ML17272A913
| ML17272A913 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 04/02/1980 |
| From: | Lynch M Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8004110345 | |
| Download: ML17272A913 (26) | |
Text
APR 2 1980
~C>p
,Docket Ho.:
50-397 APPLICANT:
1lashington Public Power Supply System V
FACILITY:
NIP-2
SUBJECT:
MEETING WITH HPPSS REGARDING POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST AFFECTING ITS gA PROGRAM k
A meeting was'held on January 4, 1980. in Bethesda, fiaryland with members, of the NRC staff and representatives of hlPPSS.
The subject was the poten-tial conflict of interest that could arise if the 14 gA engineers in the integrated l<PPSS-Burns 5 Roe gA organization on MNP-2 were to vote to join Local 598 which presently includes.the pipe fitters, welders and gC inspectors who are-audited by these 14 gA engineers.
A list of those-.
attending this meeting is presented in Enclosure l.
Enclosure 2 is a copy of the WPPSS handout accompanying its discussion.
.The meeting was arranged on an expedited basis at the request of the NPPSS organization specifically to develop any pertinent comments by the NRC staff regarding the potential conflict of interest described above.
MPPSS stated in this meeting that if the staff believed the potential conflict of interest would adversely affect the construction of the WNP-2 facility, MPPSS management and its contractors would then consider raising this point to the NLRB prior to the union certification vote.
In particular, Counsel
'or klPPSS stated his belief that the prior letter issued by OELD to llPPSS in response to a previous inquiry, was conclusionary.
Accordingly, WPPSS emphasized..that they.wished the NRC staff to reach a conclusion on this matter, if any, based on the facts to be presented at the January 4th meet-ing.
OELD's position was succintly stated as follows:
NRC's involvement would be appropriate only if there were to be'demonstrated a clear conflict of interest adversely affecting public health and.safety',
otherwise, the NRC would not involve itself in a matter which appeared to involve only hlPPSS management, its contractors, Local 598 and the NLRB.
In response to staff questions as to the special character, if any, of this potential
- problem, Counsel for HPPSS responded that it was MPPSS'elief that the potential problem they envisaged would arise at the llNP'.1>.adf 4 site, the 55P 3 and 5 site and could expand to other nuclear power sites OItItlCC~
OUIINAMO~
OATC~
AC PORM 818 (97G) NRatf 0240
~ ~ ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ I
~
J
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~
~
~
%V V O OOVICNNMKNT~IIINTINOOPPICOI I ~ 1 ~
T ~ O T ~ O
'16 64
'4 E
4 4
4
= I '
I~
'I I
=- ~
I 4
~I 4 IA 4
~
- ~
I 446
~. I-I II 11 El I
I
~
E 04 4'
'APR p )980 throughout the country.
The NRC staff then questioned whether the inclusion'f the 107 gC inspectors in the same union as the'craftsmen whose work they were inspecting (Plate 6 of Enclosure 2), resulted in any evident impact on the quality of work performed.
The WPPSS representatives indicated that no '.
such impact was evident.
In ensuing discussion of the qualifications and salaries of the 14 gA engineers involved, it was established that not all of these 14 gA personnel were actually engineers and that their salaries were in some instances, Isignificantly lower than those of the, craftsmen whose work was being inspected.
At the conclusion of the meeting, the OELD counsel suggested that in light of.no apparent violation of the f)RC 'regulations in this matter and no evidence of an adverse impact on the quality of work, ltPPSS martagement might consideretitioning the Comission for a rule-making hearing'n the general topic of potential conflict of interests.
The NRC staff emphasized that it had a
continuing concern regarding any adverse influence on the WHP-2 gA program especially in light of recent-gA prob'gems on other nuclear plants under con-struction.,
Accordingly, the staff requested WPPSS to closely monitor its gA program -to determine if the inclusion of gC inspectors in Local 598 repre-sented such an adverse influence.
