ML20212B291

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Partially Withheld Memo Re Allegation on Painters Using Pencil Grinders (Drug Abuse AMS-85-RIII-A-171).Related Info Encl
ML20212B291
Person / Time
Site: Perry  FirstEnergy icon.png
Issue date: 12/02/1985
From: Knop R
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To: Weil C
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
Shared Package
ML20212B263 List:
References
FOIA-86-254 NUDOCS 8608060280
Download: ML20212B291 (3)
v • d • e


Text

!.* (j 7 ' I l f i ".h G l V V., " T O[? Y Cf h r,p r,y I.'. O !O.? Ili 7'

n;ODf! Vi l i IH ei.

t-C L! ~ ; Lt 5 l L L 1:40'. > :;1'; /

5 a'

.: c.:: -

1+

!'.E0i'.A!'C' ". FO? :

C. H. tleil, Region III Office Allegation Coardinator FROM-R. C. Knop, Chief, Projects Section IC

SUBJECT:

ALLEGATIO!' - DRUG ABUSE A!'.S-85-RIII-A-171 Following is a discussion of a telephone call from the alleger on f;ovember 22, '.985.

(Pawlik, Stapleton, and Knop in attendance)

Pencil Grinder Stated that CEI and QC inspectors have been around asking if painters were using pencil grinders.

Wanting to know exactly where they were used.

Alleger states these tools were used extensively starting last Winter.

They were used anytime that there was a deep crevice where standard tools could not be used to get rid of rust on joints.

He stated that CEI Joe Musser had caught them using these grinders three or four times.

(This is contrary to what Musser states; he says he only heard about this use.)

8608060280 860729 LE 6-254 PDR

~

' ')

lA p, Chi

~.

i'raj n,5 3.tiic' 1C r-

  • 7 P

ALLEGATION PANEL DECISIONS

(

PANEL MEETING 1:

1 Priority: Low ived regarding RI-85-A-0114 which was rece 11/19/85 An allegation panel met on by the OAC on 11/07/85.

R. Starostecki Panel Chairman Branch Chief Those in attendance were:

S. Collins Action Office Contact R. Gallo Reactor Engineer, RPS-2A J. Grant Office Allegation Coordinator A. Shropshire

______________________S:

FOLLOW-UP ACTION SRI to learn if any of the 4 named individuals have ever or k d (ECD currently work at Seabrook and in what capacity they wor e 1) 11/22/85).

11/27/85).

2)

Reconvene Panel (ECD

__.._____________________Shropshire, OAC; R. Gallo, AOC; A.

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY: R. Starostecki, Panel Chairman PANEL MEETING 2 Priority: Low regarding RI-85-A-0114.

12/05/85 An allegation panel reconvened on Panel Chairman R. Starostecki Branch Chief Those in attendance were:

S. Collins Acticn Office Contact R. Gallo Office Allegation Coordinator A. Shropshire FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS:

AOC to prepare a closecut memo to the file based on the resident s 1) findings (ECO 12/22/85).

r R. Starostecki a b k

U R. Gallo, AOC /2//fh Panel Chairman A'. Shropshire, OAC cc:

J. Allan J. Gutierrez R. Christopher, 01:RI D. Caphton S. Collins R. Gallo C. Weil, 0AC, RIII Allegation File DEC 30 $85

.a1

1 LL a67^

y ALLEGATION DESCRIPTION Seabrook 1 50-443 (Site or Licensee)

(Docket No.)

Allegation RI-85-A-0114 was received on 11/06/85 by A. Shropshire.

Characterization of the I concern:

Four Metalweld Inc. employees now employed at Seabrook are alleged drug users from Perry Nuclear Power Plant.

Confidentiality: N/A Region III Type of Regulated Activity:

Reactor Functional Area (s):

Construction DETAILS:

(Timeframe of Allegation:

Current)

Region III provided the names of 4 individuals who are alleged drug users now working at Seabrook. The allegation was from an anonymous source to the resident at Perry. Metalweld is a coatings contractor at Perry who is not contracted by Seabrook. Region III has requested OI:RIII assistance; notified the Lake County Ohio, Narcotics Agency; and, met with the licensee to conduct an immediate inspection of the areas in question.

Region I has been given the "go-ahead" to conduct a follow-up from OI:RIII.

