ML20149M130

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Article from Courant on 961122 Re Unlicensed Workers at Millstone Nuclear Plants
ML20149M130
Person / Time
Site: Millstone  Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 11/22/1996
From: Blanch P
AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:
NRC
Shared Package
ML20149M049 List:
References
NUDOCS 9612120321
Download: ML20149M130 (6)
v • d • e


Text

_ ._ __ _. .

i i

) )

l l

From:- PAUL M. BLANCH <PMBLANCH91x.netcom.com>  !

j- To: WND2.WNP3(jaz),TWDI.TWP4(gam),WNDI.WNP2(hjm),KPDI....

Date: l 11/22/96 12:37pm

Subject:

TODAY'S PAGE 1 l

j Nuclear plants had unlicensed workers By MIKE McINTIRE- -This story ran in the Courant November 22, 1396 I I

! Dozens of unlicensed contractors have been working at the Millstone 1 nuclear plants during the past two years, a few with criminal backgrounds indicating drug and alcohol problems, state records show.

{ i Since 1994,'about 100 pipe-fitters and welders working on steam systems

, and other repair projects designed to get the beleaguered plants back in  !

working order did not have the required state-issued license, or were l l working beyond the scope of their license, records at the state Department

, of Consumer Protection show, ,

i

! Some of the workers, who were hired by four companies retained by l Northeast Utilities, may have had occupational certifications or licenses j j from other states, state officials said.

But they were still required to take Connecticut's test, which is designed

to er.sure that heating and cooling contractors meet minimum standards for j competence.

1

[ About 25 percent to 30 percent of those who take the test fail. '

2

We're not necessarily talking about a safety hazard, said Michael D.  ;

i Spagnoli, a consumer protection department lawyer. It's a technical i violation of the requirements. But the requirements are there for a reason:

j to set a minimum standard of quality. '

i State officials said they expect to negotiate a settlement for licensing l j violations with one of the companies, Stone and Webster Engineering Corp.

i of Boston, and will enter into similar talks with the other three: NSS

! Numanco Inc. of Pennsylvania, Newport News Industrial Corp. of Virginia, 1

and PCI Corp. of Chicago.

l a NU is aware of the state investigation and has had discussions with our

' contract suppliers to reinforce the expectation that contractors have the

-appropriate licenses and permits, said Deborah Beauchamp, a spokeswoman for the utility.

Asked whether NU could safely say that all the workers at Millstone are j now properly licensed, Beauchamp replied: I can't say that. We don't j know. '

i

The short-term jobs and the transitory natt re of the workers who fill them L highlight another safety issue: By the time the company can run background j checks on the workers, their jobs are completed and they are gone.

9612120321 961210 PDR ORG NRRA

l l

l A check of computerized state criminal records by The Courant found that, of about 200 Millstone pipe-fitters and welders whose names appear on a i

, list provided to the state by Stone and Webster, three had narcotics

! convictions and five had been convicted of drunken driving within the past five years.

i Two others had burglary or larceny convictions. ,

i I

Most of the men worked for periods ranging from a few days to several l

! reanths in 1995, although at least one appeared to still be on the payroll. '

i

! Records of personnel from the other three companies were not immediately 1

available.

Through the years, the issue of substance abuse among nuclear plant workers has been a serious concern. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission created fitness-for- duty rules in the early 1990s requiring utilities to

provide reasonable assurance that nuclear power plant personnel work in an environment that is free of drugs and alcohol and the effects of these substances.

Greg Smith, an NRC senior security specialist, said a criminal conviction does not automatically prevent someone from being hired for short-term jobs at a nuclear plant.

Plant operators make a judgment call on contractors' backgrounds and often have to rely on the job applicants to answer questions honestly about their criminal histories.

But, Smith said, the system for weeding out short-term workers with undesirable backgrounds sometimes fails because of the length of time it takes to process FBI background checks.

It takes a couple.of months to get that information back, so most of these guys are in and out of their jobs before their rap sheets come back,' Smith said. If the guy does not put down on his application that he has been convicted of drugs or DWI, you won't find out otherwise until )

it's too late.'

The Courant cross-checked the names and birth dates of the Millstone workers against a computerized database of criminal convictions obtained I

from the state Judicial Department. '

Both NU and Stone and Webster acknowledged that people with criminal records could be working at Millstone.

NU performs a thorough review of serious or less serious convictions' before deciding whether to hire someone, Beauchamp said.

There are some people at the Millstone site who have prior convictions.

They've paid the price through prison time or probation, or their offenses may have been in the distant past, she said.

Bob Morrow, vice president of public affairs for Stone and Webster, said:

5 l ' It's like anything else. You make judgment calls along the way.

Dozens of contractors are working at the Millstone plants at any given time.

Since early this year, when the NRC shut down all three units because of

, safety and management problems, the presence of outside workers has

increased as NU tries to convince the NRC that the units are once again j safe to operate.

, In legal papers filed in connection with the consumer protection case,

, Stone and Webster complained about the difficulties of compiling

information on its temporary labor: 'Because the work has been ongoing for some time, a large number of union workers have come and gone, including a large number of pipe- fi'ters.

i State officials said they began their investigation eerlier this year, i after a former Millstone heating- and-cooling contractor complained that j .some workers there were not properly licensed.

i l Consumer protection department investigators then conducted on- site

! inspections and reviewed documents turned over by the companies.

Consumer protection officials say some companies hired to work at Millstone don't take the state-licensing requirement seriously.

Richard Hurlbutt, administrator of the state's occupational licensing boards, said one nuclear contractor has asked that the requirement be waived for its workers at Millstone, a request that the state so far has

not granted.

