IR 05000206/1981017
| ML20005A811 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 06/11/1981 |
| From: | Andrea Johnson, Joukoff P, Shackleton O, Yuhas G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20005A810 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-206-81-17, NUDOCS 8107010299 | |
| Download: ML20005A811 (11) | |
Text
.
>
.
f)
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
heport No.
50-206/81-17 Docket No.60-206 License No. DPR-13 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Southern California Edison Comoany P. O. Box 800 - 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosamead, California 91770 Facility Name:
San Onofro Unit 1 Investigation:
San Onofre, California
_. _ _
Investigation conducted:
April 23, 24, 27-30: May 1-8, 1981 Investigators:
b. mew b,oA 4 -/O -SiI Gregory g Yuhas, Radiation Specialist Date Signed bwk 18rY/4-d-H-8/
PhilipV.~Joukoff,Investigafor'~-
Date Signed 5)
'
8-//'Al (tyw OwenJ.Shacklet, Senior Investigator Date Signed Approved By:
/[
,_ M d -//-8 Mllen D. Johnson, Accing Director, Date Signed Enforcement &jInvestigations Summary:
Investigation on April 23, 24, 27-36, May 1-8, 1981 (Report No. 50-206/81-17)
Areas Investigated: Radioactive 9terial control program and alleged removal of radioactively contaminated tools and equipment.from the site.
Results: -No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified. The allegation was not substantiated.
,
e 810701.0 M
.
.
._
.
.
ABSTRACT San Onofre Unit No.1 has been shutdown since April,1980, for major repsir to the steam generators.
This recair work involves several contractors working onsite. On April 7,1981, two employees were discharged by a site contractor reoortedly for apparent theft of a free standing drill press. The drill press was recovered by the contractor from the local residence of one of the employees.
Subsequently, the NRC received alleghtions indicating that the discharged emoloyees had been involved previously in theft of potentially radio-actively contaminated hand tools from the San Onofre Unit 1 and Three Mile Island Unit 2 sites. Further, these tools were supposedly shipped to a warehouse in the State of Mississippi.
A joint NRC/ FBI investigation of these allegations was performed. The investigation included: interviews of individuals, including co-workers and acquaintances of the accused, the accused, licensee personnel and the cognizant contractor management personnel; and radiation surveys by NRC inspectors at two former residences of the accused and the residence of an alleged accomplice, all in the San Onofre locale, and radiation surveys at the residence and nearby areas in Mississippi where the tools were allegedly warehoused. NRC's efforts were di ected toward the health and safety aspect while the FBI directed tneir efforts toward the
.
criminal aspect of the alleged thefts.
The FBI has law enforcement jurisdiction over all crimes connitted at the San Onofre site since it is located on the U.S. military reservation, Camp Pendleton.
Three NRC regional offices participated in the investigation: Regions I, II and V. Information developed during this investigation did not substantiate that contaminated tools had been stolen from the San Onofre Unit 1 or Three Mile Island Unit 2 sites.
The radiation surveys conducted at residences, storage build'ng; and nearby areas disclosed no detectable radioactive material. A few hand tools were recovered from one residence near the e n Onofre site.
These tools were taken from the site but were free of conta.ination. No warehouse was on the property in Mississippi as alleged; rather, thcr? was a tool shed containing a nonnal complement of hand tools for home use. Exclusive of the initial allegations, the individuals interviewed stated that they were unaware of any radioactively contaminated tools being removed from the plant sites.
NRC's participation in this investigation was closed when reasonable assurance was obtained that no tools and/or equipment having significant radioactive contamination had been taken from the plants.
I
.
- --
-
w w
,
,
%
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted by NRC Region V Investinators Southern California Edison Company (SCE)
- R. Dietch, Vice President, Nuclear Engineering and Operations
- J. Haynes, Manager, Nuclear Operations
- J. Curran, Plant Manager, San Onofre K. Barr, Health Physics Manager
- R. Warnock, Health Physics Supervisor J. Mortensen, Health Physics Engineer
- F. Briggs, Compliance Engineer R. Morgan: Radioactive Waste Foreman
- Denotes those individuals attending the exit interview on April 30, 1981.
In addition to the individuals noted above, other members of the licensee and contractor organizations were interviewed.
2.
