ML20199D077

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Partially Deleted Interview Rept of R Routhier, on 961218 Re Allegation That Former Plant Employee J Massey Was Discriminated Against Because of Raised Concerns W/Plant Advanced Off Gas Sys
ML20199D077
Person / Time
Site: Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date: 12/18/1996
From: Teator J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20199C790 List:
References
FOIA-97-365 NUDOCS 9801300136
Download: ML20199D077 (5)
v • d • e


Text

-

e e e L

c c EXHIBIT 39 9801300136 9801JJ i PDR FOXA HICKEY 97-365 PDR _

Infor m^.'i, - :, ;- _ , ,3 3,Qg

(

(

inacnJ; ,.

Act, wmpt;cn3 '7C

.fctmaticn FOIA- 9%3G .-

j \g i

Case No. 1 95 005 Exhibit 39

'7E / B o ol 3tg

,~ . m.

m

' ~

i INTERVIEW REPORT OF RICK RMIER

> December 18,19%, ROMER was interviewed by the reporting agent. The

%terview was conducted at the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VY),

Energy Information Center, Governor Hunt House. Vernon, VT. ROUTHIER provided the following information regarding an allegation that former VY Engineer James MASSEY was discriminated against because he had raised concerns with the VY Advanced Off Gas System (A0GS).

ER was born rity number:1s He His His home tele ne b ivers license 1 ification n r is

~i un lectrician by trade and has )erformed contract rk at Seabrook, Maine Yankee, and VY Nuclear Power currently working for Fischbach Inc., as a contractor at VY. )lants. He is ROUTHIER stated that he has known'MASSEY since 1990, when MASSEY sup vised a work grou) which he was a part of.

projects )etween 1990 and May 1994 when He also worked for MASSEY on a few small he was assigned to the A0GS design change project. He described MASSEY as an em believing that something was wrong on a job.ROUTHIER ployee who was very vocal when said that he worked on the VY Hain Transformer Replacement during t- .992 outage, and offered MASSEY's performance on that assignment as an uample of MASSEY not seeming to be interested in making a project successful.

C When he was assigned to work on the A0GS, he reported directly for MASSEY.

ROUTHIER was res>onsible for making the A0GS control wire drawings (CWDs) represent what p1ysically existed in the olant, and be congruons with the VY "

style of drawings, because the original A0GS CWDs were not c.,ngruent with the VY drawing style. ROUTHIER said that MASSEY felt strongly that the problems

' with the CWDs had to be first corrected before the design could be developed and implemented. He said that MASSEY expressed that view to his (MASSEY's) supervisor Pat CORBETT.

ROUTHIER stated that a week or two after he started working (Hay 1994) on the A0GS design change, MASSEY ended his involvement in the project. He said that he and MASSEY spent two days working together on the project, and after that, he would report his work orogress to MASSEY, but that MASSEY became uninvolved, and he (ROUTHIER) was basically on his own working on the design change. He said that, typically MASSEY would arrive at his office at' approximately 10 a.m. and lock his door for the next one to one and a half hours. ROUTHIER said that NASSEY wasn't doing a lot of the hands on work, and ~~

did not provide him with much direction.

= -

ROUlHIER said that MASSEY.didn't show much interest in working with Yankee Atomic Electric Company (YAEC) Engineer Lou CASEY, who was responsible for providing MASSEY with the ADGS design because CASEY was a new YAEC employee and NASSEY didn't want to work with him. ROUTHIER recalls that he met with CASEY to discuss the project and later told MASSEY about the meeting, and MASSEY told him " don't tell Lou CASEY nothing." ROUTHIER consented that CASEY's focus was on the ADGS design and not the problems with the CWDs.

ROUTHIER acknowledged that there were problems and inaccuracies in the CWDs EXHIBIT b CASENO. 1-96-005 1 go PAGE / OF T _ PAGE(S)

. _ ____J

r which were updated by YAEC and CASEY, but felt the problems were minor in

{ nature.

