ML20215F405
| ML20215F405 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 12/16/1986 |
| From: | Gallagher J PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| To: | Martin T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8612230385 | |
| Download: ML20215F405 (88) | |
Text
,
s s
PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY 2301 MARKET STREET P.Oi. BOX 8699 PHILADELPHIA. PA.19101 (215)841-4000 December 16, 1986 Docket Nos. 50-277 50-278 Mr. Thomas T. Martin, Director Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406
Reference:
Docket Nos. 50-277 & 50-278 Inspection Report Nos. 50-277/86-18;50-278/86-19
Dear Mr. Martin:
Your letter dated October 1, 1986 forwarded combined Inspection Report Nos. 50-277/86-18;50-278/86-19 for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3.
The delayed submittal of this response was discussed by our representatives and your office and found to be acceptable.
Appendix A of your October 1, 1986 letter identified an item which does not appear to be in full compliance with NRC requirements.
This item was one of the subjects of an enforcement conference on November 18, 1986 at the NRC Region I Office.
The following supplements the information discussed at the conference and provides a response to the notice of violation in the format required.
Statement of Violation:
A.
Technical Specification 6.8 Procedures requires, in part, that procedures and administrative polices shall be established and implemented.
Peach Bottom Station procedure A-86 " Administrative Procedure for Corrective Action" requires that a discrepancy report be initiated for suspected or known violations of Nuclear Plant Rules.
Nuclear Plant Rule #1 requires personnel to conduct themselves in a responsible manner, hhk22$DO O
7 0
5* O l k
$1r. Thomas T. Martin D:ccmbsr 16, 1986 Page 2 Contrary to the above, an altercatien between personnel in a radiologically controlled area on August 25, 1986 was not reported as required by procedure A-86.
This is a Severity Level IV violation. (Supplement IV)
I.
Admission or Denial of Alleged Violation:
PECo acknowledges that the Notice of Violation is correct in that a Discrepancy Report in accordance with Procedure A-86, " Administrative Procedure for Corrective Action" was not timely prepared for an altercation between two individuals (contractor employee Hadley and Company employee Force) in a radiologically controlled area at Peach Bottom on August 25, 1986.
II.
Reason for Violation:
The Applied Health Physicist failed to carry out the responsibility imposed upon him by A " Administrative Procedure for Corrective Action."
III.
Corrective Steps Taken and Results Achieved:
During the week of September 8-12, 1986, the NRC conducted an investigation at Peach Bottom concerning alleged physical and oral abuse to health physics technicians.
It noted that no A-86 existed for the August 25, 1986 incident.
On September 11, 1986, the Superintendent, Nuclear Generation Division, the Senior Health Physicist, the Superintendent-Plant Services, and the Contractor Health Physicists Supervisor met and it was decided that an A-86 discrepancy report should be prepared.
The report was then prepared and was filed on October 28, 1986.
IV.
Corrective Steps to Prevent Future Violations:
Following receipt on October 6, 1986 of the Commission's Notice of Violation letter of October 1, 1986, corporate management determined to investigate the failure to initiate a Discrepancy Report immediately following the incident in question, such investigation to be aided by investigators from the Claims-Security Division of the Legal Department.
In the course of the investigation, documents were examined and statements were taken from individuals who participated in or witnessed the incident and from individuals who participated in certain events
Mr. Thomas T. Martin December 16, 1986 Page 3 a
immediately following the incident.
The statements are attached hereto as Attachments A-1 through A-18 and the other documents are attached hereto as Attachment B (Discrepancy Report), C-1 and 2 (contractor technicians site coordinator's memoranda),
D-1 and 2 (Force disciplinary notices) and E-1 through 6 (accounts given by Maintenance Division employees who were participants in and witnesses to the incident
.in question within a day or two following).
It is noted that Hadley's initial account of the incident is part of Attachment B and the pertinent plant rules are part of Attachment C-1.
These attachments present conflicting accounts of the incident in question and of events immediately following the incident relating to the reasons why a Discrepancy Report was not prepared initially.
They support, however, the determination made on September 11, 1986 that the incident required the initiation of a Discrepancy Report.
They also reflect the disciplinary action taken by supervision following the incident.
(Under Company Disciplinary Guidelines,
" Fighting on Company Premises", is included under
" Major Infractions".
The first three disciplinary steps of " Oral Warning", " Written Warning", and
" Reprimand" are bypassed for " Major Infractions" and the employee may be suspended.)
The investigation indicated a need to modify the A-86
" Administrative Procedure for Corrective Action".
The revised procedure will permit the person identifying or becoming aware of an event, malfunction or problem to initiate a discrepancy report in addition to notifying a plant supervisor.
To insure that each A-86 report which is initiated by such person gets entered into the A-86 tracking program and gets dispositioned in a formal manner, the revised procedure will provide that the initiator will obtain a report serial number as the report enters the administrative process.
To ensure that all supervisory personnel on site are aware of the reporting requirements in A-86, the revised procedure will be issued to them with a cover letter emphasizing the mandatory aspects of the procedure.
To the extent the incident in question may be said to symptomize a lack of respect for and appreciation of the crucial role of Health Physics Personnel at Peach Bottom by some personnel, the following measures have been adopted:
1.
