ML20215C583
| ML20215C583 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 05/19/1983 |
| From: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Williamson E NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215C570 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-42 NUDOCS 8610100356 | |
| Download: ML20215C583 (3) | |
Text
r UNITED STATES g
- eg
' LEAR REGULATORY COMidlSSION
'S REGl!N il e
'. L
'E 101 MARIETTA STRE ET, N.W.
. 8' ATt.ANTA, GEORGIA 30303 MAY 191983 MEMORANDUM FOR:
E. L. Williamson, Acting Director Office of Investigation, Atlanta Field Office FROM:
James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator SOBJECT:
' REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATIVE ASSISTANCE:
V0GTLE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (CASE NO. 83A022)
This refers to your memorandum dated April 29, 1983, relative to the alleged intimidation of Pullman QC inspectors by a Pullman Supervisor at the Vogtle Nuclear Power Plant.
Based on our preliminary review and interviews we have conducted with selected Pullman Power Piping Company QC inspectors, we have determined that the subject allegations are credible and that they require prompt examination through investigative resources. Additionally, as a result-of the alleged harassment and intimidation of the Pullman inspectors by Pullman management, it has been further alleged that this adverse en-vironment may have led to the falsification of inspection documents.
Because of the nature of the subject allegations, we request that you conduct an investigation of this matter. We will, at the same time, provide any technical assistance that you may need at your request.
If information of any significance is developed through your investigation of this matter, please inform me immediately.
'~
If you have any questions concerning this request, please contact
, Gregory A. Todd at extension 4193.
e n.e mes P. O'Reilly cc:
R. C. Lewis i
W l
NR0200 56 861006 FOWLE 6-42 PDR F3
1 CASE CHRONOLOGY' f tLE nuasSER DATE OPENED OPENED "M"dMM
- ~
- 8 b
~
DATE 9
j ACTivlTY w
Mh%.-M kas,w igaux, M____
d-f-83 TE emM eeK ALA
& //
.)(R u to -fixx' _
//
f2fie_dM TG'I /4)u udrwhid /E: Sfa &, J 4 & u i n A
a 7-7-T5 ta Ws. (pi/AsjtsA odisad -ftk/
Jaws /m/sk ockid is sefedaled -f 6e c,+1p'eled Nu~
o 7 /r//sm u n.ss r w s n s a s.
9-u.E5 S
MeahL Fjle. es/dfisfed
~
% Ad 1 5 A % # d o d. a r e yD M ' / r b w O k &
- a 9 25
& d d / d fin 1 e d 6 / A t $d/
M x' $ _to_ A_Z.1 0
WB
<> eres
- m-dwaCahi/-hidhJ -
~
4C+ d dli
~
M A M. l __ % ~
~
~
&&~ -6
-hs c&fis s 19 2s 5.lbl
}as
~
~
~~
~
~
~
kle b~
D.s.S,c
_1 g,*
01sYM kVTecen. % 14arbise w/dalu4o assu Ns sWf a'e Jaf a._.6 % />ak__
oI 24 t4 /cmddfalad up n_t4__ifus u
rl__0M %
u_QreJJW eA~ad_kt.a ay_e_n_ fu;_ideJde/& /+s4 ma. ed G. M af 4
ei-r. A ve add'/ e.nersr ad prevrouJ chksced.
d?n,/_wi/Ldocuad y-dhd r* Vide __/,__,fAC..
~.___.__.
f o3 s s4 twra o>/hu u,aw re assessa.,d. 2~5T<~ted me, l
IMd QW h._QL. M._
Q C /1 8.-l cfd & m VMSer L/2f de itG90T pcoWed%7_ inarm !<*on reladh9 b ff.T3 iWe 6kd E"
n du<,uy Atto. sap imAw
-A, at Rend 2-e5 00S. Se san'..nte
- 2 ACTevifv CODES L/w = LETTER on WEWD TC e TELEPHONE CALL INSP s IRSPECTs0N WTO e ugTING IMV e INVESTIGATech REP REPORT IS$UED
~
=
r 1
1 93jg307 ALLE2AT13N DATA FORM U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION instructons on reverse sede i
RECEIVING OFFICE Docket Number (if applicable)
- 1. Facility (les) Involved:
IN.me)
O O d
c$ rte GE%ERICI
- 2. Functional Areals) Involved:
(Check.ppropriate bontes) oprations onsite health and safety 1
construction offsite health and safety safeguards emergency treparedness other tspecifyl 3.
