.. New York. NY 10038 g- ,-* O

• 4.194754 ~$

Federal Insurance Co. 51 John F. Kennedy Pkwy.. Short Mills. NJ 07078 7.508610 4 Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., 3333 California St.. San Francisco, CA 94119 E 2 0 "'1 ~

U 1.510112 L General Acctdent Fire and Life Assurance Corp.. Ltd.. Fourth and halnut Streets. Philadelphia. PA 19105 Great Acerican Insurance Co. 580 halnut St., Cincinnati. OH 45201

5 5 'E

.,-4 5.033705 1.342321 .')

?.

Hanover Insurance Co.. The. 440 Lincoln St., Worcester. MA 01605 C .d. 3 1.342321 *:::

Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co.. Hartford Plata. Hartford, CT C6115 c .-  % .503371 '3; Hartford 5 team Boiler Insp. & Ins. Co.. The. 56 Prospect St., Hartford. CT 06102 p , :; w 7.131082 1 Mtthiands insurance Co.. E00 Jefferson Street. Houston. TX 77002 ,- ; .; 4 . 503N1 '1 Home Indemnity'Co.. The. 59 Fatden La.. New York NY 10038 .

.419475 5'f Insurance Co. of North America,1600 Arch Street. Philadelphta. PA 19101 cg et ,,) j.) 3.691384 1.677902 2 Monaren Insurance Co. of Onfo. The.19 Rector 5c. . New York. NY 10006 g) *; . 4 ? .335580 hational Casualty Company. 28333 Telegrapn Road. Southf f eld, MI 48034 - y * ;3 Nortnern insurance Company of hew York. 59 Jonn Street. New York NY 10038 .335580 .MJ horthwestern national Ins. Co. 131 ho. Jackson Street. Milwaukee, WI $3201 md2 u y y 1.845692 3~

Ohio Casualty Insurance Coripany. The,136 North Third $treet. Hamilton. OH 45025 1) .671161 =

PACif te indemntty Co. 3200 Wilshire Blvd.. Los Angeles CA 90010 a .167790 A :

n 2 '" ma .335580 Peerless Insurance Co. 62 Maole Ave.. Keene. NH 03431 Protective lasurance Co., 3100 No. Meridian St.. Indtanapolis. IN 46208 4C%C w MM

.125843 O dj : .-

Providence Washington lasurance Co. 20 hasnington Place, Providence. At 02903 Puritan Insurance Company,1515 Suemer St.. Stamford. CT 06905 t1 (* o .251685m\

.104869 j 5, *.:

Reliance Insurance Company. 4 Penn Center Plaza. Philadelphta, PA 19103 ( *C ~u .251681 es w Royal Globe Insurance Carpeny.150 Wilitam Street. New York. NY 10038 u%y w , 1.484943 V ;d 9 5t. Paul Fire & Martne Ins. Co. 385 Wasntngton St.. St. Paal. MN 55102 4 4

r. 3.355803 Z 0

• 3 5eaboard Surety Co. 90 William St., New York NY 10038 4.751817 3

• State Farm Fire a Casualty Company.112 [ast Washington St.. Bloomington. !L 61701 e 419475 O

Transamertes insurance Co.,1150 So. Olive St.. Los Angeles. CA 90015 Travelers Indemnity Company. The. One Tower Souare. Hartford. CT 06115 04'

- d4 .83895E

.8 38 951 '~ " ' - N1

~*

a c4

.o

. :o$ :d :o O 10.906361 e '

Untted States Fideltty and Guaranty Co.,100 Liget Street, Baltimore. PD 21202 United States (fre Insurance Co., Madtton Ave at Canfield Rd. Morristown. NJ 07960 L, 10.067410 - ;j * -

2urich Insurance Co.,111 W. Jackson Blvd.. Chicago. !L 60604 1 L ,.; d a 2.68460 g NE.80  : 1.25842 e

• 0 .a 7] ,;

a r ., e Effective Date of -4o*

this Endorsement January 1, 1980 To form a part of Policy No NF-198 12:o1 A.M. Standard Time issued to Tennessee Valley Authority Date of issue - .1a rma r y 16. 10An For the su scribing Co panies By I .

/f~ Generaf Manager SC Encorsement No countersigned ey 90026235 (1/AM

Nuclear Energy Liability insurance i'

NUCLEAR ENERGY LIABILITY INSURANCE ASSOCIATION CHANGES IN SUBSCRIBING COMPANIES AND IN THEIR PROPORTIONATE LIABILITY ENDORSEMEN Calendar Year 1980

1. It is agreed that with respect to bodily injury or property damage caused, during the effective period of this endorsement, by the nuclear energy hazard: .

a. The listedword " companies" wherever used in the policy means the subscribing companies below,

b. The policy shall be binding on such companies only.

c. Each such company shall be liable for its proportion of any obligation assumed or expense incurred under the policy because of such bodily injury or property damage as designated below.

2. It is agreed that the effective period of this endorsement is from the beginning of the effective date of this endorsement stated below to the close of, December 31 e 1980, or to the time of of the termination or cancellation of the policy, {fisconer.

