ML20248L975

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to 970519 Memo from H Eichenholtz.Informs That D Vito Also Spoke W/Alleger on 970516 Re Allegation 96-128/97-0066.Alleger Was Barely Coherent & Complained About Delays in NRC Followup.Encl Partially Deleted
ML20248L975
Person / Time
Site: Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date: 05/19/1997
From: Vito D
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To: Eichenholtz H
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20248L142 List:
References
FOIA-97-365 NUDOCS 9806120181
Download: ML20248L975 (6)
v • d • e


Text

- ____ - _____ _ _ -_- _ - _ - __ - _____ _ _ - _ _ _ _ __ -

i l '

i From: David Vito /

To: HBE ', t t c h ' ' '/g#

Date: 5/19/97 7:28am

Subject:

Alleg 96-128/97-0066 -Reply

>>> Harold Eichenholz 05/16/97 04:25pm >>> l' Alleger called at 1:56 pm 5/16. While not perceived to be in a stupor, he did threaten to call out the dogs of war (ala the press and everyone else) unless we addressed all his issues in his favor. He also talked disparingly about our Ol effort because they have not come back to ask him any further questions. I asked him if he had contacted the SAC to address his concerns and indicated that he always gets the same answer that the NRC is almost done with the inspections. I informed him that I had a deadline to meet and did he expect me to do anything on his concems, and he stated that there was nothing for me to do.

Harold, Jeff,

- l also spoke with the alleger on Friday afternoon (5/16/97 @ about 3:30 p.m.). As inferred by Harold, he was barely coherent. He again complained about the delays in our followup. He i stated that we are going to "try to make the ground wire and the neutral wire the same" inferring that that is how we are going to explain our way out of that issue. He stated that if we do that ,

he will " blow my ass out of the water," that "VY won't look like a plug nickel when he's done,"  !

that "NRC is not going to come out pretty," and that "he has 2 engineering groups that will bury the NRC if we don't come out with the truth." He wants an apology from VY. I asked him for ,

more information about this statement and he told me that J. Thayer had promised him (around '

4/96) that a public apology would be made to him, but that it never occurred. I told him there was nothing I could do about that but that I would again relay his concerns to the staff. There j was a lot of additonal conversation about the alleger's personal problems but I don't feel that it i is pertinent or appropriate to the allegation to document that information.

CC: KPD1.KPP2(JAT),

l 1

i I

/

w I

9906120181-990521 P PDR FOIA HICKEY 97-365 PDR . . " .

- w __ _:_ :_ x_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _

_ _ _ __ 'L_____

Edwin James Massey k

Subject:

Concoms You Raised to the NRC Regarding Vermont Yankee

Dear Mr. Massey:

This refers to allegations that you raised with and about your management regarding the Vermont Yankee advanced off-gas (AOG) system and other safety related systems.

Specifically you raised these concems in several ways: your interview with Mr. Richard Matakas of the NRC's Office of Investigation and other members of the NRC Region 1 Office conducted on June 5,1996 in Drattleboro VT; a May 16,1996 letter sent from your attomey, Mr. D. Gibson, to Vermont Yankee's attomey, Mr. Peter Robb, in part, documenting a  !

concem you raised regarding the high pressure coolant injection (HPCI) and the reactor core i isolation cooling (RCIC) systems; and, your handwritten letter (undated) to Mr. Harold l l

Eichenholz of the NRC Region i Office that was received at the NRC's Vermont Yankee i Resident inspector Office on September 19,1996; The May 16th letter was provided by

\ i Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation to the NRC Region 1 Office on May 21,1996 to  !

l l

['; f,

. > :.n ih

..J.th n::<d

\

O A C::C;;

fOl$ _

'lfong_ Y(g EfCOM ClIGlormaliOC l' 3(i p 's

/,,,', ftf, /W, '

L__________.__._ __

. l l

l inform us of their receipt of a potential safety / allegation concem.

We infer, collectively, from these documents described above that you have the following i

concems:  !