On September 12, 1986 the Supervising Engineer-Maintenance met with all fitters in the Maintenance Division at Peach Bottom to insist
y Mr. Thomnc T. Martin D:ctmbar 16, 1986 Page 4 on the need for complete support of the Health Physics Program and strict compliance with Health Physics requirements; 2.
On September 16, 1986 the Maintenance Division Superintendent met with all Maintenance Division supervisors at Peach Bottom to reinforce the need for absolute support of the Health Physics Program by Maintenance Division personnel.
It was also made clear that uncooperative or unprofessional behavior was not to be tolerated by Maintenance Division supervisors; 3.
The Superintendent-Plant Services and the Senior Health Physicist have discussed with the Health Physics technicians the need for cooperation with Maintenance Division personnel; 4.
A revision to HPO/CO-600 has been prepared adding the requirements for reporting certain problem resolutions to the personnel affected by the deficiency or circumstances described in a Health Physics deficiency report.
These requirements will be applied to events in which significant radiological health effects are suspected or known to have occurred.
Additionally, the Electric Production Quality Assurance Division is reviewing the A-86 reporting process as part of an ongoing Corrective Action Audit.
5.
To improve the work relationship between the Health Physics technicians and maintenance personnel the Company will:
a) during the General Employee Training, which is mandatory for all site personnel, emphasize the importance of the health physics function and the absolute need for full cooperation; b) perform pre-job briefings of Maintenance and Health Physics personnel to the maximum extent possible to assure that the roles of the participants are understood.
V.
Date When Full Compliance Will be Achieved:
It is our position that full compliance has been achieved.
.Mr. Thomts T. Martin D:cember 16, 1986 Page 5 As the new Vice President, Nuclear Operations, for our Company, I am particularly concerned about maintaining a cooperative relationship between the health physics personnel and our Maintenance Division (now Department) employees at Peach Bottom.
I believe that appropriate and effective action has been taken to provide a better understanding among them as to the necessary inter-relationships which must exist at Peach Bottom, as indeed, at any nuclear plant.
In conclusion, I believe that the program weaknesses suggested by this matter have been identified and will be fully eliminated by January 30, 1987.
If you have any questions or require additional information, do not hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours,
}. W. h / /-
J. W. Gallagher Vice President Nuclear Operations cc:
T. P. Johnson, Resident Site Inspector
~1*.
~~
-ZEIsli i pu/, i,,e,1Yd -l Peach Bottom October 30, 1986 1:00 pm I, Nathan L. Scott, Jr., make the following voluntary-statement to N. R. Carter and E. M. Chiu who have identified themselves to me as investigators of the Claims-Security Division, l
Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was hired by PECo on April. 19, 1982 to be a Maintenance
)
employee.
My payroll number is 435134 and I am a 3rd Class Steamfitter assigned to work at the Peach Bottom Station.
On August 25, 1986 at 7:30 am my job assignment was to werk with a crew at the "C" Condensate Demin Tanks.
The Maintenance employees assigned to work on the "C" Condensate Demin Tanks with me are, Ronald Porrino, Subforeman, Greg Minnich, Kevin Kochenour, Richard Force and two Bechtel employees.
I then went to EL 135 Turbing Building Unit III to suit up with Anti "C".
The job also required me to wear a full face mask when I did my assigned job which was cutting the filters that were removed from the Demin Tank.
Approximately 15 minutes into the job the HP Tech was checking the dosimetry of everyone involved and in my opinion was checking Richard Force's dosimetry more than what was required.
Force at this told the HP Tech to "Go somewhere else s---bird we're trying to work here."
The two began to verbally abuse each other using profanity.
Force then said, "I'll clean your clock" and the HP Tech replied "I'll clean your clock "
Force, who was in'a sitting position, then stood up and was face to face with the HP Tech.
The next thing I observed was the HP Tech swing at Force with a
right hock.
Force duck the swing.
The two came face to face and Force said " Hit me now when I can see you."
The HP Tech backed up and went on doing his job in a different area.
Force then' returned.to the sitting position and continued his job.
Approximately 45 minutes later as I was leaving the work area, I observed Force and the HP Tech face to face verbalizing.
Ron Porrino, the Subforeman on the job, advised Force to " knock it off".
Force's reply was "no."
Force came over to the area where I was removing my Anti "C" and the HP Tech followed him.
Force and HP Tech again verbalized that they were going to " clean each rihers clock."
I proceeded to break it up.
I then grabbed Force and pulled him away.
As I grabbed Force he grabbed the HP Tech and they were thrown against the wall.
I told the two individuals to calm down.
After this I immediately left the area and returned to the Maintenance Shop.
I have read the above statement consisting of this and one other page and the facts contained herein are true.
/s/Nathan L.
Scott, Jr.
October 30, 1986 Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, 10/30/86, 1:55 pm
/s/ Edward M.
Chiu, PECo Security, 10/30/86, 1:55 pm i
m Mk A,en+ A -L Peach Bottom October 30, 1986 2:15 pm I,. Gregory Minnich, make the following voluntary statement to N. R. Carter and E. M. Chiu, who have identified themselves to me.as investigators of the Claims-Security Division, Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was hired by Philadelphia Electric Company in April 1982 to work for Maintenance at the Peach Bottom Stat ~ ion.
My payroll number is 435131 and I am a 1st Class Piperfitter.
On August 25, 1986 at 7:30 am my job assignment was to work with a crew at the "C" Condensate Demin Tanks.
