ML20027D711

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards IE Investigation Repts 50-295/81-32 & 50-304/81-30 on 811223-820615,notice of Violation & Description of Requested Corrective Actions.Util New Drug Abuse Policy Responsive.Notice of Violation Withheld (Ref 10CFR73.21)
ML20027D711
Person / Time
Site: Zion  File:ZionSolutions icon.png
Issue date: 11/02/1982
From: James Keppler
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To: Reed C
COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
Shared Package
ML20027D712 List:
References
NUDOCS 8211080274
Download: ML20027D711 (6)


See also: IR 05000295/1981032

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

__ _

_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _

_ _ _ _

9

.

4-

k

,

NOV 0 2 Sa2

Docket No. 50-295

Docket No. 50-304

Commonwealth Edison Company

i

ATTN:

Mr. Cordell Reed

Vice President

Post Office Box 757

Chicago, IL 60690

,

Gentlemen:

This refers to the investigation cor. ducted by members of this office and

our Headquarters between December '.3,

1981 and June 15, 1982, of activities

at Zion Nuclear Power Station authorized by NRC Operating License Nos. DPR-39

,'

- and DPR-48.

The investigation was conducted as a result of several allegations concerning

the use of drugs and drug related operational problems, the conduct of yout

management during your own investigation into drug use, and other allegations

such as sexual activities and alcohol use onsite.

While this report was being prepared other allegations were received in the

regional office which required our efforts to be redirected, such as the

investigation at the LaSalle County Station. This caused a delay in issuing

this investigation report.

We did not substantiate the allegations of widespread use o ' drugs either

<

4

'onsite or offsite by Station and or guard personnel. However, we did con-

clude that marijuana was smoked onsite. We also have concerns about certain

Station personnel who admitte.d using drugs offsite within the time frames

and frequency determined as likely to have a potentially detrimental affect

on' job performance, and certain guards who admitted to offsite use et drugs.

These individuals were previously identified to you. Requested corrective

actions are detailed in Appendix B.

Other concerns identified in the findings of the investigation also involve

Station personnel and guards who were identified by more than one of our

sources of alleged use of drugs onsite and/or offsite, inattentiveness of

l

hMB:

!

D

8211080274 821102

PCR ADC;CK 05000295

G

PDR

i

V

. , _

._

.

_

.._._

&

.

e

Commonwealth Edison Company

2

'N0y 0 2 882

come control room operators, quality of work performed by a contract QC

inspector who alleF.edly used drugs offsite, and the extent of alcohol use

onsite. Our concerns are also discussed in Appendix B, including our

requested corrective action.

As you are aware, man / Station employees and their attorneys expressed legal

and administrative concerns with the conduct of our investigation in the

area of offsite use of drugs. Those concerns, disagreements, questions, and

delays hindered the investigation. Questions relating to offsite drug use

were not being answered and investigation statements were not being attested

to and signed.

In early March 1982, the NRC established positions regarding

the continuation of the investigation.

It was intended and expected that

these positions would overcome the objections and would enable the NRC to

complete the investigation. The details concerning this matter are contained

in Section 3 of the report. The intervic9 process did continue and we did

obtain relevant information except in the following instance: Two Station

employees declined to sign written statement 3 and to answer questions about

offsite use of marijuana. We request specific corrective action on these

individuals as detailed in Appendix B.

We feel that your new drug abuse policy and awareness program was responsive

to this investigation and ellegations and can be effective in establishing

'

and maintaining a work environment that is reasonably free from the effects

of drug abuse. As a result of-the Zion drug allegations and similar allega-

tions at certain other facilities, the NRC recognition of the problem was

discussed in Information Notice No. 82-05, " Increasing Frequency of Drug

Related Incidents," dated March 10, 1982. Also, the results of a special

task group's survey of the nuclear industry was published in June 1982 as

NUREG-0903, " Survey of Industry and Government Programs to Combat Drug

and Alcohol Abuse." The NRC is also considering addressing the problem in

two proposed rules in 10 CFR 50, " Fitness for Duty Rule" and 10 CFR 73.56,

" Access Authorization Rule."