A11eaed Unauthorized Removal of Contaminated Toolt
~ ~ - -
The NRC received allegations that o contractor Employees, recently discharged for unauthorized removal of a free standing drill press to one of the employee's residence, were also involved in stealing potentially. contaminated hand tools from the San Onofre Unit 1 site
and had been previous,1y involved in stealing similar hand tools from the Three Mile Island Unit 2 site. Also, these tools were'
allegedly truckeif to a warehouse on one of the employee's farm in the State of Mississippi.
,
Upon receipt of these allegations, the NRC Region V Office notified the FBI office at San Diego since the FBI has jurisdiction for investigating criminal matters occurring on Federal property. The San Onofre site is located on the '.;.S. military reservation at Camp Pendel ton. A coordinated FBI /NRC investigation was then conducted with the NRC responsible for investigating and evaluating the health and safety aspect and the FBI investigating the criminal aspect of the case. The report items which follow address NRC's sc. ope of work which included investigatory work by three NRC regional offices: Region V who worked with the FBI investigating at or near the San Onofre Unit 1 site, Region II who investigated with the FBI ac the Mississippi location, and Region I who investigated with the FBI at 'the' Pennsylvania location.
The NRC investigation included examination of the San Onofre Unit 1 contaminated naterial control program, interviews with cognizant personnel, observations of certain radiation work practices at the San Onofre Unit 1 site, and radiation surveys and observations at various residences and areas which may have been affected by the alleged tool thefts.
-_
_
..
-
_ _ _
.
- _ _ -
.
._
-. - - _
. -
, _ _
-
_-
,
.
.
-2-a.
Radioactive Material Control Program at San Onofre Unit 1
,
i.
During the course of this investigation, a NRC radiation j
specialist inspector examined the licensee's system used to
'
control the release of previously contaminated materials from the restricted area. The tenn " restricted area" means any area where access is controlled fcr purposes of protection of individuals from exposure to radiation and radioactive materials as defined in 10CFR20.3 (a)(14). San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Radiation Protection Procedure S-VII-1.18, " Control of Radiation Exoosure", Revision 4, dated April 18, 1979, outlines the restricted area as including all areas within the security fence surrounding those structures housing the principal plant equipment which contain or may contain radioactive materials.
i Within the restricted area, the licensee established three discrete control zones which are defined in S-VII-1.18. These include: 1) the Clean Areas... areas where lopse sur contamination is maigtained less than 220 dpm/100 cm{ ace beta-
,
gamma, 22 dpm/100 cm alpha; fixed contamination less than 0.25 mr/hr at one inch; general radiation intensity less than i
0.25 mr/hr; and airborne activity less than the concentrations listed in 10CFR20, Appendix Bi Table II, Column 1; 2) the
<
Controlled Area... an area with radiation and contamination ig excess of the Clean Area limits but less than 2200 dpm/100 cm beta-gamma, 220 dpm alpha; 2.5 mr/hr general radiation intensity; and airborne activity less than the concentrations listed in 10CFR20, Appendix B. Table 1,' Column 1; and 3) the Exclusion
.
Area... an area with radiation, contamination or airborne
'
activity in excess of the Controlled Area limits.
.
Tools, equipment ar.d other materials taken into the Controlled
-
or Exclusion Areas may become activated or contaminated with radioactive materials. Procedure S-VII-1.18 requires that
'
material and equipment to be removed from the controlled area
'
be surveyed by qualified personnel and found to freet the Clean
'
Area standards before release to clean areas. Material not meeting these criteria are to be handled in accordance with Station Order S01-E-218, " Control of Radioactive Material",
t Revision 0, dated January 30, 1981, and the plant radioactive waste management program.
Radiation Protection Procedure S-VII-1.9, " Decontamination and
l Clearance of Tools, Equipment and Areas", Revision 3 including l
Procedure Change Notice Number 1, dated March 22, 1981, specifies the methods for surveying tools and equipment before the
'
uncontrolled release to the Clean Areas of the plant or to any (
offsite location. In a memorandum to all site personnel dated
March 18, 1981, approved by the Health Physics Supervisor, the
!
Health Physics Engineer emphasized the removable contamination i
i i
I
'
i
!.-.
. _ -.
_. _ _.
....-.
.
.
..
.
.
.
-3-release limits and decreased the fixed contaminatinn limit
.
from 0.25 mr/hr at 1 inch to less than 0.1 mr/hr. Procedure S-VII-1.9 states in paragraph 4 to " Perform final smear and radiation checks or frisk each item to be released to the Clean Area. Complete and attach a green ' Contamination and Radiation Clearance' tag to each iten or container of items which meets the limits for uncontrolled release.
