ML19093A803

Request for Nrc'S Prompt Response Advising Coalition with Intended Action Regarding Nuclear License Revocation at Surry & North Anna Site

ML19093A803
Person / Time
Site:	Surry, North Anna, 05000434, 05000435
Issue date:	01/16/1976
From:	Allen J North Anna Environmental Coalition
To:	Anders W NRC/Chairman
References
Download: ML19093A803 (9)

Text

.

\ **

.'~

• '

e ~4µ

• t NORTH ANNA ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION P.O. BOX 3951 Mr. William A.. Anclerij, Chairman . VIRGINIA 22903 Uo S. ~'UCLEAR REGULATORY CO:~USS10N (804)293-6039 Washington, Do C. 20555 In the Matter of Virginia Electric and Power Company

.... ry and North Anna Nuclear*Power Stations)

-281, -434. -435 and 50...338. -339. -404.--405

Dear Mr.,

Ariiie~ss

? * *

.** * * * *

" ., ....... ~"

Criteria for Determining_Enforcement ~ction*a.~d Categories of Noncom-pliance with AID/NRC Regulatory. Requirelnents - ltodirications 9 Dec. 31, 1974, clearly state (p. 6)s An order is ordinarily issued to revoke a license when:

• oo; 2o Civil penalty proves to be ineffective as an enforce-ment act ion; or Qo OO;

6. Any material false statement is made 1n the application OtllcG cJ t11* $<,era.tar(,

t)ocu1i*1 t. So,viCII or in any statement or. fact req,uired under Sect ion 182 St~ of' the .Act.*

~ .

o- mission hearing and inspection records provide firm evidence that Vir~

ginia Electric and Power Company (VEPCO) is deserving of complete nuclear.

license revocation at Surry and Uorth Anna sites under both of the above pro-visions on the basis of repeated improper safety actions and reporting.

NRC do*~u:nente show a thr~ea-year lag between the disco*iery of ~ major aafety problems and their reporting to the lffiC:

Problem Known to VEPCO Reported to AFJJ/rrac Fault in NA excavation February O 1970 May 17, 1973.

Abnormal settling at Surry February 0 1972 :May 6 0 1975 (by a "con-beneath reactors fidential informant)

Abnormal pumphouse settiing at NA. Dece!'!lber 0 1972 April 16, 1975 aeactor"design neglect of pressure vessel supporti 197.1 - 1972 May 7, 1975 In :!.1ey of 1973, VEPCO was the first nuclea.!" utility in the nation to be fined for improper performance and attention to safetyo This 1973 fine followed a

~ warning in 1972 fn which the then Am called VE...oCO's S-.irry record "an object lesson to the industry." The 1973 $40,000 fine and Notica of Violation included:

• Appendix A, lte~ E--

Failure to report unusual safetywrelated events to tho Al,n.

S-~ccaeding events -- including four addi~ional failurea to report -- da~onstrate civil penalties to be *~ineffective as a.n enforce:nent action" with VEPCO.

i.

,*

\ .

- I

• 1 l

Mr. Willi&i Andera * * * * *

>

. . . . . . . . . . .* * * * *. * * ** Page 2 Material False Statements lt is a ma~ter of' record that VEPCO was convicted in April of' 1975 of having submitted twelve material false statements to the Ato~ic Energy Com-miaai.on regarding the fault zone beneath the North Alina reactors., These atate.'llents included instances* of failure to adduce key safety inform3.tion (lmown to VEPCO at the time) at const~ction license hearings as well as failure to eubmit a significant report *by _ D.r.!' ...Paul Roper, Pieci:nont geologist7' Now NRC inspection reports doownent additional false statements regard-

-mg settling beneath North Anna. 0 1i1 pumphouse, a Class Istr-.icture:

Inspeotion iteport Nos.* 50-338/75-<J and 50339/75-5, .. page. 2,

"*ooThe !niiipection revealed that SAR predicted settle?Dent for the service water resefvoir pumphouse (a Class I Structure) for Units 1 and 2 ws,s exceeded with the com.'!lencement of monitoring 1n December 1972 ** *" (:Emphasis added)

The predicted settlement was 1.44 inche!ll* :Mevertheless, (pago *1-2) ~oooThis value was incorporated in the F&\R dated Januar,y 3, 1973. On February 12-13 9 1973 9 meas~rement showed that the S71P".d. (pumphouse} had settled Oo36 inches in the ~ corner to 2.928 inchea inchee in the ml corner ** e" (~a.v 20. 1975)

Thus by simple comparison of December 1972 and January *1973 figures, an ad-ditional material false statement is established: VEPCO. repeated low i'igures known to be false at the tin::e of submission.

