ML20127E088
| ML20127E088 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 05/10/1985 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Schnell D UNION ELECTRIC CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8505170328 | |
| Download: ML20127E088 (5) | |
Text
.
gung'
.f I%
UNITED STATES y g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
Te n j,,,
j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 b ]
MAY I O 1985 Docket No. 50-483 Mr. D. F. Schnell Vice President - Nuclear Union Electric Company P. O. Box 149 St. Louis, M0 63166
Dear Mr. Schnell:
Enclosed is a copy of a petition filed on behalf of the Missouri Coalition for the Environment and Kay Drey requesting that the Commission issue an order to the Union Electric Company to show cause why the operating license for the Callaway Plant should not be suspended or revoked pending an investigation of the issues described in the petition.
The petition, dated March 25, 1985, is being treated under 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's regulations, and accordingly, appropriate action will be taken on the petition within a reasonable time.
_.i In order to assist the staff in its evaluation of the petition, we request, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f), that you submit a response in writing under oath or affirmation that addresses each of the issues identified by the petition as related to the Callaway Plant and provide a response to us as soon as practicable, but no later than June 7, 1985.
Please provide a copy of this response to the Regional Administrator of the NRC Region III office.
Sincerely, T
g-w /974 W ames M. Tay3or, Director Office of W.spection and Enforcement
Enclosure:
Petition dated 03/25/85 cc w/ enclosure:
See next page
~
8505170328 850510 PDR ADOCK 05000483 P
.d 4?
i Mr. D.~ F.. Schnell cc: Alan S. Nemes, Esq.
7541 Parkdale St. Louis, MO -63105 Thomas' A. Baxter, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
20036 w
k 6-6 bb e
- r. -
n.
DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File NRC PDR LPDR NSIC-PRC System.
LB#1 R/F.(Attn: K. Baumann, M. S. 316)
M. Rushbrook T.. Alexion P. O'Connor-
- ACRS(16)
SECY OGC LIDCS31 ED0 G. H. Cunningham, ELD E. S. Christenbury, ELD J.-Lieberman, ELD L. N. Cuoco, ELD B. A. Berson, RIII li. R. Denton, NRR J. M. Taylor, IE J. A. Axelrad, IE B. K. Grimes,.IE J. G. Partlow, IE E. L. Jordan, IE G. T. Ankrum, IE W. D. Altman, IE M. Malloy, IE L. J. Toms,-IE QAB Reading DQAVT Reading
-(ED0#000523)
IE Action #85-165 3
J w
TE:
IE:DQAVT:QAB IE AVT:QAB:C IE:DQAVT:D ELD MMalloy:r WDAltman G
rum
-BKGrimes JLieberman 05/jt/85 05/pl/B5 85 05/ /85 05/ /85 IE:ES:D IE:DD IE:D JAAxelrad RHVollmer JMTaylor
.05/ /85 05/ /85 05/ /85
Mr. D.- F. Schnell -DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File NRC PDR.
LPDR-SECY OGC DCS-ED0 G. H. Cunningham, ELD
.E. S. Christenbury, ELD J. Lieberman, ELD' L. N. Cuoco, ELD J. G. Keppler, RIII B. A. Berson, RIII-H. R. Denton, NRR-T. Alexion, NRR J. M. Taylor,-IE J. A. Axelrad, IE B. K. Grimes,.IE G.' T. Ankrum, IE
~W. D. Altman, IE M. Malloy, IE L. J. Toms, IE QAB Read.ing DQAVT Reading (ED0 #000523)
IE Action #85-165
- See previous concurrence.
- IE:0QAVT:QAB *IE:DQAVT:QAB *IE:DQAVT:QAB:C.
E lD AV :D ELD Malloy:ric WDAltman GTAnkrum K ' i' s JLieberman 05/ /85 05/ /85 05/ /85 0/J/85 05/ 3/85 ES:D IE J
1r d RF.
mer lor 05/
5 O!
/85 05
/85 1
Mr. D. F. Schnell DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File NRC PDR i
LPDR SECY OGC DCS EDO G. H. Cunningham, ELD E. S. Christenbury, ELD.
l J. Lieberman, ELD L. N. Cuoco, ELD J. G. Keppler, RIII B. A. Berson, RIII H. R. Denton, NRR T. Alexion, NRR J. M. Taylor, IE J. A. _ Axelrad, IE B. K.' Grimes, IE G. T. Ankrum, IE W. D. Altman, IE M. Malloy, IE L. J. Toms, IE
'QAB Reading DQAVT Reading (EDO #000523)
IE Action #85-165
- See previous concurrence.
