IR 05000395/1979042
| ML19339A396 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 09/23/1980 |
| From: | Long F, Marsh R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19339A395 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-395-79-42, NUDOCS 8011030753 | |
| Download: ML19339A396 (13) | |
Text
[^
D UNITED STATES
f, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
$
- e E REGION 11
.
o, f
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 o@
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
.....
SEP 2 6 1980 INVESTIGATION REPORT No. 50-325/79-42 SUBJECT:
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station Jenkinsville, South Carolina Allegations Regarding Intentional Acts of Substandard Concretc Construction and Welding during 1975/1976.
DATES OF INVESTIGATIONS: November 19, 1979 through August 7, 1980 I
INVESTIGATOR:
f p%,,gJ.70 R. J. M gional Investigator Date
'>f fic e the Director REVIEWED B D
f'
] A7 Q l. J. Long, Acting g uty Director vace i Office of the Director
753
\\
1so M 038 l
I
.
.
.
-.. _....
-. -
. -. -..
,
-
--
.. _- _.. _._,
_
._- _.
_.
0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section I.
SUMMARY OF INVESTIGATION A.
INTRODUCTION B.
SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION C.
CONCLUSIONS Section II.
DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION
!
A.
PERSONS CONTACTED B.
INVESTIGATIVE EFFORT AND FTNDINGS
.
-
-
.,
O
,
I i
SECTION I SUFDIARY OF INVESTIGATION VIRGIL C. SUFDIER NUCLEAR S'ti.IION NOVDIBER 19, 1979 - AUGUST 7, 1980
!
--
..
-
-
-
-
..
,,,
.~. ~..
....
.
.
-
.
. - -
--
.
~....
.,.
, _ _
- m.
~
-
_.
. _.
J
~
- . *
![
I.A-1
A.
INTRODUCTION During a telephone conversation with the Region II Investigative
!
Staff on October 17, 1979, a private citizen expressed concern over
hearsay information he had received concerning possible acts'of j
" sabotage" which he alleged were commited during late 1975 or early i
1976 at the construction site of the South Carolina Electric and Gas Company's (SCE&G) Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station near Jenkins-
l ville, South Carolina. The private citizen stated he had a friend who had been associated with persons who professed to be " anti-nuclear activists". The caller stated his friend had attended a
,
party at a private residence in Columbia, S. C.,in late 1975 during
.
j which a group of approximately ten individuals entered into what
"
was' described as "an intense moral discussion" regarding whether i
their (the group's) intentional sabotage at the.V. C. Summer con-struction site was morally " justifiable".
l'
The group was comprised of both men and women, who had for a time i
been employed at the V.'C. Summer site as welders and general laborers involved in the placement of concrete.
The natrre of
!
their " sabotage" was discussed only in general terms and indicated
~
i that intentional substandard welding had been performed and that excess sand had been added to batches of concrete. The identity of the individuals in :he group, the name of their employer (s), or specific details on the. nature of the group's actions was not
,
i available from the private citizen.
- '
The private citizen refused to identify his friend, the source ~of this information.
The caller was urged to have his friend contact
,
[
the NRC, in an anonymous method if preferred, so that all available
'
details of the alleged incidents could be obtained.
Subsequently,
,
on October 26,-1979, the private citizen's friend contacted the
'
Region II Investigative Staff. 'The friend, henceforth referred to as the alleger, still refused to. identify himself but did acknow-i ledge that the information provided the NRC was in substance correct.
The alleger did provide additional specific information of a limited nature.
!
.
i
1 l
i-
,
4
.,_
y
._,,.,,,. ~, _
,
_
.=
,
.,, _,..
9,.,
,
..e.
a m_.
,
,,,r
=
._
.
_
. _. _
-
_
___-- _.
!
!.-
I.B-1
.
t
B.
SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION -
An investigation was initiated on November _19, 1979 under the authority provided.by Section 161.c of the Atomic Energy Act of j
1954, as amended, to ascertain the degrea of truthfulness and
'
substance of the information provided and the impact the alleged actions would have on the nuclear safety of the plant. The scope of the investigation included the following:
,
i -
l 1.-
Review of licensee records including welder qualifications,
employee rosters, deficiency notices, (Concrete) Batch records, and additional quality assurance documentation.
-
2.
Interviews with licensee personnel (QA/QC, Welding, and Civil Engineering).
A second trip to the V. C. Summer construction site was performed on August 7, 1980 to secure additional details related to the initial findings and to continue interviews with licensee personnel familar with the welding and concrete placement efforts underway during the time period in question -(late 1975 to early 1976).
i
,
t I
i
.
E
?
,
y
-
,,,,
-
-
-
g, - -,
-- -
,
-4
- - - -,,,-
-,
-
v
.
. _,..
-
...
