ML20247F107
| ML20247F107 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 03/25/1987 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247F042 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-89-2, FOIA-89-A-7 NUDOCS 8905300004 | |
| Download: ML20247F107 (27) | |
Text
- - -
UN11EU STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NO:
i INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW (CLOSED) f e
LOCATION:
Rancho Cordova, California PAGES:
1 - 23 DATE:
25 March 1987 1
i
\\
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
/
'\\
OfficalReporten 444 North CapitolStreet
(
Washington, D.C. 20001 l
@2W7-3E 8905300004 090516 PDR FDIA l
FRIEDM A89-A-7 PDR NATIONWIDE COVERACE 5 o/0 5 -(,6
= _ - _ - - _ - _ _ _ - _
4
)
l 1
BEFORE THE 1
3 UNITED STATES l
3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4
REGION V 5
g In the Matter of:
)
)
7 INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW
)
DOCKET NO: NONE
)
g
.(CLOSED MEETING)
)
9 Sunrisa Sheraton Hotel 11211 Point East Drive 10 Rancho Cordova, California 11 Wednesday, March 25, 1987 An investigative interview was conducted with
.(
HARVEY LEE CANTER, commencing at 2:25 p.m.
PRESENT:
15 RONALD A. MEEKS, Investigator 16 PHILIP JOUKOFF, Investigator Office of Investigations, Region V 17 Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 15 o
James w.Hrooms 37 ES ET #23 SAN FRANOSCO. CALIFOANIA 94114 (415] 621-2460
. _ ~ _
F I
2 1
- CONTENTS 2
WITNESS PAGE S
Harvey Lee Canter 4
Examination by Mr. Meeks 1
i l
5 Examination by Mr. Joukoff 4
- j l
6 Examination by Mr. Meeks 4
7 Examination by Mr. Joukoff 5
8 Examination by Mr. Meeks 6
i 9
Examination by Mr. Joukoff 17 10 Examination by Mr. Meeks 17 11 Examination by Mr. Joukoff 21 12 Examination by Mr. Meeks 21
-15 I
14 15 EXHIBITS 16 (None) 17 18 19 20 21 22 25 24 25 i_______.____l.--------------
^ - - - ' - ~
3 l
1 P_ 3 g g E E p I_ N,3 S 2
2:25 p.m.
3 MR. MEEKS:
For the record this is an inter-4 view of Harvey L. Canter, spelled C-a-n-t-e-r,__who is 5
employed by the. Sacramento Municipal Utility District.
6 Present at this. interview are myself, Ronald-7 A. Meeks, an investigator with the U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory _
8 office pf ' Investigations, as well as Philip Joukoff,' also an 9
investigator with NRC's Office of Inves tigations.
10 As agreed, dais interview is being transcribed 11 by a court reporter.
Your name, whatever it is.
12 REPORTER:
Harry Attmore.
13 MR. MEEKS:
The subject matter of this inter-14 view concerns the liquid effluence program at the Rancho 15 Seco Nuclear Genebating Station.
16 Mr. Canter, if you will stand and raise your 17 right hand, I will swear you in.
18 HARVEY LEE CANTER l
19 was called as a witness herein, and, having first been duly 20 sworn, was examination and testified as follows:
21 EXAMINATION 12 BY MR. MEEKS:
23 O
There was a modification which was carried 24 out.
That modification concerned the transfer of tritiated 25 water from the demineralized reactor coolant storage tank of 1
g
?-
1.
the primary liquid rad waste system from that side. of the 2
house to the regenerate holdup tank, which we understand is 3
a storage tank for the secondary system and' that modification ;,
4 a' modification was made which allowed water to be transferred.
5 f rom that, what we refer to as the DRCST or D-R-C-S-T to the 6
RHUT.
Harvey, what's your knowledge of that modification?
7 BY MR. JOUKOFF:
8 O
Could we back up just a minute here.
Mr.
9 Canter, you're currently employed with the Sacramento 10 Municipal Utility District,. is that correct?
11 A
Correct.
12 Q.
And prior to being employed by the district, 13 who were you employed by?