During this investigation, certain of your activities appearel to be in

noncompliance as described in Appendix A.

The investigation showed that

action had been taken to correct the identified noncompliance and to pre-

,

l

vent recurrence. Consequently, no reply to this noncompliance is required

l

and we have no further questions regarding this matter at this time.

t

l

l

Certain areas axamined during this investigation concern a subject matter

which is exempt from disclosure according to Section 73.21(c)(2) of the

'

NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 73, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.

i

t

!

l

!

!

!

l

-

-

.

._

-

- - ,

.

v.

Commonwealth Edison Company

3.

NOV 0 2 382

This information must be handled and protected in accordance with the provisions

of 10 CFR 73.21.

Consequently, Appendix A to this letter and attachment 3 to out-

report of this investigation will not be placed in the Public Document Room.

Sincerely,

Original signed by

James G. Keppler-

James G. Keppler

Regional Administrator

Enclosures:

1.

Appendix A, Notice

4

of Violation

(UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION)

2.

Appendix B

3.

Investigation Report No.

50-295/81-32(DETP) and

No. 50-304/81-30(DETP)

w/ UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS

INFORMATION (ATTACHMENT 3)

cc w/encls:

Louis 0. De1 George, Director

of Nuclear Licensing

K. L. Graesser, Station Superintendent

IE Files

IE/DRP/ORPB

NMSS/SGPL

NRR/DL/SSPB

OI

cc w/encls, w/o UNCLASSIFIED SAFEGUARDS

INFORMATION:

DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS)

Resident Inspector, RIII

Karen Borgstadt, Office of Assistant

Attorney General

Mayor John B. Spencer, City of Zion

G. Jones, First Assistant, U.S. Attorney,

Chicago, IL

C. Hill, U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration

'

Cnicago, IL

R. Kozak, Illinois Department of Law Enforcement

F. Foreman, Illinois State's Attornev Lake

e

County, Illinois

~

"

-

N. Lee, Chief of Police, Zion, Illinois

'

RIII

RIII

RIII

RIII

RIII

Ch

k

D

gler

1)l/8%/82

(~V

lpll2

C"aed/jp

Il}9t/s

er

//O

gj 1 l @ 2.-

\\\\

.

I

Appendix B

-

During our investigation conducted between December 23,~1981, and June 15,

1982, certain matters which do not represent n.oncompliance but are con-

sidered serious were noted. We request that you take certain corrective

,

actions on these matters and respond to each of these items within 30 days

-

of your receipt of this letter.

Please include a detailed description of

the actions you have taken or plan to take. Your statement of corrective

-

actions should include a description of the actions and e schedule for

completing those actions.

1.

Finding: Although widespread use of drugs onsite could not be sub-

stantiated, the investigation concluded that marijuana was smoked onsite.

However, the identity of in'ividual(s) involved was not determined.

(Report Section 4.b.(1))

Requested Actions: The CECO drug abuse and awarness program addresses

this finding. Please provide any current information as to the effec-

tiveness of this program as it relates to this finding.

2.

Finding:

Six nsmed employees were alleged to use drugs onsite and

offsite by more than one source of information. Four named employees

were alleged to use drugs onsite by more than one source of informa-

tion. One named employee was alleged to use drugs offsite by more

than one source of information. Each of these employees denied drug

use. However, based on the information obtained, we do not believe an

accurate determination of their use/non-use of drugs was made. The

seriousness and implications of the possibility of drug use by these

individuals requires that additional assurances be provided that they

are fit for duty.

(Report Sections 4.b.(1) and 4.b.(2))

Requested Action:

Provide a description of how and when these named

individuals' fitness for duty will be determined. Also provide the

results of the determinations.

3.

Finding: Two named employees declined to answer investigatcrs'

questions regarding their alleged offsite use of marijuana and/or other

drugs within the criteria established as being possibly detrimental to

job performance. They also did not provide written statements to

-

address denial or confirmation of the allegations.