ROUTHIER said that by the time he an working on the >roject, MASSEY had bon working on it for awhile-and Y had reviewed t1e original control room 9 50 panel drawings and fcund problems in the drawings.- ROUTHIER said that MASSEY was correct in that the drawings didn't match with what was actually installed in the panel. ROUTHIER said that MASSEY-listed 30 to 40 questions that he had on the original panel drawings and he (ROUTHIER) was

-able to easily answer most of the questions based on the usiated drawings which had already been produced by CASEY. ROUTHIER said tut CASEY was--

focused on producing and implementing the design while MASSEY was focused on reviewing and corracti roblems with the CWDs. ROUTHIER said that he initially agreed with 'Y, but after spending one month reviewing the CWDs, he reached a point where he felt the QOs were in pretty good shape and that any additional roblems which were discovered, could be addressed and-corrected duri the design implementation process. ROUTHIER said that when he informed NAS Y of his belief, MASSEY didn't disagree with him. and MASSEY areed that all of his issues had been addressed. ROUTHIER stated that

!- :because MASSEY wasn't working with him on the project, he got CORBETT to ap3 rove hiring another electrician named Jim DAYTON to help him review the

CW)s, because DAYTON was a good, conscientious, and " picky" electrician.

ROUTHIER wanted DAYTON as another set of eyes to help him make sure that his

! conclusion was carrect that the CWDs were in pretty good shap?. ROUTHIER said j that DAYTON found few problems during a point by point review of the actual l

wiring and the CWDs, and sustained his conclusion about the drawings and that the riesign change should proceed.

ROUTHIER said that he did not witness MAFSEY reviewing any of the CWDs

- produced or )rovided by CASEY to MASSEY, and that if he (ROUTHIER) found any mistakes in CASEY's CWDs, he would point them out to MASSEY. ROUTHIER-commented that the drawings produced by YAEC.and CASEY were good, but did contain some mistakes (some were ty)ographical) which were corrected during the back and forth (between ROUTHIEt and CASEY) review process. ROUTHIER

' stated that MAMEY was uninterested in reviewing CASEY's final CWDs. He said that HASSEY was dedicated to the belief th6t a point by point review of the wiring had to be completed, and compared to the CWDs of the entire A0GS.

ROUTHIER did not feel that was necessary'due to the lack of significant probleas'he found during his review of tile CWDs. ROUTHIER stated that he did discover problems with the control room 9 50 panel in that neutral wires.were

-wired to an energized 120 volt AC panel, but he and MASSEY found them early during their review of the A0GS, and MASSEY "made some noise" and used that as an exam)1e of the system being a mess, but then became disinterested.

ROUTHIELsaid that problem was corrected during the 1995 refueling outage, and it was not a safety issue because it was wired to a grounded neutral, although

-it was an incorrect wirirg practice.

ROUTHIER stated that he and MASSEY reviewed the 8 motor control cubicles in the A0GS and found that the A0GS Recombiner was not wired as shown on the original drawings. He said that Bill WITTMER rev.iewed the issue 6nd WITTMER couldn't figure out the problem, but that it did not effect the operations of the Recombiner, it was just a bad documentation problem from when the A0GS was C Case No. 1-96 005 2 EXH BIT N PAGE OF Y PAGE(S) i

installed, in that the actual wiring change had not added to the drawings.

R0lRHIER stated that he agreed with Pat McKENNEY's and George HENGERLE's independent assessment that the design should proceed. ROU1HIER said that he told McKENNEY end HENGERLE that NASSEY was resolute in his belief that the design should not continue until the problems with the CWDs was resolved. He also told them that MASSEY wn not interested in working with CASEY on getting the design change itplemented, but McKENNEY and HENGERLE believed that HASSEY "would come around" and work with CASEY.