FLlrther 9 such a key foundation and constl"'.iction problem* should have been brought before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.when it convened 1n llay of 1973 to consider construction licenses fo~ North Anna Onita #3 and 4.

Failure to adduce North Anna p~~phouse information clearly constitutes another miiterTe:Cralse statement,,' .Acoording_to 'i:b.e HOO inspection report (page L,..11)

• o ** The SWPH for Units 3 and 4 is several h".llldred feet west of the BWPH for Units land 2 and ties into the aa~e dike *** When asked about the adequacy of' the do'3ign and constr-.iction for Units 3 and 4,.

no concern~ expressed Ex. the licensee (VEPCO) _. .. (~pha.sis added)

The inspectors from NRC at Surry find the same attitude as reported on October 16 of 1975 (page 7):

00

• • • There was .!!2_ evidence of concern~ th~ licensee to resolve the move:nents of*the reference datum at this ti:.ie (1972) ** o" regarding the several indications that abnormal settling was OCC'..ll'ring beneath Surry 0 a reactors which went critical in 1972 and 1973.

l>e11pite ~ pe?1alties, three altogether 0* intervening between 1972 and 1975 9 the record supports ?l'.A]l! 0 e contention that VEPCO exhibits consistent and

. intraotsb°le nuclear negligence with "no ~vidence of concern."

.. ** e e Mr. William Andera . * * * * * *

• 0 .. . . . .. . .. . . . .. Page 3

Material ~alee S t a t ~ {cont.}

"Site suitability" hearings were held in regard to S3urry Units 13 and 4 In July of 1974. Surely such key foundation -and constructicn information as ab-nor:nal settling beneath Reactors #1 and. 2 sho:.ld have been. adduced at this ti:ne.,

NBC' s investigation shows that VEPCO ~ reported this problem,, which can:& to the attention of the Oo!C!lisslon only through,_ ~he call or a concerned individual on May 6, 1975.

Nevertheless, ?,"RC'11 S,.:.rry Inveeti~tlon 50-2.80/75-1, 5C-28i/75-l docu:nenh not only the fact that VE?CO was aware of the settling prcble!:1 from February of 1972 on but also that VEPCO allowed the reactors to go critical with the proble~

unresolved>a.nd was dilatory and uncooperative in response to repeated questions from an insistent* engineering consultant from the Nuclear E.~ergy Liability .In-surance Association. (NELJA)

• Correspondence included as exhibits in the Surry Investigation aubstanti~te the existence of the settling beneath the Surry reactors, its progressive charac-ter, and VEPCO's reluctance to confront.this serious safety issue:

Exhibit # 4 - Letter from 100.IA'lll Engineerjng Consultant to Henderacn and Phillips, Inc., VE?CO's Norfolk Insurance*broken dated December 8, 1972:

"Tha.'lk~ sincerely for the information accompanying your letter of December 4. ( ~ ncte1 Dec. 4 .letter not a..,r,ong exhibits) It ill interesting and rather surprislr.g to note settlements L~ the~e of 3 to. 4" and contin,;.ingo It would be advisable to discuss the import of these observations at the time of our next visit. In the meantime, it is honed that additional UP to date levels will be run. 11 (E.'Tlphasls in the Exhfoit)

. Exhibit :{f 5 - ~tter: from VEPCQl>s Insurance Department to Henderson and Phillips, Inc., dated April 5, 1973:

vt5URRY POWER STATION :?-;ELIA POLICY NO. NF-186 On December 28* you advised us of ~ Individual A's coa:ments regarding the settlements at S"..u-ry* Power Statlono We ha7e been ad*,ised by

~ Individual C that additional settle~Gnt read1ngs have not been ta.1<:en and are not anticipatedo ~ further ad.-

vised us that because of "bench marks" which have been covered up.

