ML20215M709

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to Re Leak Rate Testing.Nrc Expended Tremendous Amount of Time & Resources in Attempting to Comply W/Request.Recent Telcons to Chairman Zech Not Addressed Due to Recipient Refusal to Identify Subj Matter
ML20215M709
Person / Time
Site: Zion  File:ZionSolutions icon.png
Issue date: 10/28/1986
From: Jourdan C
NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
To: Reytblatt Z
ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, CHICAGO, IL
Shared Package
ML20213C853 List:
References
NUDOCS 8705140105
Download: ML20215M709 (8)
v • d • e


Text

.. _ _ _ .

bkht h. '

.m..,$g UNITED STATES

-  ?, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5 ej WASHING T ON. D. C. 20555

%,....+/

October 28, 1986 Dr. Zinovy V. Reytblatt Illinois Institute of Technology Building El, Room 208 1 10 West 32nd Street '

Chicago, Illinois 60616

Dear Mr. Reytblatt:

1 This letter sets forth the 11RC's actions taken as a result of your letter to this agency dated March 12, 1986 and a prior letter that you refer to in your March 12 letter.

The NRC has expended a tremendous amount of time and resources in consideration of your communications concerning leak rate testing. As you can see from the attached list, the 11RC has had over 100 recorded contacts with you.. This does not include your FOIA requests or the dozens of telephone calls you have made to virtually every part of the agency.

In your March 12, 1986 letter you refer to four issue's raised in-a letter written by you three years previously. Of those four

  • issues, Issues 1,2, and.4 are indisputably within the scope of G 8 you currently pending lawsuits. Issue 3, although it is closely connected with your suit against Harold Denton, was addressed r through a referral of your allegations to the office of Inspector and Auditor (OIA).' -
  • Q)tA 0 Pursuant to discussions a_nd interviews with yo ,EIA conducted an investigation of Mr. Denton% activities and concluded that he had done nothing improper. Following'that result, you refused to cooperate with OIA any further.

g ,

As for the rest of your letter of March 12, 1986, each point D .

raised and each request made either (1), f alls clearly within the

_ambit of your two pending suits, or (2) concerns allegations that g' are within the scone or tne investigation that OIA has concluded, in part, due to your lack of cooperation.

hb *t%OCAS %%W & hit The NRC substantively responded to your concerns prior to the I -

filing oT your lawsuits. This fact is illustrated in several pieces of correspondence that you are apparently ignoring because you do not like the result. For example: Documen.ts_51, 59, 64, 69, and 76 in the attached list of HRC/Reytblatt contacts.

W t/t {

! B705140105 870401 .

i 7DR ADOCK 05000295 p PDR l

2 '

4 With regard to your continuing communications with the agency since the filing of your lawsuits, I must repeat the agency's position on discussing matters that are encompassed in either of your currently pending suits. No one in this agency will discuss any of those matters with you until the lawsuits are concluded.

Our attorney, Ms. Wawzenski, will address your concerns on these matters on our behalf in the meantime.

In regard to matters that are not the subject of either of the lawsuits, this agency always has and will continue to discuss them with you as appropriate. Prior to this letter your attorney was given a list of some of the communications that the agency has had with you since you filed your lawsuits, e.g., FOIA correspondence. The attachment to this letter will supplement that list.

In regard to several telephone calls you made recently to Chairman Zech, your call was not responded to by any representative of the agency _because of your refusal to identify the subject matter of your intended communicatEon.

This concludes NRC action on your March 12, 1986 letter and D

related contacts. -[thf, Sincerely, 6 G V--

Carolyn Jourdan Attorney Office of the General Counsel Attachment as stated .