- IE:DQAVT:QAB *IE:DQAVT:QAB *IE:DQAVT:QAB:C E :D AV :D ELD Malloy:ric WDAltman GTAnkrum
'i s
JLieberman 05/ /85 05/ /85 05
/85
,0/)/85 05/ 3 /85 ES:D IE\\
JAA 1r d RfV mer lor 05/
5 05-
/85 05
/85
~
+
March 25, 1985 i
9 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Reguirtory Commission Washington, DC 20555 l
. Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement
~
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission F
Washington, DC 20555 l
Show Cause Petition Requesting Suspension or Revocation of Operating License for Union Electric Company's Callaway Nuclear Power Plant, Unit One.
i I.
Introduction l
Come now the Missouri Coalition for the Environment and Kay Drey (" Petition-ors") to petition the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, and the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement ("Directbr") of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Regulation, pursuant to 10 CFR 5 2.206 to serve upon the Union Electric Company
("UE") an order to show cause why the operating license for the UE Callaway Nuclear Power Plant, Unit One ("Callaway Plant") should not bessuspended, pending l
a full investigation by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") of the viola-tions of law described herein, or revoked, and why such other actions as request-cd in this Petition should not be taken.
,-,fI[ Description of Petitioner Missouri Coalition for the Environment'is a non profit corporation dedicated in part to ensuring proper safety control and environmental protection in tne generation of nuclear power and is the successor in interest to an intervenor in the proceedings for issuance'of an operating license at the Callaway Plant.
Kay Drey is a rate payer of UE and a Missouri citizen concerned with proper protec-tion of public health and safety with regard to the generation of nuclear power.
III. Authority Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, S 2.206(a), establishes the right of the.public to petition the Director to institute a proceeding pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.202(a) to modify, suspend, or revoke a license or for other relief.
Such a petition must set forth the factual basis for the petition and the relief requested.
The Director may, pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.202(a) institute such a proceeding by serving upon the licensee an order to show cause.
1 no "
UE has permitted -at least ' twenty two unqualified inspectors, including personnel responsible for supervising. safety inspections, to undertake testing and inspections that UE, the NRC, and 'the public rely upon to insure safe opera-tion of the Callaway., Plant.
Inspectors without proper training and expertise have for at least four years tested and inspected every portion of the plant including the reactor building, assuring management, regulators and the public.
that electrical systems, civil work, mechanical systems and materials are in conformity with prescribed designs for operation and maintenance of the plant.
The disqualification of these inspectors raises serious questions as to the adequacy of the inspection process and the actual safety of the plant..In addition, the failure of UE management to identify the problem for such an extensive period, despite complaints from the inspectors themselves, reveals violations of UE's. legal obligation to monitor safety inspections continually at the plant and to provide inspectors with direct access to levels of management sufficient to assure prompt reaction to safety violations.
V.
Facts
~
1.
UE operates the Callaway Plant pursuant to a facility operating license granted by the NRC in October of 1984 (License No. NPF-39).
Construc-tion of the plant was completed in 1984 under a construction permit granted by the NRC in April, 1976.
2.
UE is required by law to institute and maintain a quality assurance program ("QAP") at the Callaway Plant, during both construction and operational phases.
The QAP sis designed to assure that every aspect of the design, construction, operation and maintenance of the plant meets the standards set by the NRC to protect the health and safety of the public.
The foundation of the QAP is the quality control program
("QCP") which involves safety inspections and testing of the physical characteristics of materials, structures, components and systems throughout the Callaway Plant.
1 3.
NRC regulations and UE policy mandate quality control ("QC") personnel be certified as meeting specific training, educational and technical standards in order to insure competent and accurate safety inspections and testing.
4.
