IR 05000250/1982018
| ML20052C264 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 04/13/1982 |
| From: | Alderson C, Tobin W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20052C253 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-250-82-18, 50-251-82-17, NUDOCS 8205040550 | |
| Download: ML20052C264 (4) | |
Text
_
,pn %,
a'
'o UNITED STAT ES
{c},k),',-},',f
!*
f.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
REGION 11 o, 7 g toi r.wucirA T.. n.w. suire 3:00 g s ".,-
f ATLANT A. GEORGIA 30303
.....
APR 1,41982 INQUIRY REPORT NOS. 50-250/82-18 and 50-251/82-17 SUBJECT:
Florida Power and Light Company Turkey Point Nuclear Station Homestead, Florida Review of FP&L Investigation of Onsite Drug Use by Contractor Employees DATES OF INQUIRY: March 30 - April 1, 1982 INVESTIGATOR: N # b,_ J M p'_
j$
8 Q, U. J. Tobin,\\R'gional Investigator Dete Signed Enforcement an Investigations Staff O)
N
\\
l REVIEWED BY:
..
.(hme
,
_f-G-87.
Car 7. Alderson, Director Date Signed Enforcenent and Investigations Staff 0205040550 020414 PDR ADOCK 05000250 G
I
- - - -.. - -. - _ - _ - - - -
-
-
... -
--
--.-
- -
-
.
!
I i
i
!
!
o i
I i
l i
!
i i
i
i
,
i i
!
!
.
!
!
!
i i
i
<
!
<
!
SUMMARY OF INQUIRY
!
l FLORIDA POWER AND LIGIT COMPANY
.
,
j TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR STATION
I l.
MARCH 30 - APRIL 1, 1982 i
.
,
o a
i t
,
t
!
'
I l
I
,
'
i
'
i
!
!
!
l
!
.
!
i l
,
!
l
,
,--
.
-.-
-. -
.
- _... - - -, - -... -... - - - -, - _,. - -,.
-.
-
.
_
.=..
. _ _
. _.
.
I-1 A.
BACKGROUND On January 26, 1982, an individual (hereaf ter referred to as the alleger) provided preliminary information to his supervisor that drugs, in the form of marijuana and cocaine, were being used and sold onsite by employees of three contractors.
The alleger also implicated a food concessionaire as the supplier of the cocaine.
The alleger provided no information to his supervisor or the licensee of drug use onsite or offsite by any members of the operational staff of any other licensee emoloyees, nor was there information that the alleged drug use occurred in any operational vital areas of the plant.
Later in the day, January 26, the licensee notified the Region II Resident Inspector of this initial information and of its intent to polygraph the alleger to detemine his credibility. On January 27, the alleger successfully completed a polygraph test furnishing specific information implicating seven members of the contract guard service, three contract cmployees, and one food concession-aire as being involved in use of drugs onsite.
On the basis of the information provided by FP&L officials an inquiry was initiated under the authority provided by Section 161.c of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amended.
B.
SCOPE OF INQUIRY From March 30 to April 1, 1982, a review of the licensee's investi-gation was conducted to determine if FP&L and its contractors had verified the information against the eleven individuals and had taken timely action to deny them access to the site.
The inquiry alt,o reviewed the-depth and scope of the licensee's investigation.
During this inquiry the Investigator interviewed the FP&L Security Supervisor at the Turkey Point Nuclear Station, the FP&L Corporate Security Manager, the major of the Wackenhut contract guard service, a member of the Dade County Public Safety Department, and the Region II Resident Inspector.
The Investigator attempted to interview the alleger, but was unsuccessful, as the alleger declined a personal face-to-face meeting.
The Investigator did, however, arrange to receive a telephone call from an individual identifying himself as the alleger who volunteered information in both summary
,
'
and detail to establish his identity and verasity.
Results of polygraphs, the licensee's investigation report, and individual screening files and records were reviewed by the Investigator.
,_
_
-
.
_ _ -
_ - _ _ - _ _ _ _
_-
_
.
..
1-2 C.
FINDINGS 1.
No violations of HRC requirements nor FP&L commitments were i
identified.
L 2.
All information furnished by the alleger was investigated by the licensee, timely corrective measures were taken, and results furnished to the NRC.
3.
The FP&L investigation resulted in the following actions:
a a.
Two guards indicated deception when polygraphed about the use of marijuana onsite and they were subsequently terminated.
,
b.
One guard indicated deception when polygraphed about the purchase and use of cocaine onsite and this guard was subsequently terminated.
c.
Two guards indicated deception when polygraphed about their knowledge of other guards use of marijuana onsite and these guards were subsequently terminated.
,
d.
One guard sucessfully passed the polygraph but was trans-ferred to a non-FP&L location at the request of the
,
licensee.
c.
One guard successfully passed the polygraph and was reinstated at the station.
f.
One Bechtel Power Corporation employee indicated deception when polygraphed about the purchase and use of cocaine onsite and was terminated.
g.
One Daniels Construction Company employee indicated deception when polygraphed about the use of marijuana onsite and was terminated.
h.
One Bechtel Power Corporation employee refused to be polygraphed about bringing marijuana onsite and resigned without notice.
i.
One food concessionaire indicated deception when polygraphed
about the sale of cocaine onsite and was banned from
future access to any licensee site.
4.
Although the licensee notified the Miami Office of the Drug Enforcement Administration and the security contractor notified the Dade County Public Safety Department, neither law enforcement agency considered the alleged drug quantities to be of sufficient size to warrant investigation.
There was no physical evidence seized during the licensee's investigation.
-~._.
.
-
_.
._
_
,_
=_