O e

e

0 C0fl1EllTS

1. Reytblatt to NRC: 3 Short Proposals (a. Turbine missile; b. ILRT; c. Pipe vibration monitoring) - 4/26/82
2. Gillespie to Reytblatt: on Bidders' List - 5/20/82
3. Reytblatt to Gillespie: ILRT resubmittal w/ Form 129 - 7/82
4. Gillespie to Reytblett - 8/19/82
5. Reytblatt to Gillespie - 8/17/82
6. Reytblatt to Gillespie - 8/25/82
7. Gillespie to Reytblatt - 9/21/82
8. Reytblatt to Gillespie - 10/5/82
9. Reytblatt to ORNL - 10/5/82
10. Arndt to Reytblatt - 11/1/82
11. File Note: Arndt 10/27/82 call to Reytblatt 11/2/82
12. File Note: Reytblatt 1/14/83 call to Arndt 1/17/83
13. Reytblatt to Arndt: Comments on ANS 56.8 - 1/14/83
14. NRC to Reytblatt: Response to dmployment application - 1/17/83
15. Reytblatt request to Senator Percy - 1/20/83
16. Arndt to Reytblatt - 2/28/83
17. Reytblatt to Arndt: Opposses use of mat'l w/o consent - 2/28/83
18. Arndt to Reytblatt - 3/28/83
19. Reytblatt to Arndt: Critique (w/ pp. 18, 19) + revised AflS 56.8 - 4/7/83
20. Naus to Reytblatt: w/Z.R. ltr to Naus, 4/27/83 w/ pp 18, 19 - 4/19/83
21. Reytblatt, Shomaker, Arndt meeting - 5/5/83
22. Naus to Reytblatt: reply to ZR ltr of 4/27/83 - 5/3/83
23. 'Reytblatt to Arndt: proprietary application - 5/23/83
24. Reytblatt to Naus: ORNL contract - 5/20/83

e t

. 25. Naus to Reytblatt: reply to ZR ltr of 5/20/83 - 5/27/83

26. Record Note: Reytblatt/Arndt foncon - 6/30/83
27. Reytblatt to Arndt: ANS mtg mat'l - 7/16/83
28. Reytblatt to Arndt: request for mailing of Critique (PDR) - 7/5/83
29. Arndt to Reytblatt: reply (PDR) - 7/22/83
30. Thompson to Reytblatt - 7/11/83
31. Reytblatt to Thompson - 7/15/83
32. Thompson to Reytblatt - 7/29/83
33. Reytblatt to Arndt - 7/26/83
34. Reytblatt to Palladino - 7/26/83
35. Reytblatt to Federal Register - 7/26/83
36. Federal Register to Reytblatt - 8/4/83
37. Reytblatt to Naus: re ORNL contract 7/14/83
38. Burns to Reytblatt: Palladino ltr under review - 8/23/83
39. Z.R. to J. Burns: 2 week review of connents - 8/30/83
40. Arndt to I.R.: Proprietary filing approved 9/14/83
41. .M. Weber (ANS) to Z.R. - 9/29/83 ,
42. R. Thompson (CON)toI.R.: Reviewing proposal - 11/10/83
43. File Hote: Z.R. call to Arndt - 1/25/84
45. Thompson to Z.R. - Proposal not funded - 2/27/84
46. Thompson to Z.R.: 3 unsolicited proposals 3/20/84
47. Z.R. to R. Thompson - 3/2/84
48. Z.R. to Palladino - 3/2/84
48. Z.R. to Felton: F0IA - 3/2/84
49. Z.R. to Full ACRS (written L oral stmts, Vugraph copies, & partial transcript) -

3/15/84

50. ZR application for Federal Assistance (Form 424) - 4/2/84 2

s

. 51. J. Burns to ZR: reply to #2 - 4/17/84

'52. Felton to ZR: Reply to #3 - 3/23/84

53. R. Thompson to ZR: no debriefing - 4/20/84-
54. ZR to J. Dougan - 5/18/84 -
55. ZR to ORNL - 5/18/84
56. - ZR to ACRS - 5/18/84 .
57. J. Rose to Arndt: ZR Attorney - 6/7/84

~

58. ZR to Arndt foncon - 6/25/84
59. Ross to ZR -7/10/85
60. ZR to Ross (incl enc 1 ltrs to ORNL, ACRS, CANP) - 7/22/84 ,
61. ZR to Rehm - 7/22/84
62. 'ZR to Palladino - 7/25/84

' ~

63. Shomaker to Rose - 8/3/84
64. Rehm to ZR - 9/7/84
65. ORNL to ZR (w/ #10 incoming) - 7/2/84
66. ZR to ORNL - 8/2/84
67. ORNL to ZR - 9/7/84 ,
68. ZRtoRehm(inclIRtoOPMof 9/24/84) - 9/29/84

, 69. Fraley to ZR - 8/16/84 l 70. ZR to Fraley - 9/24/84

, 71. ZR to Morton: grant proposal - 10/17/84 .