. (E 14 A
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
15 0
And during what -- approximately what period 16 of time were you employed by the Nuclear Regulatory 17.
Commission?
18 A
From July 1974 to July 31 -- July 6, 1984.
19 O
And during that time period were you ever 20 assigned as a resident inspector at the Rancho Seco Nuclear l
21 Generating Station?
C 12 A
I was assigned as the senior resident inspector 23 from July 19 79 to January 19 84.
I 24 MR. JOUKOFF:
Fine, and now --
25 BY MR. MEEKS:
O Okay.
What is your knowledge of that 1
1
5 1
y
_i modification?
2 A
I need more details because I know for a numbe r 3
of years there was a PVC temporary piping going ' from these 4
two tanks that you mentioned.
5 I left Rancho Seco in January 1974 -
'84, 6
pardon me.
Came back as a SMUD employee in July of that 7
year.
So I need to know what you're -- if you're talking 3
about a permanent modification or a temporary.
I need to 9
know more details.
10 0
Okay.
The details, Jet's go at it this way, yg-when did you first become aware of that modification?
12 A
If you're talking about the technique by 33 which they transferred water trom -- the demineralized k
14 water reactor coolant storage tank to the RHUT, using PVC i
P Ping, I don't remember exactly when that started but I 15
- 16 remember tripping over that thing for a number of years.
17 That was the more or less standard way of transferring water.
13 It may have started af ter the first steam generator tube
~
19 leak.
I'm not quite sure but I know that they used that 20 method for a fair length of time.
21 Q
Okay and do you know was it there when you 12 went to Rancho Seco?
23 A
I can' t say for sure.
i 24 BY MR. JOUKOFF:
25 O.
can you recall when the first steam tube l
J l
v.
~
6 i
break occurred?
2 A
Somewhere in approximately '81 I recall.
3 BY MR. MEEKS:
4 Q
Okay. 'Once again, when did you,come on' site 5
Lat Rancho Seco?
6 A
July of '79.
7 O
July of '79 and it's your -
you don't recall 3
exactly when that steam generator -- excuse me, when that 9
modification was installed?
10 A
No.
It was, I tripped over it for many years.
11 But I don't recall exactly when they first started putting 12 in the pipe.
Now there kere a tremendous amount of dis-13 cussions amongst the licensee at meetings that I sat in on, 14 a number of discussions with the NRC about it.
NRC 15 inspectors from the region office came out and talked about 16 it.
So off and on for a fairly -- for quite a few years I 17 knew and the NRC knew that that thing existed.
But exactly
-18 when, I don't remember.
19 Q
Okay.
Who -- was that s'ource of initial 20 information was through the -- what did you call this, a
21 meeting?
12 A
The source of initial information was me 23 walking around the plant doing my normal job as the 24 resident inspector, tripping over the thing and that's how 15 I found out,about it first and then I'm sure --
t t
i ____i_. _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _
$@,e$$
A
- A, O
ti IMAGE EVALUATION
//
~#
\\[fj// '(
(k TEST TARGET (MT-3)
~'
/
,f,W 4, f
y
!k I.0 tm M lg [" L21 i.i y '= ILag l
1.8 i__
l.25 1.4 1.6 4
150mm 4
6"
['b/,
/4%
.,.,3
.,,g:2:fp g
//
o
,p,
e 1
D v~:
.& p
% Q &ggb o
% % v2 IMAGE EVALUATION
, t 4,
\\//o//\\"
%ff TEST TARGET (MT-3)
/
/-],j6 ' <(p, f/ gl?'
k's, f y
I.0
!Qt* M F#
232 1
c e s,.
l,l l.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 4
150mm d
6"
/hxxxx#
%w.,
3,,,.
o
~
')h-t
e
,.e O
q@,;e
<;;c>
s _.
4
4
.tf*
sr %ss )<f*
y O
5 @ %s.