Because these

individuals did not provide adequate information to prove or disprove

the information received by us, a determination of their involvement

could not be made.

(Report Section 4.b.(2))

Requested Action:

Provide a description of how and when the two

named individuals' fitness for duty will be determined. Also provide

'

the results of that determination.

-

a

(:

4

/

Appendix B

2

4.-

Finding: Two named employees admitted to offsite use of -marijuana

within the criteria established as being possibly detrimental to job

,

performance. These individuals were previously. identified to you,

~

and we were informed that action for fitness for duty determinations

had been initiated.

(Report Section 4.b.(2))

Requested Action:

Provide a description of how and when their fitness

for duty was determined and the results of that determination.

5.

Finding: The presence of empty alcohol containers strongly suggested

that alcohol had been consumed onsite, although the time frame and

identity of individuals involved could not be determined.

(Report

Section 4.b.(3))

Requested Action: Develop and/or describe a program and procedures

for surveillance and monitoring to detect indications of alcohol con-

sumption onsite. The program / procedures should include methods of

surveillance and a description of management actions in the event

unauthorized activities are noted.

6.

Finding:

A named contract Quality Control (QC) inspector who reviewed

safety related welds allegedly used marijuana offsite. The extent or

timing of his alleged use was not determined. Due to the safety

related nature of the inspections he conducted in 1980, additional

assurance of the adequacy of his job performance should be provided.

(Report Section 4.b.(6))

Requested Actions: Determine the extent and number of welds inspected

by the named individual. Verify that the work he did was adequate to

ensure that proper quality control of the safety related welds was

accomplished.

7.

Finding: Although no information was developed which indicated

control rocm nuclear station operators (NS0) were asleep, information

did indicate instances of inattentiveness. This concern was addressed

by the licensee as early as November 1, 1980, through.the publication

-

of the Nuclear Stations Division Vice President's Directive No. 13,

" Conduct of Operators." The instances of inattentiveness developed

during this investigation indicate that revision to that policy is

needed along with appropriate management implementation.

(Report

Section 4 b.(8))

Requested Action: Review, revise, and strengthen the policy to

reduce the types of incidents described in the report. The qualifiers

described in the Directive relating to " habitual or chronic lack of

attentiveness" conflicts with the necessity for on-duty control room

operators to be attentive at all times.

..

.

..

.

e

Appendix B

3

.p .

Finding: Six named members of the contract security force admitted

to recent offsite use of marijuana.

Three of the six were also alleged

to use drugs onsite by more than one source. These individuals were

previously identified to you and we were informed that at your request,-

the centractor inititated actions relevant to the information provided.

(Report Section 4.c.(1))

Requested Action:

Provide a description of how your contractor has and

will determine their fitness for duty to provide assurances that their

admitted use of drugs has not nor will not affect their on duty per-

formance including results of determinations which have c1 ready been

made. Also, provide the details of the drug abuse policy and awareness

program applicable to your contract guard force.

9.

Finding: Two named members of the contract guard force were alleged

to use drugs offsite by more than one source.

Based on the information

we were able to obtain, an accurate determination of their use/non-use

could not be adequately made. The implication of the possibility of

offsite drug use by individuals that could have a detrimental affect on

onsite duty performance requires that additional assurance be provided

that they are fit for-duty.

(Report Section 4.c.(1))

Requested Action:

Provide a description of how and when the two named

'

individuals' fitness for duty will be determined. Also provide the

results of that determination.

10.

Finding:

It was possible to bring alcoholic beverage onsite without

detection. The need to prevent alcoholic beverages from getting

onsite, combined with the established information that alcoholic

beverages have actually gotten onsite requires a review and upgrade

of your practices and procedures to reduce the probability of future

occurrences. Your stated policy prohibiting introduction of alcoholic

beverages onsite is clear and adequate.

(Report Section 4.c.(8))

Requested Action:

Provide a description of practices you have or will

-

implement to reduce the probability that alcoholic beverages will not

be taken on site.

.