ML20199G151
| ML20199G151 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant |
| Issue date: | 09/15/1998 |
| From: | Lochbaum D, Nader R, Riccio J AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED, UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS |
| To: | Diaz N, Shirley Ann Jackson, Mcgaffigan E, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20199G134 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9901220198 | |
| Download: ML20199G151 (4) | |
Text
.
September 15,1998 The Honorable Dr. Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman The Honorable Dr. Nils J. Diaz, Commissioner The Honorable Edward McGaffigan, Jr., Commissioner Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
Dear Chairman Jackson and Commissioners Diaz and McGaffigan:
We are writing to express our concern over the actions of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) with regard to the United States Enrichment Corporation, Inc. (USEC). USEC was a federally charted corporation owned by the United States government which was established by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to take over uranium enrichment operations previously handled by the Department of Energy. Pursuant to the 1996 USEC Privatization Act, the USEC was privatized.
On July 23,1998, USEC conducted its initial public offering and the privatization was completed on July 28,1998.
It has come to our attention that the NRC failed to protect the public and plant employees from the significant dangers present at USEC's Portsmith, Ohio and Paducah, Kentucky gaseous diffusion plants. Despite serious and documented safety violations, NRC and USEC officials withheld important information from the public on the safety problems at USEC's plants. In addition to endangering the health and safety of workers and the public, the NRC facilitated the defrauding of investors. The NRC appears to have violated its own regulations in order to maintain the facade that USEC was properly operating its facilities.
Well before the initial public offering, the NRC was aware that USEC's Paducah facility was operating with serious safety problems that may have remained uncorrected until at least September of 1998. On February 25,1998 USEC sought permission from the NRC to continue its operations while its safety violations were corrected. The NRC is not permitted to grant enforcement discretion for unreviewed safety questions. Instead of denying USEC's request, as it should have, the NRC issued USEC an order which allowed the facility to continue operating despite significant risks to the public and plant employees. In that April 22.1998 document,' the NRC concluded that USEC's
" violations involve an inadequate accident analysis and a failure to comply with the conditions of certification." NRC documents from July 1998 also catalogue numerous safety violations at both the Paducah and Portsmith plants. The violations included failures to adhere to safety requirements, improperly trained staff, failed systems, unintended emissions, poor maintenance, over 100 event reports and lack of attention to detail in safety evaluations.
Even after USEC was privatized, it appears that the NRC acted to prevent public disclosure of imponant information. The NRC staff was scheduled to brief the NRC commissioners on USEC's performance at a public meeting in July of 1998. According to a transcript of the minutes of the July 29,1998 commission meeting, an NRC staff member, Mr. Callan, indicated to the NRC commission that in accordance with the schedule for the meeting, he had prepared a report on evaluating materials facilities [ including USEC's plants). He stated that he could provide a " thumbnail
' NRC letter dated April 22.1998 from James Lieberman, Director, Office of Enforcement, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to James H. Miller, Vice President, Production, ESEC.
{
9901220198 990107 I
PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR
l discussion and sketch, if you want it. Otherwise we can.. " At this point Mr. Callan was interrupted by Chairman Jackson, who said: "We'll look at the paper." Thus, the briefing on the record never l
occurred. In addition NRC documents addressing USEC's plants have been removed from the NRC's public reading room. It appears that the NRC engaged in a conscious effort to conceal information that would alert workers and the public to the ongoing safety problems at USEC's facilities.
l The NRC allowed USEC's facilities to continue operating in contravention of the NRC's regulatory requirements. These actions exposed plant workers and the public to unnecessary and unacceptable risks. In addition, the NRC's actions created the impression that USEC's facilities were l
operating safely and investors were not provided truthful and accurate information as a result. We believe that a thorough investigation of the NRC officials involved in this maaer is necessary.
Sincerely, ChbY ti fWh N(D I0 LW RalptlNader dim Riccio David Lochd/um PO Box 19312 Staff Attorney Nuclear Safety Engineer j
Washington, DC 20036 Public Citizen Union of Concerned Scientists Critical Mass Energy Project 1616 P Street, NW, Suite 310 215 Pennsylvania Ave, SE Washington, DC 20036 Washington, DC 20003 CC:
Huben Bell, Inspector General Karen D. Cyr, General Counsel i
l l
l l
?