The Maintenance employees assigned to work on the "C" Condensate Demin Tanks with me are, Richard i
Force, Nathan Scott, Ron Porrino, Subforeman, Joel Neff, Kevin Kochenour, Ken Kammer, Jr., and two Bechtel laborers.
I then went to EL 135 Turbine Building Unit III to suit up with Anti "C".
The job also required me to wear a full face mask when I did my assigned job.
I believe the incident in question happened in the early pm hours.
I was involved in disassembling the 1
Condensate Demin Filter Elements.
This particular part of the job involves operating an electric nut runner to remove the nuts, washers and springs from the rod assembly.
When this is i
completed the individual parts are distributed into their proper buckets.
The filter is removed from the rod and passed on to be cut up.
This complete job is an assembly line type job which requires smooth operation of everyone concerned.
As I was involved in the disassembly I became aware of a disturbance to my l
right.
I then observed Richard Force and a HP Tech face to face shouting at each other.
I grabbed Richard Force and told him to relax and Kevin Kochenour restrained the HP Tech.
After this incident Force returned to his job assignment and the HP Tech continued his job.
Approximately 15 minutes later I heard some shouting and observed a person fall on Ron Porrino as he was cutting filters.
I did not go to the area where the individual fell because Porrino had the situation under control.
We finished the job and left the area approximately 10 minutes later.
I have read the above statement consisting of this and one other page and the facts contained herein are true.
/s/ Gregory G. Minnich October 30, 1986 Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, 10/30/86, 3:30 pm
/s/ Edward M. Chiu, PECo Security, 10/30/86, 3:30 pm
o O N
~
~
A7f'W44 m M M A-8 Peach Bottom October 31, 1986 9:30 am I, Ronald A. Porrino, make the following voluntary statement to N. R. Carter and E. M. Chiu, who have identified themselves to me as investigators of the Claims-Security Division, Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was hired by PECo in November 1970 to be a Maintenance employee.
My payroll number is 435184.
Since 1983 I have been a Subforeman Pipefitter.
My assigned work station is Peach Bottom.
On August 25, 1986 at 8:00 am I held a briefing with the following crew that was assigned to me:
Greg Minnich, Kevin Kochenour, Richard Force, Nathan Scott and Joel Neff.
Each employee was assigned a specific job in the removal of elements from the 3C Condensate Demin Tanks located in the Turbine Building EL 135 Unit III.
The job required me to wear Anti "C"
and a full face mask with outside air supply.
In the early pm hours my crew went to the 3C Condensate Demin Tanks to remove the fitters.
My job assignment was to enter the Demin Tank and remove three hundred and two elements.
After I removed the elements I surveyed the job and noticed that the employees cutting elements needed help.
While engaged in cutting the filter elements a body fell on top of me.
I looked through my face mask and observed that the individual was a HP Tech.
I helped him to his feet and at this time I observed Richa'rd Force yelling at the HP Tech.
I told Force to exit the area and he told me "no."
Whereupon, I instructed the HP Tech to stay by my
side until the job was completed.
The job lasted for approximately five minutes more.
We left the area with no further incidences.
I have read the above statement consisting of this and one other page and the facts contained herein are true.
/s/ Ronald A. Porrino October 31, 1986 Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, 10/31/86, 10:20 am
/s/ Edward M. Chiu, PECo Security, 10/31/86, 10:20 am I
e o
m,
y
.p
,--,---------,-------r
"o. '.
T "I5;. E h ejmeir"l k~Y Peach Bottom October 31, 1986 10:45 am I, Kevin P. Kochenour, make the following voluntary statement to N. R. Carter and E. M. Chiu, who have identified themce'lves to me as investigators of the Claims-Security Division, Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was hired by Philadelphia Electric Company on August 25, 1985 to be a Maintenance employee.
My payroll number is 435005 and I am a helper assigned to the Peach Bottom Station.
On August 25, 1986, between 7:30 am and 8:00 am, I received by job assignment from Ronald Porrino.
The work assignment was to help other Maintenance employees remove filter elements from the 3"C" Condensate Demin Tanks located on EL 135 Turbine Building Unit III.
The other employees in the crew were Ronald Porrino, Subforeman, Nathan Scott, Joel Neff, Richard Force and Greg Minnich.
Also assigned were two Bechtel laborers.
The job also required me to suit up with Anti "C" and wear a full face mask s
with outside air supply.
My job assignment that day was to take the filter elements from Joel Neff and stack them.
As I was doing my job the HP Tech kept checking my dosimetry.
This caused the process to slow up and several times I was hit with the filter elements.
Richard Force observed this and told the HP Tech to stay out of the way.
The next thing I observed was Force and the i
i I
HP Tech face to face exchanging words.
The HP Tech then took a swing at Force who ducked.
Greg Minnich grabbed Force and the two separated.
+
_2_
I have read the above statement consisting of this and one
- other page and the facts contained herein are true.
/s/Kevin R Kochenour i
October 31, 1986 Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, 10/31/86, 11:15 am
/s/ Edward M. Chiu, PECo Security, 10/31/86, 11:15 am 0
0
,-p.,-
..m.
,7
,,e,,__w.
.,,.,.,~,c_,,.w-_,
,,. -,._~,,,,, -,
m.
- g*
evo m.-
2
/$NstbmenY $~S~
Peach Bottom October 31, 1986 2:10 pm I, Jeffrey W. Ball, make the following voluntary stat' ment to e
N. R. Carter and E. M. Chiu, who have identified themselves to me as. investigators of the Claims-Security Division, Philadelphia Electric Company.