It would be alt-.ost fo1poasitle. to se*cure any settlement readings now."

Exhibit# 6 -- Letter fro?:1 ::ELIAea Engineering Consultant to VEPCO's Insu::-ance Depart:i:en t. dat*ed February 4, 1974:

11.Uso while in Richmond, v,e discussed the nroeressive settlement that ha.:i taken place~ confirmed in ~~~- Individ;;.al G's (VEPCO Insurance Dapart~ent) letter of August 4, 1972. This settle?:1ent has been of concern because it has sho\m a different 1al ~

- e . JI

Mro Willia:n*Andera * *

• 0 .. . . Cl O O Q *

• 0 V O ,* *

• 0 * *.

• Page 4 .

Exhibit# 6 (cont.)

ment between structures, and 1n addition, has been progressive in acme instancea. Thia settlement has been even more surprising be-cause the weight of some of the struo-tures has been less than the weight of the material re~ovedo (S9.7-l:8-12-67) Mention is also made in that reference,to the possibility of elastic rebound of those lighter ~tructures. {Emphasis added}

. . ............

"The facility is founded on sc::ne 13.00 feet ~f' overburden which :puta it in a distinctive class* *** 11 Exhibit 4fa 7 - Letter from Henderson and Phillipa to VEPCO's Insurance Department, dated(?) .April 2lp 1974:

"BE: ?TELIA Policy NF-186 Conf1rming our telephone conversation of todey, ~ Individual A (:!'/ELI.A's E11gineering Consultant) is extre::nely upset over the ti~e it is tal{ing you to get the informa-tion as outlined in his letter to you of February 4, 1974.

"If he does not receive a reply fro::n you within the next ten days 9 his only alternative is to infor:n the NELIA underwriters that he is unable to co:?iplete his re!)crt due to his inability to get certain information from VEPCO *** 11 (:Emphasis in Exhibit)

• We a.re sure ~hat you l!Jl.iat agree that the Exhibits in the NRC .Investigation clearly pro~e VEPC0 9 s knowledge of the Surry settling problem from 1972 on 7 that there is no evidence of' the problec'a denial (now th0 stanc~ of both VEPCO and the NRC). Ratr.er. there is firm evidence of the discussion of Wprogressive" and "differential" settlement problems between VEPCO and NELIA in Exhibit if 6. The settlement problem is, recognized and. reale>

Thus it is* the position of !-!A.EC that VEPCO's .failure to ai;lduce known eettlement proble?ns beneath Reactors 'i?l ar.d 2 at Cor1struction License or Site Suitability hearings for Reactors #3 and 4 constitutes a material false statement, since in the No~th ~ case

~.~(The Atomic Safety.and Licensing) Board properly held that failure to make timely disclosure of information which fa significant for purposes of safety review gives rise to a mat~rial false statement *** 11 *

• Nae Brief' of 11/28/75 One must ahio inquire why* the S--1:::-ry .A.to:nic Safety and Licensing Beare. did not CJ..Uestlon foundation ccr,iitions. :.um made a limited appeara?1ce at the July 1974 hearing for the precise purpose _of rahing questiona on a site labeled 11 s'.lspect" by the NRC, who also comments (page*2..:..25 of &t~':~Y EVb.LU-ATlON): "Tho ~tegrity of certain zones *** ia questionable, with liquefac-

~ ~ possibility under dynamic conditions ... " *

..

e* e Mre William Andera ..

• e e o

• e O e . . . * .. . . . . .. ** ....

~

• Page 5 Reactor Design Neglect

.Aocording to an NRC meeting sum.'llary o.f' May 9-, 1975 by North Anna Project Manager Robert Ferguson. and a let~er of July 28, 1975, by NB.C's A. Schwencer:

Between 1971 and 1972, VEPCO recognized that asymmetric loads had been neglected in the original design o.f' the reactor pressure veaael (RFV) supports. for North Anna Units land 2.