Description:
l4fl/ ldhf 14l#l A/lpl4 l-fl l/la/l rl/ l Atl / lblAlr-l/ loIM lo l
/
(Limit to 100 characters) j g l7 l l l l l l gl l g II IIIIIIIIIIIIII IIII III III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
- 4. Source vf Allegation:
/
(Check 1ppQri te box)
_Y Contr8Clor employee securiiv guard licensee employee news media NRC employee private citizen organization (specityl other (specify)
MM DD YY
- 5. Date A' legation Received:
~
O O f $$
N MMI
- 6. Name of Individual trirst two initi.i..nd i..: n m.:
_ Receiving Allegation:
- 7. Office:
ACTION OFFCE N-
- 8. Action Office
Contact:
(First two initi i. nd iant n.mei
- 9. FTS Telephone Number:
y y 7
y
- 10. Status:
(Check onel Open, if followup actions are pending or in progress Closed, i.f followup actions are completed MM DD YY
- 11. Date Closed:
- 2. Rematks:
l l l l ji l l l j li l l l ; j j i i i (Lamet to 50 characters)
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
- 13. Allegation Number:
A r 1 8 3 *A' o o F-2_
r' e
~
UNITED STATES g tso 4
I' o
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
jf p
M o
REGION 11 V
g 101 M ARIETTA STR EET, N.W.
//fwa /4cv/9 ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30303
/-
,[
fy,pyg u,r.
SEP 2'8 1983 M'""
b b Georgia Power Company ATTN:
Mr. R. J. Kelly Executive Vice President
'P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING - DOCKET NOS. 50-424 AND 50-425, V0GTLE 1 AND 2 This refers to the management meeting conducted, at your request, at the Georgia Power Headquarters Office on August 22, 1983, among members of your staff, myself-and others of my staff.
This ' meeting was held to discuss your findings con-cerning the investigation of subcontractor quality assurance performance at Plant Vogtle. A summary of this. meeting and list of attendees are enclosed.
It is our opinion that this meeting was beneficial and has provided a better understanding of the investigation, 'gvaluation and corrective actions being implemented by Georgia Powe'r' Company with regard to quality workmanship at the Vogtle site.
In accordancE%ith~section 2.790 of NRC's " Rules of Practice", Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter will be placed in the NRC's. Public Document Room.
Should you have any questions concerning thi.s matter, we will be pleased to discuss them.
Sincergly, A
Yej A$-
/
James P. O'Reilly Regional Adninistrator
Enclosures:
1.
Summary of Meeting 2.
Attendance List cc w/encis:
H. H. Gregory, III, Construction Froject Manager E. D. Groover, QA Site Supervisor D. O. Foster, Vice President and General Manager G. Bockhold, Jr., Plant Manager 0%J-. utt h c Rh n
=fN, F-6
--m
+
i ENCLOSURE 1 MEETING
SUMMARY
Georgia Power Company Licensee:
Facility:
Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 Oceket Nos:
50-424 and 50-425
SUBJECT:
SUBCONTRACTOR QUALITY ASSURANCE PERFORMANCE The meeting conducted on August 22, 1983, covered the following three subjects with regard to subcontractorg vality assurance performance:
q 1.
The measures taken by Georgia Power Company to investigate allegations made by Pullman Power Products quality, control personnel were discussed.
A special task force was' formed by Georgia Power Company to investigate the allegations.
This investigation was conducted over a two week period and consisted uof personnel interviews, observations of work progress and a review of relevant documentation.
Specific technical areas covered were pipe support installation and piping installation.
Since there was an expressed concern that salary administration practices and personnel policies in the Pullman site. organization could have a detri-mental effect on the attitude of quality control personnel with regard t.o the quality of workmanship, the -investigation focused on three specific areas:
The rationale used in establishing salary increases in early 1983 Certain disciolinary actions l
Transfer or job rotation practices among QC inspectors The Georgia Power Company investigation found that, although there are improvements which are still needed, the overall quality control program for the installation of the piping systems at Plant Vogtle, with the changes which have been implemented to date, is effective. The 1.nvestigation found that the QC inspectors are well qualified and knowledgeable, ar.d found no evidence that Pullman Power Products management had used the salary admini-stration program to intimidate Quality Control Personnel.
There was no indication that "short cuts" were being taken nor that the inspectors were being called on by their superiors to overlook problems. The investigation found that the craftsmen performing the work do not have adequate detail knowledge of the specifications and pr'ocedures and that considerable confu-sion existed concerning allowable dimensional. tolerances.
___-.______._.__._m__
2
.The task force recommended that craft training be enhanced, that dimen-sional tolerances be clarified, that Pullman Power Products' consider more formal salary administration and other personnel programs and that other improvements be made to the quality control program.
2.
Status of investigation dealing with allegations made by a Walsh Company boilermaker that improper welding and work practices had occurred at the '
Vogtle site was presented.
Specifically, there wer'e 23 concerns expressed by the Walsh employee which dealt with 12 separate items.
The investiga-tion began on August 8 and includes interview as well as confirmatory nondestructive' examinations. To date, of the 23 items of concern, 15. items have been completed.
Georgia Power Company expects to complete the inves-tigation by August 31,.1983.
3.
A summary of defects found. during the reinspection of Pullman Power Products manufactured.:9..i. ping spool pieces was presented.
Georgia Power Company stated that thers are an estimated 15,611 spools on site.
Over 35,000 welds in these s' pools have been reinspected of which 966 welds required the resolutibn of a, No,n-conformance Report l(NCR).