(1) equipment safety issue on disconnecting of motor heater circuite for the HPCI and RCIC systems resulting in a loss of reliability; (2) equipment safety issue on the crossing of safety related and nonsafety related power supply neutral / ground wires in the AOG system and potentially other safety systems in the control room such that a fire may occur; lI (3) numerous design errors, wiring errors and print errors associated with the AOG system msulting in personnel safety issues, system reliability issues, and the ability to  !

safety start-up the system subsequent to performing design changes on the system; i

(4) the qualification of personnel and their supervisors involved with design efforts or issue resolution for the AOG system; in particular, on their inability to read

~

prints / drawings; (5) management inattention tu safety concems raised by employees and, in particular, for the safety concems you raised as reflected in items (1) and (2) above; (6) Vermont Yankee management not being truthful or forthright in providing information to the NRC and their lack of integrity, in particular, during the AOG inspections;

l (7) your being harassed and intimidated by your management following your involvement in raising safety concems involving the AOG system, or the motor heaters for the HPCI and RCIC systems, or your refusal to lie under oath for Vermont Yankee's benefit during a contract dispute with the contractor for the security gatehouse modification; and (8) NRC staff / inspectors being so busy that they can not identify if licensee is being truthful and, in particular, the inspectors who conducted a followup on AOG deficiencies in NRC Inspection Report No. 50-271/96-03 did not realize Vermont Yankee was not being truthful.

You specifically requested that the NRC investigate your concems. In this regard, our review of the aforementioned documents disclosed a number of times that you have stated that you are not the only Vermont Yankee employee that has concems and that these are not your only concems. It is noted that these statements lack specificity, therefore potentially limiting the NRC's ability to obtain corroboration of your concem or to be fully responsive in addressing your concems. Nonetheless, we have initiated actions to examine your concems l

as characterized above and willinform you of our findings. In particular, by January 30, 1997, we plan to conduct technical inspections on your concems as reflected in items (1) i 1

through (4) with documentation to follow about one to two months thereafter. The remaining issues are pending further review.

i l

i The NRC notes that in resolving technical issues, the NRC is also protecting the identity of j i

allegers and intends to take all reasonable efforts to not disclose your identity to any 1

organization, individual outside the NRC, or the public unless you clearly indicate no

)

=

. objection to being identified. If your concems are referred to the licensee for resolution, your name and other identifying information will be excluded from the information that is referred.

However, you should be aware that your identity could be disclosed if disclosure is necessary to ensure public health and safety, if disclosure is necessary to inform Congress or State or Federal agencies in furtherance of NRC responsibilities under law or public trust, or if you have taken actions that are inconsistent with and override the pumose of protecting an alleger's identity. Also, your identity may be disclosed at the NRC's discretion in order to pursue an investigation of issues involving potential wrongdoing, such as the issue you brought to our attention.

Also, your identity will be disclosed as part of any NRC investigation of issues of potential discrimination against an individual for raising safety issues, such as the concems you raised above.

In addition, the NRC was established to regulate safety issues in the nuclear industry.

Regarding the discrimination that you feel occurred, the Department of Labor (DOL) has the authority to order backpay, reinstatement or compensatory damages. In order.to protect your rights, you must file a written complaint with DOL within 180 days of the occurrence of the discrimination. Any such complaint can be filed with your local DOL office or: )

l i

The Office of Administration  !

Wage and Hour Division Employment Standards Administration l

L U.S. Dept. of Labor, Room S3502 l 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.

= _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Washington, D. C. 20210 Your complaint must describe discrimination you feel occurred. A copy of the DOL's

" Procedures for Handling of Discrimination Complaints Under Federal Employee Protection Statutes" is enclosed for your attention.

8 With respect your concems regarding alleged improper actions by NRC staff (item % above),

we have referred this matter to the NRC Office of Inspector General (OlG), and if you should have any questions or other. comments on these matters, you should contact the OlG directly at 1-800-233-3497.

If a request is filed under the Freedom of infom1ation Act (FOIA) related to your areas of concem, the information provided will, to the extent consistent with that act, be purged of names and other potentialidentifiers. Further, you should be aware you are not considered a confidential source unless confidentiality has been formally granted in writing.

' Should you have any additional questions, or if the NRC can be of further assistance in this

~

matter, please call me via the NRC Safety Hotline at 1-800-695-7403.

Sincerely, l

l David Vito l

l-l

o , ,

Senior Allegation Coordinator Docket No. 50-271 License No. DPR-28 File No. RI-96-A-0128 Enclosure : -As stated CERTIFIED Mall RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED i

.. k t

'k ._

\

\.

x; t

t t'

\

k*t

_ _ _ . . _ .

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20248L975&oldid=3216062"