72. ZR to Thompson: unsolicited proposal - 10/18/84
73. ZR to Rehm: enci #27, f28 - 10/18/84
74. ORNL to ZR - 11/6/84 .
75. J. Rose to ELD - 10/31/84
76. Rehm to ZR - 10/30/84 i

3

. . 77. Thompson to ZR - 11/23/84 78 ZRtoArndt-(+ Huang,Shapaker, Umbel)- 11/26/84

' 9.

7 IRtoRehm(w/encI)- 11/26/84 80 Haney, WW College, to Arndt: Seminar invitation, rec'd 1/14 - 1/7/85

81. ZR to Rehm - 1/9/85
82. .. Thompson to ZR: .No proposal re-evaluation - 1/28/85 i
83. Rehm to ZR - 2/20/85
84. ZR to Asselstine (w/ Asselstine 3/4/85 memo to Dirks) .1/9/85
85. Cunningham to Rose: Denial of $75k tort claim - 3/15/85
86. ZR to Denton: 2.206 petition re: ILRT suspension & investigation of Arndt, Huang, Shapaker, Schwencer & Novak - 3/6/85 l 87. ZR to Denton: 2.206 petition re: Volumetrics software - 3/8/85- i
88. Rose to Cunningham: ZR affidavit on 5/5/83 mtg - 5/6/85.
89. ZR to Arndt: Wants ACRS material - 5/20/85
90. J.P. Murray to J. Rose: NRC affidavit reponse - 7/18/85
91. ZR to Denton: 10/17/85 mto - 9/2.0/85
92. ZR to Ross
draft NUREG 0956 (J. Mitchell) - 9/23/85 t 93. ZR to Stello: CRGR & ZR " guide" - 9/23/85
94. ZR to Arndt
invitation to 10/17/85 mtg 10/7/85
95. Stello to ZR: reply to #15 - 10/15/85 1
96. .Bernero to ZR: re: 10/17/85 mtg w/ ZR 0 R 111 - 11/18/85

-97. ZR to Bernero: reply to #18 - 12/19/95

98. ZR to Denton - 12/13/85
99. ZR civil action vs HRC/Arndt: rec'd 1/27/86 - 1/17/86

~

100. ZR to Chilk: comments on NUREG-0956 - 12/26/85 101. ZR to S. Connelly, 01A - 2/17/86 102. ZR to McGee (Palladino staff) - 2/18/86 4

- . - . . -a ,. .a .- . - , , - . _ . - -

. , i e

  • 103.'ZR call to Minogue - 3/3/86 104. ZR to S._Connelly, DIA - 3/10/86 105. ZR to Zerbe, OPE, w/ SECY-85-341 - 3/11/86 106. ZR to Palladino: 11 requests - 3/12/86 107. ZR to Roberts - 3/21/86 108. ZR to Zech - 3/21/86 A

0

)

5 L l

easssu nu '

    • 1;i~ e s . -

\

\

HR. BERUERO:

Vf $ls Holl, we will look fi$q 0f l0ll7/gf into that. ,

.]

Hay I consider that the conclusion of I.

your proposal here? ~

[ l' , DR. REYTBLATT: Unless somebody objects this '

decision, because I want it to be unanimous. If il l 'somebody do e s not object, that obviously means that j i one ~ accepts it.

t I' HR. BERNERO: Dr. Reytblatt, I can interpret

\

! that you unanimously support that resolution. I can Y

10' assure you that I don't unanimously support it. I 11' vill study it, as I will study the entire record o f' h

!! this meeting , and we'll correspond with you, either 1 g., ,.

0I or Mr. Denton will correspond with you in 14 consideration, after we have had a chance to review y15 wha t -- some of the stuff you've showed here is 4 _

l 16 familiar to me from previous meetings. Other 17 material you showed here is new to me, at least. I I 18 don't know if it might be new to others.' But I 19 think a deliberate consideration of it is in order, 20 and.I do not intend and do not expect

  • adoption of 21 the resolution here today. So let me take it as -

22 your recommendation and put it into the record that 23 way.

~

24 And now what I would lihe to do is, I

l 25 would like to offer Commonwealth Edison a chance to

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20215M709&oldid=3233448"