IMAGE EVALUATION
, t A
\\//// 'h'
%k TEST TARGET (MT-3)
/
f
,f ;,f'? /p,
%//
spyj NNN\\ jf/7/ 77 e
1.0
_~
l-
! 2.2 rn b rt, llll12.0 l.l
=
I l_I.8_
=
l.25 1.4 1.6 150mm 6"
ih~/ '4 sp?44!%
g,y,y,pl,,,p, g,d '.f 3////p s
O
,:g
",, p i
r w.,
.Q f,p e
.s s O
'b W, J'f;4' IMAGE EVALUATION
/J'O,
\\ ~
s f>
2-w
////f (
$k/
TEST TARGET (MT-3)
/
614;g h
I.O 3" W
- m g,, p=
o l,l b
l l
1.8 l.25 1.4 l
1 l
.6 4
150mm 4
6" b%
+ s' A 4
e @j j ;g/4////
<S
- p[; 3//4c fV Y
o
.(@
I' 0
II
[,
7 L
b i
O Why don't you explain to us when you tripped 2
over it, you know noticed it was there, what did you do?
3 A
Again I can't remember when it nappened but 4
when it did, I'm certain that I asked licensing pc.sonnel 5
what that was and I'm certain that they told me.
6 0
okay and what did you understand that 7
modification to consist of?
3 A
Pipe, PVC piping that was -- one reason I 9
remember a lot is that ever single joint in the pipe had to lo be covered with poly bags and I thought that was sort of 11 unusual.
That's how I ran across it at first, seeing poly 12 bags around the joints.
So I asked what was going on and 13 they told me what was going on.
That it was a way to 14 transfer water from the demineralized water reactor coolant 15 storage tank to the RHUT.
Because there was no hard pipe 16 system available to do that.
17 0
Okay.
What were the requirements for Rancho 18 Seco, the officials running Rancho Seco, to notifying NRC 19 of that modification?
20 A
I can' t tell you what the requirements were.
21 I don't recall.
22 0
Okay.
What -- after you were informed, who 23 was it that informed you?
Who did you go to ask about that 24 modification?
25 A.
My recollection is not exact.
I can only tell
8 3
who I probably went to and that was someone in the Health 2
Physics Department or I might have gone to the plant 3
superintend but it's all supposition on my part.
I can't c
4 remember the exact details.
f:
5 0
Okay.
What do you recall about subsequent
~
- l. -
6 discussions about the existence of Unat modification?
7 A
Well somewhere along the line, I made sure 3
that the Region knew about it because I'm not -- I was the i
9 resident expert in everything so to speak, and I was supposed to to be knowledgeable about everything but not necessarily an 31 expert in everything.
12 So whenever there was a health physics related 33
-- or effluent related problem, I tried to let the Region
(-
34 know about it.
15 0
Who in the Region did you notify?
16 A
Harry North.
17 Q
Harry North and when was this?
Is A
I, again, it was in the beginning of the --
19 i t was in the eighties, early eighties.
But I cannot, my 20,! recollection, I j ust can't tell you exactly when that 21 happened.
12 Q
And what action did Harry North take about 23 reviewing this?
14 A
Harry did take action but I can't remember 25 exactly whete, if at all it was documented, or what action
9-
- 1 g
was taken.
Typically what I did when I collected issues L
th&6 I needed to tell the Region about, I'd tell tha Region, 2
3 and the next regular inspection that the inspectors would 4
come out to perform under their normal modular program, 5
they'd have a list of things th at I've called into-the 6
office, or I' d have a list to tell' them and we' d sit ' down 7
and have a little prebriefing and of f they' d go.
But the 3
health physics issues were turn over pretty consistently on-p my part as far as I recall, to the Region.
to Q
okay and you specifically recall. talking to 11 Harry North about this?
12 A
Yes.
13 0
Why would that be?
In other words, is it 14 because of his position?
15 A
Because Harry North was the Regional Base 16 Inspector that handled health physics related activities 17 for Rancho Seco.
13 Q
For Rancho Seco.
Did you have occasion to 19 talk to any other individuals at the Region or health 20 physicis ts, or anybody else about this modification?
21 A
Not that I can recall.
22 O
What's your recollection on what action Harry 28 North took at the site?
You know, in reviewing this matter--
24 A
The c :ly --
25 Q-and determining what exactly --
i 10
)
\\
g A
The only recollection I have is gene ral.