Since at least 1981 and until recent weeks, during both construction and operational phases of the Callaway Plant, UE has, by its own admission permitted an undetermined number of its QC inspectors, 1
including several individuals in supervisory capacities, to conduct inspections and testing for which they were unqualified by NRC require '
ments, UE policy, and industry standards.
(The facts relied upon herein, unless othenvise noted, are derived from Exhibits "A" and "B" attached hereto, being copyrighted stories in the Columbia Daily Tribune for Thursday, March 7,1985, page 1 and Friday, March 8,1985, page 1 and Exhibit "C", an article from the St. Louis Post Dispatch dated March 26, 1985.) Published articles originally indicated that UE officials had illegally certified at least seven of thirteen QC inspec-tors to undertake inspections for which they were not qualified; only in the recent weeks has UE reportedly decertified these inspectors to 2
.o
~
p.
conduct inspections in specific areas.
UE E internally reviewing the qualifications of some fifty to sixty other quality control personnel employed by Daniel International Company, UE's contractor at the plant 4
and other subcontractors, in order to determine whether these inspec-tors were properly qualified iri accordance with regulations. As of the date of submission of this Petition, the number of unqualified inspec-tors has expianded from seven to twenty-two.
The disqualification of the QC inspectors cast doubt upon the validity of least 12,000 work inspections conducted throughout the plant, including those undertaken within the reactor building. All of the quality control inspectors
~
described above undertook inspections in one or more areas for which i
they were not properly certified including mechanical, civil, electri-cal, and materials divisions.
5.
The NRC relies heavily upon the accuracy of the safety inspections. and testing reports issued by UE's Quality Assurance ("QA") including QC personnel, in order to assure proper functioning of the Callaway Plant i
and adequate protection of the public health and safety.
In addition, the NRC has relied substantially upon such reports in previously rejecting allegations of safety violations at the Callaway Plant.
(See e.g., Report #50-483/84-45(DRP.).
6.
zQC inspectors repeatedly and over a long period registered complaints to assistant QC supervisors about unqualified inspectors and supervi-i sors, but no action was taken by UE.
Inspectors then took their complaints directly to the QA department in December of 1984 but the QA
+
department did not order an audit of the problems for nearly two months thereafter.
7.
According to UE officials, supervisors and assistant supervisors in the QC group need not be certified to conduct inspections although they I
routinely review QC inspections and technical questions of. QC inspec-tors.
Reports indicate that despite such lack of training, QC inspec-I tors were ordered by an assistant QC supervisor not to seek technical advice and information from other QA personnel.
8.
UE's QA department has itself determined that UE has violated company p.olicies and NRC regulations regarding qualification of at least twenty two QC inspectors, including inspectors with supervisor capacity, and has moved to suspend these individuals from performing inspections in areas for which thiy were not certified.
UE has reportedly undertaken an audit of over 12,000 work orders dating from 1981 to review the extent to which its thirteen QC inspectors and some sixty inspectors of Daniel International Company and its subcontractors have conducted inspections for which they were not qualified.
VI.
Conclusions of Law 1.
The license under which UE operates the Callaway plant (Facility Operating License #NPF-30) is conditioned upon UE's continued compli-
- ance with the NRC's quality assurance regulations for nuclear power
~
plants.
10 CFR 55 50.54(a)(1); 50,55(f)(1) 10 CFR S 50, Appendix B.
3
2.
NRC regulations require tha tE QAP, incl [ ding QCP. " provide for the indoctrination and training of personnel performing activities affect-ing quality as necessary to assure that suitable proficiency is achieved and maintained".
10..CFR S 50, Appendix B(I) 3.
The NRC defines " suitable proficiency" for QA, including QC, personnel as the attaining of the level of training and technical expertise as defined by ANSI standards.- See, NRC, " Qualifications of Nuclear Power.
Plant and Inspection, Examination, and Testing Personnel", Regulatory Guide 1.58 (revised 1980).
UE inspectors and inspectors of Daniel International Company and its subcontractors do not meet the qualifi-cation requirements established by the industry and adopted by the NRC.
i In addition, UE violated its own established policies by failing to meet the standards set out above.