..In subsequent discussion on this matter, it was determined that HPPSS had successfully convinced the 14 gA personnel not to join Local 598 thereby removing one of HPPSS'oncerns regarding the potential conflict of interest.
Enclosures:
As stated cc:
See next page gx.igfnaI. signea by:
II l1. D. Lynch, Project Manager Light Water Reactors, Branch No. 4 Division.of Project (management OVIIHAMCW OATO~
DPt:Ll<R II4
'MDLgnch:mec 3/ ZP./.80,.
~ ~ ~
~ ~
Gi ray 3/ Q
/80 I ~ ~ ~
L u
OELD D
Paton/t1ur y
3/
/80 ein 80
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
P ~ ~ ~ ~
~
RRC EORM 518 (9 76) NRCM 02Ii0 0 UeO OOVORNMONT PRINTINO ORRICOI I)TI O ~I T ~ O
+P.) g Nl.
J'i P
HEFTING SUl'JURY Dl STRI BUT ION Docket File NRC PDR Local PDR TIC -,NSIC NRR Reading LWR¹4 File H. Denton E.
Case H. Berkow W. Russell D.
Ross D. Vassallo S.
Varga J. Stol z R.
- Baer,
- 0. Parr L; Rubenstein C. Heltemes L. Crocker F. Williams R. Mattson R.
DeYoung Project Manager M. D. Lynch
- Attorney, ELD Licensing Assistant M. Service IE (3)
ACRS (16)
R. Denise NRC
Participants:
W.
Haass J. Gilray J.
Murray W. Paton"
V APR g 1980 Docket No.:
50-397 APPLICANT:
Washington Public Power Supply System FACILITY:
WNP-2
SUBJECT:
MEETING WITH WPPSS REGARDING POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST AFFECTING ITS QA PROGRAM A meeting was held on January 4, 1980, in Bethesda, Maryland with members of the NRC staff and representatives of WPPSS.
The subject was the poten-tial conflict of interest that could arise if the 14 QA engineers in the integrated MPPSS-Burns 5 Roe QA organization on WNP-2 were to vote to Join Local 598 which presently includes.the pipe fitters, welder s and QC inspectors who are audited by these 14 QA engineers.
A list of those attending this meeting is presented in Enclosure 1.
Enclosure 2 is a copy of the MPPSS handout accompanying its discussion.
The meeting was arranged on an expedited basis at the request of the WPPSS or ganization specifically to develop any pertinent comments by the NRC staff regarding the potential conflict of interest described above.
MPPSS stated in this meeting that if the staff believed the potential conflict of interest would adversely affect the construction of the WNP-2 facility, WPPSS management and its contractors would then consider raising this point to the NLRB prior to the union certification vote.
In particular, Counsel for WPPSS stated his belief that the prior letter issued by OELD to MPPSS in response to a previous inquiry, was conclusionary.'ccordingly, WPPSS emphasized that they wished the NRC staff to reach a conc1usion on this matter, ff any, based on the facts to be presented at the January 4th meet-ing.
OELD's position was succintly stated as follows:
NRC's involvement would be appropriate only if there were to be demonstrated a clear conflict of interest adversely affecting public health and safety,'therwise, the NRC would not involve itself in a matter which appeared to involve only WPPSS management, its contractors, Local 598 and the NLRB.
In response to staff questions as to the special character, if any, of this potential
- problem, Counsel for WPPSS responded that it was MPPSS'elief that the potential problem they envisaged would arise at the MNP."1;arid 4 site, the MNP 3 and 5 site and could expand to other nuclear power sites orr>cc>>
eusvassa>>
OAT@>>
MR@ HRQC 518 (9.76) NRCM 0240
~ i
~ ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00
- VeO>> 44VWIINNCNTPltllCTIHO OPPIOSS I ~ 'F ~
S ~ 0 70l
APR 3 3980 throughout the country.
The NRC staff then questioned whether the 1nclusion of the 107 gC inspectors in the same un1on as the'craftsmen whose work they were inspecting (Plate 6 of Enclosure 2), resulted in any evident-impact on the quality of work performed.