I am a Bechtel employee assigned to work at the Peach Bottom I
station..My payroll number is LB243 and I am a Laborer.
My date of hire is March 29, 1986.
On August 25, 1986, my work assignment was to work with PECo Maintenance at the "C" Condensate Demin Tank EL 135 Turbine Building, Unit III.
After lunch I went to my work assignment and my job was to pack the cut filters in 55 gallon drums.
I was dressed in Anti "C" and had a full face mask with q
i-outside air supply.
Shortly after being in the area I observed the HP Tech ask Richard Force to place his pencil dosimetry outside of his coveralls.
At this time Force told the HP Tech to go work in another area and I'll stay here and do my job.
The HP Tech went to the other side of the vessel and did some surveys.
The HP Tech returned to the area where Force was and continued to do surveys near Force.
Force had his back to the HP Tech and was handing a 6-foot filter to another PECo employee and accidentally hit the HP Tech with the filter.
Force was down on his knees when this happened and the HP Tech at this time swung his survey meter at Force.
The meter did not hit Force.
Force stood up and shoved the HP Tech into the wall.
Nathan Scott interceded and broke up the altercation.
The HP went to the other l
l
an,
end of the work area and surveyed the area.
The HP Tech then came back to the area where Force was and he pushed the HP against the wali.
Ron Porrino broke up this altercation and the Maintenance employees left the area.
I have read the above statement consisting of this and one other page and the facts contained herein are true.
/s/Jeffrey W. Dall October 31, 1986 a
Witnessed:
/s/ Edward M. Chiu, PECo Security, 10/31/86, 2:40 pm
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, 10/31/86, 2:40 pm i
n 9
0 f
.amn ~ >
ly@gg);megf g. 4 Elkton, MD November 5,.1986 10:45 am I, Richard'J. Force, make the following. voluntary statement I
to N. R. Carter and E. M. Chiu, who have identified themselves to me as investigators of the Claims-Security Division, Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was hired by Philadelphia Electric Company on April 12, 1982 to work in the Maintenance Division at the Peach Bottom Station.
I am a 3rd Class Pipe Fittet and my payroll number is 435135.
On August 25, 1986 at 7:30 am I received my job t
assignment which was to work with a crew removing filters from t
the 3"C" Demin Tanks on EL 135 Unit III Turbine Building.
The crew and I worked with Ron Porrino, Subforeman, Nathan Scott,
~
~
Greg Minnich, Kevin Kochenour, Joel Neff and two Bechtel laborers.
The job required us to dress in Anti "C"
and to wear full face air masks with an outside air supply.
When I started to dress, Marvin Hadley, the HP Tech, advised me to place my pencil dosimeter on the outside of my Anti "C".
I forgot to do 4
this.
A short time later I was approached by Hadley and he requested that I place my dosimetry on the outside of my Anti "C".
As I was busy at this time I did not immediately remove the dosimeter from the inside of my Anti "C".
Hadley then said, "I
e said put the pencil dosimeter on the outside of your Anti "C"."
To me this sounded like a command.
I then placed the pencil dosimeter on the outside of my Antic "C".
I then went to my I
assigned job, disassembling the filters.
While the HP Tech was l -. - -
doing his job, he began to get in the way, which in my opinion, caused a production and safety problem.
At this time I said, "Will somebody please get this pussy out of the way?"
The'HP was standing over me so I stood up and we were face to face.
The HP c
Tech then said, "I'll clean your clock."
I laughed in his face.
We then had a verbal exchange and the HP Tech took a swing at me.
I ducked and the swing missed.
Gregory Minnich, Nathan Scott and Kevin Kochenour got between the HP and me.
I went back to my job and the HP Tech left the immediate area.
A short period later the HP Tech came over to me and we were face to face 1
i exchanging verbal remarks.
I thought the HP Tech was going to swing at me again so I pushed him cway and he fell over Ron Porrino.
Porrino helped the HP Tech up and confronted me telling me to leave the area.
I informed Porrino that I was going to finish my job.
Porrino then advised the HP Tech to stay by his side.
The job lasted another five minutes and we all left the area without further incident.
I believe this incident occurred in the early pm hours after my lunch break.
I have read the above statement consisting of this and one other page and the facts contained herein are true.
/s/ Richard J.
Force November 5, 1986 Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, 11/5/86, 11:30 am
/s/ Edward M. Chiu, PECo Security, 11/5/86, 11:30 am l
I
=
ryn;n-- 12 :: )
s Jf /ACA/rs M V k j Salem, NJ November 7, 1986 9:00 am I, Marvin Hadley, make the following voluntary statement to N. R. Carter and E. M. Chiu, who have identified themselves to me as investigators of the Claims-Security Division, Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was born on April 2, 1960 in Durant, OK, and currently live at 279 Harmersville Road, Salem, NJ.
My wife, Tammy, lives at 7728 Enfield Avenue, Apt. 202, Norfolk, VA.
From March 31, 1986 to August 27, 1986 I was employed at Peach Bottom Nuclear Station as a HP Tech.
Previous to this I was in the Navy for six years as a Nuclear Rad Control Supervisor.
I am currently employed at Salem Nuclear Station as a HP Tech.