See UE Snupps-C/ Final Safety Analy-sis Report 17.2-9 (REY. 7/3/84)
Due to Ud's violation.of regulations concerning proper qualification of 4.
personnel, there exists an alarming possibility of extensive violations by UE of the quality assurance regulations and design and operation criteria including safety standards: 1)to ensure conformance of materi-als and systems to specifications; 2) to ensure accurate inspection of materials and systems; 3) to identify and correct defective material ~
and equipment; 4) to document testing and inspections.
See 10 CFR S 50 i
Appendix B subsections I - XVIII; 10 CRF $ 50, Appendix A.
The extent t
of such violations and the risk to public health and safety will not be known until proper investigation is undertaken by the NRC.
5.
NRC regulations require.that " persons and organizations performing quality assurance functions have sufficient authority and organization-al freedom to identiify quality problems; to initiate recommend - or provide solutions and to verify implementation of solutions." Further-more, the regulations require that " irrespective of organizational structure, the individuals assigned the responsibility for assuring effective execution of any portion of the quality assurance program at any location where activities subject to this appendix are being 3 /.
performed shall have direct access to such levels of management as may be necessary to perform this function". 10 CFR S 50, Appendix B (I)
(1984).
Despite numerous complaints to supervisors by QC inspectors concerning inadequate training of QC personnel, management was either unaware of or wholly ignored these complaints for an extended period.
/
Indeed, a memo issised by QC's supervisor in March of 1984 reveals that the QC management had instituted procedures to discourage access to higher levels of management.
An audit of the problem was undertaken by the QA department only after disgruntled QC personnel brought the matter directly to the QA department.
These facts reveal that UE's QAP does not meet the requirements of providing sufficient organizational freedom or direct access to insure proper identification and solution of safety problems.
6.
UE is required to verify on an ongoing basis that its QAP is function-l ing effectively in accordance with NRC regulations.
10 CFR S 50, Appen-I -
dix B (I) (b).
As a means of such verification, UE is required to l.
undertake a " comprehensive system of planned and periodic audits... to b
9
=
verify compliance with alt aspects of the qiiality assurance program".
10 CFR S ' 50, Appendix B (XVIII).
UE's inability for at least four years to _ identify the lack of qualification of QC's personne1' in accordance with NRC' regulations and. guidelines as well as with UE policy reflects severe deficiencies 'in the verification and auditing programs of UE, and. a violation of UE's legal obligations to verify proper functi'oning of the QAP.
7.
UE is required by NRC regulations:
a) to insure the " structures, systems and components important to safety are tested to quality standards commensurate with the importance of the safety functions to be performed", and b) to establish a QAP "in order to provide adequate assurance that these structures, systems and components will satisfac-torily perfom their safety functions".
10 CFR 550, Appendix A By allowing unqualified QC personnel undertake critical safety inspections and testing for such an extensive period, UE has violated these impor-tant safety obligations..
8.
The NRC may revoke, suspend or modify in whole or part UE's operating license for UE's failure to comply with the conditions of its construc-tion permit or operating license, or for the revelation of any fact, 4
. report, inspection or otherwise that would warrant refusal to grant a
'. license upon original application, or for any violation of law, regula-tion or order of commission.42 USC S 2236; 10 CFR S 50.100 (1984).
. VII. Remedies Petitioners respectfully request the Director pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.202 (a), to order UE to show cause why its operating license #NPF-30 for the Callaway Plant should not be suspended pending a full investigation by the NRC or revoked:
(a) for failure to comply with quality assurance regulations and guidelines regarding proper training of QA personnel, as described above; (b) for failure to comply with NRC regulations requiring UE to continually verify that its QAP is functioning effectively and in accordance with NRC regulations, as outlined above; (c) for failure to comply with NRC regulations requiring UE to institute and-maintain a QAP that provides adequate freedom to identify QA problems and to driitiate and implement solutions; and (d) for failure to comply with regulations which require direct access by QA personnel to levels of management necessary to effectively' provide quality assurance at the plant.
i Further, the Petitionert request that, pursuant to the proceedings institut-i ed under 10 CRF S 2.202(a), the NRC:
- 1) undertake an independent investigation of all QA, including QC, personnel during the construction and operational phases of the Callaway Plant to determine whether such personnel have met and continue to meet the prescribed qualifications for their level of responsibility; 2) institute an audit of all testing and inspections undertaken by unqualified QC personnel; 3) conduct an independent inspection of all work inspected by unquali-l' fied personnel or reviewed by unqualified personnel; 4) implement such other
~
actions and remedies that the commission deems appropriate in this instance.