The state offers the written test once a month in Hartford and in . West l Haven, but out-of-state workers can take the exam any time at designated occupational training centers around the country.

l

"A lot of these nuclear companies seem to think they are shielded from i

the normal requirements, that no one follows what they're doing down l there, Hurlbutt said. "They don't want to be bothered with taking the 4

test. "

Moody's/ The Nuclear Picture Is Not A Pretty One

/

I Source: THE ENERGY DAILY THE ENERGY DAILY via Individual Inc. : Nuclear utilities face a troubled

, future, with dubious prospects for securing license renewal, the i possibility of premature plant shutdowns and related replacement power

costs, decommissioning costs and uncertainties over nuclear waste disposal, j according to a new report from Moody's Investors Service.

! The good news, Moody's said, is that a handful--eight to be exact--of

investor owned nuclear utilities have been upgraded since Moody's last I report on the nuclear power industry in April 1993; the bad news is that

i the bond ratings of 24 nuclear utilities have since been downgraded, some more than once. For comparison sake, Moody's pointed out that during the same period the ratings of 12 non-nuclear 100s were downgraded, while 13 were upgraded.

Many nuclear utilities are among the group least likely to avoid a deterioration in credit quality as competition unfolds, the credit rating firm wrote in its report, Moody's Assesses Nuclear Power Risks In A More Competitive Market. "Notwithstanding the progress that many of these utilities have made in lowering non-fuel operating and maintenance expense, interest and property taxes, the cash costs tied to nuclear power production remain high and may not be recoverable in the rates dictated by l an open market. '

From a ratings perspective, Moody's says competition will drive down the average rating for the U.S. electric utility industry, with the sector overall falling to Baal while the average for utilities with significant nuclear investments is expected to decline to Baa2. Moody's currently rates just over $200 billion in 100 debt and preferred stock, over 70 percent of which is issued by 100s with nuclear power assets.

l The report points out that 66 percent of the operating nuclear plants in the United States will be 20 years or older by 2000. These plants, mostly licensed for 40 years, face a host of problems, most notably license renewal and rising nuclear waste storage costs, Moody's said.

Moody's also downplayed the revised rules adopted recently by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on reactor license renewal, which are designed to make it easier for plants to extend their operating lives an additional l 20 years. 'The revised rules do not, by themselves, suggest a marked I increase in the number of utilities that might seriously consider such a strategy," Moody's said.

The reason, the report said, is that the economic benefits associated with I license renewal--more time to accumulate decommissioning funds and the  !

flexibility to stretch depreciation costs--likely will be offset by the l

significant additional capital investments...needed to meet future '

regulatory, operating and safety standards.

That could explain why IOUs like Virginia Power and Duke Power Co., each of which have credit ratings well above the industry average and which own well- running nuclear plants, appear reluctant to pursue relicensing in earnest. While both utilities have expressed an interest in pursuing i relicensing for these reactors, none of these plans are definitive. 1

[In] the end, Moody's said, favorable economics may not, in and of itself, be sufficient for these utilities to relicense their nuclear pl ants . ' Another big disadvantage for nuclear utilities concerns what Moody's refers to as the radwaste quandary.

The storage crisis, especially for high-level radioactive wastes,

" dampens the utility's enthusiasm for extending the operating licenses of their nuclear facilities and for building new nuclear plants for meeting future energy demand," the report said.

l 1

, And regardless of what some say, the Moody's report contends that many l utilities fece a genuine crisis on spent fuel storage: The Energy Department's proposed Yucca Mountain waste repository is nowhere near i

completion, but there already are 16 nuclear utilities whose spent fuel pools are at full capacity. Some of these already have turned to

, aboveground storage, but these too are beginning to reach full capacity, the report said. And there are another 17 utilities with commitments to build on-site dry storage because of the delays in the DOE program, i And, Moody's noted, the considerable costs these utilities are racking up i

in connection with on-site storage is in addition to the money they are i required by law-to pay into the federal nuclear waste disposal fund.

Legislation to remedy the situation fizzled in the last Congress, but the issue is expected to be revisited in 1997.

J

l. On the bright side, the Energy Department recently declined to challenge a federal court decision ordering the department to take responsibility for

. the nation's waste by 1998. However, as the report points out, the agency

has yet to take any definitive steps in that direction.

j The report groups 65 nuclear utilities followed by Moody's into three risk

categories--significant, moderate and insignificant-- and gives net nuclear j investment ratios and key nuclear plant information for each utility.

1 The report puts 47 utilities into the significant risk category, including: Commonwealth Edison Co.; Arizona Public Service Co.; Ohio Edison i Co.; New England Power Co.; Georgia Power Co.; Peco Energy Co.; Northeast j Utilities; and Public Service Electric and Gas Co.

For those 47, Moody's has some advice

1 1

  • Improve the company's financial flexibility to compensate for increased i business risk in a deregulated environment and to withstand the potential j nuclear plant writedowns.

i

  • Seek authorization to accelerate the amortization of deferred regulatory i assets and/or to accelerate depreciation of higher- cost nuclear i generation.

l

  • Cut the company's operating costs.
  • Continue to push for a solution to the radioactive waste disposal problem.

{  ;

The report was released Thursday. For more information, call (212) 553-0376.

<<THE ENERGY DAILY -- 11-22-96>>

I

4 l

i Paul M. Blanch Energy Consultant i 135 Hyde Rd. 1 West Hartford CT 06117 / j Voica 860-236-0326 ' '

Fax 860-232-9350  !

L I

l i

i l

1 I

I I

i l

- _ , . , - . . . , -

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20149M130&oldid=2973527"