The inspector observed implementation of this material control program during tours of the restricted area. Large quantities of equipment and tools from the Clean Area were taken into the Controlled and Exclusion Areas without restriction. Tools and equipment taken into Exclusion Areas were subsequently decon-taminated and packaged in plastic bags prior to removal to the Controlled Area if unconditional release was desired. The material was decontaminated in either the decontamination tent located on the operating deck of the Contaimnent Building or in the decontamination room located in the Auxiliary Building.
After decontamination, the material was taken to the Door 16 Paalth Physics Office where a radiation survey was performed y a Health Physics Technician... Surveys observed by the inspector consisted of smears.taken and counted in a proportional counter and direct radiation measurements made with a thin window Geiger-Mueller detector. The results of these surveys were recorded on a " green tag" if the survey indicated compliance with the release limits.
The technician also recorded a description of the material, the date, and his name on the tag. The tag was then attached to the item and the item
-
placed on the floor outside the Health Physics Office. When the survey showed levels of radioactivity greater than the Clean Area limits, the material was repackaged, the activity level marked on the package and the object returned for additional decontamination or disposal as radioactive waste.
The inspector observed that the only record of these survey results was that entered on the " green tag".
-
Workers who brought material, tools and equipment into the
.
Controlled Areas and removed same by the above process then
'
carried the " green tagged" item to the Controlled Areas egress point. This egress point was continuously monitored by a contract health physics aide.
This individual was instructed not to permit material to leave the Controlled Area without a
" green tag".
The health physics aide was observed to check items leaving the ares for " green tags" which he removed as the item was allowed to enter the Clean Area.
The removed
" green tags" were retained for a short time and then discarded, according to the aide.
.
_
_.. _
_
_
_
_ _ _
-
.
.
-
-4, Contractors and other workers can, according to the licensee representative, continually take material into and out of the
,
restricted / Controlled Area as necessary to complete their assigned responsibilities. Workers stated this is most frequently the case with hand tools.
The inspector observed that material,' equipment and tools leaving the restricted area (security fence) from the Clean Area via the truck gates was not surveyed for radiation and no property or material pass was required. Hand-carry items leaving the restricted. area from the Clean Area via the portal monitors similarly did not require a property or material pass and were not required to be checked through.the portal monitor radiation detectors.
The inspector performed a radiation survey on April 30, 1981, of the tool crib located in the AWS Building -(which is outside of the restricted area) using an Eberline PRM-7 micro R/hr
'
Meter, NRC Servial No.008596. Three bags of lapping blocks were observed to have " green tags" attached.
No contaminated tools or equipment were identified during this survey.
The inspector's review of the licensee's existing radioactive material control program indicated that several regulatory and
,
,
industry principles have not been addressed in the licensee's procedures. For example:
,
"
(1) The person or organization releasing property previously contaminated above allowable limits should maintain complete records of released property. The record should include identification of the property, the date cf last monitoring operation, the identity of the individual who performed the monitoring operation, the type of monitoring instru. ment used, and the results of the monitoring operation.
(Reference: 10CFR20.401(c)(2),DraftANSN13.12).
'
(2) Surfaces of premises, equipment, or scrap which are likely to be contaminated but are of such size, construction, or location as to make the surfaces inaccessible for the purposes of measurement should be assumed to be cor.taminated in excess of the permissible radiation limits.
(Reference:
USNRC Reg. Guide 1.86, Draft ALS N13.12).
(3) Radio.utivity on equipment or surfaces should not be covered by paint, plating, or other covering material unless contamination levels, as determined by a survey and documented, are below the limits specified.
(Reference:
USNRC Reg. Guide 1.86, Draft ANS N13.12).
.
g,
-,,..
,_
,
-.---
,
-y,-
,
-g
-
__
"
.
.
-5-b.
Radiological Findings in San Onofre Area Th'e inspector detennined from interviews with the individuals involved that contaminated tools and eouipment were collected from SCE and contractor employees working inside the Exclusion Area, mainly the Containment Building, and delivered to either the decontamination tent or decontamination room for temporary storage and cleaning.
The inspector reviewed licensee radiation and contamination survey data recorded on the follcwing dates to determine the levels of contamination to which tools and equipment may have been exposed.