-o>
5
=
WHEREFOR the Petitioners. pray for an order granting the request for relief set forth above.
m;
.,t.
x: ::
v g-Z ;j. :
': Respectively submitted:
2-
.... ~. n."
.r
....: n: 3.e.
.,r.__
- r
.~
4
- - /...
...a...-> x. v...w.,
-. 7-r g.=...,--
, -.; w,;
-%. ~
a
,.,;..z,..--
. q../~.,e -4 :: g /(..
~.. Alan S. Nemes r
r
. Attorney for the Petitioners a y a :s + nz,s..n
~ 7541 Parkdale
-. i.
..s.w x St. Louis, Missouri 63105
- -=c
..;:: =.-
Datedthis27th'dayofMarch!'1985
- .,:z ::4 9 :.; :q ?.
=
i
+
d
,. =.
-.--v..
$Y -
- .." % n. bf' *~y Y'
- _-lg 5. - "
"-*?5'-
a
.~-
~
k 4 ;;7:;'ySc. t.
J $ '. l.
v.
J.:L - = u e'
..v. g. '.-..
L.. --
g
"' ' ?f -
..D
^ ^
~
x 3., r**:g<'s.. -g....,,.
,.J...'..
4
- m'k -
.4-
. 4 b*
.4.
8
,.T S*
- H 6
4 9
f' M-
.e.4 4
=
~
7 n
,M.-
..-. h e
i
- ..* g, 4
\\
6
'*$a'ily ri.J!Iane
~
s,_ s -,.,<,,,.
UE targets unqualified plant inspectors ;
!FiE=
I iff i
, }!
HHHBlRRIEilB
-==. n, p.:
--. :.y - ~ ~
1 O ss ; '
g x..-..,
s.
s.
.ed,,& 7 r f..
p ;...
. ~
'?'**~'
_ (
-==sh Q y-W SQ
..& a y-e,. c., -. -
3.ad"h ^*
r E..
.g-
- r. -
_ _ _ -. av -
I&C 7
l 12tae saw w
e,- art ;.
pahey Monaten federal esle%
- s. When.
grantedheunnes to haDd and operate ChDaway, Union Doctrne piseged to
~ 7Qe, spheld NltC regulatasas as weD as
'. m m~
suunpany palleine Uggle 30 tad, on ra.eday. o
,y.na.,e d.
E3,}_W ast believe we have *=='a#1-4 any staintions "But Dalen Doctric, ut-en senmend, knows the runsa.
DutG the utGIty and uttne esm.
piste their rustews of the earttSca-lien prehism, !*Ils anM the prot >
g lums are emanidend "patentsal veo.
lations" that eenid lead to discipib-ary action er Bass by the eenmaas-sien.
la addition to suggesting that the 3
"m g
ear **Maam he peDed trean the
=
.Mp.
"[- g.:.
seven inspectors anta their qualth.
,7p.,
'~
catlans are estabushed thw audit proposed arveral other steps for im-j WM
- 6 e
M-prwmg the earttSennon preessa
_Z.v..Z*
la response, Powers sag, a gr oup y MC',g.g sf hispectars, managers azul qualny amarance wortars wc! W i
spectSechangestomatd erexceed
t
~ ~ - ' = _--
..a,_ am the prwsDing katastry standards
.y-Isr omrttSestnen.