On August 26, 1986 between 9 and 10 am I attended a meeting with PECo Maintenance Management; Tom Stafford, my supervisor, Bartlett Nuclear Services; and Ron Porrino and Richard Force, who were involved in the incident the day before.
A person, whom I believe to be a Maintenance Manager, started the meeting by referring to the rules and regulations of PECo concerning reprimands.
I was told they have to follow the guidelines for this type of incident.
I told my side of what happened the previous day in the bowling alley and Force then told his side of
]
the story.
After Force was finished I told the group that Force was not telling the truth.
I asked the group to polygraph both of l
us to ascertain who was telling the truth.
I received no response.
Porrino then said, "Is there any way we can reach an
agreement concerning this event?"
He suggested that we apologize and that this will not leave the room.
I said "no.."
I then pointed at Force and said, "that man and others like him should a
not work in a nuclear facility."
I also remarked that I'm going j
to make sure that he does not.
The Maintenance Supervisors who were in attendance held a private conference at this time.
~
Porrino and I had a conversation concerning the job.
He, advised me that no other HP Tech had ever covered the job the way I did and that he feels I am one of the better HPs on the job.
- Porrino, Force and I were asked to leave the meeting and go to our jobs.
At this time Stu Nelson, Supervisor for PECo HPs, arrived at the meeting.
The next morning, which was August 27, 1986, I informed Tom Stafford that I was going to quit.
I thought about the incident and the meeting held yesterday.
Last night at home, because of the way I was treated, I decided to quit.
Tom Stafford asked me to think about it and informed me that he wants to meet with me after the morning rush.
At 9:00 am I met with Tom Stafford.
He advised me that he had been requested by those at the meeting to ask me to write another statement.
In this statement I am to express that Force and I had a verbal dispute and I am instructed to leave out the physical contact.
Force will be directed to fill out a similar statement.
I told Stafford that I will not fill out a statement that is not true.
Stafford then 9
informed me that the group feels I was telling the truth and that Force was lying.
I then asked Tom for direction an'd he told me I have three options which are:
- 1. try to forget what happened and
continue to work here;
- 2. sign the statement that is requested and go back to work; or, 3. just quit.
I elected to quit at this time.
I have read the above statement consisting of this and two other pages and the facts contained herein are true.
/s/Marvin G. Hadley November 7, 1986 Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, 11/7/86, 10:00 am
/s/ Edward M. Chiu, PECo Security, 11/7/86, 10:00 am l
e i-
eu y_evern
/ /i fd g l7 m e n f $ - $
Salem, NJ November 7, 1986 I, Marvin Hadley, make the following voluntary statment to N. R. Carter and E. M. Chiu, who have identified themselves to me as investigators of the Claims-Security Division, Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was born on April 2, 1960 in Durant, OK and currently live at 279 Harmersville Road, Salem, NJ.
My wife Tammy lives at 7728 Enfield Avenue, Apt. 202, Norfolk, VA.
From March 31, 1986 to August 27, 1986 I was employed at Peach Bottom Nuclear Station as a HP Tech.
Previous to this I was in the Navy for six years as a Nuclear Rad Control Supervisor.
I am currently employed at Salem Nuclear Station as a HP Tech.
On August 25, 1986 my job assignment was to work with maintenance crew in the 3"C" Condensate Demin Tank on Turbine Floor, Unit III, Level 135.
Prior to going to my job assignment I received the ALARA Traveler and HP guideline.
This is the first time I have been assigned to this particular job or with this crew.
During the pre-job brief I informed crew who were not wearing alarm dosimeters to wear pencil dosimeters outside their Anti "C".
At this time someone said we did this job numerous times and I should stand back and watch.
I thought they were kidding so I ignored the comment and left to prepare for job.
I went into tank area prior to the crew and started taking' air samples.
When the crew arrived I verified dose rates and then the crew started their assignment.
A few minutes into the job I
_ ~
noticed Nate Scott and Rich Force did not have their pencil dosimeters outside their Anti "C".
I waited until there was a lull in activity when Force moved from his work assignment'toward the rear of Demin area.
I approached Force and asked him to put his pencil dosimeter outside Anti "C".
Force said, "Why the f---
should I do that?"
I said there is a good dose near the filters where you are working and I want to read your dosimeter.
Force
- said, "F--- off.
There's no dose back there and you don't know what you're talking about."
I then said "put your dosimeter outside your Anti "C".
Force at that request complied and returned to his work station.
The filter elements were starting c
to pile up because Porrino was working quicker than the crew.
I continued to stay out of the way but every time I went near the elements Force would say things like "get the f--- out of the way" and on one occasion he called me a "Hp c--."
This abuse happened about four. times in a twenty minute period.
At this time I was again checking dose rate near filter elements and Rich Force almost hit me with a metal retaining piece from inside the element'.
I thought it was an accident because Force was bent down looking at the elements.
I left the immediate area and returned about five to ten minutes later to check dose rate near filter elements again.
At this time a retaining piece which Force was removing came toward my chest.
I looked toward Force and he was looking toward me.
I told Force if he hit me with that I was going to " kick his a-."
Force stood up and pushed me toward Demin Bowl.
At that time I swung at Force which he ducked and the i
~
- - a punch missed.
Two crew members interceded and I returned to the rear of the work area.
I calmed myself down but I still had to return to elements to continue my work assignment.
Each time I returned to elements-to take readings I could hear Force say things like "I'll meet you at the step off pad" and " wait till we f
get to dress out area."