The WPPSS representatives indicated that no such impact was evident.
In ensuing discussion of the qualifications and salaries of the l4 gA engineers involved, it was established that not all of these 14 gA personnel were actually engineers and that their salaries were in some instances, significantly lower than. those of the craftsmen whose work was being inspected.
At the conclusion of the meeting, the OELD counsel suggested that 1n light of no apparent violation of the t<RC regulations 1n this matter and no evidence of an adverse impact on the quality of work, WPPSS marlagement might cons1der petitioning the Commission for a rule~king hearing on the general topic of potential'conflict of interests.
The NRC staff emphasiied that,it had a
continuing concern regarding any adverse influence on the WNP-2 gA program especially in light of recent gA prob'g4ms on other nuclear plants under con-struct1on.
Accordingl>, the staff requested HPPSS to closely monitor its gA program to determine if the inclusion of gC inspectors in Local 598 repre-sented such an adverse influence.
In subsequent discussion on this matter, it was determined that WPPSS had successfully convinced the l4 gA personnel not to )oin Local 598 thereby removing one of HPPSS'oncerns regarding the potential confl1ct of 1nterest.
Enclosures:
As stated t<. 0. Lynch, Project Manager Light Hater Reactors, Branch No.
4 Division o'f Prospect Management cc:
See next page gD
~
4'PI'ICk~
SllIIIIAllk+
OATk~
DP
'LWR ¹4 MDLgnch:mec 3/ Z2 /80
~ ~ ~
Gi ray 3/Z.
/80 OELD 0
Paton/t1u y
L 3/
/80 ein 80 i%BC PORN 3lb (9.76) NRCbf OWO
- V,~ OOVOOIIMOIIT~OINTIIIO OOOICO I
~ ~ 1 ~
1 ~ O Tkk
'L z>S neo>
0 Cy p0~
nO I
+>>*++
UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 APR 2 1880 Docket No.:
50-397 APPLICANT:
Washington Public Power Supply System FACILITY:
'NP-2
SUBJECT:
'EETING-WITH WPPSS REGARDING POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST AFFECTING ITS QA PROGRAM A meeting was held on January 4, 1980, in Bethesda, Maryland with members of the NRC staff and representatives of WPPSS.
The subject was the poten-tial conflict of interest that could arise if the 14 gA engineers in the integrated WPPSS-Burns
& Roe gA organization on WNP-2 were to vote to join Local 598 which presently includes the pipe fitters, welders and gC inspectors who are audited by these 14 gA engineers.
A list of those attending this meeting is presented in Enclosure l.
Enclosure 2 is a copy of the WPPSS handout accompanying its discussion.
The meeting was arranged.
on an expedited basis at the request of the WPPSS organization specifically to develop any pertinent comments by the NRC staff regarding the potential conflict of interest described above.
WPPSS stated in this meeting that if the staff believed the potential conflict of interest would adversely affect the construction of the WNP-2 facility, WPPSS management and its contractors would then consider raising this point to the NLRB prior to the union certi.fication vote.'n particular, Counsel for WPPSS stated his belief that the prior letter issued by OELD to WPPSS in response to a previous inquiry, was conclusionary.
Accordingly, WPPSS emphasized that they wished the NRC staff to reach a conclusion'on this matter, if any, based on the facts to be presented at the January 4th meet-ing.
OELD's position was succintly stated as follows:
NRC's involvement would be appropriate only if there were to be demonstrated a clear conflict of interest adversely affecting public health and safety,'therwise,.
the NRC would not involve itself in a matter which appeared'o involve only WPPSS management, its contractors, Local 598 and the NLRB.
In response to staff 'questions as to the special character, if any, of this potential
- problem, Counsel for WPPSS responded that it was WPPSS'elief that the potential problem they envisaged would arise at the WNP 1
and,.4 site, the WNP 3 and 5 site and could expand to other nuclear power sites
APR 2 ]980 throughout the country.
