ML20027A790

Amend to 820324 Request for Show Cause Proceeding.Nrc Should Expand Investigation of Alleged Potentially Hazardous Condition at Facilities

ML20027A790
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	05/03/1982
From:	Goodie J ILLINOIS, STATE OF
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20027A786	List: ML20027A790 ML20027A796 ML20027A808 ML20027A816 ML20027A817 ML20027E090 ML20027E102 ML20027E107 ML20027E109 ML20027E110 ML20027E133 ML20027E146
References
FOIA-82-328 NUDOCS 8205200255
Download: ML20027A790 (10)

Text

>

c ..

I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION L' ) .

Id'the Matter of )

i )

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-373

) and LaSalla County Nuclear ) 50-374 Generating Station, Unit 1 )

)

AMENDMENT TO REQUEST FOR SHOW CAUSE PROCEEDING The People of the State of Illinois (Illinois), by TYRONE C. FAHNER, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, in further support of Illinois' Request to Institute Show Cause Pro-ceeding and For Other Relief, filed March 24, 1982, submit th'e following additional allegations of reinforcing steel damage in the construction of the LaSalle County Nuclear Station, relating specifically,to the primary containment structure.

1

l. On April 29, 1982 the Office of the Attorney General of ,

Illinois received copies of the affidavits of three construction l

workers, who state that the core drilling of holes through rein-I forcing steel (rebar) occurred in the primary containment walls and'in the reactor pedes _tal__of LaSalle Unit 1 and/or Unit 2.

= ,

I Prior to receiving these affidavits, Illinois had no information relating the previously alleged rebar cutting practices to the i

i primary containment structure.

l _

A l

9%Anh NpP:&

( ' -;.

2. Illinois is informed by the Government Accountability Project of the Institute for Policy Studies that the affidavits of four LaSalle Station construction workers are being submit *ed to James G.

Lt .

K@pler, Regional Administrator of Region III, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Of the four affidavits, Illinois understands that _two are being submitted subject to a commitment L

by Mr. Keppler not to disclose the identities of the two respec-tive affiants. The identities of the remaining two affiants are 7

not being kept confidential. At the time of filing of this Amendment to Request for Show Cause Proceeding, Illinois has no knowledge of the identity of the two affiants whose identities are to be protected by the NRC. All identifying information had been deleted from the copies of these two affidavits before they were made available to the Office of the Attorney General of Illinois. Of the four affidavits mentioned in this paragraph and reportedly in t'he possession of the NRC, three will be discussed here only to the extent that they bear directly upon the pending request for a show cause proceeding.

3. The fir,st unidentified affidavit, dated April 21, 1982, consisting of 3 pages, states in pertinent part:

From personal observation I can confirm that several years ago around 1,000 holes were core-L' drilled into the containment wall-and the j $ reactor vess'el pidestal around the 694 foot .

1-elevation of-Unit I at the LaSalle plant.

Construction crews core-drilled right through l the reinforcement bars. . . [W] hen I left they had not replaced or repaired the reinforcement bars they cut through.

[

[' ., _ -

I personally observed another example [of damage to concrete reinforcement bars) at the 761 foot elevation of Unit II. Construction crews had to install supports to hold upithe control rod casings. Fitters from Reactc r .

if Controls, Inc. ("RCI") were core-drillin(

eight to ten inches down into the concrete t

i* floor, which I estimated was about 18 inches thick. The fitters were not taking the time

~

to_ check for and detect _the reinforcement bars, '

however. As a result the fitters were hitting the bars. I saw the core bits pulling out chunks of steel from the floor reinforcement bars. Again, the supports were installed with-out replacing the reinforcement bars.*

4. The second unidentified affidavit, dated April 21, 1982, consisting of 6 pages, states in pertinent part:

[D]amage [ core drilling of concrete reinforce-ment bars] occurred in the pedestal that the reactor si'ts on.

Between the pedestal and the containment wall long tubes called downcomers come down from the drywell to release excess pressure. Several years ago the Nuclear Regulatory Commission required nuclear plants to install supports for the downcomers. . . . Walsh, the construction firm, installed the supports by boring holes into the primary containment wall and the pede-stal itselt on tnree different levals. Walsh drilled noies to install bolts on the plates that hold the supports. They did this about 500 l times on the containment wall and 500 times on l the pedestal. In the process, Walsh drilled holes l

up to three feet deep in the concrete . . . .

(emphasis supplied)

• [ These allegations concerning supports for " control rod casings" are not specific enough to identify whether the particular equip-i ment referred to would be found inside the primarp containment

' or the secondary containment (reactor building). ;

t L

P== ,,

~

Walsh core-drilled right through the reinforce-ment bars ("rebars") in the reactor pedestal and containment wall concrete. I know thes_e facts, because I personally observed the vopk.