R0lRHIER said that shortly after that ir. dependent review, CASEY provided MASSEY with the design drawings, but MASSEY showed no interest in reviewing them, ROUTHIER recalls that after he was told by CASEY that he had given the drawings to MASSEY, he (R0lRHIER) asked NASSEY if he had the drawings, and MASSEY laughed and said, yeah they are here. ROUTHIER said that after he realized that HASSEY wasn't going to review the design drawings (approximately two to four weeks after the drawings had been on site), he took them and began doing a point by point review and found significant wiring errors with the control logic in the drain tank, power distribution, and neutral wires being crossed. ROUTHIER said that it became apparent to him that CASEY should have had assistance in designing the power feeds. R0lRHIER said that he made a

" punch list" of the problems and gave it to MASSEY , but HASSEY never looked at it, although MASSEY was " gleeful" when he told him of the problems.

ROUTHIER said that at that point, he got DAYTON reinvolved in the project and he told CASEY's supervisor, Ro because the wiring was a mess.ger VIBERT, that the drawings needed to be fixed ROUTHIER said that VIBERT came to VY and reviewed the drawings with him and CASEY, but that HASSEY did not take part in the review. He said that VIBERT concurred that there were problems and asked ROUTHIER if they could be corrected. ROUTHIER said he told VIBERT that they could be corrected, and that VIBERT told CASEY to work at the site for as long as it icok to fix the design.

ROUTHIER said that there is no doubt in his mind that HASSEY did not fulfill his responsibilities in the A0G design change project, in thet MASSEY didn't l want to communicate or share information with CASEY. He said that HASSEY was determined to not let the design be implemented, because MASSEY wanted to do a l

wiring verification of the entire A0GS.

He never heard MASSEY state that he had a safety concern with the A0GS design change, and HASSEY never told him he i

had any issue which involved a personnel safety issue regarding A0GS. He does recall MASSEY stating many times that he didn't want to be the control room when the A0GS didn't work due to wiring problems. guy in the Regarding him being interviewed by VY in res xnse to allegations made in the Brattleboro Observer newspaper on the A0GS, 30lRHIER said that he Sas never walked away with the feeling that VY management was unresponsive to safety issues that he had previously raised. He added that the whole thrust of the VY interview a safety seemed to be whether he was to intimidated to bring VY management issue.

ROUTHIER said that he agreed with the decision to remove PASSEY from the

( project, but that CASEY should have been given more help from the beginning of the project. ROUTHIER commented that even after he, CASEY and VIBERT fixed Case No. 1-96 005 3 EXHIBli 3 PAGE 3

_OF 4 _ PAGE(S) ew _ . - - , ,- - -

~ , -

the design problems, there was still debate between the VY Operations and Engineering Departments over the design of the A0GS drain tank controls, where

'{ MASSEY wanted a simple fix, CASEY wanted a complicated design, and Operaticas wanted a siphon system. R0lmilER said that to his knowledge that part of the A0GS design was never resolved. .

3 R0lmlIER said that the A0GS is a com)licated system and that a complicated design was neaded to resolve its pro)lems, and that because of those things, CASEY should have been given more hel) from the beginning. He feels that the blame for the failure of the design s1ould be shared by all for not meeting project milestones and project completion. He commented that on other design changes that he had worked on, if there were design problems there was adequate communication to get them resolved, but that did not exist on this pro;ect. He said that VY believed that MASSEY would use his ex;)ertise to assist CASEY on the project, but MASSEY did not help or assist CASEY and VY management should have been "more in tune" with that. He added that a lot of people worked hard on the >roject, but MASSEY wasn't one of them. He doesn't feel that MASSEY gave his >est effort on the project.

Repor':e d a :

Jeffrd A. Teator, Special Agent Office.of Investigations

( Field Off'ce, Region I Case No. 1 96 005 4 EXHJIT PAGE 7 0F Y _PAGE(S)

____-

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20199D077&oldid=3336632"