E.
q Powers said the review of snakate.
anace wart orders would show i
.4 whether asaw piant syslams need 4
r am rara-umn e rwiew a an.
hhad, Qaary added Daten Doctrie has centracted to here two more to-to meet the workload.
amid the men average two b-upare$ama a day.
la amplaining the origin af the ear.
m aumenen prehlen. Powers saw some amar= rears had been hired by Uman g
meetrie inen ensaracur Dan 6el In-tornataanal Co. Then, <wnpaw man-
.E, hased on overty troad smarpfvta g
arvra gave them nrw cre'eae*
.w -
.~
. e h ar= + e >y r
g Mfhwh-# -J~= 7 sam. The stanatar!.s asy othetals
- a.. e w.
d '* 5 9#' ' * # d " h. A P L Q-q &. ua_
_:- E EMAPA'h,$.aE
~
'MJ may take rel,ated czpenance sto a
.p f.p gW *it?QNMW cuande.rsucc tr. cert: tying inspee-1 Ab p. r * @ y-~r f P g
- Q s., g g -v.c sam cae km== ta : "They acused
. (..-- e w._.j;---
~ne.ag w -.x.c. m.. m.- a - -
the tem 'related expe wnee ' ibe hack hoe n a nousy marr i
e7 reo v. ant worten ease io a prehisen sam managen had hoped Y
requests for correettre actaan:
CaDaway plaat manager Steve MD-as own rains try==af*6ar same to save money by emag taspectors m.
- One of three qualt:y control as-tsaberger==p-dad PortaD's deal men freen the ertterns wtthout dece.
der multiple dimos matead of terug
-9) sapervisors, Vernon Portan, carek=He He relates his superW-meeting why, amare employees.
eted smessaary esper$smee a ervil aery peamen.Omarysaw,but he has After naheunt their report, endi-Powers denied east arvtags as a
~$
alectrical '-- w Selds he base harnd trean further sevD er ters wtetsked the het of aminalthart asteve. "We lett there were some S
w.
electncal 6a= Par *t-=
inspectars to seven by verttymg program weaknesses and perhaps
- the man r==r==m for apprw-
. Mest of the u men had authertty
- =r+=e=1 prowess wttb dee-n nts esme p tg===== that shouktn't have e
certtricanon of mapactors, qua16 for +==p ra-a= to more than see of er na tasarewes with the other so-been made. I esestder any notaban ectarolsupervisor terry Shaw, en the four eache=1 catagenes - to-spectora.
of the program as a signt*wertt con-
~
ree==== sance Oct. 22 vietat-tahag 3 ear **he=*i== among them
- OnDeepreceduralpoints, quad-cem."
._3 esmpany niles for certifymg m-
- but half of these eerahmenaaa ty control maangers dodged Union
=
were found r = 3ble. In some useine's own wrestan pah ior this starr war eenpaad and wr1t.
9 pereoc that Show reenm-cmana, the men did set naast ertsena proper carehanam of the inspectors ame by Tremar reportars Qins@h he certised for two tachat-accepted withm the industry la charyd wttb assunag Causway's K=rempf andDahree Fhantryman I dutnes was Ptrtan. Last week.
ethers, Umlan Doctrne had ignored safe apareuen.
and minar Psautacerts.
T ' Yearlongworkers'riftrevealed 4
in UE safetyassuranceproblems By CHRISTOPH SZECHENYI of the Tribune's staff Shaw's' inspectors. "I would expect a supervisor to be Friction between inspectors and their supervisors at e=Wt in inspection philaeophy."
the Callaway County nuclear power plant had surfaced Several I-aws said such a management attitude nearly a year before Union Electric Co. started mves-aesd sui ~ h' shortage of expertase spuned inspec.
tigstag its deteriorating quality control system, an in-tors' eam'%ts to Powers' oftice, which did the auct. It outlined inadequate training, education and experience ternal memo reveals,
~,,,
Company documents show that on March 10,19s(,
amang seven of 13 inspectors -laeua! Portall and as-sistant supervisor L.M. Zahara - and sparked suspen.
quality control supervisor Terry Shaw artiered laspec- 'sion of some of their duties.
tors under hin. to take tachaient problems to him or to an asastant supernsor before approaching other depart-FoDowing the audit's suggestion, the company sus-tions are established. Union Electrie is ais mest managers.
"In past weeks, there have been numeroes instances demonstrating a lack of effective commualection withm some 12,000 work orders to determine whether disquab-the quality control department," Shaw wrote in the Sed men did laspections that could jeopardise the plant's safety, memo to 30 people, many of whom were inspectors.
"Our aim is to solve problems through communication, The St. Imis utility is also reviewing the credentials f
and work of 50 to 80 more inspectors employed by a firm
' g; o
i not create them."
j But some inspectors said this week that they repeated-that helped buDd the plant, which sitarted generst=g ly get no action from Shaw when volcag concerns about slectricity in December.
ua L
supervisors who were unqualified to make technical de.
