ML20153H405

Discusses Concerns About Future Operation of Plant in York County,Pa for Response.Served on 880818

ML20153H405
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	08/16/1988
From:	Rhodes J PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF
To:	Zech L NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
CON-#388-6941 OLA, NUDOCS 8809090168
Download: ML20153H405 (2)

Text

"

y 0. $l [hC,

@~.$'hRh Af L b.N N!, d b u3Ns PENN SYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION CObMONWEALTN OF PCNNSYLVANIA N AR RIS S U RG, PE N N SYLVANI A 2.rrep r.

August 16,1919)CMf 4 3 v,-

sCt hv Chairman Lando W. Zec5, Jr. SERVED AUG 1 8 1988 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington D.C. 20555

Dear Chairman Zech:

As a Commissioner of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, I ha.ve a statutory responsibility for the public health and safety in regards to the operation of electric generating stations operating within the Commonwealth. My specific concerns about the future operation of the Peach Bottom Nuclear facility in York County run deep.

Recently the Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced a set of fines it is imposing on the Philadelphia Electric Company (the utility that manages Peach Bottom) and on certain personnel at Pet.ch Bottom because of the company's poor record of running the plant in recent years and because of alleged misconduct on the part of these individual PECO employees. While the fining of individual operators is unprecedented and the $1.'5 million company fine is the largest such fine itaposed to date, the very announcement of these fines at this time raises serious questions about the relationship between the NRC and PECO.

The most serious question to me 11 the relationship between the announcement of these fines and the restart schedule for Peach Bottom. One could draw the conclusion that by announcing these fines, the NRC has cleared the way for PECO to receive expedited approval of its Peach Bottora restart plar,. The fact that the NRC chose to fine these reactor operators but not to susper.d their licensas un Jerscores this possible scenari1.

The issue of the level dred nature of communications between the NRC and PECO cencerning these fines, therefore,is of vitalimportance. The public and this Commission has a right to know what transpired between key PECO and NRC personnel on this subject. The fact that you, Mr. Corbin McNeill(Senior Vice President, Nuclear Operations for PECO), Mr. Dickinson Smith (Vice President, Peach Bottom) and Mr. James Watkins, the newest member of the PECO Board of Directors, are all former admirals in the nuclear navy, further amplifies this concern.

8809090168 000816 PDR ADOCK 05000277 o PDR

"~l

Page Two Chairman Lando W. Zech, Jr.

August 16,1988 The Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) regnsted public disclosure of its letter of January 11,1988 to the special oversight committee of the PECO Board of Directors because of the seriousness of the situation it had observed at Peach Bottom over recent years. This is not a time for regulatory oversight in secret.

Therefore, I request that you make public the dater and topics of discussion of all meetings and phone calls since November 25,1987 between senior PECO executives and NRC senior management surrounding both the issue of restart and the imposition of the recently announced fines. In particular, I request that you disclose any such communication on either or both subjects between or among yourself and Messrs.

Paquette, Smith, McNeill, and Watkins.

The proposed disclosures will go a long way toward restoring public confidence in the NRC's oversight role vis-a-vis Peach Bottom and PECO. Now is not the time to cloud the decision-making process with bureaucratic red tape and stonewalling.

You are dealing with the worst management problem in the history of your agency and I believe a forthright disclosure of these communications will contribute to the public's acceptance of your future role in this matter.

I respectfully await your reply.

Sincerely, Joseph Rhodes, Jr.

Commissioner T

cc: Joseph F. Paquette