The NRC staff then questioned whether the inclusion of the 107 gC inspectors in the same union as the craftsmen whose work they were inspecting (Plate 6 of Enclosure 2), resulted in any evident impact on the quality of work performed.
The WPPSS representatives indicated that no such impact was evident.
In ensuing discussion of the qualifications and salaries of the 14 gA engineers involved, it was established that not all of these 14 gA personnel were actually engineers and that their salaries were in some instances, significantly lower than those of the craftsmen whose work was being inspected.
At the conclusion of the meeting, the OELD counsel suggested that in light of no apparent violation of the NRC regulations in this matter and no evidence of an adverse impact on the quality of work, WPPSS management might consider petitioning the Corenission for a rule-making hearing on the general topic of potential conflict of interests.
The NRC staff emphasized that it had a
continuing concern regarding any adverse influence on the WNP-2 gA program especially in light of recent gA problems on other nuclear plants under, con-struction.
Accordingly, the staff requested WPPSS to closely monitor its gA program to determine if the inclusion of gC inspectors in Local 598 repre-sented such an adverse influence.
In subsequent discussion on this matter, it was determined that WPPSS had successfully convinced the 14 gA personnel not to join Local 598 thereby removing one of WPPSS'oncerns regarding the potential conflict of interest.
Enclosures:
As stated M. D. Lynch, Project Manager Light Water Reactors, Branch No.
4 Division of Project Management cc:
See next page
Washington Public Power Supply System ccs:
Joseph B. Knotts, Jr.,
Esq.
Oebevoise 8 Liberman l200 Seventeenth
- Street, N.
W.
Washington, D. C. 20036
'ichard
- g. guigley, Esq.
Washington Public Power Supply System P. 0. Box'68 Richland, Washington 99352 Nicholas Lewis, Chairman Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council 820 East Fifth Avenue Olympia, Washington 98504 Hr. 0. K. Earle Licensing Engineer P. 0.
Box 968
- Richland, Washington 99352 Resident Inspector/WPPSS-2 NPS c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0.
Box 69
- Richland, Washington 99352
ENCLOSURE 1
ATTENOANCE WWP-2 JANUARY 4 1980 WPPSS h
G. Sorenson D. Rooney A. Sastri M.'Witherspoon N. Reynolds (counsel)
NRC W. Haass Gilray J. Murray (counsel)
W. Paton (counsel)
M. Lynch h
ENCLOSURE 2
THE ISSUE
'ILL EFFECTIVENESS AND INDEPENDENCE OF QA PROGRAM BE IMPAIRED IF CONTRACTOR QA ENGINEERS BELONG TO SAME UNION AS CRAFTS, QC, NDT TECHNICIANS AND DOCUMENT CLERKS WHOSE WORK THEY MONITOR2 Plate l
WPPSS ORGANIZATION Managing Director Assistant Director Projects Assistant Director Technology WNP-2 Project Manager
- Manager, Quality Assurance WNP-2 Project QA Manager
WPPSS PROJECT ORGANIZATION WNP-2 PROJECT MANAGER DY. PROJ.
MGR.
ENGINEERING DY. PROJ.
MGR.
CONSTRUCTION PROJECT QA MANAGER B&R NY B&R FIELD WPPSS ENGRG.
INTEGRATED
WPPSS/CONTRACTOR QA INTERFACE WPPSS CORPORATE QA BGR CORPORATE QA h~i<5
QA Typical QA QC NDT Sub-Contractors
WNP-2
'Contract 215 WSH-BOECON-GERI (WBG)
SCOPE OF WORK:
All mechanical and structural installation work including piping, equipment erection, and structural steel (including Category I)
Procurement of most valves and pipe spools
'including Category I)
Design of small bore piping, detailed design of, structural steel (including Category I)
Includes most safety related piping/mechanical work on site Cost of contract, about
$250M Plate 5
4 WBG'RGANIZATION JOINT VENTURE CHAIRMAN
~
(Seattle)
EXECUTIVE VP (Seattle)
CORPORATE'A MANAGER (Seattle)
GENERAL MANAGER (WNP-2 Site)
QA MANAGER (WNP-2 Site) 1200 CRAFTS 225 PEOPLE 700
, PIPEFITTE+WELDERS FROM LOCAL 598 107 QC INSPECTORS 35 DOCUMENT CLERKS 60 NDT TECH.