September 15,1998 The Honorable Dr. Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman The Honorable Dr. Nils J. Diaz, Commissioner The Honorable Edward McGaffigan, Jr., Commissioner Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
Dear Chairman Jackson and Commissioners Diaz and McGaffigan:
We are writing to express our concern over the actions of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) with regard to the United States Enrichment Corporation, Inc. (USEC). USEC l
was a federally charted corporation owned by the United States govemment which was established l
by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to take over uranium enrichment operations previously handled by the Department of Energy. Pursuant to the 1996 USEC Privatization Act, the USEC was privatized.
On July 23,1998, USEC conducted its initial public offering and the privatization was completed on July 28,1998.
t 1
It has come to our attention that the NRC failed to protect the public and plant employees from the significant dangers present at USEC's Portsmith, Ohio and Paducah, Kentucky gaseous diffusion plants. Despite serious and documented safety violations, NRC and USEC officials l
withheld important information from the public on the safety problems at USEC's plants. In addition l
to endangering the health and safety of workers and the public, the NRC facilitated the defrauding of l
investors. The NRC arpears to have violated its own regulations in order to maintain the facade that USEC was properly operating its facilities.
Well before the initial public offering, the NRC was aware that USEC's Paducah facility was operating with serious safety problems that may have remained uncorrected until at least September of 1998. On February 25,1998 USEC sought permission from the NRC to continue its operations while its safety violations were corrected. The NRC is not permitted to grant enforcement discretion i
for unreviewed safety questic is. Instead of denying USEC's request, as it should have, the NRC issued USEC an order which allowed the facility to continue operating despite significant risks to the l
public and plant employees. In that April 22,1998 document,' the NRC concluded that USEC's
" violations involve an inadequate accident analysis and a failure to comply with the conditions of cenification." NRC documents from July 1998 also catalogue numerous safety violations at both the Paducah and Portsmith plants. The violations included failures to adhere to safety requirements, improperly trained staff, failed systems, unintended emissions, poor maintenance, over 100 event reports and lack of attention to detail in safety evaluations.
Even after USEC was privatized,it appears that the NRC acted to prevent public disclosure ofimportant information. The NRC staff was scheduled to brief the NRC commissioners on USEC's performance at a public meeting in July of 1998. According to a transcript of the minutes of the July 29,1998 commission meeting, an NRC staff member, Mr. Callan, indicated to the NRC commission that in accordance with the schedule for the meeting, he had prepared a report on evaluating materials facilities [ including USEC's plants]. He stated that he could provide a " thumbnail
' NRC letter dated April 22,1998 from James Lieberman, Director, Office of Enforcement, Nuclear Regulatory l
Commission, to James H. Miller, Vice President Production. ESEC.
discussion and sketch, if you want it. Otherwise we can..." At this point Mr. Callan was interrupted by Chairman Jackson, who said: "We'll look at the paper." Thus, the briefing on the record never occurred. In addition, NRC documents addressing USEC's plants have been removed from the NRC's public reading room. It appears that the NRC engaged in a conscious effort to conceal information that would alert workers and the public to the ongoing safety problems at USEC's facilities.
1 The NRC allowed USEC's facilities to continue operating in contravention of the NRC's regulatory requirements. These actions exposed plant workers and the public to unnecessary and unacceptable risks. In addition, the NRC's actions created the impression that USEC's facilities were operating safely and investors were not provided tmthful and accurate information as a result. We believe that a thorough investigation of the NRC officials involved in this matter is necessary.
Sincerely, Cbkl kW\\fA (El}0f W
/
RalpflNader im Riccio David Lochtdum PO Box 19312 Staff Attorney Nuclear Safety Engineer Washington, DC 20036 Public Citizen Union of Concerned Scientists Critical Mass Energy Project 1616 P Street, NW, Suite 310 215 Pennsylvania Ave.SE Washington, DC 20036 Washington, DC 20003 cc:
Hubert Bell, Inspector General Karen D. Cyr, General Counsel I
i l