Further, last week I confirmed the number of '

fl 4

holes with the guys wh6' did the work. Y

5. A third affidavit, signed by Dennis Wayne Swartz, who worked at the LaSalle site from 1973 to 1982, states in pertinent part:

Probably the most serious construction de-ficiencies that I personally observed occurred during a February-March 14, 1980 stretch that I worked at LaSalle. The flaws involved the con-crete in the containment wall and the reactor pedestal. We were helping to install supports for large tubes that came out of the suppression pool between the reactor pedestal and the con-tainment wall.- Chicago Bridge and Iron cut out stainless steel panels and then the concrete was core-drilled to install the supports. I per-sonally saw holes at least a foot to twenty inches deep being drilled into the containment at the 71D~ foot elevation. In the' process, many of the reinforcement bars were severed. I personally saw a half dozen rebars severed on each of two or three occasions during the first few days of core-drilling. (emphasis supplied)

The shattered rebars is [ sic] not limited to the pedestal. I saw rebars severed all over the plant during core-drilling.

6. The above-quoted statements indicate that the practice.

of severing reinforcing steel during core drilling was probably mo y widespread as to the primary containment than was assumed or taen into account during the presentation of Edison to the NRC

s on March 31, 1982. On that day the following stateme ts were made

_4_

7

       ,                                                                                          1 on the subject of the primary containment, as reflected in the transcript:                                                             l           ..

A. Mr. Reklaitis (Sargent & Lundy): b (( { We had some holes in the containment walls, a few holes, but they were not true through holes through the walls. They were for expansion anchors up to 6 inches deep and maybe one inch in diameter. (Transcript, p. 60) [ Edison's " clarification" of the first sentence of this remark, in Comments submitted to the NRC Division of Licensing with a letter from C. W. Schroeder dated April 22, 1982, is as follows:] We had some expansion anchor holes in the con-tainment wall. There were no core holes through f these walls. (Edison Comments, at p. 4) / B. Mr. DelGeorge (Edison) : No reference was made to primary containment that I can remember. (Transcript, p. 61) C. Mr. Denton (NRC Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation) : I had assumed the reference was to so-called secondary containment, not primary containment (Transcript, p. 60-1)

7. The above statements indicate that the pending concerns about rebar damage have thus far been limited to buildings other than the primary containment. Also, the initial allegations of rebar damage were limited to the work and procedures of the electrical n

cdntractors, and did not extend to the general construction or

             =.

reactor controls contractors. ) U t

P . ' f

8. Because of these initial limitations on the scope of

                                                                                       ~
         ~

tha allegations and on the scope ,of the present inqu cy, Edison il represented to the NRC that "o'ver the full course of the five percent i power license that we have requested, . . . the radiation levels in those areas of the plant subject to inquiry here would not be such that continuing review or inspection would be precluded." (Transcript, March 31, 1982, p. 73, DelGeorge) Thus it appears that the NRC's decision of April 17, 1982 to grant Edison a limited operating license, for fuel loading and zero power physics testing at LaSalle Unit 1, may have been based on the fact that the alleged concerns over the integrity of safety related structures did not extend to the primary containment. And concomitantly it appears that the NRC's current investigation into the extent and impact of rebar damage does not extend to the primary containment walls or to the reactor pedestal.

9. In view of the new allegations of rebar dar. age in the primary containment structure, which have been brought to the NRC's attention by the Government Accountability Project of the Institue for Policy Studies, the scope of the NRC's investigation of the alleged potentially hazardous condition at LaSalle Units 1 and 2 At the very least the investigation shoul,d mujstbeexpanded.

in)cludetheprimarycontainmentstructure. Preferably, the investi-

                   -f gation should encompass all safety related structures and installations which involved core drilling in concrete.

1 ___ -6 -

Y. .

      ~

a... For the reasons stated above, the People-of Illinois e . reypectfully request that the NRC and the Director of Nuclear il Re actor Regulation, as part of the NRC's consideration of Illinois'

              >+                               .

Request to Institute a Show Cause Proceeding, investigate thoroughly the extent of the rebar damage in all safety related structure _s, and particularly the primary containment, prior to granting to Edison the authority to conduct low power testing beyond initial criticality and up to five percent power. Respectfully submitted, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS TYRONE C. FAHNER Attorney General ' State of Illinois BY: Q11) . JUD$H S. GOODIE Assfstant Attorney General Environmental Control Division 188 W. Randolph Street Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60601 (312) 793-2491 l l D5TED: May 3, 1982.

                ?I                                                      .

2

                                                                       ?

pP"" , o .; .. .% i PROOF OF SERVICE i q _.

                                                                           +

f . I, 11ARRY HARRIS, being sworn and under oath do state that r +. . on May 3, 1982, I served the foregoing Notice of Filing and Amendment To Request For Show Cause Proceeding upon the persons to whom said Notice is addressed, by first class mail, postage prepaid, except that Director Denton was served by express mail at the U. S. Postal Service, 160 N. LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60601. SUBSCRIBED and Sworn to before me this 3rd day of May, A. D., 1982. Notary Public f

                +i
                 'l                                                        i ti l

2

                                                                            ?

t I t}}