ML20155C903
| ML20155C903 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 06/03/1988 |
| From: | Kane W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Corbin McNeil PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8806140378 | |
| Download: ML20155C903 (8) | |
Text
.
~'
x..
-t i
s 08 JUN 1988
.s Docket Nos. 50-277/278 File No. RI-88-A-0057 Philadelphia Electric Company ATTN: Mr. C. A. McNeill Executive Vice President-Nuclear 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Gentlemen:
Subject:
Allegations by Councilwoman Parrott at the Public Meeting on Peach Bottom Restart, May 16, 1988 in Pylesville, MD At the public meeting in Pylesville, Maryland, Councilwoman Parrott provided a written statement which was read into the record. She raised a number of allegations associated with security, health physics, on-site drug activity and on-site fire emergencies.
Enclosed is a copy of her statement. We request that you investigate her allegations and provide us with the results of your investigation of each allegation. We would appreciate receiving your response within thirty days.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely, hiS%71soodW
~
William F. Kane, Director Division of Reactor Projects
Enclosure:
As stated h
'I 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY ALLEGATI0BS BY PARROTT - 000.0.0 06/01/88 8806140378 880603 PDR ADOCK0500g7
m
~. -
sp Philadelphia Electric Company 2
08 JUN1988 cc w/ enc 1:
John S. Kemper, Sr., Senior Vice President-Nuclear J..W. Gallagher, Vice President, Nuclear Services E. C. Kistner, Chairman, Nuclear-Review Board Dickinson M. Smith, Vice President, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Jack Urban, General Manager, Fuels Department, Delmarva Power & Light Co.
John F. Franz, Plant Manager, Peach Bottom Atoinic Power Station Troy B. Conner,~ Jr., Esquire W. H. Hirst, Director,- Joint Generation Projects Department, Atlantic Electric Bryan W. Gorman, Manager, External Affairs Eugene J. Bradley, Esquire, Assistant General Counsel (Without Report)
Raymond L. Hovis, Esquire Thomas Magette, Power Plant Siting, Nuclear Evaluations W. M. Alden, Director, Licensing Section Doris Poulsen, Secretary of Harford County Council Dane Honan Public Document Room (PDR)
Local Public Document Room.(LPDR)
Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)
NRC Resident Inspector Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
- bec w/ enc 1:
Regian I Docket Room (with concurrences)
Management Assistant, DRMA (w/o enc 1)
Section Chief, DRP Robert J. Bores, DRSS RI:DRPCW
RI:DRP (lMJ)
R
(
William (/rn.
LinvilleM ke
' ger e
[r/l /88
/r/ / /88 88 6/J/88 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY ALLEGATI0BS BY PARR0TT - 0002.0.0 05/27/88
.p>; h& h !
/)
COUNTY COUNCIL OF HARFORD COUNTY, MARYLAND A-(m y
/i JOHN W. HARDWICKE BARDARA AHERN RISACHER J. ROBERT HOOPER 9'esces
-;%W Osk<rA D.sa c 0 st > 4 JOANNE $. PARROTT G. EDWARD FIELDER O s"<I 9 Cusx<r i JOHN W. SCHAFER FREDERICK J. HATEM OOR4S PCMSE N O stret C 0,st,cr i swes, u n cw STATEMENT BY:
COUNCILWOMAN JO ANNE S. PARROTT May 16, 1988 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Public Hearing Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Re-start 20 WEST COURTLAND STRLCT / BEL A!R MARYLA',D 21014 / (301) 638-6000 / 679-2000 4, f w 0.vun, Ecen er Seven 'long months and twenty-two days ago on September 24th, 1987, citizens and elected officials were given an opportunity to attend a public hearing before you, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, at this very location to address our concerns about the shut-down of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station six months earlier.
At that tim e, my comments to you stressed my concern 3 that Peach Bottom A tomic Power Station was iraproperly being operated by on-site management, separate and apart from its parent corporate headquarters in Philadelphia.
My impression was confirmed in the January 11, 1988, INPO(Institute of Nuclea r Power Operators) letter, which evaluated the Peach Bottom cris.is, to Mr. llobert P. llarrison, Chairman, Special Committee Philadelphia Electric Company, Board of Directors.
So where does one now begin to impress upon you the, N it C, that we, the citizens of liarford County, are still very much concerned about the futur'e re-start of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station.
There is still much to consider.
Many loose ends are dangling before us.
The January 11, 1988, INPO evaluation letter contained some rather "heady" informa tion that even noted that problems existed years before the shutdown.
Here was a nuclear industry group coming down hard on one of its own.
And the best way to summarize the findings of the INP0 evaluation is to quote from page eight of the INPO letter, "It (peach tiottom) is an embarrassment to the industry and the nation."
I insist that the findings outlined in the January 11, 1988, INPO letter and the forthcoming INPO evaluation to be accomplished prior to re-start, be evaluated and strongly considered by the NitC taefore re-start.
Philadelphia Elect ric Company continues to send out press releases and letters to the NttC indicating the percentage of tasks that have been
/
3 4
completed which are necessary to attain their re-start goal, as if it is a casual check-off of a grocery list, as if everything is honkey-dory.
They seem awfully confident that clearance will be given to re-start Unit 2 by December 31.
They seem proud that by the 1st of August 4,000 corrective and preventive maintenance items will be completed on Unit 2.
But I must still be wary.
Questions must still be answered in the areas of plant security, drug activity onsite and the reliability of health physicist positions and rad waste procedures.
Two months ago, I had the opportunity to speak confidentially with a fermer security guard, a most reliable source.
The following was brot.ght to my attention:
~%
i l
-Armed Gtards were observed sleeping at their posts.
