ML20203C016

Discusses Initiation of OI Rept 4-95-044 Re False Allegations That Fire Watch Records Were Being Falsified

ML20203C016
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	02/23/1996
From:	Lieberman J NRC OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT (OE)
To:	Callan L, Goldberg J, Russell W NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV), NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
Shared Package
ML20203B905	List: ML20203B900 ML20203B967 ML20203B978 ML20203B982 ML20203B989 ML20203B995 ML20203C004 ML20203C010 ML20203C016 ML20203C019 ML20203C025 ML20203C032 ML20203C048 ML20203C059 ML20203C074 ML20203C087 ML20203C092 ML20203C118 ML20203C125
References
FOIA-99-76 NUDOCS 9902110128
Download: ML20203C016 (2)

Text

_ _.-_m__.__.._.....~._.___..,___._.__.._m.._._._.m._..__.._., . _ . . . _ _ . . _ . . _ . _ . . . _ _

_ , ~,

UNITED STATES

• -) NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION s / WASHINGTON, D.C. 20088 40M

..... February 23,'1996 '

MEMORANDUM FOR: Leonard J. Callan, Regional Administrator Region IV '

William T. Russell, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regul'ation Jack R. Goldberg, Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Enforcement Office of the General Counsel FRON:

' James Lieberman, Direc h Office of Enforcement /

[ tor

SUBJECT:

OI REPORT 4-95-044; RE: WATERFORD 3 The above captioned OI report was initiated to investigate allegations that -

fire watch records Waterford 3 facility.were being falsified at the Entergy Operations, Inc. (E01),

On July 28,1995, E01 contacted the RIV staff, after an individual had alleged to the licensee's corporate security organization that fire watch personnel had 1) signed for having checked an area of the plant for fire hazards, when in fact, the individual signing had not actually performed the' check and 2) failed to check certain areas of the plant for fire hazards,

.but had " signed off" the area as having been checked. -The licensee subsequently initiated an investigation and substantiated both. allegations and later terminated the fire watch personnel who were both relatively~ low-level employees. 'In addition to terminating these individuals, other corrective actions taken by EDI consisted of: 1) installing electronic devices throughout the plant to help validate all future fire watch room checks and 2) initiating training for fire watch personnel to reemphasize management's expectations and the acceptable manner to perform proper and accurate logkeeping. 01 reviewed the licensee's investigation, in addition to performing independent interviews of selected licensee employees (including one of the individuals who was terminated), and also substantiated that the two fire watch employees had deliberately falsified fire watch records.

4 01 17, had 1996initiated a separate investigation (OI Report 4-95-035 dated January falsifica) tion; however,that reviewed these same specific issues of fire watch 4-95-035 was initiated as result of an individual

contactina RIV directiv 'with allegations of fire watch records being falsified and_ fire watches being improperly conducted at the Waterford 3 facility. 01 closed 4-95-035 -without independently substantiating the allegations because of the low priority of that investigation and because repeated attempts to contact the alleger by. telephone and letter were unsuccessful, although OI did review the licensee's. investigation. In a January 29, 1996 memo, OE did not request an OGC analysis of 4-95-035 and indicated that it would consider the

. matter of that 01 investigation closed. OE's basis for not pursuing further action in 4-95-035, as stated in the January 29 memo, was that, in OE's view,

1) any action that might be warranted with regard to the licensee could be properly dispositioned during. future regularly scheduled enforcement panels -

9902110128 990208 PDR FOTA "QUNTER99yyd, PDR n a~ - y p s

February 23, 1996 with RIV and 2) because of low level of the individuals involved in the falsifications and the licensee's substantial action in terminating these individuals, it did not appear that enforcement action against the individuals was warranted.

OE's position remains unchanged on this matter of fire watch record i

falsification, especially in light of the fact that the information that was developed in 4-95-044 is consistent with the facts in 4-95-035 and the log falsification discussed in 4-95-035 are the same as those found in 4-95-044.

Consequently, OE does not see a basis to request an 0GC analysis of 4-95-044.

We will consider the matter closed, insofar as the OI investigation is concerned, unless we receive a different view within three weeks of the date of this memorandum. As we indicated in the January 29 memo, any enforcement action warranted against the licensee should be considered during future regularly scheduled enforcement panels with RIV. During, the enforcement panel that will discuss this matter, OE intends to discuss with RIV any indications of previous fire watch or other plant record falsifications at Waterford 3.

In addition, OE intends to generically discuss the manner that enforcement actions should be taken on future log falsifications. Please contact Mark Satorius of my staff at (301) 415-3280, with any comments.

cc: J. Milhoan, DEDR R. Zimmerman, NRR G. Caputo, 01 G. Sanborn, RIV DISTRIBUTION:

JLieberman, OE JGray, OE MASatorius, OE Day File 0! File

/

OE DD M D:d l

MASatorius JG [ JLiederman 02/ M/96 02/7/ /96 02/7/96 Doc Name: G:\495044.MS t

l l

l