.
.
.
I.C-1
,
C.
CONCLUSIONS The allegations were not substantiated by this investigation. No items of noncompliance with NRC regulations were identified.
Regarding the allegation of substandard welding, safety related welding did not commence at the V. C. Summer site until Augast 1976, a full six months after the alleged acts; therefore, the substandard work, if it did occur as alleged, could not have involved critical nuclear safety related areas.
The absence of nuclear safety related considerations places the matter outside the scope of NRC's regulatory jurisdiction.
Regarding the allegation of sand being added to concrete, insuf-ficient information was identified to establish the allegation as being factual.
In the single instance identified as bearing a resemblance to the alleged act, the deviation from quality stand-ards was identified by the licensee's QC/QA system, which functioned properly, and appropriate corrective action was taken.
!
J
)
i
.
f l
,
I
-_
_
_. - _
.
.
t SECTION 11 DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION VIRGIL C. SU}DfER NUCLEAR STATION NOVEMBER 19, 1979 - AUGUST 7, 1980 l
.
.
-
.,.,,
n
,
.,-, -.
,, -
-
,, - -.. -, -
-
.e-
-
.. -. - -.
.
.
II.A-1
.
A.
PERSONNEL CONTACTED South Carolina Electric and Cas Company (SCE&G)
J. F. Algar, Site Manager O. S. Bradham, Plant Manager D. A. Nauman, Managr of QA and Security D. R. Moore, Director of Surveillance Systems J. M. Woods, QC Manager A. A. Smith, Site QA Coordinator T. A. McAlister, QA Surveillance Specialist M. W. Eddings, General Superintendent - Welding Daniel Construction Company (DCC)
C. C. Wagoner, Project Manager J. M. Harvey, Construction Manager W. L. West, Project Quality Manager NRC Resident Inspector J. L. Skolds
.
._
,
II'. B-1
,
,
I B.
BACKGROUND
!
The alleger attended a party at a private residence located on Confederate Street, Columbia S.C. on an unknown date around the holiday season of late 1975 or early 1976. The alleger identified by name (phonetic) the owner or renter of the residence but was unable to provide a specific street address.
The party was attended by a group of approximately ten professed " anti-nuclear activists" who, during the course of the party, engaged among themselves in what the alleger described as an " intense moral discussion" concern-ing the ethics of their " intentional sabotage" at the Virgil C.
Summer Nuclear Station construction site.
The alleger stated he
!
did not know the. members of the group by name and that his relation-
!
ship with them was, at most, casual. The alleger provided no explanation as to what caused him to delay his reporting of these i
allegations to the NRC for nearly three years.
From the groups discussion, the alleger concluded that members of the group had initially secured employment at the V. C. Summer site in order to vocally protest nucicar power and to create dissension among their fellow workers. When the group saw how ineffective their efforts were, they began to actively downgrade their workman-ship with the goal of slowing down construction and/or creating problems that would cause a breakdown when the plant became opera-l tional.
The alleger concluded the actions of the group had taken
place recently (late 1975) and that the group had all terminated employment at the site before the date of the party. In response to
!
the investigator?s efforts to more precisely establish the time period in question the alleger estimated that the acts would most probably have occurred during the period between November 1975 and January 1976. He indicated he relocarvd from the Columbia, SC area in March 1976 so it would have had to have been before that time.
,
e i
{
--
-
-.
-_
-
.
-._,
.
II.C-1
.
C.
ALLEGATIONS, DISCUSSIONS AND FINDINGS 1.
ALLEGATION Welding was performed in an intentional substandard manner.
DISCUSSION The alleger stated he viewed from past experience, which he refused to specify, the statements of four of the group (three women and a man) to be reliable.
The four, including a female known to the alleger as " Marjorie," had mentioned in the discussion that while employed as " welders" at the site they had intentionally sabotaged their assignments in such a manner so as to bring about a " nuclear incident." 7he alleger
.
could provide only limited additional details on the individuals and the employing subcontractor.
He told the investigator he felt all of the group were from the " Tidewater" Virginia area due to their accents.
It was his opinion that the welding firm involved was the only one on the site at the time and was a " local company." The alleger could provide no information on the nature of the welding involved or its location at the construction site.
The investigation disclosed that nuclear safety related welding did not commence at the V. C. Summer site until August 1976.
The welding accomplished prior to that time was of a non-critical nature and involved general construction effort on non-nuclear piping and tanks, railings, walkway plates, etc.
During the time period in question (November 1975 to January 1976) the following firms were engaged in performing welding operations at the V. C. Summer site:
1.
Pittsburgh - Des Fbines Steel Company Installation of shop fabricated steel plates and tank liners (all non-nuclear-safety-related). No female welders were identified in welder qualification records.
2.
