ML20132D667

Allegation Rept Q-1-84-020 on 840827.Allegations Documented Through Interview of D Day Re Grinding of Piping,Pipe Mismatches,Lack of Proper Records of Faulty Welds,Harassment of QC Inspector,Weld Defects & Rusting Valves

ML20132D667
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	08/27/1984
From:	Christopher R, Evans D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20132D624	List: ML20132D621 ML20132D630 ML20132D641 ML20132D646 ML20132D667 ML20132D676 ML20132D688
References
FOIA-85-560 Q-1-84-020, Q-1-84-20, NUDOCS 8509300252
Download: ML20132D667 (4)

Text

.

REPORT OF INTERVIEW Report Number: 0-1-64-020 Correncing at 0900 on August 24, 1984 a telephone interview was conducted with an anonymous individual using the pseudonym of " David DAY". The interview was cceducted by R. K. CHRIST 0PHER, Director, 01:RI, Stewart EBNETER, Chief, Engineering Prograr:s Eranct, EtS i cn I, and Deborah EVAt5, Ir.vtr.t'rrtfve Aid, 01:RI. The ellegr cle.cted to remain anonynious cespitt be'ng offered con-fident'el'ty tr.c' kculd consent only to a teiephcr,c 't.ttrvicv.

The allerer se'd tc kcrked at Seabrook Station as a carpenter frorr August 1978 to Septerher IML cr.d ficn October 1980 to June 19L3 cs t t'rtfitter. He said the time period invr1v'r.5 L's concerns extended f rcn. Acst.st 1901 until his res'cr'aticr.. Lc said his primary area of ccrccrr during this time was the Pu11ran Higgins (P-F) Fcid'rc tr.d Quality Assurance Prc5 rani. itt allcgtr stated hc kcrked in various areas of the pit.r.t during his employment, 9

'r.cluding waste processinr, ccr.tc'nment, turbine room, diesci Scr. craters , }

r6dicactive steam tunnel and the IAE (Fcrr Auxiliary Bu'1 ding).

tlc interview was conducted ty tr}'r.s detailed questions to the all(scr abcut sittecents cade by hir in a letter dctcc' Jrly 24, 1984 to Com'ss'ena Jaccs ASSELSTILE. l.eterous technically criertre r,t. cst'ons concerning pipc and wcid locations and cc6e rect'rcrents were asked by EBNETEF; tic restcnses to which are not recordeo in this interv'cv, but are recorded serrrticly by EBHETER.

This Repcrt of Irterview is concerned prfrarily with knowledge in the pcsses-s'cr. of the alleger concerning any wrcr.sde'rc, records fals'ficatfor tr.(./c.r Orti f ty Control Ir.spectc r 'r. tit.io6 tion.

in t.is itit(r, the alleger stated that p'rirt t:as being grinded down tc thickness beles. those rer.r'rrt ty the codes and that 't m "11tsai as Lc11, out everycnt cic it'. Luring the interview the allrr.cr rcturec to a specific CBS iine. I!e st6tcd ttrre was a mismatch or. the linc (En3C-153-1-CB51211) requiring extensive grindir.5 trd that the P-H field superviser (t'ikt Sell. SCIA) kDf/jg2850906 Mos3BEsb 560 pon 1 Exhibit 2

(I tcrctit.) at.d the Quality Assurance (0/,) supcrvtscr (Jchn MARTIN) werr evirc cf the mismatch and subsequcrt gr it.oing.

The alleger saic thct in the Centainment Building $rrty Syster.:, welding crews frequently u.ccortrred pipe m'smatches arid it w as cci.ctn knowledge that the way to correct the probitt.. kes thru grinding the pipe walls. Ttr r11cgen was c or.c c rr.c t' trat the grinding weeld rcstit it. i significant reduction it. pig wcil thickness. He said the QA su rviscr, John MARTIN, and the otbrr tretc trc' craft supervisors surt er Oct: LTL5h and Geno "LAFEVE" (phonct'c', utrr everr rf ttcse problems. The allegu saic c crc cver specifically directrt' hir to do anything frpre r ci.C that it was just the general wort'rr philoso-phy at tbr s'tr. Tht. clieger was unable to prcsi6t r.ct.cs cf other potential witnesses to sti r1 Lis concerns. he also advis(C ttti tc rrver actually raised the issuc vitt t's so rviscrs and also state.d he. Scs rct aware of any acts of int r.'dtticn cr threats by manager.ient, ettcr irdividuals, or groups.