1 i

i

-,---,,----e

,_ame

--.,,.,,gn-

.,,,-w, e,,

.s-e.,

  • t THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMIN ATING COMPANY P o BOm 5000. CLtvEt AND OHlo 44101. TELEPHONE (216) 672 9800 - ILLUtdiN ATING BLDG - SS PUBLIC5oVARE Serving The Best Location in the Na: son Fi.IO211Y f.C'f12 i MURRAY R. EDELMAN liig_ l,;, m A07-c

-I vlCE PRESIDENT me +/ W i_. _

auc"^a ff

..a l

. - S Fi < l

'h December 13, 1985 rite.7/My PY-CEI/OIE 0148 L Hr. Charles E. Norelius. Director Division of Reactor Projects. Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn Illinois 60137 RE: Perry Nuclear Power Plant Docket Nos. 50-440; 50-441

Dear Mr. Norelius:

In response to your letter of November 4,1985, relative to activities associated with Metalveld, Inc.. The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (CEI) has investigated each of the five concerns noted. We have analyzed each concern, performed necessary inspections and conducted appropriate investigations to determine the validity and significance of the conditions. Additionally, appropriate actions have been taken to address both the specific concerns and root causes. Our review noted that Concerns 2, 3, and 4 were discovered during routine inspections and were documented and tracked on Nonconformance Reports prior to our receipt of your concern.

Below is a summary of the results of our investigations and inspections as well as the action taken to date to resolve each concern.

Investigative Results for Concern #1 Background checks and inspections of applicable work areas f ailed to substantiate the improper use of controlled substences at the Perry Nuclear Power Plant (PNPP). To further substantiate that work was performed in accordance with the high quality standards of PNPP. a reinspection of 28 selected areas was performed in which the identified craf t and inspection personnel had worked common areas.

No workmanship deficiencies were noted. This inspection coupled with a review of the contractor's quality program indicated that the program was effective in ensuring quality workmanship at every stage of the process.

((

m m#y~" 3 0>I^

em to ar 9/i7%

DEC 161985,

W?GD At7/.

(*H ** Y * # N'

Mr. Charles E. Morelius December 13. 1985 FY-CEI/OIE 0148 L Investigative Results for Concern #2 Investigation revealed that a Nonconformance Report (NR) was written on November 1.1985 as a result of the identification of coating defects on the spray headers during a routine inspection. However, to determine if the defects were generic in nature, a visual inspection of all spray headers and a detailed inspection of four of the six spray headers was conducted. The inspection identified only minimal additional defects (3 spots the size of a quarter). The total area of defects (including the initial discovered defects) was only 0.75 square feet over a total area of 2.648 square feet. This amounts to a 0.03% defect ratio caused by overspray and/or construction damage.

Investigation substantiated that these defects were not caused by excessive surface temperature or poor surface preparation. These defects were mapped and the NR was revised to address all minor defects. The coatings have been reworked.

Investigative Results for Concern #3 An investigation into this concern revealed that a Nonconformance Report was written on October 14. 1985 to address coating deficiencies on the polar crane box beam girder.

Investigation revealed that the cracked coating was caused by failure of cohesion of the sinc primer on the weld ares due to the unique configuration of the area. NDE examination of the weld (full penetracion weld with fillet welds on each side) in the vicin-ity of the coating cracks indicated no weld defects exist. The coatings have been reworked.

Investigative Results for Concern #4 Investigation into this concern revealed that a Nonconformance Report addressing defective coatings on the auxiliary platform (referred to in the concern as the refueling floor bridge crane observation platform) was issued on September 11. 1985.

Inspection of the platform revealed rust-ing had occurred due to inadequate surface preparation at the vendor's shop.

Since the auxiliary platforms were the only equipment supplied by the vendor, it was determined to be an isolated case. We are currently in the process of reworking the coating on the platform.

Investigative Results for Concern #5 i

Interviews with cognizant personnel did not substantiate the use of tungsten carbide tipped drill bits to prepare surfaces for coatinE.

However, interviews with QC inspectors and a painter revealed deburring i

tools were used by painters on structural steel shapes. Further discus-sion revealed that these devices are permitted by the Steel Structures Painting Council (SSPC). Each individual interviewed noted that these devices were not used on welds, pipe. or snubbers, and uses were limited to removing sharp edges from structural steel shapes. The.re were no indications that excessive metal was removed.

_,,,,_,___,_.,, _ __..,,._,,_._ ___. ~_ - _ _,..__..,,.. _ _ _, _,,, _. _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ -. _ - _ -, _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.

1 _.._..

Mr. Charles E. Noralius December 13, 1985 PY-CEI/OIE 0148 L Documentation outlining the extent of our investigation and supporting our results is being maintained on site. These files are open for your review. We believe the supporting documentation we have gathered will adequately address each of the concerns you have brought to our attention.

If you have any questions. please call.

Sincerely.

Murray R. Edelman Vice President Nuclear Group MRE:sab cc:

J. Silberg, Esq.

J. Grobe K. Connaughton d

0

_

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20212B291&oldid=4002059"