Chicago Bridge and Iron Company Installation of tanks (non-nuclear-safety-related). No record was identified regarding the use of female welders.
l
.
.-._....
-.,.--_
-
.
. - -. -..
_
_
_
..
. _ _ _.
._
_.
_.
_
.._
..
,
_
_
.
-
-
'
!
~*
II.C-2 3.
Daniels Construction Company No nuclear safety related welding underway dtiring the specified time period.
'
The review of employment and welder qualification records and
discussions with licensee personnel eho were employed at the construction site during the perio/ in question identified
,
only one female welder (Daniels Ccnstruction).
This welder I
was certified for nuclear safety related welding procedures and subsequently advanced into a quality control (welding)
!
inspector position which she currently holds. Her employment
{
record at the V. C. Summer site and at previous nuclear sites was found to be satisfactory.
I An interview of this female QC inspector conducted on November 20, 1979, revealed she could not provide any substantial
!
information to assist this investigation.
It was her recollec-tion that she was the only female certified welder during the
,
i early stages of the welding program.
She did not remember encountering a female welder by the name of " Marjorie."
There was an apparent association between those of the alleged i
group that identified themselves as welders and those whose work assignments brought them in contact with the concrete
,
!
pours. It was therefore suggested by members of the SCE&G QA
!
staff that the entire group of ten may have been among the
- j general labor force used to support the concrete placement activities.
Non-critical welding _ (e.g., non-nuclear-safety-
'
i related and non-code stamp) was routinely performed by members i
of this labor force in the fabrication and erection of such things as temporary forms and retention barrier for the concrete placements. Due to the temporary and non-safety aspects of this work, additional investigative effort into i,
this proposed scenario was not deemed warranted.
i l
FINDING The investigation identified no findings of fact which would support the allegation.
The placement of the alleged incident of substandard welding in a time period at least a full six months prior to the commencement of nuclear safety related welding establishes the alleged acts as outside the scope of NRC's regulatory jurisdiction.
-. - -. - -
,
..
~...-.- -.
.. _..
,
. -, - -.
- -. -, -
.
.
.
II.C.2-1 2.
ALLEGATION Concrete was degraded by the intentional addition of excess sand.
DISCUSSION The alleger indicated he had overheard the remaining members of the group (six individuals, both male and female) speak of getting caught by an " inspector" for adding too much sand to a batch of concrete. One of the female members is alleged to have stated "Well, at least we got three batches through." The alleger said he was unsure of the degree of reliability of these individuals. He was unable to provide additional details beyond references by group members to " cooling towers" and " control module building."
The investigation disclosed that the design of the Virgil C.
Summer Nuclear Station does not include " cooling towers" but utilizes a man-made lake as a heat sink.
The reference by the group most probably referred to the agreggate and cement storage silos (or towers) located at the concrete batch mixing plant at the V. C. Summer site.
The reference to the " control module building" is taken to refer to the control building at the concrete batch mixing plant.
Composition of the concrete batches utilized in the construction of the site is controlled by an operator using coded instructions to a " computer" which meters out proper portions of aggregate, cement and additives from the storage silos. The overall design of the mixing operation was found to be an essentially mechanical operation with minimal human interface beyond the impact of computer commands by the operator.
Intentional efforts to bypass the auton:ted hopper gates, scales, and metering devices would have been difficult and obvious.
SCE6C QA and Civil Engineering representatives described the staff responsible for the operation of this plant as few (approximately 12-15 narsonnel including drivers) and stable.
Personnel available onsite during the investigation who worked around the batch plant during the time period in question have no recollection of incidents similar to those alleged.
No record or recollection was identified of cliques of employees who presented disciplinary problems, advocated anti-nuclear
sentiments, or who were hired and/or terminated together.
.
.
II.C.2-2
,
,
A review of quality assurance records identified a " Batch Record Summary" for December 8, 1975, which bears a degree of resemblence to the alleged incident.
The record reflects that on that date three batches of concrete (Ticket Nos. 7431, 7433, and 7439) were found to be rejectable as "too dry" or
" air too low."
These batches were described by QA personnel as having been dispositioned by " dumping them over the side" (e.g., discarded as waste in the dump area).
On that same date two additional batches (Ticket Nos. 7441 and 7442) were found by subsequent audit to be out of specification (excessive coarse aggregate). Deficiency Notice No. 315, dated December 9, 1975, properly dispositioned the matter by providing the results of a compression test (Compression Test Record for 3530 and 3533 placement areas) which indicate that neither strength nor durability of the concrete were affected by the discrepancy noted for these two batches.
FINDING The investigation failed to identify any records or recollec-tions which would support the allegation.
In a single instance records reflect the identification of a series of rejectable batches, but the discrepancies were identified by the QA system in effect at the time and were properly dispositioned.
<