It's 2
not specific.
But I seem to recall talking about it at an 3
exit interview.
_ That's a lot of times' fn the exit meetings 4
at the end of the month that I held with licensf bring up issues that happened to be comi f
5 es, I'd ng up and I don't 6
recall whethe r I brought it up at an exit int
-t erview or 7
whether Harry brought it up in one of his i t n erviews.
But I do recall the subject was brought up 3
Now whether that's documented in exit notes or any repots 9
I can't say.
We'll have to search the record to find that out 10 11 MR. MEEKS:
Okay.
Phil, do you have any 12 questions at this time?
13 MR. JOUKOFF:
No, I do not.
14 BY MR. MEEKS:
15 0
Okay.
i You recall that these activities we're 16 talking about were during the early ei h i g t es.
17 A
Yes.
Is Q
What did you say you were told was the 19 for transferring that --
reason for that modification?
20 A
I can't --
21 0
Did I ask you that question?
12 A
You may have but I'11 try, if this is the 23 same --
24 Q
Answer it again.
25 A
,As I say, I can't recall the specific reasoning 1
F 1
L..-
1 I knew -- I know ' the mechanics of Ob system there and know I said earlier that the sy 2
3 wire, hard piped system to transfer wat ere was no harc 4
from the demineralized water reacto er from the RHUT --
r.coolEMt storage tank 5
to the RHUT, to the regen holdup tank, and fo 6
they had to transfer lots of wat r some reason through R15020, er because the off-site is 7
the radiation monitor outside 8
of the RHUT tank.
, downstream And obviously there's tritiated 9
in that demineralized water reacto 4 - cer-r coolant storage tank 10 and if you want to release radioactive 11 had to go through that release point water outside, it
, R15020.
So that's 12 my supposition as to why they piped ove I
6 13 r to the RHUT.
But' k
exactly why, I don't remember.
a lot of water and I can only -- I'm stI know they 14 15 arting to put some o my own~ feeling as to why they put it in th f
j 16 tell you what they told me.
ere.
I can't I just don' t remember.
17 was too long ago.
That I
18 Q
Okay.
the steam generator tube leaks?Could it have 19 with 20 A
Yes, it could have been.
21 Q
Do you recall any conversations with 12 C
olumbo concerning the review dhat thi Ron 23 s got by him or the lant review committee and - or exactly p
24 what the review hould be on this modification?
s 15 A
I don't remember any details of said meeting i
t,.
12 4
y or said discussion with Ron Columbo.
2 O
With Ron Columbo.
Do you recall any~conversa-g tions-with anyone concerning the sanctioning of this modification by the plant review committee or any individual 4
5 r anybody on-site?
I'm talking about SMUD officials.
6 A
My recollection is that it was discussed in y
the PRC and MSRC.
8 0
What's that?
9 A
The Management Safety Review Committee, which to is the of f-site review committee made up of the senior yy managers associated with Rancho Seco, as opposed to. the on-12 sir.e review committee or plant review committe, which full yg of operations related people at the plant.
' (.
y4 1 know of -- my recollection is this went all 15 the way up to the MSRC to the PRC.
Ron Columbo is th e 16 Chairman of the PRC and typically if he has any problems 17 with changes that happened at the plant, he bucks problems 33 on up to the MSRC for their decision.
And my recollection 1
1, is these things were discussed, but I can' t tell you when, 20 1 can' t tell you the results.
I know for -- I can only 21 tell you that the pipes were still out there and I know there 22 was discussions about funding to put permanent piping from 25 the demin water reactor coolant storage tank over to the 24 RHUT tank.
I know that funding had a lot to do with the 25 delay in. putting permanent piping in there.
That's why they I
~
- - - - ' ~
13 1
kept using PVC.
So those discussions did come up.
2 0
.Do you recall with whom?
3 A
No.
4 0
Who would it most likely have be,e,n?
You know, 5
who do you talk funding with, or who would have been talking 6
funding and you could have been a party of it?
7 A
Well, that's -- I as a resident sat in on 3
MSRC and PRC meetings.