The Nuclear Regulatory r'-faion's inspector at 5;p etstons for ensuring safety. In addition, the utility con.
Callaway is also planning to review some work orders.
itrmed today that inspectors took their concerns to Yesterday, the Fulton Sun qucted plant spokesman Shaw's boss in early December, nearly two snonths be-Mike Cleary as saying that "we have a good system bere pg fore the utility started an audit of problems.
for recourse...I'm not sure why the la*a-t s didn't go toa Several inspectors said they did not trust some super. up the quality control chain of cammant' "
Pet visors because they lacked expertise in certam quality But today, Cleary admitted that statement was un-control areas. "On a day to day basis, you're going to true. He said be had been unaware of the insp I
have taehase=1 questions," amid one informed seurte forts when be talked to the Fulson newspaper.ectors' ef-no wb) requested anonymity. " Management wants as to goBe conceded that seven or eight inspectors had taken Ii to them for answers, yet how can they dascuss these their concerns in early December to Paul Appleby, anJ problems when they're not taehaieally qualified?"
assistant plant manager who oversees quality control operations.
r One asststant supernsor, Vernon Porte!!, recently lost t
certzfication ior two types of inspectacas at the 33 billion Cleary said the inspectors' concerns "were being plant near Fulton. Reacting to the faished audit, dated taken seriously." After the interviews, Cleary said. Ap-t Feb. 22, plant manager Steve Miltmaher pleby put together a plan for corrective action. Cleary r
Portell's certification. Portell, however, ger suspendedsaid he didn't know what changes Appleby had pro. :
retams his su-posed.
.. peryuory role.
A supervisor does not have to be certified at any level Inspectors said this week that they grew impetient s
in any disciphne." said Robert Powers. assistant man.
with Applebv'r effcrts, an:1 so they asted Powers' quah.
ager ef the insion that oversees the effectiveness of ty assurance effice to investigate. Powers noted that :n.
spectors have the nght under cer ps'y policy to com.
plain to his 6nsion.
THt-r WEATHER Aud.itors concluded managers had broken wnr.en
'""7 ' 2*$ i" "*2 i"' '" 57 **"8 =
inspectors."Tbe inspectors check electncal, mecha Fair tonight with a low in the upper 30s. Mostl civil and matertal work throughout the plant, incluing t.
Y sunny 1ornorrow. High sround 50.
rystems in the reactor buildmg and other key compo-nents.
,zy -
gu+,
4,% - *
+.A $
'L.,
4 m
"C" (St. L uis Post Dispatch, March 26, 1985) i UEIdentifies
~
Unqualified Inspsetors FULTON, Mo. (AP) - Union Dectnc Co. has identified 22 quality.
control laspectors who lack qualifications to ensure the safe Nuclear Power Plant, according to aoperation of its C Nuclear Regulatory Commission li official.
Earlier this month concluded that seven q,ality-controlthe utility i
u inspectors lacked si;fficient train:ng
'or experience. As a result. Union ;
1 Lectric suspended the men from i
doing certainjobs.
1.ast week.15 0therinspectors were.
added to the list, said Bruce Uttic, an NRC official based at the power plant.
35mineseastofColumbia.
Acting on an internal tip from an inspector. Uttle said, utiitty engineers and auditors began lowestigating the backgrounds of taspectors last month.
Uttle said the utility had identified the unqualified iabout 250 inspections performed by past threeyears. nspectors dunng the But a special Union Doctric task force has found that the 22 inspectors were qualified to do 230 of the 250 jobs i
Uttle said. The task force has foundthat had been revie no evidence of deficiencies in the i
plant's hardsare, be said.
1 t
The St. Louis based utility is -[
uttle said. He said his agency souldreviewing about 12.0 wait forTnion Dectric to complete its study before considenng regulatory 3
action.
Mike Cleary, a Union Dectne spokesman, said utl3ty officials had declined to comment on their investigation of the taspectors' work.
Jie confirmed that the 22 inspectors lacked certate work credentials.
I
~.
- ~ -
_ _..