At this time Porrino came out of Demin Bowl and was unaware of the situation.
I checked Porrino's alarming dosimeter and dose rated his gloves.
At my request Porrino removed his gloves and I returned to the rear work area to get Porrino new gloves.
Force, when I walked past him again said, "he would see me outside."
Force was cutting filters at this time and he was holding cutting snipers.
I felt there then that Force was going to hit me with them so I stayed out of his way.
When I finished changing Porrino's gloves I stood up and Force purhed me and I fell over Porrino's legs.
I stood up again and Force pushed me against the wall.
Porrino thought I tripped the first time but he naw the second incident.
Porrino told us to cut it out or leave the area.
I left immediate area to take smears of work area.
The maintenance crew started to leave area and I stayed to finish my work.
When I left the area I immediately went to Bill McAllister, my supervisor, who informed me to go to Tom Stafford, Site Coordinator, and write a report which I did.
I have read the above statement consisting of this and two other pages and the facts contained herein are true.
/s/Marvin G. Hadley November 7, 1986 Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, 11/7/86, 10:55 am
/s/ Edward M. Chiu, PECo Security, 11/7/86, 10:55 am
s mm..._
g hS4tbm&Y k~
Peach Bottom November 13, 1986 I, Michael McLaughlin, make the following voluntarily.
statement to N. R. Carter, who identified.himself to me as an investigator with the Claims-Security Division,-Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was born on March 10, 1967 at York Hospital, York, PA, and currently reside with my parents at RD #2, Box 492, Delta, PA 17314.
I currently work for Bechtel at the Peach Bottom Station as a Rad Waste Tech.
I was hired by Bechtel on July 17, 1985 and my payroll number is LB176.
On August 25, 1986 I was assigned to work with the PECo Maintenance Group on Level 135 Turbine Building, Unit III Demin Tanks.
I worked with Jeffrey Ball packing the cut filters from the Demin Tank into 55 gallon drums.
My job required me to wear Anti "C" and a full face mask with an outside air supply.
During the morning hours when the job was going on I observed the HP Tech using hand signals to advise Rich Force to place his pencil dosimetry on the outside of his Anti 1
"C".
Force placed the dosimetry on the outside of his Anti "C".
A short while later I observed Rich Force bend down removing the rod assembly from the filters.
The HP Tech was near Force taking RAD Readings when Force accidentally hit the HP Tech with the rod assembly.
I don't recall where the rod hit the HP Tech.
At this time the HP Tech swung his hand with a RO2A meter in it at Force.
l The swing missed.
Force then stood up and I observ,ed a verbal l
l l
i
k.
exchange between the two.
Several maintenance employees moved between the two and each one returned to their work.
I have read the above statement consisting of this an'd one other page and the facts contained herein are true.
/s/ Michael A. McLaughlin November 13, 1986 Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, 11/13/86, 11:17 am I
y y _-,,- __. _.
n s
"""Ig7-
- ~
hadb/n&rf k-/0 1901 William Penn Way Lancaster, PA November 20, 1986 6:30 pm I, Thomas Allen Stafford, make the following voluntary statement to N. R. Carter and J. C. Rullo, who have identified themselves to me as investigators of the Claims-Security Division, Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was born on November 18, 1945 at Inglewood, CA and currently reside with me wife and children at 1901 William Penn Way, Lancaster, PA.
On August 26, 1986 at 9:00 am I attended a meeting concerning the Hadley/ Force incident on August 25, 1986.
In attendance at the meeting were Don Kemper, Stu Nelson, Sandy Mellor, Ron Porrino, and Richard Force of PECo 14aintenance, and Marvin Hadley, Senior Health Physics Technician, Bartlett Nuclear.
During the early part of the meeting Stu Nelson was not present.
Hadley was the first to tell his side of the story.
Next, Mr. Force told his side.
There was a difference in the stories as to who started what.
During the meeting Force offered to " shake hands" and forget the whole matter.
Hadley refused the offer.
After approximately one hour Porrino, Force and Hadley were told to go back to work.
Before Force left the meeting, I asked him if he had ever been involved in this type of incident.
He replied, "yes, but it was nothing."
Hadley was asked the same question.
He said, "no."
Kemper, Mellor, Nelson and I remained to discuss the matter further.
During the course of the discussion the subject,of the A-86 discrepancy surfaced.
Don Kemper advised that an A-86 report
y 1
documenting this event would not be written because "The NRC might see it."
Mellor then stated, "We are going to white wash it."
I took this as meaning they were going to cover up the incident.
Kemper then said he was going to take the matter up to higher supervision to determine what action was going to be taken with regard to corrective or disciplinary (action) with Force.
Kemper advised that Casey, at Oregon Shops, will be contacted.
Before the meeting broke up I was advised by Kemper that whatever the outcome was I had to discipline Hadley the same way.
Later on the same day a second meeting was held with Nelson, Kemper and Mellor.
During this meeting it was explained to me by Kemper that PECo has a strict policy with regard to infractions of company rules.
Fighting on company property, according to Kemper, is a major infraction and could result in a mandatory reprimand with time off.
The time off could be a few days to termination.
I was then told that no one wanted to see Hadley lose his job.
I understood this as a threat to Hadley so I didn't pursue this further.
Kemper then advised that Force would be given a documented verbal warning for " inappropriate conduct."