SU85C918tNG C088PaNff 5 b. Pe0PORTf 0N OF 1001

f)

Aetna Casualty and Surety Co.. The.151 Famington Ave.. Hartford. CT 06156 Aetna Insurance Company. 55 C1m St.. Hartford. CT 06115 chd r1 -

10.067410 2.516852 Affiltated FM Insurance Co.. Allendale Park. P.O. Box 7500. Johnston. R1 02919 '"kJ L1 5 .251685 Alliana Insurance Company 6420 Wilshire 81vd.. Suite 500. Los Angeles. CA 90048 7 e 4 Allstate Insurance Co.. Allstate Plata. Nortnbrook. !L 60062 . 1.342321

~ O 4.194754 American Home Assurance Co. 102 Maiden La.. New York. NY 10005 O" .,". A g 4 Amedcan Motortsts Insurance Co., Lon Grove. IL 60049 81tuminous Casualty Corporation. 320 8th 5t.. Rock Island. !L 61201 $ ru g gJ

.880898 419415 .;

Centennial Insurance Co. 45 Wall St.. New fort. NY 10005 * .c -*a fc .419475

.575719 1

4 Comerctal Union Insurance Co.. One Beacon St.. Boston. MA 02108

• 3 M ?

Connecticu tndemnity Company, the.1000 Asylum Ave. Martford. CT 06101 3.020223 3 Continent 4 Casualty Co. CNA Plata. Chicago, IL 60 85 0 3 *U* ' 419475 D

Continental Insurance Co.. The. 80 Malden La.. New York. NY 10038 g ,-* O '*9'

• 4.194754 M Federal Insurance Co., 51 John F. Itencedy Pkwy.. Short Hills. NJ 07078 7.508610 4 Fireman's Fund Insurance Co. 3333 California St.. San Francisco. CA 94119 yC$9 1.510112 J y1 J 5.033705 General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corp.. Ltd.. Fourth and Walnut Streets. Philadelphia PA 19105 ,, it h ~J Great American Insurance Co. 580 halnut 54.. Cincinnatt. OH 45201 r, :: .3 3 1.342321 1.342321 D

Manover insurance Co.. The 440 Lincoln St.. korcester. MA 01605 Ll::

Hartford Accident and Indemntty Co.. Hartford Plata, hartford. CT 06115 ('  % .503371 31 Hartford Steam Botier Insp. & Ins. Co.. The. 56 Prospect St.. Hartford. CT 06102 w 7.131082 Highlands Insurance Co. 600 Jefferson 5treet. Houston. TX 17002 . 3 .  : w.0 .503371 **1 Home Indemnity Co.. The 59 Ma tden La.. New York. NY 10038 " i o o .g n., .419475 'j' Insurance Co. of North America.1600 Arch Street. Philadelphia. PA 191C1 -< ,1

, 3.691384 w g = . * '?

Monarch Insurance Co. of Ohfo. The.19 Rector 5t.. New York NY 10006 1.677902 L3 kational Casualty Comoany. 28333 Telegraon Road. Southfield. MI 48034 , M .- d

.335580 Northern lasurance Coepany of New York. 59 Jonn Street. New fort. NY 10038 Northwestern nettonal Ins. Co., 731 No. Jackson Street. Milwaukee, WI 53201 ,c g 2 g a o "r1

~

.335580 1.845692 .)'j "*

Chto Casualty insurance Company. The.136 North Third Street. Hamtiton. OH 45025 .671161 .

Pacific Indemnity Co. 3200 W11 shire 81vd., Los Angeles. CA 90010 Peerless Insurance Co. 62 Maple Ave.. Keene. NH 03431 g

g 2, " O I :3 .167790

.335580

[ 4c o5 Protective Insurance Co., 3100 No. Meridtan St., Indianapolls. IN 46208 Providence hasnington Insurance Co., 20 hashington Place. Providence. Rt 02903 a35C w ( 1 **

.125843 O2 L Puritan Insurance Company.1515 Sumer St. 5tamford CT 06905 t0 Y o .251685m\/

.104860 )5 *~

. ) *C dn Reliance Insurance Company. 4 Penn Center Plaza. Philadelphia, PA 19103 * .251685 c'i L Aoyal Globe Insurance Company 150 William Street. New Yort. NY 10038 5t. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. 385 Washington St., St. Paul. Mn 55102 y hy

• c 1.48494) 3.355803 ( /

4 1' q V -- ~J e 5esooard Surety Co. 90 William St.. New York. NY 10038 A 4.751817 cs M 419475 O *s' 0#M4

.:,3 State Farm Ff re & Casualty Company.112 f ast Washington St.. Bloomington. !L 61701 Transamerica lasurance Co. 1150 So, Olive St.. Los Angeles. CA 90015 C .83895) ' . - . ' '

Travelers Indemnity Company. The. One Tower $duare. Hartford. CT 06115 o .838951 Mi 1)ntted States Fidelity and Guaranty Co.,100 Light Street. Saltimore. MD 21202 .o j a::.O 10.906361 :o '

tJntted States Fire Insurance Co. Madison Ave, at Canfield Ad.. Morristown NJ 07960 3 3 10.06741 G*

• h 14 '

2urich Insurance Co. 111 W. Jackson Blvd.. Chicago. IL 60604 NE.80 M Lo~-=e. .a 2.684643 1.25842

] g, ]p J Effective Date of Inis Endorsement January 1, 1980 ddIN 12:01 A.M. Standard Time To forrn a part of Policy No NF-198 issued io Tennessee Valley Author *ity Date of Issue - hmra ry 14. loa 0_

For the su scribing ce panies By ] I

/f General Manager Endorsement No 50 '

countersigned by

. M026236