ML20236U458

Forwards Internal Memo Re Summarized List of Concerns & Followup Items of 870221-24 Insp as Result of Ofc of Investigations Rept.Memo Inappropriate & in Violation of Regional Policy

ML20236U458
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	04/20/1984
From:	Olshinski J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20236U436	List: ML20236U434 ML20236U458 ML20236U476 ML20236U478
References
FOIA-86-98 NUDOCS 8712030068
Download: ML20236U458 (2)

Text

un. , mu.n = a.- wa +~"-"""" '~

.g

, , , , mcLt An atoutAtoRY cOMMisslON T

j,w , ;q . ,

.\ ,

anci:w n . g

'p W eAARIETTA STRE E T. N.W.

,: ,. j f ,

ATLAxta.csomosa mma s e . %, . . . . * /

A?h2alggg

+ > .

MEMfytANDUM FDR: James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator i

FR0rb John A. Obhinski, Director, Division of Reactor Safety I

SUBJECT:

DISTR 18U110N OF DRAFT INSPECTION MATERIALS AND INTERNAL j , MEMORANDA TO LICENSEES ,3 9 o a >

During an inspection s " conducted at Plant Vogtle from February 21, 1984 . to j

February 24,4*84, a Division of Engineering and Operational Programs inspector provided a w/py of an internal NRC memorandum to the licensee. The internal NRC memorapdum. %qrlosure 1), originally written by the inspector himself, summa-

i

'rizad a '111t of concerns and followup itru that our Division had generated as a ruult of'isviesin] As completed Office of Investigation Report on these issues

.i M. Vcgtle. These cotidens 'and followingmams relate to the work of a vendor of 1

> toe Georgia Power Con 6pany e Pullman Power Products.

' \..' (

yt\ ham carefully reviewed t'his matter to determ!ne if the memorandum that was provideo tr. the licensee revealed any informatica that was not previously. avail-able to them. To the best of our knowledge,. following a detailed review, each

,h item in the memorandum had been identified either through Georgia Power's own j

Lj. r internal investigation on tki, issue or during Region II meetings with the licen-9 see d' iscussing safety issues related t.o our investigation. Based on our review,

" therefore, I do not believe that the release of the mamorandum resulted in a i

comprise of matters phy.aining to the investigation.

5 t

y Enn though the release of the memorandum did. not compromise investigative d matte /,t , the release of the memorandum was inappropriate and in violation of j Regional policy. As a result of recent concerns at N Agency level on the .  ;

9.,  !

release of draft reports, Regirp 11 has conducted a number of training sessions l 1

with Resident an$ Regional based inspectcrs concerning this issue. The Regional 1 position which ym personally espoused in more than one such meeting, and which I have emphasized .in at least two full staff meetings, a6d which has been rett-16

! erated at Branch and Section Chief meeti.sgs is that no written communication is '

to be given to the Yirsne during our inspection process. This policy was i clearly violated. ,

1 / / r As corrective arcion, the faction Chief, Branch Chief, and I have each inter-viewed asp i.ounseled the <1nspectnr. It appears that in spite of the numerous R

previous niterationsgf/ the polley, tne inspector still focused the policy on ,

jl draf t report issues ande'did not seem to understand tnat the restrictions applied l to NRC internal memor4M2 as well. I do believe that the inspector clearly "

9* y3 understands the policy now. The inspector's intent in providing the memorandum was not malicious in nature, but was intended to facilitate his inspection.. The inspector had bern involved in"dits issue for well over a year and was very '

r

' fr.miliar with Georgia Power Company's extensive involvement and detailed investi -

gations of thi Pullman Power Products issues.  :

g m .

____ __ . . . . n

. . . . . . . . . ......u... .=: - .

. . x. .,e.. ., .- .. ..

.j *

, 5 o -

I ., ,-

i~ -

' James P. O'Rei.lly - 2~

t APR 2 0 jgg I have had the Regional policy reiterated to my inspectors at the section level, on the branch level, and I myself have reiterated this event and the policy on a full Division staff level. As additional corrective action we cenducted a survey of all of our inspectors in order to attempt to identify any other instances of violation of the policy. One other instance Was noted. It involved the same inspector in the same time frame, but at another f acility. The second memorandum (enclosure 2) was an internal NRC memorandum that contained the Nr.C's position on -

tes' ting of check valves. My research on this subject and discussions with HRR

, and other Regions indicates that the position in this memorandum has been dis-

. cussed extensively with licensees. It also appears that this memorandum was previously released to licensees outside of the Region. In any case, the release 3 of this memorandum to this licensee by my inspector was against Regien II's

stated policy. The memorandum in question is being attached to the related

,; inspection report (Report Nos. 50-280/S4-05 and 50-281/84-05), and is thereby I

being provided to the public document room. The memorandum relating to Plaot Vogtle will be attached to the related inspectim rep)rt (Report Nos.

. 50-424/84-05 and 50 t*~ '*4/05) and will thereby be 'rsvided to the public docu-ment room. That insp . non report will, of course, include inspection findings on each of the items included in the released memorandum as stated in the subject memorandum itself. '

a* '

John A. Olshinski n

~

Enclosures:

1. Memo dated 1/11/84 frtim A. Herdt to B. Uryc

2. Memo dated 1/3/83 from D. G. Eisenhu . to C. E. Noreli.rs S

9

- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _