ML20064C491
| ML20064C491 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000142 |
| Issue date: | 12/30/1982 |
| From: | Hirsch D COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE GAP |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8301040413 | |
| Download: ML20064C491 (13) | |
Text
_
, e weea -
S .w w
CDP.MITTEE '1V BRIDGE T GA AHO 3 9337* f 12/30/82
)
1637 Butler Avenue, S 203rrooth58-Ios Angeles, Californi 2 g &38' (213) 478-0829 ,
N UNITED STATES & AMRICA NUCLEAR REGMTGtY COMMISSION BEFORE THE A'!DMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of }
) Docket No. 50-142 oL THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY
& CAI. M R m (Proposed Renewal of Facility
- * " " * * ~
.(UCLA Research Reactor)
)
AFPLICATION FOR ISSUANCE _&_ SUBPOENA DUCES 'IECUM t
Pursuant to 10 CFR 2 720, the Committee to Bridge the Gap applies to the presiding officer in the above-captioned proceeding' for iesuan:e of a subpoena duces tecum requiring the Department of Fire of the City of Ios Angeles to produce the evidence identified herein.
Backgrotmd As per Board Order of November 10, 1982, CBG submitted to the Applicant on November 12 a request for production of certain documents as to Contention III, relating to emergency planning issues. By pleading dated November 24, Applicant objected to production of certain of the
, requested documents. 'Ihe Board, because of this dispute, suspended the discovery scheduled included in its Order of November 12, and in two
, conference calls attempted to resolve the dispute. By Order dated December 2, 1982, the Board directed the Applicant to produce certain of the requested documents. Certain other documents, which Applicant indicated it would have difficulty locating, were to be attempted to be obtained by CBG 8301040413 821230 PDR ADOCK 05000142 O ,
' G,O'%
fram the Los Angeles Fire Department. Only failing in that attempt, would the issue of UCLA attempting further to locate the requested documents be discussed. CBG was first to attempt to obtain the documents from the Fire Department. H e rest of the discovery schedule (interrogatories which were to follow production of the documents) roamins suspended until the document issue is resolved.
CBG submittad the attached list of requested documents to the Fire Department, requesting that they be voluntarily produced for inspection and copying. De Fire Department declined, indicating concern about the i precedent that might be established were it to appear to voluntarily cooperate with one party in a dispute being litigated. It was indicated that a subpoena would mitigate that probles.
j General Relevance he matter of the general relevancy of the requested documents has already been addressed in the Board's Order of December 2,1982.
A few brief additional points may be in order.
De asserted adequacy of UCLA's Emergency Plan with regards fire response reets on essentially three points, put forth variously by the Applicant and/or the NRC Staff (1) that no fire is likely to occur because " periodic inspections" prevent conditions conducive to fire from existing (Staff SER, p. 9-2), (2) that were a fire to occur, l
l pre-existing agreements with off-site fire response forces (the M Fire Dept.)
and pre-fire planning by the Fire Dept. ard UCLA would provide assurance of prompt, full, and correct response by the M Fire Dept. (letter of agreement from LA Fire Dept., included as Attachment A to UCM's Emergency Plant i
SER p. 9-2 on pre-fire familiarization of NEL for local Fire Chiefs),
I I
1/ The attached letter from UCLA's Walter Wegst to the Fire Dept. indicates, in its fashion, that UCLA does not object to the Fire Dept. providing the requested documents. Note that CBG's request to the fire dept. is not for doctments for all UCM buildings, as implied by Wegst: at the request of the fire de the request was narrowed to the building housing the reactor and
__RERBabt.b9rst dd3m Bagldinss.
and (3), that UCLA's assertion that no radiological planning outside the reactor room is necessary is dependent upon prompt detection and prompt and correct suppression of the fire before the reactor fuel is put at risk (Hawley, et al, report, p. 13,41,43).
Se attached exchange of correspondence between the LA Fire Dept.
and UCIA puts at issue the Staff assertion that periodic inspections can be expected to prevent a hazardous condition from arising at UCLA. The Fire Department letter alleges that a failure of UCLA to comply with a number of fire safety regulations, months after the violations were cited, e*ther caused or contributed to a July 27, 1982, fire involving hazardous materials and chemicals during which 19 persons, " including nine firefighters, two paramedics, five UCLA employees, and three personnel from I.T. Corporation
[a hazardous materials clean-up company] required hospital treatment for exposure to hazardous materials." The letter further asserts "a lack of urgency on UCLA's part to correct all of the violations cited" and concludes t
Firefighting is a very dangerous business and involves calculated
! risks. De Los Angeles Fire Department does not wish to subject its firefighters to known hazardous conditions that have been identified, but not corrected, because of a " lackadaisical" attitude of persons responsible for such conditions.
his letter thus also puts at issue what the Fire Dept. would do,. if called to the I
l scene of a fire involving a nuclear reactor, if it feels it does not have from UCLA the l
l assurances necessary that its firefighters will not be subjected to unnscassarily hazardous conditions. This is a matter that merits further scrutiny in light of the supposed " letter of agreement" by the Fire Department included in the Emergency Plan, which indicates that the Fire Department plan is not to suppress the fire, if the reactor is involved, but to confer on the scene with UCLA arti other officials as to what, if any, response is to be made.
A standing and heated dispute with those same UCLA officials, which the Fire
. 2/ Production of these two letters was initially objected to ty UCLA: the l Boani in its Order of December 3,1982, ordered that the documents be produced. The handwritten notations on the letter from the Fire Dept. were on the copy provided to CBG and appear te be those of UCIA Asst. Vice Chancellor (for Community Safety) John Barber, who signed the responding letter. D e " Walt" referred to in Barber's notation appears to be Walt Wegst.
Department appears to believe contributed to the hospitalization of nine of its firefighters, is certainly' relevant to the supposed agreement with the off-site response force and the speed in which the force would, not arrive, but once on the scene have sufficient faith in the information provided by these particular UCLA officials as to the proper action to take (e.g., use water, which CBG alleges could create an explosive coniition) to put their firefighters at risk in such a situation.
Se msponse by UCLA to the Fire Department letter underscores the general relevancy of further pursuing the matters identified in the document listing. UCIA asserts in that letter that it is not obligated to correct fire safety violations cited by the Fire Department because UCLA is on state property, asserts that the Fire Department inspectors
" simply do not understand what they are observing," and that "[t]he real problem with all safety at UCLA is the lack of state funds to correct safety problems, whether they be fire safety or otherwise."
l Conclusion n e general relevancy of the requested documents has been well established. UCIA has indicated to the Fire Department it has no objection to the materials being produced. CBG has indicated to the Fire Department a willingness to make the request the least burdensome possible for the Department. CBG respectfully applies for lasuance of the request subpoena duces tecum. /9/
b '
Daniel Hirsch dated at Ben Iomond, CA December 30, 1982 President Committee to Bridge the Gap J/ The Fire Department requested that the inspection occur at its offices, that it be provided a minimum of five working days from service of the subpoena to produce the documents, and suggested modifications to the initial request to better fit their document retrieval system and minimize the effort in retrieval.
Huitch 9tates of America
~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .
C In the matter of:
THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY CF CALIFORNIA
>. DOCKET NO. 50-142-OL (UCI.A Research Reactor) (Proposed Renewal of TO Facility License)
Captain Patrick McGuinness Custodian of RecoYds .
Department of Fire City of Ios Angeles 200 North Main Street Ios Angeles, CA 90012 YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to appear ..".t your,, offices,,,, , , , , , , , , , , _ , , , , , , , ,
in the city of . Loa. Atigale.a....CiL11fornia... ......... .. .......... . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
NMXItStKXXXXXXYYYalffYtffYY YY YY YY Y YYY m Yk9Y YYY YYm mY mmWrimtm TY tt
, X90(KRtXiKEKMXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.XX.XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXK t
within ten (10) working days of service of this subpoena duces tecum to uce for inspection d cop na wust ---- -- - 4dmand_ _
ytur the document (s) or obj.ect(s) described in the attached schedule.
BY ORDER OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD BY l
Rspresenta tive mWRNEY FOR Committee to 39,_
Pv4 rien +h n C1m HPA-/ AftA. i Ennin1 Mi vst h TELEPHONE (2M) W8-0829 l
l lo C.F.R. 2.720 (f) pressdent office' or. af he ss unvastable. the On monon made promptly. and an any event Commssston may (1) qua.sh or modsfy the sub-at or before the time spreffled in the sesbpoena poena of it is unreasonable or requares evndence for complaance by the person to whom the sub- not relemmt to any matter in Lusue, or (:) con-poena ss dsrected and on nonce to the party at dinon densal of the motxon on just and reasonable
- ose snstance the subpoena was issued the terms.
FIPE DEPARTMENT RECORDS AS TO UCLA REQi1ESTED BY CBG FOR REVIEW AND G)PYING A. 1. Records for the UCLA Nuclear Energy Iaboratory (NEL)
- a. Records of fires (cause, exte.it of damage, problems in suppressing)
- b. Records of fire safety inspections
- c. Pre-fire planning documents for response to a fire at NEL 2 Records for the Boelter Hall (Engineering) complex
- a. Records of fires
- b. Records of fire safety int ections
- c. Pre-fire planning docume.its for response to a fire alarm from the Boelter complex which does not necessarily (but may) involve the reactor
- 3. Records for the Life Science Quad buildings (Young Hall, Slichter, Franz Halls and the Geology Building)
- a. Reccrds of fires
- b. Records of fire safety inspections.
4 Fire and fire safety inspection and response plan documents for the radwaste
- "*8*""**
B. We are particularly interested in documents regarding the July 27, 1982 fire in Young Hall, and inspections of the facility a few months earlier that reportedly led to a request to post warning signs.
C. We also wish to review correspondence between the Fire Department and the UC Regents, or other UC officials, as to the need to take pre-fire measures such as the requested sign-posting at Young Hall. In particular we are interested in correspondence that relates to the Young Hall incident.
D. Correspondence with UCLA about Fire Department response to a fire which might involve the reactor. In particular, documents which form the basis for the September 16, 1981, " EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN, NUCLEAR ENERGY IABORATORY AT UCIA," submit ted under cover letter of same date by Ross. Williams, Ihttalion Chief. Planning Section. We have specific interest in documents indicating how a fire which does involve the reactor should be fought (e.g. , with what suppression agents).
i i E. Records indicating agreement or dispute by UCLA as to authority of Fire i
Department to enforce fire safety regulations at UCIA.
t I
F. Generalized audits or overall reviews of fire safety at UCLA generally.
j CBG understands that the above documents are maintained by the Fire Department for a period of three years, with some older documents kept elsewhere.
CBC's request is for those documents readily retrievable and is prepared to modify this request should retrieval difficulties arise.
COMMITIEE TO BRIDGE THE CAP 1637 Butler Avenue Suite 203 Los Angeles, CA 90025 (213)478-0829
\ QQ .-
Attachment A (2 pages)
CITY OF LOS ANGELES r..u,.o er CALIrORNIA DIPARTMENT O7rPtME pn , co. egsson.*9 200 NORTH MAIN ST.
d?'"9012 0
.., LOS ANGELE5. CA 90012 s a. . , *et 6 Lated JOM"4C.CER.*O
- E*'Ot97 l CNear .secaMtem g ,g , <
x =..een,0~ <
.' T R W * ,IELOS i r r. w e. : A w mus ALCAVA tr.nasr HetLL TOM BRADLEY tvA v. ELOCx s.carvaar August 3, 1982 ne e University <rf Californ b Berkeley 590 University Hall '
Berkeley, CA 94720
Dear Mr. Cunningham:
Fire Safety / Violations at the University of California -
at Los Anceles (UCLA)
On Tuesday, July 27, 1982, at approximately 2029 hours0.0235 days <br />0.564 hours <br />0.00335 weeks <br />7.720345e-4 months <br />, a fire occurred in a storage building adjacent to the six-story chemistry building known as Young Hall on the UCLA campus. The fire involved hazardous materials and chemicals and was caused by chemical reaction of known uncompatible materials. Storaged included hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, acetic acid, phosphoric acid, ammonium hydroxide and sodium hydroxide.
Cr. March 11, 1982, a Notice of Fire Life / Safety Violation was issued to UCLA to comply with eight specific violations of the State Administrative Code, Title 19, Section 3.14. Over.four months later, four of the eight cited violations had not been fully com. plied w i th , thus. a i the r causino and/or contr.icuting to tne ,
'inc ide n t that occurred on July 27, 1982.
During this inc id e n t , 19 persons, including nine firefighters, two pararedics, five UCLA employees, and three personnel from I.T.
Corporation, required hospital treatment for exposure to hazardoes aterials.
~
C4 < June 29 19 , members of the Los Angeles Fire Denactment met
'ti D repres,entatives of UCLA to discuss the lack of 'ompliance c with t v- icsued Fire / Life Safety Violation and the apparent lack of
\W
~
L:.'/[C7 - 8//dW
- r . Themas J. Cunningham g)f g 7pf, fjp
.s.ugust 3, 1982
?aqe 2 /g1fl{ y 7"~d 7%&3c 5747EMENG concern and cooperation,by members of the UCLA staff. During his'N4'
~
meeting, it was evident that there was some confusion and misunderstandings as to specifics that the Fire Department re rc however,_it was also very clear that there was a lack of urgency on UCLA's part to correct all of the violations cited.
[ One point that was brought,up at this meeting was that some of the items cited in the violation would require monies for full
\ compliance, even though funding would be minimal. I informed members of the UCLA staff that it was my intention to notify th Honorable Edmund G. Brown, President of the Region, Mr. Tho=asf .
' Cunningham, General Consul of the Region, the State Fire Marshal, State of California Department of Health Services, CAL OSHA, And other agencies concerned with hazardous materials incidents.
Firefighting is a very dangerous business and involves calc lated .
risks. The Los Angeles Fire Department does not wish to sqkIect its firefighters to known hazardous conditions th t 'n e baan
^
ide n ti f ied , but not corrected, because of of persons responsible for such conditions.
lackadaisi @ ttitude This Department has the responsibility of informing those persons having the responsibility for maintaining public institutions in the safest environment possible of what is taking place on the university campuses in this State. Further, we would appreciate any direction that you could give the staff at UCLA that would, encourage their ir. mediate cooperation in alleviating the ongoing multitude of identified fire / life safety problems on this campus.
Very truly 40rs, '
/
Donald F./Anth6ny
- q.
Fire Marshal DFA:mb
' ^ - ' ' ' - . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
Attachment B (2 pa6es) r* ,!VEltSITY OF CALIFORNIA. LOS ANCELES p UCLA
/Cd3-a y; ..
... .. . . o i. m e. t ves ne:H e nn e wi>>. s n eurt.se s n e n ni ne n -q gi! a n ts a gr.asas s nTs C4 Z m wl's vy.. -- i DEPAltTMENT OF COM MUNITY SAFETY LOS ANcELES CALIFORNIA 9V24 September 13, 1982 A . P. . Evansen Chief Engineer and General Manager Department of Fire 200 N. !!ain Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 Daar Chief Evansen:
UCLA would like to respond to the letter written by D.F. Anthony (Fire Marshal) to T.J. Cunningham, dated August 3,1982.
First, let ete say that UCLA has always tried to cooperate with the LAFD in every way and to make their job (fire fighting) on the campus as saf e as possible. We taka seriously the suggestions, comments, and citatlans '
of your inspectors, and whenever practical and possible, we implement their requirements. However, we must again point out that the State Fire Marshal is the " enforcing agency" on the UCLA campus, not the LAFD. Some of the requirements specified by your inspectors based on Los Angeles city codes are simply not practical at UCLA and are not required by the State Fire Marshal.
As an example of one of the ways we cooperate with your depart =ent, I cen-tion the on-the-job training we giva your new inspectors. We don't mind trying to educate and train these~ ins'pectors who arrive here without even a rudimentary knowledge of chemistry, toxic =aterials, explosives, etc.
However, we do obj ect to being cited by such individuals when they of ten simply do not understand what they are observing.
Secondiy, we were frankly quite surprised by Mr. Anthony's letter. The UCLA representatives who were at the meeting on July 29, 1982 (not June 29 as ref erenced in Anthony's letter), all lef t that meeting with the under-standing that the LAFD would try to help us with our fire prevention job.
S pec if Ically, they thcught that Mr. Anthony was going to write a letter urging f Inancial support of our fire safety efforts and also that he was go ing to let us see a draf t of that letter. He did neither, and instead released a critical article to the LA Ti=es published on August 1, 1932,
- nd wrote a highly critical and vindictive letter about our fire preven-t ian activit ies. Neither of these actions is particularly productive nor helpful toward gaining the cooperation of UCLA or for that =atter the Un iversity system.
L a cit l y , we take streng exception to the i= plication that UCL\ is not con-ernd with f ire prevention and has a " lackadaisical" attituda toward
Page 2
, fire safety. The staf f of the Of fice of Research and Occupational Saf ety has two full-time people (one of these individuals is a Deputy State Fire Marshal) who devote all of their efforts to fire prevention and fire saf e-ty problems. Further, when that office can find suitable students, such individuals are hired to do routine and continuing fire safety inspec-tions. (During the past academic year, a student worked twenty hours per week on such inspections.) The real probin with all safety at UCLA is the lack of state. funds to correct safety problems, whether they be fire saf ety or otherwise. We thought Mr. Anthony understood that af ter the July 29 meeting and was going to try to help.
Again, we will try to cooperate whenever possible. For example, we have ordered and will use NFPA 704 arndag placards even though that is a Fire Prevention Bureau requirement, not a State Fire Marshal requirement. We welcome your Fire Inspectors and will work with them openly and cooper-a tively. We will correct truly unsafe conditions as quickly as possible within the limits of available resources.
However, we must point out that your Fire Prevention Bureau may not have all the appropriate answers for fire saf ety at an institution involved in complex scientific research and that cooperation is a two-way street requiring give and take by both sides.
Very truly yours, Milba r~
ohn C. Barber Asst. Vice Chancellor Com= unity Safety cc: W. Wegst - R. & 0.S.
