ML20197E766
| ML20197E766 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 01/17/1986 |
| From: | Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Glickman D HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197E682 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-59 NUDOCS 8605150311 | |
| Download: ML20197E766 (3) | |
Text
- - - -
g{ -f6 $ $
- ,p na UNITE 3 STATES g
Stello 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
Roe I
WASMWGTON, D. c. aoen I
Rehm Sniezek C,
%,*****/
Denton Kerr, SP JAN 171986 GCunningham c"* "
' "A i. i g-i Taylor ED0 R/F The Honorable Dan Glickman, Chaiman Subcomittee on Administrative Law and Governmental Relations is 8 -
L United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515
Dear Congressman Glickman:
In his letter 'to you dated December 13, 1985, Carlton Kemerer of our Office of Congressional Affairs noted that answers from the NRC would be forthcoming on two questions in your November 21, 1985 letter, i.e., the basis upon which the Comission decided to issue tne Wolf Creek operating license, as well as the process for determining which complaints at Wolf Creek to pursue and which to disregard.
The bases for the Comission's decision to issue a license were several. The NRC staff had completed its review of the plant design and engineering, the j
construction progran and its implementation, the start ty and testing program, and the adecuacy of operating personnel and procedures.
Further, all contested adjudicatory issues raised by the public in the hearing process were resolved. Moreover, the staff expended substantial resources on other uncon-tested safety issues, inspecting Wolf Creek and investigating the allegations that there were significant safety problems at the plant. The staff satisfied both itself and the Comission that Wolf Creek complied with all NRC require-rients, and that none of the allegations warranted dental of a full power license. Enclosed is the transcript of the Jure 3, 1985 public meeting at which the staff briefly sumarized to the Comission its inspections and investigations, and the reasons for its conclusion that issuance of a full power license was warranted.
During the construction of Wolf Creek, the f'RC staff, through its audit review, performed various reviews and cosite inspections to assure that components, systems and structures important to safety were designed, fabricated, and tested to quality standards comensurate with the importance of the safety functions to be performed. These reviews were conducted by some 50 different technical disciplines within the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
In addition, resident inspectors and region-based specialist inspectors carried out a comprehensive inspection program related to plant construction and testing.
Region-based specialist inspectors assess welding, nondestructive examinations, civil, mechanical, electrical and instrumentatici engineering, preoperational testing, emergency preparedness, and environmental protection.
Resident inspectors typically apply more general experience in construction activities related to installation of equipment and structures..
2 8605150311 860501 O
STEPHENSO6-59 PDR
{
l I
f.
( n For Wolf Creek, approximately 40 inspectors spent varying amounts of time on inspection activities and readiness for operation of the plant. The staff expended significant efforts during the final stages of construction review in 1984 to provide reasonable assurance that the construction had been completed in accordance with Comission requirements. The results of each of these inspections have been documented in inspection reports issued by the NRC.
I hope that this letter, and the enclosed transcript, will help dispel your concern that the Commission might have granted a license in disregard of serious, unresolved allegations.
In fact, the staff had evaluated the technical safety significance of allegations NRC received over the course of
- the construction and preoperational testing of Wolf Creek up to the time of its licensing, and NRR did not issue a low power license until completion of a 100% reinspection of accessible, structurally significant welds. Detailed sumaries of these and similar. efforts are contained in information previously sent to you in letters dated June 5, 1984 and March 11, 1985, from W. J. Dircks, our fonner Executive Director for Operations.
Moreover, a full
~
power, license was not authorized until the Comission had reasonable assurance that the plant complied with all NRC safety requirements, notwithstanding allegations of drug use, intimidation of inspectors, inadequate quality assurance / quality control, and records falsification.
During 1984 and 1985, the NRC staff carried out six inspections to review programatic aspects of the utility's Quality First ("Q-1") Program, and audited approximately half of the Q-1 files to assure that the applicant was dealing appropriately with self-identified concerns.
In May 1985, a special team of NRC technical specialists and investigators performed a detailed review of all 271 Q-1 case files and the 752 concerns contained therein. The staff's inspection effort and findings are discussed in more detail in Inspection Report 85-28, which is enclosed for your information.
i l
Based upon these inspections, the staff reported to the Comission:
- 1) that i
from the standpoint of construction, startup testing, and operation, there j
were no significant safety issues still open; and 2) that the utility had satisf.ied all requirements for a full power 1fcense.
The Comission's actions confonned with its policy for handling of late allegations, which explains that "if the staff determines that an allegation raises a significant safety concern regarding operation of a facility or about quality assurance or control or management conduct, which brings into question the safe operation of the facility at a given stage of operation, the allegation must be addressed prior to authorizing that stage." 50 Fed. Reg. 11030 (3/19/85) (attached).
The Office of Investigations (01) also complied with the above-referenced Policy Statement regarding late allegations. OI initially conducted an
. assessment of wrongdoing allegations and investigations completed by the utility's Q-1 Team at Wolf Creek. Focusing on the documentation in the Q-1 case files, without reference to information outside those files -01 found approximately thirty cases which appeared to have been improperly or inadequately investigated or followed up by utility personnel.
i 4
e
,-r,--
--r e v
-r-,-----,-,--,-,
mms.,,,,,n,,wrom..
m m m e,--,m w,-,,,,.m
,, m n,r
-e n.,,m
,.nw
. ~. ~.
Prior to full power licensing, 01 infomed the Comission of these conclusions and, as noted above, the Connission and its technical staff agreed that these preliminary results did not raise a sufficiently serious safety concern to postpone licensing. Nevertheless, these preliminary investigative results were considered sufficiently significant to warrant followup. Accordingly, on July 1, 1985, the O! Field Office Director for Region IV met with the Regional Administrator and his staff to review these problem cases.
From the approximately thirty cases reviewed, ten were chosen as having obvious investigative deficiencies. Out of those ten, 01 decided to select three cases in differing subject areas as a sampling for further O! examination.
Th.e Region IV-01 office opened these three cases as investigations. Our Office of Investigations is nearing completion of reports in two of the cases.
We will be reviewing the reports with our staff. Since 01 believes that the reports contain information that may lead to further investigations, possible enforcement action, or criminal referral, these reports are not being publicly released. Public release at this time could compromise further investigation.
Hence, we will be providing the reports to you under separate cover to avoid any compromise of an 01 investigation. We respectfully request that the two reports, when delivered, be held in confidence and disseminated to the Members and staff of your Subcomittee only on a need-to-know basis.
Sincerely, LP t'
(LC he' Nunzio J. Palladino
Enclosures:
1.
Transcript of June 3,1985 - IN bl Comission meeting 2.
Inspection Report 85-28 3.
Comission Policy Statement dtd March 19, 1985 cc w/o encl: Rep. John Dingell
~
Rep. Morris Udall Rep. Bob Whittaker
_