ML20247C957
| ML20247C957 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 03/23/1989 |
| From: | Murley T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Sierra Club |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247C960 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-#189-8363 2.206, NUDOCS 8903300330 | |
| Download: ML20247C957 (4) | |
Text
.
i.:
mur k
UNITED STATES
- [
g
' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
n
'j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655 March 23,-1989
-Docket No.'50-482 Kansas Chapter of the Sierra Club P.O. Box 272 Wichita, KS-67201-0272 i
)
Dear Sirs-L This is to acknowledge receipt of a " Petition for Isenediate Action to Protect Public Health and Safety from Undue Risks Posed by Lack of Quality Assurance Compliance at Wolt Creek Generating Station, Burlington, Kansas," dated January 30, 1989, which you filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
The Petition has been referred to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation for consideration pursuant to 10 CFR i 2.206.
The Petition asked.the NRC to immediately suspend the Wolf Creek Nuclear.
Operating Corporation's (WCNOC's) operating license for the Wolf Creek Generating Station.
In addition, before lifting the requested suspension the Petition i
askedtheNRCto(1)reopentheOfficeofInvestigations'(01),CaseNo. 4-86-004
-(2) provide sound technical reasons why Wolf Creek should be allowed to operate; to review'all information on quality assurance and operation at Wolf Creek developed subsequent to issuance of Case No. 4-86-004 through 1989 to provide sound technical reasons why Wolf Creek should be allowed to operate; (3) modify the existing license to require all appropriate corrective actions'necessary to meet federal regulations and, if necessary,) revoke the operating license if such requirements are not satisfied; and (4 bar certain named individuals and any other persons found to have violated the integrity of the quality assurance program from employment or any other activity requiring an NRC license at the Wolf Creek Generating Station.
You seek relief based on allegations that (1) from the inception of the quality assurance program to date, WCNOC management has ignored real safety issues; (2) from the inception of operations to date, WCNOC management has failed to safeguard the integrity of its quality assurance program and has failed to demonstrate management competence to address and resolve real safety concerns; and (3).NRC's actions to date do not ensure that safety problems at Wolf
)
Creek have been resolved or will be resobed within a reasonable period of I
time. To substantiate your beliefs, you rely on NRC's investistion into the WCNOC Quality First Program (Q1) at Wolf Creek in 01 Case No. 4-86-004 and on Notices of Violation issued by the NRC. Specifically, you rely on the OI investigation into allegations of Q1 personnel involved in document shredding and blackballing, improper reorganization of Q1 management, pressure _ on Q1
{
investigators to close out cases, confiscation of Q1 tape recorders, Q1 I
supervisors imposing improper limits on Q1 investigations, Q1 mishandling allegations concerning falsified documents, muzzling of Q1 investigators, Q1 ignoring wrongdoing, Q1 supervisors improperly changing Q1 investigators' conclusions, WCNOC improperly firing Q1 investigators, conflicts of interest within Q1, and Q1's failure to deal with drug allegations.
'(Df 8903300330 890323 PDR ADOCK 05000482 il E
PDC f
i t
,Xansas Chapter of the Sierra Club..
With respect to the request that the Commission issue an immediate Order sus)ending operation of the Wolf Creek Generating Station, I decline to take suc1 action for the following reasons.
Q1 is a voluntary program operated by the licensee and it should not be considered synonymous with the quality assurance program required by Appendix B of 10 CFR Part 50. The staff has not relied on Q1 as a primary source of information in making any of the licensing decisions associated with granting the operating license and will not rely on Q1 as a primary source of information to make future licensing decisions.
Nevertheless, I note that WCNOC has committed to keep Q1 in place and retain all Q1 records available for NRC inspection. The NRC staff will continue to review Q1 as part of the regular inspection program.
In response to similar allegations regarding WCNOC's Quality First Program (letter from Thomas Murley, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC to Billie Garde, Government Accountability Project forwarding DD-88-14, Director's j
Decision Under 10 CFR $ 2.206, dated August 22, 1988, copy enclosed), the staff i
reviewed 01 Case No. 4-86-004 and agreed with the conclusions made by OI that Q1 was not used to prevent the NRC staff from becoming aware of Q1 allegations.
In DD-88-14 I explained that during May 1985, the staff reviewed 100 percent of the Q1 files and found no substantial safety concerns that would be a restraint to full power operation of the Wolf Creek Generating Station.
In addition, in its review, the staff concluded that the 01 report did not raise any issues requiring further staff actions. Your petition does not raise any new issues j
regarding the OI report or the substantive staff review of Q1 nor does your petition raise any public health and safety issues warranting immediate action.
{
Regarding your other allegations concerning management competence and findings subsequent to the 01 report, our preliminary review indicates that there is no basis for the staff to take immediate action. Accordingly, your request for j
immediate action is denied.
