IR 05000498/1978005

IE Investigation Repts 50-498/78-05 & 50-499/78-05 on 780321.No Noncompliance Noted.Major Area Investigated: Allegation by Brown & Root Employee That Job Is in Jeopardy for Insisting on Compliance W/Documentation Procedures

ML19347E448
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	03/31/1978
From:	Crossman W, Hubacek W, Julie Ward NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML16251A407	List: IR 05000498/1977005 IR 05000498/1977008 IR 05000498/1977014 IR 05000498/1978005 IR 05000498/1978008 IR 05000498/1978009 IR 05000498/1978014 IR 05000498/1980013 IR 05000498/1980021 IR 05000498/1981004 IR 05000498/1981006 IR 05000498/1981008 ML19347E402 ML19347E408 ML19347E410 ML19347E411 ML19347E412 ML19347E418 ML19347E420 ML19347E435 ML19347E443 ML19347E467 ML19347E470 ML19347E471 ML19347E473 ML19347E475 ML19347E476 ML19347E477 ML19347E482 ML19347E483 ML19347E484 ML19347E485 ML19347E487 ML19347E488 ML19347E489 ML19347E490 ML19347E491 ML19347E492 ML19347E493
References
50-498-79-05, 50-498-79-5, 50-499-78-05, 50-499-78-5, NUDOCS 8104270386
Download: ML19347E448 (3)

Text

,,

.

.

_

..

I I

<

s

=

-

y

.

,

REPORT OF IllVESTIGATION r.=

0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT l:;.

v

-

REGION IV

h=

g:.

p Subject: South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-498; 50-499

..z=z

.

Investigation based on an allegation by a Brown and Root employee

=. ;,..

.

.

...::b Period of Investigation: March 21, 1978 y.j(:_;I

'

F:

.

Investigator:

d 3 '$l-72 h,

Jirhn J. Ward' Investigation Specialist Date

~

~

.

'

% :L:.:

i

Reactor Inspecto

/ D.h, 8 a, M_

3/3/hY-J:::;

W. G. Hubacek,'~ Projects Section Date f~

h!ME-Approved:

c5/3//78

..

W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section Date

}.

_

. ee n.

~E:

=

l

=-

!

_'

I.Y.':.

ij:::'

,

j iiii=

r=

810427035(y Q____

.-

,

,. ~. T{.}

T.';.. :; ~ ~ ~

-T.k';[

y h--h

' 'N TN "l':.

Y".Y

. : ' Y I'

'T^ 71 ~

.

;; ;;

.. _.. _

- ^ -

-y en

-

w-r

--,y y+wr 9y-yM yu

--

WiyMyy ww T'M-'==

-w'uwi-fPv Wwenwwwwr-w

--

wily-sw-y w

-

r-w-p w

y gy y

y-w y

e

!

-

-

I-

,

.

_

.'

Reason for Investigation

A letter to NRC Headquarters dated February 20, 1978, from an individual p

which indicated he was a potential scapegoat for improper procedures at U

the South Texas Project.

i.=

Scoce of Investigation To interview the alleger and to identify the specific areas of his

=

complaint.

Summary of Facts s

The complainant, Individual "A," believes that his job with Brown & Root is in jeopardy only because he has to insist upon compliance with the Brown & Root documentation procedures. He believes that other Brown &

Root personnel who do not comply with the requirements, and who ' object to his insisting that they corplete required forms, would blame him for improper operations. These operations do not involve any fabri-e=:

cation or construction of nuclear safety systems or nuclear construc-

!=~

tion. The complainant's concerns are involved primarily with personnel

-

matters.

He also alleged that there is not a consistent method of E

removing outdated procedures and certification lists and posting the current ones,which results in craft personnel not knowing about changes

~

in procedures and current authorizations.

,

Details

Individual "A" was interviewed in the presence of Mr. William Hubacek, 55=.:

Reactor Inspector, on the afternoon of March 21, 1978.

"A" stated that W1T he had written directly to the NRC's Headquarters so that he could get L=

prompt action on his complaint.

His letter stated that he has been placed in a " quadruple bind as a E

i potential scapegoat." He further explained this to mean that there are four groups of people with whom he dealt on a daily basis that could,

-

i for reasons of their own, place his job in jeopardy by blaming him

...

l for an improper use of procedures. He stated he has instructions

-

l from his superior which requires him to insist upon compliance with

-

l procedures on the documentation prepared by various craftsmen.

He w

stated that these craftsmen frequently become annoyed when he will E

n6t accept ill-prepared documents and they complain to their foremen

,.""

who, in turn, complain to Individual "A"'s supervision. He feels he is in the middle, therefore, and the problem seems to be that the z.

directives he receives from his superiors as to the documentation T

requirements are not made a matter of general information and passed on to the craftsmen who must con +1y with the directives.

E l

......

._.

,

-2-

E

!

l l

e" f.

l

.

.

...

sees we.8

.

,

...J...

.. J......:..:_.

1_.L..

~

--:

=== :. :

.

I

-

.

-

,

.

-.

-

.-

...

'He stated further tha't when the new procedures are issued and new

.= ?

certification lists are prepared and distributed tc his department t=

that there is no provision for the old procedures which are outdated i[

to be retrieved or destroyed. Consequently, there is confusion as to k

which persons are certified, which persons can be issued equipment,

~....

and what procedures will apply to particular material.

In the dis-cussion, Individual "A" cited several examples wherein this had caused problems, none of which would have safety significance. No safety-related matters were identified.

= =. -

-

• ["..

==

.C'..

===:-

e

-

-

?. b

-

.,

gjs 5-ix;:=

'i-iiiih=

..

....

~. "..

55?=N::

ziE.hi-

• ":.*

5.

bkh:

". ::'

Z.~

EiEi

ii2L=i

==E=:

=:

if E:

'.;;,

"

.ba:

GE:i=

..

• =':.

bS::

=.T

l=il:

"...E-3-

~

......

rur=r

.

J&&

--

....

_..'~

-

...._.;;.;;===='" ;;.;;:l^ ' ~~"'~"* SQ f

. ;;:-s%.

r-

_;. _..

.

.::-:::

.

t