So that's why I'd hear about these 9
things.
I never got involved in funding.
I didn'tl care 10 about funding.
I just card about doing it safely and 11 right.
12 O
Sure.
13 A
But the MSRC would most likely talk funding
(-
14 through the engineer people who had to make the design.
15 0
You mentioned putting in a permanent 16 installation.
17 A
Yes.
18 0
You're talking about in other words equipment 19 that would be considered permanent?
20 A
A permanent design change to the plant to 21 allow transfer of water from the demin water reactor coolant 22 storage tank to the RHUT-Underground piping.
23
.0 would you consider -- what did you consider 24 the system that existed there, that modification?
25 A.
A temporary system.
i
14 1
Q And why did you consider it temporary?
I J
2 A
Because when'you transfer radioactive fluid, 3
you usually don't use PVC piping with a. bunch of tape and i
i 4
rad signs, and stick it out so people can runjqver.it and 5
trip over it, like NRC inspectors.
6 Q
So from a hardware standpoint, you would 7
consider that temporary?
8 A
From a hardware --
9 O
Standpoint.
The material they used.
10 A
Yes.
From a hardward standpoint it.was 11 definitely temporary.
12 O
Now but you recall over the years that you 13 were there, that system was always there?
14 A
I can' t recall when -- I can never iecall it 15 not being there.
You see I'm putting some of the knowledge 16 as to how the plant works into my mind here as to when it 17 probably was put in.
But in actuality, I can't tell you 18 when that system was put in.
19 Q
okay.
20 A
My recollection is that it was related to the 21 steam generator tube leak.
But I know for a fact that when 22 you shut that plant down you have to transfer a lot of 23 water and they've been shutting that plant down a lot.
So 24 they have had to transfer a lot of water.
So I would imagine 25 since 1979 pfter TMI, there's probably a good reason to put
~
15 1
it in there.
2 O
After TMI?
3 A
Af ter Three Mile Island, TMI.
4 O
What's your recollection of any c, conversations 5
with Ron Columbo concerning whether this is a temporary 6
modification or not?
7 A
Ron Columbo talked to me a lot about-a lot 3
of things, but I can't recall a specific conversation on 9
this issue.
10 0
okay.
Is it likely that such -- your 11 recollection, your impression, is it such that that kin ~d of 12 conversation could have occurred?
Or your recollection is 13 s uch that --
14 A
No.
It's likely that Ron Columbo would come 15 to me.
16 0
If he had a question?
17 A
If he had a problem like that or a question.
j 18' O
Okay.
In conjunction with using this 19 modification as a temporary procedure, in other words, 20 using a temporary procedure change and what type of review 21 it would receive, does that jog your memory at all?
Him 22 coming to you and talking about the --
25 A
No.
24 0
Were you ever involved in any discussions 25 with anyone,other than Harry North about this modification?
______m____.___________
16 1
'A Absolutely.
2 O
At NRC7 3
A Absolutely.
4 0
would that have been individuals at the---
5 that worked for you as residents or individuals at the 6
Region?
7 A
'Well, there's no doubt in my mind that I did -
8 not -- there is not doubt in my mind that my resident 9
inspector who worked for me, Jack O'Brien, -and we discussed 10 everything.
We did everything together.
It may have been 11 him that went out and tripped on it first.
I don't know.
12 But there's nothing I can think of that Jack O'Brien wouldn
13 have been involved in.
That's for certain.
14 I also typically called the Region every single 15 week and talked about things that were happening.
So my 16 boss at that time might have been Tolbert Young.
He was 17 my boss for most of the time.
I seem to recall Tolbert 18 Young, so I might have told him.
19 But again, as I said earlier, my usual -- I 20 usually talked to Tolbert Young and then I got a hold of 21 the HP people and told them of issues and expected them 12 to come and follow up.
So I would probably not follow up 23 on procedures or the use of that system or how they 24 transferred water or what went off-site, or why they did 25 it, or anything else.
I'd usually turn that over to someone 1
1 o
I I
I
17 I
who could really speak the language and then I'd -- if they 2
had something important, I'd sit in on the exit and I'd find 3
'out about it.