Il s was q'dit8 a common occurence (for example: at the door to the contamination area).
-Armed Guards would not escort other personnel as required to and froin entrance / exit areas.
-Armed Guards would sit fou r (4) to eight (8) hours without any activity.
-T h ree-fou r t h s (3/4ths) of the secu rit y force k participated in a drinking party, beer, wine, and whiskey, during the day shift Easter week-end its87 soon af ter the plant shut down.
-Security s hif t s were typically short s ta f fe d.
flotation and relief of guards did not occur as promised or required.
-If a boyf riend / girlf riend were working the same securit y shif t, they would go off somewhere to meet and not return to their respective guard post on time and this would have a snowball effect and delay rotation of other guards.
-There is only one ladies restroom in the power block.
At one time it was said to be a contaminated area and fernale employees were informed not to use this rest room facilit y, but female employees did anyway, for the closest non-contaminated ladies room was a 15 to 20 minute walk away o hich would be used if a guard was lucky enough to be relieved from duty.
4
-Security personnel typically worked 12 to 16 hour1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br /> sII1fts, 6 to 7 days per week.
In February, '88 a Philadelphia Electric Company employee informed the
[
liarford County Cou ncil, some security force personnel were still working 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br /> per week.
-During the hiring process, those who inquired were aM they did not have to work long hours, but when
- hired, Burns was emphatic about scheduling security personnel to work 12 hour1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> - 16 hour1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br /> s hif ts.
Some security personnel felt they would be fired if they did not comply.
-Guards in the gower block area worked typically 8 to 10 hour1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> shifts and were lucky..if they got relieved.
-Health physicists changed the settings on the radiation monitoring equipment, so radiation levels
?
would be indicated to be lower, especially at the times rods were changed, because of excess water on the floor in that area.
-Susquehanna River water quality reports were done and evaluated properly by testor, but. sometimes f
someone would change the reports to downgrade radiation levels.
-In the decam room contaminated items would be put in cans that were not sealed properly; some cans were cracked.
-The guard who related the preceding information to me was afraid to report observations of wrong doing to the Burns supervisors for fear of being fired and for fear that his/her own security clearance would be jeopardized and would be put on a "blackballed" list with other security agencies.
-T his person eventually quit the security force, because the job demands of excessive overtime was affecting family relationships.
-One former security guard has filed' a, complaint with the U.S.
Department of 1, abor (as noted in the Evening Sun-Mayti,1988) because she was fired by the nuclear division of Burns international Security "i n retaliation for her identification of safety problems related to its security services at Peach Bottom."
^ '
The preceding information which I outlined was furnished by another former security guard.
I request that the NRC thoroughly investigate ano provide the llarford County Council with detailed information regarding the former and present
[
practices of Burns international Nuclear, Division at Peach Bottom and what corrective actions the NRC expects Philadelphia Electric Company to make in this area prior to re-start.
Another area of concern:
DRUG ACTIVITY ONSITE!
Just last week, three Philadelphia Electric Company employees were arrested by the FBI and a fourth indicted for drug activities.
TilREE were maintenance workers and one was a health physicist.
Now exactly, Wil AT were these workers maintaining?
Were they responsible in part for a portion of the 4,000 corrective and preventive maintenance items for Unit 2?
The lives of 172,000 citizens of liarford County are relying on the capabilities of employees such as these?
I ask the NRC to provide to the liarford County Council specifics on P'
all prior drug activity at and around the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station AND specifics on what and how Philadelphia f;1ectric Company and the NRC plans to eradicate the drug problem!
Another area of concern:
On site fire emergencies. Wh en local officials met with Philadelphia Electric Company officials less than a month ago, I was informed that the last time Peach Bottom management worked with the surrounding volunteer fire companies was February,1(J87.
That was over a year ago!
Can the onsite Philadelpnia Electric Company "five man fire briga d e", as described by Philadelphia Electric Company, handle a fire onsite?
S'.ould there not be practice drills with the local fire companies during this "shutdow n" phase?
1
-U-As you know, I attended the February 20th meeting at the NRC llegion I headquarters in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania when the NRC requested Philadelphia Electric Company to a<ldress the rcoccurring problems which have existed in the areas of security anu health physicists personnel.
I left that meeting with the impression that management onsite at Peach Bottom and manageraant at corporate headquarters in Philadelphia sounded like iney are still educating theinselves on things that they should have been doing onsite many years ago. If Peach Hottora had not been shutdown because of inattentiveness and sleeping by control room operators, would the NltC be probing and questioning security and health physicist problems?
J ust as Philadelphia Electric Company's corporate headquarters was ignoring the oasite problems and onsite management, did and does tne NRC "corporate' headquarters in Washington, D.C.
really have a true concept as to what was aud is happening cn site at Peach Hottom?
! challenged Mr. William Kane, Jirector, Division of Reactor Projects, Region 1.
to heed one of his concluding remarks to Philadelphia Electric Company on February 26th.
When air. Kane questioned the Philadelphiu Electric Com pa r.y officials as to why problems continually occur af ter Philadelp.sia 1.!cet ric Company officials say corrective r /tions have been taken. Mr. Kane stressed, " B efore l'each Isottom is re-opened the NRC needs assurances that the plans presented have been fundamentally effective before recommendations are given to the Nuclear ilegulatory Commission."
Well, not only does liarford County need assurances, so do all the surrounding cou n ties in.\\ia ryla nd and Pennsyivania.
A population of 2,500,000 need assurances.
There are still rnany questions to be answered and we rely on the NRC, and expect _ the NRC to het the answers, to evaluate and to make a decision that is thorough, and not hasty, i
-U-1