Date Description Range of Contamination in dpm/100 cm'
fiarch 31, 1981 TMI Modifications 2.2 E6 to 4.8 E6-10 ft. elevation April 1,1981 TMI Modifications -
-- - --- 2.0 E3 to 1.0 E4 -
All levels except -10 April 5,1981 TMI Modifications 3.4 E2 to 2.1 E3 42 and 54 ft. elevationc
-
'
April 11,1981 R.E.D. Buildir.g 1.0 E2 to 8 E3 April 12,1981 TMI Modifications 4.5 Ea '~ 2.65 E5
-
-
-10 ft. elevation
-
,
April 26, 1981 Containment 1.0 E2 to 1.6 E4 All levels except -10 April 27,1981 Containment 1.0 E2 to 8.4 E3 All levels except -10
'
Tools removed from the above areas were said to have been decontaminated and taken to the Health Physics Office for survey and release or returned for additional decontamination as necessary. Each individual interviewed, that was either aware of, or involved in, this activity was asked the following question. "Are you aware of any contaminated material which left the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station site without.
being surveyed and properly released?" All individuals interviewed by the fiRC and FBI stated that they were unaware of any :ontaminated material leaving the site without being properly surveyed and released.
.
. __
_
-._
_.-__ _. _.
__. __ ____
.
,
-6-Once the tools and equipment were released and " green tagged",
' they were allegedly picked up, the tag removed, and t'aken to a
.
contractor's onsite facilities.
From there, the materials were allegedly taken from the restricted area via the truck access and personnel egress points to locations off site.
'
On April 7,1981, SCE representatives discovered two 4 foot by 18 inches wide by 12 inches deep tool boxes loaded with
,
handtools, portable electric tonis and a portable cut off saw
in the contractor's supply tr; Ter. These tools were given a cursory radiation survey by a rechnician and returned to their owners. The Technician did not record the survey results since he had ca -luded that they were not contaminated.
In this same time pei fod, the management of the contractor was conducting an investigation of allegations that some of their employees were stealir.J tools and equipment from the restricted On April 7,1981, the contractor management representatives area.
. recovered a new drill press from an employee s residence.
The drill press was returned to SCE, surveyed, and found to meet l
the Clean Area standards.
'.
Based on the above information, the inspector and an investigator requested and.were given permission on April 29, 1981, by the present occupant at the employee's prior residence, to perform a radiation and contamination survey in the garage, storage areas and laundry room. Direct radiation. measurements were made with an Eberline PRM-7 micro R/hr meter, NRC Serial No.
008596, calibrated December 15, 1980. This survey indicated
.
radiation levels of 0.007 to 0.009 mr/hr which is indicative
!
'
of natural background radiation. A direct radiation and contamination survey using an Eberline E-520 with HP 260 probe, NRC Serial No. 006385, calibrated March 27, 1981,
,
i indicated less than 200 dpm per probe area. Smears for loose surface contamination were also taken and analyzed on the NMC,
-
PC-55, NRC Serial No. 000383 and found to have no activity grgater than the minimum detectable activity of 50 dpm/100
cm. While surveying the garage, the inspector observed and
,
L surveyed a flashlight engraved " Southern California Edison i
Company".
No radiation or contamination above Clean Area
!
limits was found during this survey.
Similar surveys were performed at two other suspected residences on the afternoon of April 29, 1981.
The same NRC instruments were used and no detectable radiation or contamination above background was found. Southern California Edi' son hard hats and rainsuits were observed and surveyed at both residences and a 100 ft. tape measure with Bechtel identification was also surveyed and found to meet the Clean Area standards.
i
.-
e a.-r
--
viw4 y
,r,w w-y vm
,y, y
y v ~ w -g w.
,,.w_yn.,w py-w,.9wp-
.,3,
,w94
,9
,, _ _,-.,
9 9 gmy
_
a-e-e-s w
a
-
c.
,,.--
w s
,
-
.
-7-On April 30, 1981, the following tools and equipment that had been taken from the San Onofre-Unit 1 site were retrieved from the first residence surveyed.
10 inch 422 Channel Lock Pliers 10 inch 430 Channel Lock Pliers 7.5 inch 207-6 Proto Dikes 10 inch KAL-1549 Ratchet 5461 Proto 3/4 inch crowsfoot with 5 inch extension 5461 Proto 1/2 inch by 5 inch extension 5461 Proto 1/2 inch drive with 3/4 inch box end 1-1/8 inch deept well KAL-1636 Socket 6 Snaptite Inc. VRC-4 connectors
_
Survey of these tools with the same NRC instruments did not reveal any radiation levels above background.
c.