ALL FROM LOCAL-598 I
(
Ii//
Pr 14 QAE's WHICH LOCAL 59
'IS ATTEMPTING TO ORGANIZE Plate 6
)
WBG QA ORGANIZATION QA MANAGER WNP-2 SITE Supv,.
QA Engrg.
QA Engrs
.(2)
Supv.
QC I
I I
I I
I Supv.
NDT Sub. Contr.
Supv.
(107)
Doc. Clerks (35)
HOV Techs.
(60)
QA Engrs (5)
Supv.
QA Turnover
,QA Engrs (1)
These 202 people now belong to local 598 These 14 QAE's are subject of dispute
~
k 4
'I WBG QA/QC 'FUNCTXONAL RESPONSIBILITIES QUALITY ENGINEERING
- WRITE, APPROVE QA AND OTHER WORK PROCEDURES CODE INTERPRETATION AND COMPLIANCE o
TRENDS QA AUDITS INTERNAL AUDITS SUBCONTRACTOR AUDITS o
TRENDS QA FIELD SUPPORT APPROVE (SOME)
PROCEDURES APPROVE QC XNSP.
REPORTS NRC DISPOSITION FIELD SURVEILLANCES VENDOR DOCUMENT REVIEW 6 APPROVAL TRENDS'AR'S.
QA TURNOVER TURNOVER PROCEDURES PUNCHLISTS FINAL DOCUMENT ACCOUNTABILITYAND B~-OFF INSPECT TO ESTABLISHED PROCEDURES INSPECTXON REPORTS FOR DISCREPANCIES~
BUT NO DECISION ON ACCEPTANCE DOCUMENT REVIEW BUT NOT FINAL BUY-OFF Plate 8
'CHRONOL'OGY OCTOBER 31 NOVEMBER 30 LOCAL 598 WRITES WBG IN AN ATTEMPT TO ORGANIZE 14 QA ENGINEERS NLRB, SEATTLE, HOLDS A HEARING ON THE CASE DECEMBER 28 NLRB, SEATTLE~ DIRECTS THAT ELECTXONS'E HELD NEXT STEPS WBG WILL 'REQUEST REVXEW BY NLRB (WASHINGTONg D " C
)
OF DIRECTION OF ELECTION NLRB WILL LIKELY PERMIT ELECTION TO PROCEED WITHIN 30 DAYS (BY JANUARY 28, 1980)
OF DIRECTION OF ELECTION; BALLOTS MAY BE IMPOUNDED BY NLRB PENDING REVIEW i
r Plate 9
IMPLICATIONS'OR'NP'-2 VIABILITYOF QA AS A MANAGEMENT TOOL CONFLICT BETWEEN 10 CFR VS.
UNION BYLAWS; FOR EXAMPLES INTIMIDATINGINFLUENCE OF UNION'S RIGHT FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST MEMBERS "SOFTENING" OF QA ENGXNEERS XN XMPOSXNG QA PROGRAM; FOR EXAMPLE, RELUCTANCE OF QA ENGINEER TO STOP WORK XF XT AFFECTS CRAFTS EMPLOYMEN'g LACK OF UNION ACCOUNTABILITYFOR QA-'.cC.,
10 CFR 21 Plate 10
~ i
THE BROADER'MPL'ICATIONS LOCAL 598 IS ALREADY ATTEMPTXNG TO ORGANIZE QA ENGXNEERS AT OTHER WPPSS NUCLEAR SITES.
DECISION ON WNP-2 CASE WXLL SET PRECEDENT (IGE REGION V CONCERN).
P'late 11