The NRC will continue to review the Petition in accordance with 10 CFR 6 2.206 and I will issue a formal decision with regard to it within a reasonable time. A copy of the notice that is being filed for publication with the Office of the Federal Register is also enclosed for your information.
Shcerely; m att neu Alc7 j
Thov 3 E. Murley, Director j
Offi e of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
As st.ted cc w/ enclosures:
See next page DISTRIBUTION Docket File w/ incoming ltr only NRC PDR Local PDR ED0# 0004245 ED0 Reading V. Stello, ED0 T. Murley, NRR J. Sniezek, NRR D. Mossburg, NRR (EDO# 0004245)
S. Varga G. Holahan L. Rubenstein J. Calvo P. Noonan D. Pickett PD4 Reading C. Cater, SECY*
M. Malsch, 0GC*
L. Chandler, OGC-WFl*
V. Yanez, ARM (w/cys of Director's Decision and NRCI Transmittal Form)
- To be handcarried by Branch Secretary on day of issuance. *See previous concurrences:
PD4/LA*
PD4/PM*
Tech. Ed.*
OGC*
PD4/D OI*
ADR4*
PNoonan DPickett:sr RSanders JCalvo RFortuna LRubenstein 03/14/89 03/02/89 03/02/89 03/16/89 03/ /89 03/17/89 03/16/89 (A)D:DRSP*
(A)ADP*
DDONRR*
[
GHolahan SVarga JSniezek
' ur y 03/17/69 03/20/89 03/21/89 03 89
Kansas Chapter of the Sierra Club.
With respect to the request that the Comission issue an immediate Order sussending operation of the Wolf Creek Generating Station, I decline to take suc1 action for the following reasons.
Q1 is a voluntary program operated by the licensee and it should not be considered synonymous with the quality assurance rrogram required by Appendix B of 10 CFR Part 50. -The staff has not relied on Q1 as a primary source of information in making any of the licensing decisions associated with granting the operating license and will not rely on Q1 as a primary source of information to make future licensing decisions. Nevertheless, I note that WCNOC has comitted to keep Q1 in place and retain all Q1 records available for NRC inspection. The NRC staff will continue to review Q1 as part of the regular inspection program.
In response to similar allegations regarding WCNOC's Quality First Program (letter from Thomas Murley, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC to Billie Garde, Government Accountability Project forwarding DD-88-14, Director's Decision Under 10 CFR i 2.206, dated August 22, 1988, copy enclosed), the staff reviewed 01 Case No. 4-86-004 and agreed with the conclusions made by OI that Q1 was not used to prevent the NRC staff from becoming aware of Q1 allegations.
In DD-88-14 I explained that during May 1985, the staff reviewed 100 percent of the Q1 files and found no substantial safety concerns that would be a restraint to full power operation of the Wolf Creek Generating Station.
In addition, in its review, the staff concluded that the 01 report did not raise any issues requiring further staff actions. Your petition does not raise any new issues regarding'the 01 report or the substantive staff review of Q1 nor does your petition raise any public health and safety issues warranting imediate action.
Regarding your other allegations concerning management competence and findings subsequent to the 01 report, our preliminary review indicates that there is no basis for the staff to take imediate action. Accordingly, your request for imediate action is denied.
The NRC will continue to review the Petition in accordance with 10 CFR 5 2.206 and I will issue a formal decision with regard to it within a reasonable time. A cosy of the notice that is being filed for publication with the Office of t1e Federal Register is also enclosed for your information.
Sincerely, h ?O (
Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
As stated cc w/ enclosures:
See next page i
):
V
- Wolf Creek Generating Station Unit No. I cc:
Mr. Bart D. Withers President and Chief Executive Officer Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation Post Office Box 411 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Jay Silberg, Esq.
Mr. Gerald Allen -
- Shaw, Pittman, Potts & LTrowbridge Public Health Physicist 1800 M Street, NW Bureau of Air Quality & Radiation Washington, D.C.
20035 Control Division of-Environment Chris R. Rogers, P.E.
Kansas Department of Health Manager, Electric Department and Environment Public Service Commission Forbes Field Building 321 P. O. Box 360 Topeka, Kansas. 66620 Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 Mr. Gary Boyer, Plant Manager Regional Administrator, Region III Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corp.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 411 799 Roosevelt Road Burlington, Kansas 66839 Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137-Regional Administrator, Region IV Senior Resident Inspector / Wolf Creek U.S. Nuclear Regulator. Commission c/o U. S.- Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Executive Director P. O. Box 311 for Operations Burlington, Kansas 66839 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011 Mr. Robert Elliot, Chief Engineer Utilities Division Mr. Otto Maynard, Manager Licensing Kansas Corporation Commission Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corp.
4th Floor - State Office Building P. O. Box 411 Topeka, Kansas 66612-1571 Burlington, Kansas 66839 l
l I
l e-_____--___--
. _.