Defects requiring an NCR include:
Defect Percent of Total NCRS Linear Indication 7
Cracks 1
Undercut-11 Invalid PT (PT over slag) 20 Incomplete Penetration 10 Porosite 3
Incomplete Weld 1
Lack of Fusion 2
Slag 16 Arc Strikes 13 Miscellaneous (Wrong ID 16 rust, melt thru, physical damage)
Georgia Power Company has evaluated each NCR and has concluded that none could affect the safety of operation.
9
ENCLOSURE 2 s
' ATTENDANCE LIST Georgia Power Company Representatives R. E. Conway, Senior Vice President, Engineering, Construction and Project Management D. O. Foster, Vice Pres'ident and General Manager, Vogtle Project E. E. Dutton, Vice President, Generating Plant Projects W. E. Ehrensperger, Consultant P. D. Rice, General Manager, Quality Assurance and Radiological Health and Safety H. H. Gregory, III, Construction Project Manager, Vogtle W. T. Nickerson, Manager, Nuclear Generating P.lant Construction.
C. W. Hayes, Vogtle Quality Assurance Manager.
K. D. Handy, Assistant to Senior Vi.ce president W. D. Drinkard, Section Supervising Engineer U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Co'mmission J. P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator R. C. Lewis, Director, Division of Project and Resident Programs (DPRP),RII H. C. Dance, Chief, Project Branch 2, DPRP, RII A. R. Herdt, Chief, Engineering Program Branch, Division of Engineering and Operational Programs, RII V. W. Panciera, Chief, Project Section 28, DPRP, RII W. F. Sanders, Senior Resident Inspector, DPRP, RII S
I
%e o
4
.p
.. es UNITE 3 STATES
- g8 "8Tuq'o,,
6 CLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION JAN 13 R b 4
o REGION ll I
E 101 MARIETTA STREET,N.W.
/
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 o*e.
,/
V JAN 111984 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Bruno Uryc, Investigation / Allegation Coordination Staff THRU:
John A. Olshinski, Director Division of Engineering and Operational Programs 4
FROM:
Alan R. Herdt, Chief, Engineering Program Branch
SUBJECT:
TECHNICAL REVIEW 0F INVESTIGATION REPORT CASE NOS.:
01/RII 2-83-005 IAC/RII RII-83-0022
REFERENCES:
(1) Memorandum from Bruno Uryc to Alan Herdt, "Vogtle: Alleged Intimidation / Harassment of QC Welding Inspectors and Possible Falsification of QC Inspection Records", dated December 7, 1983.
(2) Report of Investigation, "Vogtle Nuclear Plant-Alleged Intimidation / Harassment of QC Welding Inspectors and Possible Falsification of QC Inspection Records by Pullman Power Products, Inc., " dated October 26, 1983.
As requested in your memorandum (Ref.1), we have technically reviewed the final report of the investigation conducted at Vogtle (Ref. 2).
Based on that review we have identified the following concerns, related to work performed on site by contractor Pullman Power Products (PPP), which require additional investigation:
1.
PPP management harassed and intimidated QC personnel such that there was-insufficient organizational freedom in the quality control organization to t{d assure proper accomplishment of its quality functions.
Unsatis' factory welds in piping and supports fabricated at the PPP fabril 2.
cation shop in Williamsport, Pennsylvania have been accepted by shop and4 }*7k~
site QC.
jk,gde' 4
3.
PPP site QC inspectors who attempted to reject unacceptable welds noted in
{
piping and supports fabricated by the PPP Fabrication Shop were informed T,.,.D l
that it was not their job to report these non-comforming conditions. This F l
indicates possible excessive restriction on the freedom of inspectors to identify safety concerns.
I N
PPP failed to correct repeatedly identified material storage deficiencies. h'{ky "j.
4.
r1. J 5.
A PPP QC inspector allegedly fraudulently verified correction of storage p/.
deficiencies on a Storage Inspection Report.
This action was alleged to a named individual.
6.
Two named PPP QC welding inspectors allegedly fraudulently signed for tik Y
inspections that were not performed.
W M "g\\ )
- e n m e,,,l a ;
NE
~'""f F-4
JAN 11 M Bruno Uryc 2
6
',- 9 +
7.
A named PPP QC inspector failed to comply with visual inspection procedure maximum inspection distance limits.
j.
',ti 8.
The PPP training program for welding inspectors and welders is inadequate.
C 9.
Some PPP records, specifically storage inspection reports are missing. v-r 9'N
(
10.
Socket welds may have been improperly performed. Obk
[*) Q nggspurgedamsma{havebeenleft 11.
Rags and paper towels placed in p t
% WAA
, L "
- IlO there after welding, bivtus a
q
- 12. PPP does not post documents as required by 10 CFR 21.
k'd kN-13.
Pipe was improperly sand blasted resulting in thin areas. This was due to inexperienced sand blasters. z,,Jrm_ - Li wa La ca uA - zc
- 14. The PPP QA/QC Manager does not have adequate authority to obtain corrective actions for continued non-conformances, such as storage deficiencies.
Note: This is closely related to 1 above.
As agreed to in our meeting December 15, 1983, with Greg Todd, we will further evaluate the above concerns during subsequent inspections at the Vogtle site.
An inspection report or reports will document the concerns and our findings.
Aw t
Alan R. Herdt b
A
$p