It the alleger's letter to Cerr'ss'u.er A55ELSTINE, he made ref erence te in- '

stcrces ccncerning a lack of pro r cccerrentation of faulty welds 'r. itf. pipe tunrit.1. k*tcr. questioned regarding this cer.ccrr,, ie said there was a lack of paper work to docuuent thc cetting out and repairing of welds. lit saic he. was not aware of documentation concerning poor welds beirc prpsely destroyed to prevent NRC identification of problems nor was he aware of weld and/or in-spection reccrds and documentation being falsified. The alleger said his primary concerns is that he thought the QC Inspector who was examining welds performed with Diametric welding machines was ordcred not to continue inspect-ing welds after he began documenting problems due to a lack of fusior, and

" suck back". The alleger said the QC Inspector (David BAKER) was ordered by his foreman not to inspect any more welds. The alleger said he knew BAKER stopped the inspections because he (the alleger) had been assigned to work with BAKER to cut out the unacceptable welds identified by BAKER. The alleger said BAKER's foreman, Dennis CLARK, was the individual responsible fer stop-ping BAKER's inspections. The alleger surmised that CLARK did this because of instructions he received frort the area foreman (Dan EVANS). The alleger stated that EVANS was heard to coment that they had over 100 suspect welds in 2 i Exhibit 2

4 the pipe tunnel. The alleger also said he felt BAXER was being harassed and intimidated because he (BAKER) was transferred to a less desirable job on the second shift. The alleger clarified that it was his personal opinion that BAKER was harassed even though BAKEk had not made such a concern known to him or anyone else. The alleger said the incident in question occurred sometime in January 1982. The alleger said, to his knowledge, all 100 welds were supposed to be inspected but he is not aware of any of the inspection records actually being falsified because the final inspection only required visual inspection and since the inspectors could not see the inside of the weld by ther they could have legitimately accepted the welds.

In his letter, the alleger stated that on May 11, 1982, while working on field weld No.108, he noticed a Dravo shop weld defect. He said this was located in the No.1 Turbine Building where many Dravo fabricated welded pipes were installed. The alleger said he informed a P-H QA Inspector (Brian KENNEDY) who advised him a Dravo shop weld was not their (P-H) concern and not to worry about it.

The alleger stated that in the Waste Processing Building he had observed instances of improperly welded pipes to valves. He said many of the valves had become discolored and rusted because of exposure to excessive heat. He said he " heard" an unidentified QA Inspector had written numerous NCR's on this condition but was told by Dan EVANS, the. area supervisor, that the NCR's were overridden and the work was " accepted as is". He said EVAt;S had told him that the inspector had gotten overzealous and improperly evaluated the nonconformance.

The alleger also rade reference in his letter to electronically activated valves stored near the Waste Processing Building that had been exposed to the rain and were rusting and that the NRC Inspector overlooked this condition.

When questioned cn this issue,~he clarified that the NRC Inspector had in fact cited the licensee for improper storage. He said he was not alleging any improprieties on the prt of the NRC Inspector but that he was concerned about the disposition of the citation since the valves were ultimately installed.

3 Exhibit 2

4 The a11eger concluded that he could provide no additional specific information  !

and said he could identify no individuals who would be potential witnesses to

?ly instances of intimidation, (other than possibly BAKER), harassment, ,

falsification of records, and/or other acts of wrongdoing. The interview concluded at 10:30 AM.

This Report of Interview was formally recorded on August 27, 1984.

Reported by: kl{ " ]i11' t) l Lt v R. K. Oristopher,/ Director i Office of Investigations Field Office, Region I Noli - s brd DEborah L. v(vfis, Investigative Aid Office of Ittvestigations Field Office, Region I I

li i

I i

l Exhibit 2 4

!