ML20199L097
| ML20199L097 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 07/03/1986 |
| From: | Aamodt M AAMODTS |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#386-903 86-519-02-SP, 86-519-2-SP, LRP, NUDOCS 8607090309 | |
| Download: ML20199L097 (4) | |
Text
i,.1 c
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Presiding Board 00CKETED USNRC
)
g g %)Ikl In the Matter of
)
Docket No. L
)
)i ASLBP No.' 86-519-02 SP FigEgShygyk.
INQUIRY INTO THREE MILE. ISLAND UNIT 2 )
LEAK RATE DATA FALSIFICATION
),i July 3, 1986 agANCH
)
)
~.
o..
AAMODT RESPONSE TO GPU FILING OF JUNE 16, 1986 AND REQUEST FOR RELIEF In responding to the Aamodt's comments of June 6,1986, GPU made a baseless and vicious attack on us personally. We request the Board's address of the tenor and substance of GPU's comments which have willfully and unfairly maligned us.
GPU alleged that our statements about two individuals, GPU sought to have excluded from the instant inquiry, were
" reckless and derogatory". GPU requested that the Board " admonish the parties (and particularly the Aamodts based on their performance to date) not to misperceive their obligation to argue their positions l
in this proceeding as a license to abuse the rights of individuals or assault their character absent a sound basis in fact." ' GPU, pp.2-4.
Our total statement about the two individuals was as follows:
"...GPU's assessment of the culpability of two of these employees does not appear valid.
Mr. Zechman was a supervisor
[
of training prior to the accident; Mr. Dubiel was manager of
(
radiological controls. These responsibilities would indicate involvement and/or knowledge of leak rate falsification."
Aamodt, June 6,1986, p. 3, emphasis added.
The sum total of our additional comments concerning GPU's pro-
~
posal to eliminate 15 individuals from the hearing were that the pro-posal was " premature", not "significant", and " inappropriate".
Id.,
l 8607090309 E60703 PP.3-4 PDR ADOCK 05000320 Q
PDR 3 503
r, 3
W L We made no statements about any of the individuals under in-vestigation in the instant inquiry prior to GPU's filing of June 16 other than those quoted above. Hence we are at a total loss concerning GPU's reference to our " performance to date."
The Commission's Order of December 18, 1985, Instituting this inquiry, established that this Board's investigation should be directed toward identifying all those who were involved in, responsible for or aware of falsifications of Icak rate reports at TM1-2 The Commission, therefore, placed all who could be alleged to have been involved /
responsible / aware under investigation, i.e.,
suspicion. The' suspicion of criminal behavior surrounding GPU's employees was alleged by the Commission, not the Aamodts.
GPU is fully aware that the history of the Aamodts' participation in the TMI hearings has demonstrated their consistent responsibility toward and consideration of individuals. They supported GPU's request that operators' ideatities be protected during the hearing of their cheating on tests. They opposed the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's attacks on individuals operators and an instrw. tor.
(Two motions, January 1982.) They opposed the Special Master's recommendation of singular criminal prosecution of two shift supervisors who cheated on tests. They refused to join an attack by intervenors, the Commonwealth and the NRC on Jim Floyd which,resulted in his criminal prosecution and an NRC judge's rightfully coming to his defense. They opposed GPU Chairman Kuhns' description of the operators at the time of the accident as "four dummies".
(December 5, 1983 Commission Meeting). They have no interest in pursuing the present hounding of a TMI instructor who was the product of GPU's mismanagement of the training program.
(Husted hearing). To this day, they have never revealed the identity of a
e.
a
.a
\\
. single operator whose identity was protected in the cheating hearing controlling althoughths/ordermaynolongerbeineffect. They have consistently demonstrated a high regard for individual dignity.
Even in the case of the despicable behavior of GPU's seasoned attorney during the cheating hearing, which they reluctantly brought before this Board, they held their tongues for fear of injuring a neophyte attorney who appeared to have become inadvertently involved.
(See Aamodt Motion, March 14,19B6.)
The Aamodts presently have two motions before this Board which are motivated by their concern that operators are not made the scapegoats for the leak rate falsifications (as they were for the Unit 2 accident and the cheating on tests.
See Aamodt Motion, April 16, 1983 pp.14-16.)
GPU's attack on us is so vicious and unwarranted as to raise this Board's suspicions concerning the issue involved: GPU's request that 15 individuals be excluded from the instant inquiry. GPU has protested too vigorously.
GPU has no substantial argument for its request that 15 individuals be excused from the instant inquiry. GPU's cites statements of employees that did not specifically name these individuals. However, failure to be named does not provide exculpatory evidence. The individuals interviewed, even if forthright, could not be expected to know those individuals above their immediate supervision who were involved or aware. Job title does l
provide inculpatory evidence absent an investigation. The NRC investi-gations found " management" involved (condoned, fostered), but the investi-l gators did not identify individuals. This new evidence provides further i
l basis for the Board to deny GPU's request for the exclusion of the 15 individuals, at least two of which were managers.
Respectfully submitted,
$lllldhtLA AA -
it thrjorie M. Aamodt July 3, 1986 l/
_ _. _ _ _ -, - - ~ -. - _ -
F UNITED STATES OF AllERICA tlUCLEAR REGULATORY C0tullSS1011 Before the Presiding Board DOCKETED USNRC
)
In the Matter of
)
Docket No. LRP g
)
ASLDP No. 86-519-02 SP INQUIRY INTO Ti!REE !!ILE.. ISLAND UNIT 2 )
0FFICE U 2L.T.: i Ai!"
LEAK RATE DATA FALSIFICATION
)
DOCKET..
E Fin.r
)
July 3, 1986
)
This is to certify that copies of the document AAMODT RESPONSE TO GPU FILING OF JUNE 16, 1986 AND REQUEST FOR RELIEF was served on the following list by deposit in U.S. Ma'll, first class delivery, postage prepaid, on July 3,1986.
(
[4d'/
/
tcc.M
' Mnrjorie' M. Aamodt Chief, Docketing & Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 James B.' Burns, Esq.
Isham, Lincoln & Beale Presiding Board, the lionorabies 3 First National Plaza James L. Kelley, Chairman Suito 520'O Glenn O.
Bright
- l Chicago, IL 60602 Jerry R. Kline Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panej P11chael W.
01aupin U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission flunton & Wijliams Washington, D.C.
20555 707 E. flain St.
P.O.
Box 1535 Jack R. Goldberg, Esq.
Richmond, VA 23212 tiary Wagner, Esa.
Office of the Executive Legal Director.
Smith B.
Gephart, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ki11ian & Gephart Washington, D. C.
20555 216-210 Pine Street Box 006 Ernest L. Blake, Esq.
)i n-i s bu r g,
l'A 17100 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge g'
(~~
1800 P1 Street, N. W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 g
ha
[r'ie01.
Aamodt
, liarry 11. Voigt, Esq.
LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & tlacRae 1333 New ifampshire Ave.,
N. / W.
Suite 1100 Washing ton, D.C.
20036
--