Investication Conducted in Pennsylvania By NRC and FBI
.An NRC investigator and a special agent of the Fb-I interviewed two individuals in Pennsylvania who allegedly were knowledgeable
.
of unauthorized removal of tools and other materials from the
- Three Mile Island, Unit 2 (TMI-2) nuclear power station.
Both
.
individuals denied witnessing or having any first hand knowledge that contaminated tools or other materials had been stolen from the plant.
In addition, each of the individuals believed that if any teols or materials had been taken, the level of contamination would have been low and not easily removable and therefore would not constitute a significant radiological hazard, d.
Investigation Conducted In Mississippi By NRC and the FBI An NRC inspector and investigator met with special agents of the FBI and proceeded to a residence located in Mississippi, alleged to be the location that potentially contaminated tools were stored. After being informed of the purpose of the visit, the occupant volunteered his consent, in writing, to a search of his residence, his property and other buildings thereon. The residence was a double wide mobile home with corrugated steel underpinning. A storage shed approximately 20ft x 20ft was located to the side and slightly behind the residence. Four empty post holes were noted adjacent to this
. _ - _ - _.
-
- _ -.
_
_
_
-
_.
_
__.
.
- '
,
-8-
'
.
storage shed which the occupant stated had been for supports
for a " lean-to" which had been recently torn down, but was previously utilized to store his tractor.
The post holes indicated the building had dimensions of approximately 10ft x 10ft. A 40-foot shipping container, stenciled with serial number CTIU 207892 and bearing a Lykes Line decal, was located approximately 1,500 feet up a very rough dirt road which began adjacent to the storage shed. The mobile home occupant stated that the container did not belong to him and was not on his property, but that he was utilizing it to store his tractor.
Another shed approximately 8ft x 8ft was located near the property. When the occupant was further questioned as to the ownership of this shed, he indicated that it belonged to his father-in-law and he gave his consent to the search of that shed also.
A physical search of each of the above structures was conducted.
This included removal of portions of the trailer underpinning.
The physical search did not' disclose any caches of tools or equipment. Small tools were observed in the 20ft x 20ft storage shed; however, none were identifiable as being stolen property.
>
The NRC radiation specialist inspector conducted radiation
,
surveys of each building and the property' utilizing a 2 in. x 2 in. sodium iodide detector attached to a " Rascal" Model' PRS-1 portable rate scaler. No radiation levels above natural-background were d.etected.
,
Smear samples were taken from the tools and equipment and the
floor of the shipping container. Soil samples were collected from the dirt floors of the storage shed and the area where the lean-to had been located. The samples were checked using
a HP-210 Geiger-fiueller detector connected to the " Rascal" Model PRS-1 portable rate scaler. No indication of radioactivity above natural background was observed. The soil and smear samples were returned to the Region II laboratory where further
,
!
analysis with an alpha / beta proportional counter was conducted, l
Again, no radiation levels above natural background were detected.
,
!
i The mobile home occupant was interviewed by the FBI /NRC team i
and denied any knowledge or culpability in the theft of tools from either TMI or San Onofre.
The occupant's brother was also present at the residence. He stated he was on vacation from his residence in Houston, Texas. He was also interviewed by the FBI /NRC team and he too denied any knowledge or culpability in the theft of tools from TMI'or San Or.ofre.
l
,
I
.
!
<
!
!
!-
,-
-
,
.,,,,
-
.-
--
-,
.-
- -. -. -. - - - - - -, - - -
-.,.
.-
_.
-
..
.9
..
k The investigation team then proceeded to the residence of another individual also located in Mississippi. With this individual's consent, surveys were conducted of his residence, a storage shed (approximately 8ft x 12ft) and his vehicle, a van, utilizing the sodium iodide detector and " Rascal" Model PRS-1 portable rate scaler. No radiation levels above natural background were detected.
The individual was interviewed by the FBI /NRC team and denied any knowledge or culpability in the theft of tools except, when queried about the drill-press which reportedly was recovered from his residence when he worked at San Onofre Unit 1, he politely declined to discuss the matter explaining that it may be self-incriminating.
3.
Exit Interview The radiation specialist inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) on April 30, 1981, at the conclusion of the NP.C onsite radiation protection effort at San Onofre Unit 1.
The inspector summarized the scopecand radiation protection findings of the investigation at San Onofre.
The inspector stated that no information had been developed indicating that licensed radioactive material had been removed from the San Onofre restricted area.
The inspector also discussed the weaknesses
'
observed in the station's control of radioactive materials..
.
!
!
-
l l
l
!
[
-
-
-.....
.
. - -
.
.