}Tot till :Otey 1975 did VEPCO report this problem to the :rrac. w 1th J.tr. Fer{,"tlson noting on Mas 9: * ..... results to date indicate that the existing reactor vessel supports will not withstand loss of coolant accident (LOCA) loads ** *" (Enphai°is added) - - -

Since 8'.irry Units :/J:l and 2 ara twins of North Anna Units 4f.l and 2, the aboYe is further documentation of intractable nu~lear* negligence:

VRPCO allowed Surry Units :/J:l and 2 to go critical with a significant reactor design neglect problem unresolved. Further, the inadequat~

vessel aupports provide dubious seismic protection for a. plant that also has unreported abnor.nal. settling problel:ls 9 foundation problems that also were unresolved when the reactors went crit*1ca1 0 Both of these situations should have figured.heavily in VEPC0 9 s precedent-set-ting $40,000 fine of May 0 1973 I

They did not. Nevertheless, .A:ppendix A, Appendix B, and Appendix C of that May 1973 document dea*cribe an unfortunate pattern of inco;?1petent and untrustworthy behavior that has been consistent from that t i"llao "AID In-spection Findings" listed in Appendix Call show serious misrepresentation of safety actionsJ described as accomplished by VE?CO's Vice-Presi.dent, proven false by subsequent~ inspections.

Inspection and study of current OPE!µTING maT STATUS REPORTS reveal mounting numbers of infractions at Surry 0 proving repeatedly that with this utility a "Civil I>enalty" is 'iineffective as an enforcement action 9 "

tulfill ing an NR.C requirement for licens.e revocat iono License Revocation If MSC Regulatory Requirements.have meaning. then the Co::!l!i'lisslon must.

by the force of its own ?'evocation criteria, act to remove VEPCO's n-.iclear licenses on the basis of its inability to i~prove integrity of performance after repeated oivil penalties, and on the basis of previous conviction for material false statements, plus the following additional false stateme::its, following the ASL13 findine- that "failure to ma.lee timely disclosure of in-forI!',ation which is signific2.nt for purI'oses of safety review gives rise to a material false statement":

....

..

e *l 14r. William Andera, * * * * * * .... * * * * * * .. . . . . . . .

. Page 6 ADDlT 101-l'.U. UATE:lIAL FALSE ST.ATE:-~TT$

1. .Failure to report abnormal settling. beneath Surry reactors*.

2. Failure to adduce Surry settling problems at Site &~itability and Construction License hearings 9 July and October, 1974.

3. Failure to report excessive ?rorth Anna Pumphouse settling in December, 1972. (Report made in April, 1975.)

4. Submission in January, 1973 o:r" pumphouse figures known to be false at the time of submission, aotual measure:n:ents having alreacJ.v exceeded the repeated *iow predictions.

5. Failure to adduoi& North Anna pumphouse abnormal settling problems at l!ay.1973 Construction License hearing$ tor North .Alma Reactors* :ft3 and 4, who~e pumphouse tie1s into the same d_ikeo

.6. Failure to report reactor design neglect problem in 197]...19?2. (Report ma.de in 1483i 1975.)

,* Failure tCI adduce reactor design neglect problem at Con-struction License hearings for *?rorth .Anna Reactors :ff3 ar.d. 4 1n Mav of' 1973.- Also at Surry hearings in 1974.

s*. Submission of.false pipe stress meas~rements: 2300 psi when the actual measur*ement was *2a,990 psi.

Since the Coalition has no staff and also has no convenient access to 8'..u-ry documents, the Ei>ove list m~ be considered incomplete until a thorough study is made of aubmissions to the Am/?TRC on the subject of' Surry fom1da-tions. Given new USGS findings regarding Coastal Plain geology, further upJoration o*r the Hanpton Roads Fault might be in order by the NRC.

We bring this_letter to a close by asking that the Nuclear Regulatory Co!ll:niss1on abide by its own rt;ig-..tl~tions and protect the public by revoking tho nuclear licenaes of a utility that is unimproved by frequent civil penalties and warnings, and up.able to adhere to integrity and a'{oid safety-related material false statements.

We respectfully request your prompt response advisine the Coalition of your intended actions. Thank you for your professional consideration.