JCB/jn l
{
l l
I
Exhibit C (2pages)
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES _ UCLA
- p. v.y .
y - ,
s i smuu non nu ns ws ocaus nnsnuos m onco - usrnocnco -
g sunsasar sancnez COMMUNrrY SAFETY DEFAATMENT OFFICE OF RESEAACH ar OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY IDS ANCELES, CALIFORNIA 90004 Decenber 16, 1982 Mr. Allen R. Evansen Chief Engineer / General Manager IAFD 200 North Main Street Ins Angeles, California 90012 Pc: Inspection of Fire Department Documents Belating to the UCIA campus
Dear Mr. Evansen:
I understand you have received, or will receive, a request fran a Mr. Dan Hirsch, President of a group called the Ccmnittee to Bridge the Gap (CBG), to examine los Angeles Fire Department (IAFD) docu ents containing information on fires that may have occurred at UCIA campus or fire department inspections that may have been conducted on the UCIA cartpus. As explained below, the University has been directed to advise you that it does not object to your providing any of the docunents requested by the CBG which fall within the cate<jories set forth in the second paragraph N1ow.
As you may be aware, UCIA is in the process of relicensing its nuclear reactor in proceedings before the Nuclear 'tegulatory Ccmnission's Atcmic dafety and Licensing Board (Iicensing Board) . 'Ihe reactor which has been operated since 1960, is located in the Nuclear Energy Tahnratory (!EL) of the School of Engineering within the Boelter Hall, Math Science cmplex of buildings on the campus. CBG is opposed to the relicensing and is participating as a party in the proceedings. Among its allegations, CBG is claiming that UCIA cannot deTonstrate adequate fire response capability for energencies that might occur at its !EL facility.
In attmpting to discover information which might support its claim, CBG has formally requested that UCIA produce for CBG's e.unination certain categories of documents, including the following tm itens:
. . . (Itan) 18. Pecords of inspections conducted at UCIA by local, state, or federal fire safety officials as to fire safety precautions at UCIA."
" . . . (Itan) 19. Pecords of fires at UCIA, including identification of causation, details of damage created, and inspection of fire suppression response."
~
Mr. Allen R. Evansen Decenber 16, 1982 The University formally objected to producing doctanents related to these items on the grounds that the sm pe of inquiry being proposed by CBG, that is, an e.unination of fire incidents, fire department responses, and fire department inspections for all UCIA biildings, goes far beyond the proper focus of the imC proceedings and is irrelevant to the question of the fire suppression response capability at the NEL facility. The University also objected that to search its files for all such records would inpose an unreasonable burden on University's staff.
In the adjudication of this " discovery" dispute between the University and CBG, the Licensing Board inquired whether the University would object if CBG attertpted to obtain the requested docunents frcan the IAFD. The University stated that it did not regard itself as in a position to raise any objection which 'an IAFD would be obliged to consider and, accordingly, the University would not raise such an objection. The Licensing Board also requested that the University advise the IAFD that the University would not raise any such objection. '1his letter serves as that connunication.
Sincerely, 4$ 5 Walter F. Uegst Director, Research &
Occupational Safety cc: Dan Hirsch
( hTW/gr I
1 1
l
UNITED STAT]iB 0F AMERICA NUCLEAR RECUIATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of Docket No. 50-142 THE RECENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA (Proposed Renewal of Facility License)
DECIARATION OF SERVICE I hereby declare that copies of the attachudi APPLTCATTON FOD Te M NcE ,
OF SUBPOENA DUFFR TECUM in the above-captionoci proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, addressed as indicated, on this dates n e. hav- 10. 19P2 .
John H. Frye, III, Chairman Christine Helwick Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Glenn R. Woods U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of General Counsel
$90 University Hall Dr. Emmeth A. Imebke 2200 University Avenne Administrative Judge Berkeley, CA 94720 Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. John Bay
( Vashington, D.C. 20555 3755 Divisadero #203 San Francisco, CA 94123 Dr. Oscar M. Paris Administrative Jud68 Lynn Naliboff Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Deputy City Attorney U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission City Hall Washingtcn, D.C. 20555 1685 Main Street Chief Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary Dorothy Thompson U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Iaw Center Washington, D.C. 20555 6300 wilshire Blvd. Suite 1200 Counsel for NRC Staff U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 attention s its. Colleen Woodhead William H. Cormier '
l Office of Administ2a tive Vice Chancellor f l University of California ,/ , // f' 405 Hilgarti Avenue ' '
fg/
Los Angelse. California 90024 t,7 m l President
! CCMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE CAP 1