4 BY MR. JOUKOFF:
5 0
Can you recall who the regional based operations 6
NRC inspector was at that time?
7 A
My recollection is that it was Jerry Zwetzig.
8 But there were a number of shif ts.
Jerry Zwetzig was' a 9
regional based inspector and very, very familiar with the 10 Ranch.
He may have been the person.
There was also Dennis 11 Willet for a while.
That's -- Jerry Zwettig is the most 12 likely candidate.
13 O
Do you have any recollection at this time 14 that you discussed this temporary piping modification with 15 any of those inspectors?
That they brought it to your 16 attention, tripped over it themselves, or anything along 17 those lines?
18 A
No specific recollection.
Again, had they 19 done it, had they tripped over it, I'd know about it and 4
20 visa-versa, but no specific recollection on that activity 21 and who I talked to exactly.
22 BY MR. MEEKS:
23
-Q So if I understand what you just explained to 24 us, even if there were conversations about what kind of 25 review this,should have by the Chairman of the Plant Review
1 18
)
i 4
1 Committee, Ron Columbo, or the Plant' Review Committee itself, or whether it needed any review at all, that 's a 2
matter which you could have addressed but only in responding 3
at the' time but you would more normally refer,_that to the 4
5 Health Physics, to Harry North.
Because that would be his responsibility and he would be the authority.
6 7
A That was my MO, modus operandi.
i s
0 What authority did you have to address 1
9 situations like that on-site?
Io A
Well my authority was to be the eyes and ears 11 of the NRC.
So technically I'd probably have the authority to do -- to talk -- there's no doubt in my mind, 12 13 I had the authority to talk to people.
To issue a stop 14 work.
To raise Cain.
I'm certain that I had that authority, 15 So, had Ron Columbo come to me for example 16 and talked to me about the issue, I' d probably make sure 17 that he understands that the looks like a temporary 18 modification and that the PRC, the Plant Review Committee, 19 should review the issue for a 50.59 design change, do 20 whatever they're supposed to do.
21 And so that's the action I'd take and the 22 more serious the issue, the higher up I'd go.
23 0
But what -- let's, just let me explore this 24 a little bit about, you had the authority to stop certain 25 functions of the plant or to shut it down if you had too?
l 19 m.
g A
No.
2 O
. Is that what you said?
l 3'
A No.
4 Q
I'm sorry.
5 A
I definitely did not have that authority.
I had' authority to talk to anybody about any issue.
Th a t 's -
6 7
for sure.
That's for certain.
But in order to stop work,-
3 to shut the plant down, I'd go back -- I'd have.to go back to the Regional Office, because the Regional Administrator p
and the NRC headquarters people have that authority.
10 I
ij didn' t have that authority.
12 O
So, I guess I misunderstood your last response 33 then.
b 34 A-okay.
'15 Q
Let me make sure I do understand it now.
You 16 had the authority to address an ' issue like the review that this modification should receive if it.were asked of you, 17 18
-But you didn't have authority to authorize or bless that modification as temporary or that it received the proper 19 20 review.
21 A
That's correct.
22 O
That's what you would refer --
23 A
I definitely did not have the authority to bless any of the changes that were made on the part of the 24 25 licensee.
0
- - - - - - ^ -
n 20 s
i 1
Q Okay.
What is the system that was set i
up to ---
i i
in other words, how was the system set up to handle 2
3 questions like that?
4 A-Which system?
Within the NRC?,_
5 0
In other words originating from Rancho Seco 6
and the SMUD officials to NRC.
In other words, you would 7
be the eyes and ears.
You could naturally be approached 8
by this and you could relay it back to the region.
But 9
th at -- any representations you made wouldn' t be official.
10 A
Right.
Okay.
I understand.
11 0
What would be the official channels?
12 A
The of ficial routes th at the licensee has 13 available to them, supposed to use, are basically stated in
' k 14 10 CFR 50.
I don't know if 50.72, 50. 73 were. around.
But 15 they had tr,eport to us en a monthly basis any design 16 changes that were safety significance to the plant.