Sincerely,

~c~NA ~

ENV IROlt.B!fl'AL COALITION

. '

.

• UNITED STATES oF*A~IBRICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO:-I}!ISS.ION

. C

.-r*, In the Matter of )

1.

)

VIRGINIA EL~CTRIC AND POWER ) Docket No.(s) 50-338

_COMPA~,Y ) 50-339

)

(North Anna Power Station, )

• Unit Nos. 1, 2) ')

)

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby.certify that I have this day served the foregoing docu~ent(s)

• upon each person designated on the official service list compiled by the Office of the Secretary of the Corr.mission in this proceeding in

• accordance wit.h the: requirements of Section 2. 712 of 10

• C:FR Part 2 -

Rules of Practice, of*the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Rules and

• Regulations *

..

.

Dated st Washington,

--~

.

day of

. . .,n,c.

Q.a._,µ

..

this

. 197 {c;.

.

Secretary of the Cori.:a:i'ssion

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of )

)

VIRGINIA ELECTRIG AND POWER ) Docket Nos. 50-280 COMPANY ) 50-281 (Surry Power Station, Units 1, ) 50-434

• 2, 3, and 4) ) 50-435 (North Anna Power Station, ) 50-338 Units 1, 2, 3, and 4) ) 50-339

) 50-404

) 50-405 SERVICE LIST James R. Yore, Esq., Chairman Frederic S. Gray, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board NRC'.Staff Counsel U. S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission U. _S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Washington, D. C. 20555 Frederic J .. Coufal, Esq., Chairman William Massar, Esq.

Atomic sa*fety and Licensing Board NRC Staff Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Washington, D. C. 20555 Dr. Frederick P. Cowan David Favre, Esq.

Conquistador II - 104 13629 Warwick Boulevard 100 Rinconado Newport News, Virginia 23602 Stuart, Florida 33494 T. Justin Moore, Esq.

Dr. Forrest J. Remick Virginia Electric and Power Company j 207 Old Main Building 7th and Franklin Streets Pennsylvania State University l University Park, Pennsylvania 16802

. Richmond, Virginia 23209 1; Michael W. Maupin, Esq.

Mr. R. B. Briggs Hunton, Williams, Gay.& Gibson 110 Evans Lane 700 East Main Street Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Richmond, Virginia 23212 Mr. Lester Kornblith, Jr. Mr. Stanley Ragone, Vice President Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Virginia Electric and Power Company U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 1194 Washington, D.C. 20555 Richmond, Virginia 23209

• Dr. Emil T. Chanlett Mr. Rod Vandivert Department of Environmental Sciences Executive Director University of North *carolina Striped Bass Fund, Esq.

Chapel Hil~, North Carolina 27514 P. 0. Box 501 Babylon, New York 11702

page 2 Honorable Frederick S. Fisher William H. Rodgers, Jr., Esq:

Honorable James E. Ryan, Jr. Georgetown"bniversity Law Center Assistant Attorneys General 600 New Jersey Avenue, N. W.

Cormnonwealth of Virginia Washington, D.C. 20001 Supreme Court Building - Library 1101 East Broad Street Randolph W. Church, Jr., Esq.

Richmond, Virginia 23219 Mccandlish, Lillard, Church

-

and Best Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.

Roisman, Kessler & Cashdan 1712 N Street, N. W~

4069 Chain Bridge Road Fairfax, Virginia 22030 ..

Washington, D. C.

• 20036 Allan E. Kaulbach, Esq.

1730 M Street, N. W.

Clarence T. Kipps, Jr., Esq. Suite 707 1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Washington, D. C. 20006 John T. Schell, Esq.

Carroll J. Savage, Esq. 1730 M Street, N. W.

l*

!.- 1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. Suite 707 Washington, D. C. 20006 Washington, D. C. 20036 Mrs. June Allen 1719 Meadowbrook Heights Charlottesville, Virginia 72901 Mr. James Torson 705 Mountainwood Road

• Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 Mrs. Geraldine M. Arnold The Elms, Route 1 Trevilians, Virginia 23170 1

j i

-l

-l' j

~