It was then explained that there would be no documentation concerning the event or the physical violence that had occurred.
I was instructed by Kemper to give Hadley a verbal warning and document this in a memo stating
" Inappropriate Conduct."
I was also advised not to document in this memo or mention any physical violence with respect to the incident.
The meeting ended.
Subsequently I was shown a preprinted form by Kemper that reflected Force was given a verbal warning for
" Inappropriate Conduct."
' 4 I
In early September 1986 I was invited to attend a meeting held by Mr. Leitch concerning the Hadley/ Force incident.
Those in attendance were Leitch, Hilsmeier, Cotton and myself.
I was asked to write an A-86 report and I declined.
I informed the group that
)
Bill McAllister, a PECo HP Supervisor, should write the report because he was the first one advised by Hadley of the incident.
I then informed the group that I would write a report on what I know.
Therefore, the eight page memo to John Cotton dated September 11, 1986.
Before I could give the original copy to John Cotton I C
received a telephone call from Bob Moore, Head of QA, concerning the Hadley/ Force incident and the Maintenance group's attitude toward other groups.
I agreed to meet with Bob Moore in John Cotton's office.
Moore read the original report and requested a copy.
I denied his request.
Cotton at a later date was given the original report.
I did not l
keep a copy at this time.
However, during a meeting with Cotton at a later date he asked me if he could send a copy to Joe Cooney.
He advised that Cooney knew the statement existed I advised him that I would also like a copy and to send Cooney a copy.
Cotton immediately made a copy for me.
In early October 1986 Cotton showed me a handwritten, in pencil, A-86 report concerning the Hadley/ Force incident.
The report reflected everything that I had written in my September 11, 1986 memo to Cotton.
I remarked to Cotton that since the incident I have seen a significant improvement in attitudes and cooperation among the maintenance workers and the HP Techs.
~-
On my own, without any prompting, I gave another memo to Cotton dated October 24, 1986 reflecting my personal feelings concerning the incident.
I read the Hadley statement today concerning the meeting that i
Hadley and I had on August 27, 1986.
There are several points that I want to clarify concerning the statement.
At no time did I request Hadley to write another statement changing his story.
I also did not ask Hadley to write a statement that was not true.
I feel that Hadley misunderstood the subject of the written warning. I did inform him that there was to be a written memo advising of an
.:al reprimand with no mention of physical violence.
As a matter of fact I did not write a memo as instructed by Kemper.
Hadley referred to options in his statement but what I informed him was:
1.
You do not hL's ro quit your job.
You will not be terminated or laid off or arassu in any manner by anyone at this site.
2.
There is a resident NRC Inspector on site whom you can talk to if you wish, and 3.
Federal Law provides protection for anyone who wishes to report any allegation to the NRC.
This
" protected activity" applies to anyone working at any NRC licensed facility.
I have not been contacted by anyone at PECo or any other organization within PECo to change or write a new memo concerning the Hadley/ Force incident.
I have read the above statement consisting of this and three other pages and the facts contained herein are true.
9
/s/ Thomas A. Stafford November 20, 1986 Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, 11/20/86, 10:00 pm
/s/ Joseph C. Rullo, PECo Security, 11/20/86, 10:00 pm
{
I f
1 l
"""TnTT L;
j$NACArMnb k-ll Peach Bottom November 21, 1986 1:25 pm I, Donald L. Kemper, make the following voluntary statement to N. R. Carter and J. C. Rullo, who have identified themselves to me as investigators of the Claims-Security Division, Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was born on August 14, 1934 at Menges Mill, PA and currently reside with my wife and children at RD #4, Box 209, Quarryville, PA.
In early October of 1986 I met with John Cotton concerning the 4
Tom A. Stafford memo of September 11, 1986.
I read the statement and I objected to the majority of its contents.
I feel that they are incorrect.
The quotes that I made on the A-86 that "The NRC might see it" and that the entire problem was going to be
" whitewashed" are incorrect.
I did not make the above statements not did I hear anyone in the meeting make those statements.
I have read the above statement consisting of this page and t,he facts contained herein are true.
/s/ Donald L.
Kemper November 21, 1986 Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, November 21, 1986, 1:45 pm
/s/ Joseph C.
Rullo, PECo Security, November 21, 1986, 1:45 pm
n"'m hfftabm/nl }$ ~lb Peach Bottom November 21, 1986 2:20 pm I, Earl H. Mellor III, make the following voluntary statement to N. R. Carter and J. C. Rullo who have identified themselves to me as investigators of the Claims-Security Division, Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was born on September 15, 1937 in Philadelphia, PA and currently reside with my wife and children at 195 Solanco Road, Quarryville, PA.
I attended a meeting on August 26, 1986 concerning the Force /Hadley incident.
During that meeting there was no mention of not writing an A-86 report so that "the NRC might see it" and that the entire problem was going to be " whitewashed."
I did not make the above statements nor did I hear anyone in the meeting make those statements.
I have read the above statement consisting of this page and the facts contained herein are true.
/s/ Earl H. Mellor November 21, 1986 Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, November 21, 1986,,2:35 pm
/s/ Joseph C. Rullo, PECo Security, November 21, 1986, 2:35 pm
if[aA nrenf $; ~ /3 -
suggery=H Peach Bottom November 21,L1986-3:55 pm I, Lonnie D. Davis, make the.following voluntary statement to N. R.l Carter and J. C. Rullo, who have identified themselves to me e
as investigators of the Claims-Security Division, Philadelphia n
Electric Company.