17 If they ilgured they had a licensee event 18 report, some reportable occurrence, they had to put daat 19 information on a licensee event report, which vent through the 20 PRC first.
The PRC usually determined whether the thing was 21 a licensee event report.
So that was the mechanism by which 12 they could inform the NRC.
Il They also can get on the old phone and pick 24 up and call the region.
They can also pick up the red 25 phone and call the NRC headquarters just directly and tell
--m___m.m_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
l l
21 l'
I them they had a terrible problem and they had ODR's, which L
2 was an in-house way for anybody ' at the plant if they had 5
any problem that was a safety significance, or procedure 4
change, or any problem really, they could write, an.AP-22 5
or ODR, occurrence der;;iption report.
Send that up to the 6
PRC.
Ron Columbo would screen and review that thing and then
)
7 if he felt it was important, or a tech spec violation let's 8
say, bri,ng that to the PRC for them to review.
9 So those are the mechanism that come to mind 10 right away.
11 BY MR. JOUKOFF:
12
.Q.
Did you consider a temporary modification like 13 the one that was done in this case, to be a safety issue?
k~
14 A
Depending on the activity level of the 15 effluence that would be discharged due to this modification, i
l 16 yes it's possible.
17 BY MR. MEEKS:
18 0
What safety classification did that 19 modification carry?
Do you recall?
20 A
No.
21 O
What's the safety classification of the 12 demineralized reactor coolant storage tank?
23 A
one.
24 Q
Class 1.
.How about the liquid rad waste 25 system, do you recall what that safety classification is?
0
22 l
1 A
It's just a guess.
I can't tell you for sure.
2 Q
What is your guess?
3 A
One.
l 4
Q One.
Okay.
5 A
Anything that has to do with the potential 6
release of radioactive material is most likely one.
Or if 1
7 it's not, it should be.
8 0
Okay.
What --
9 A
That's why -- excuse me.
That's why I hemmed to and hawed there.
I'm going on what SMUD used to call --
11 SMUD used to make their classifications of things not 12 necessarily in accordance with practices that are currently 13 in place.
So I'm thinking about what SMUD would call it as 14 opposed to what I'd call it.
There's no doubt in my mind i
15 th at that's category one stuf f.
16 O
And -- but your answer also reflected your 17 thoughts on what SMUD would have classified it as?
18 A
Yes.
19 0
What did you understand was being transferred 20 in that water?
I mean what were the contents of the water 21 as far as nuclides?
12 A
Tritium was the main thing.
I know for a 23 fact.
I got involved enough to know that tritium releases 24 were very high.
That was for sure a major constituent of l
25 the releaseg that masked a lot of other things.
At the time
{
1 i
t I
i l
23
-1 that you're. talking about, I can't say that I paid diat _ much 2
attention to the constituents of the water going off-site.
i 3
That was turned o"er to the HP people a'nd I would have 4
relied on them to handle'that issue.
5 0
Mr. Canter, have I or any other NRC representa-6 tive here, or any other NRC. representative in conjunction 7
with this interview, threatened you,or coerced you, or 3
offered you promises of reward concerning this interview?
9 A
No.
10 Q
Have you given this statement freely and 11 voluntarily?
12 A
Yes.
i IS O
Is there. anything else you would care to add 14 for the record?
15 A
No.
16 MR. MEEKS:
Thank you very much.
We 17 appreciate you taking the time to -- on such short notice 18 to come down and talk to us about this matter.
19 MR. CANTER:
Thank you.
20 (Interview concluded at 2:50 p.m.)
21 22 23 24 25 f
ao
7___
Thio is to ccrtify that tho cttach d prceacdinga baforo tho d
i
.UNITEDeSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION in the matter of:
NAME OF PROCEEDING:
INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW (CLOSED)
DOCKET NO.:
NONE PM:
Rancho'Cordova, California
'DATE:
25 March 1987 waro held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
/
/A
(
(sicft).
/
L (TYPED)V HARRY A RE
~
Official Report Reporter's Affiliation Jim Higgins and Associates e
e 9
e
___----.m.-
-~m
..mmm.
.,,m mn.,
cm g,,,,
p,,
o g
,,p