I was born on August 20, 1944 at North East, MD, and currently I
reside with my wife and children at 143 Yellowfield Boulevard, Elkton, MD.
i On August 27, 1986 at approximately 7:30 am, Tom Stafford, A6rvin Hadley and I had a meeting that concerned Hadley quitting.
Hadley informed Tom Stafford that he was leaving that day.
The p
reason he gave was that he thought the utility was going to force Stafford to make him quit.
Stafford advised Hadley that this would not happen and tried to convince Hadley to stay.
Hadley advised him j
that he would think about it but.he was sure his mind was made up.
t j
At this point Hadley went to work and the meeting terminated.
During this meeting'I did not hear anyone request Hadley to change i
his statement.
I have read the above statement consisting of this page and the 4
j facts contained herein are true.
1
/s/Lonnie D. Davis November 21, 1986 4:15 pm t
Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, PECo Security, November 21, 1986, 4:15 pm
/s/ Joseph C. Rullo, PECo Security, November 21, 1986, 4:15 pm L
l
z - -.
$4tl1menY b~/Y PBAPS
.c November 24, 1986 2:15 PM I, Ralph W. Macallester, make the following voluntary statement to N. R. Carter who has identified himself to me ss an investigator of the Claims-Security Division,-Philadelphia-Electric Company.
[
I was born on April 23, 1944 at Cooperstown, New York, and currently reside with my wife and children at RD#2, Felton, Pa.
My date of employment with Philadelphia Electric Company is October 1971 and my payroll number is 448052.
I am a Senior Technical Assistant H.P. Group at the Peach Bottom Station.
On August 25, 1986 Marvin Hadley, a H.P. Tech. for Bartlett Nuclear Services, stopped me at the change room outside of Decom Area Radwaste EL 135.
Hadley advised me that he just had a confrontation with a maintenance employee by the name of Force.
He advised that he lost control and swung at Force, the swing missed.
Because of previous co-employment problems, I advised Hadley to contact his supervisor, Tom Stafford.
Later on that day I contacted my Supervisor Stu Nelson and Tom Stafford of Bartlett to ascertain if Hadley had informed them of the incident.
He had.
I have read the above statement consisting of this page and the facts contained herein are true.
(
/s/ Ralph W. Macallester Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, 11/24/86, 2:30 PM
/s/ Samuel Q. Tharpe, 11/24/86, 1480 hrs.
L.
Y
+,,;.
-N.
agegg w W e g l v ?! t n Y 8 - /6 ~
1007 River Road Quarryville, PA November 24, 1986 4:45 PM I, C. Stuart Nelson, made the following voluntary statement to N. R. Carter, who has identified himself to me as an investigator of the Claims-Secur.ity Division, Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was born on Januarl 12, 1941 at Jamica, New York, and currently reside with my wife and children at 1007 River Road, Quarryville, PA.
My date of employment with Philadelphia Electric Company is March 1978, and my job title is Applied H.P.
On August 26, 1986, at approximately 10:00 AM I attended a meeting with Don Kemper, Sandy Mellcr, Richard Force, Ron Porrino, all Philadelphia Electric Company employees; and Tom Stafford and Marvin Hadley, Bartlett Employees.
After about five (5) minutes Force, Porrino and Hadley left the meeting.
The remaining parties discussed the Force /Hadley confrontation and the punishment each will receive.
After the discussion it was decided that Force /Hadley were both equally at fault and would receive the same punishment.
Kemper advised that he has to contact Casey at Oregon Shops for permission to handle the situation in the above manner.
During the time I attended the meeting, which was from q
10:00 AM to 10:30 AM, I did not hear anyone say that they wanted to " white wash" the whole problem nor did I hear anyone state that
\\
~
. they did not want an A-86 documenting the incident because "The NRC might see it."
I have read the above statement consisiting of this and one-other page and the facts contained herein are true.
/s/C. Stuart Nelson Witnessed:
/s/Nathaniel R. Carter, 11/24/86 5:30 PM
\\
a i
l
m.
f**
) f/Ask e t,*rf k'/b December 3, 1986 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19101 1
i (c,TU I, William F. Casey, make the following voluntary statement to Joseph C. Rullo and Thomas J. O'Donnell, who have identified i
themselves to me as Investigators of the Claims-Security Division, i
Philadelphia Electric Company.
i I was born on October 3, 1937 in Chester, PA, and currently i
reside with my family at 321 N. Fairfield Road, Devon, PA 1933.
I was employed by PECo on June 15, 1959 and currently am employed as Superintendent, Station Maintenance Division, Oregon Shops.
My payroll number is 436097.
On August 26, 1986 around 2:00 pm Donald Kemper, Maintenance I
Supervisor, contacted me by phone regarding an incident which had occurred the previous day at Peach Bottom.
The incident involved an altercation between PECo employee Richard Force, Steamfitter, 3rd class, payroll number-435135, and a Bartlett Nuclear Services contractor Health Physics technician.
The incident entailed the Health Physics technician throwing a punch at Richard Force who in turn pushed the technician.
Don Kemper related this event to j
me and was seeking advice as to the level of discipline to be i
administered.
As I discussed the event with Kemper, he described the fact that there had been an argument which subsequently resulted in the punch (which did not contact Force) and the pushing of Hadley.
During the conversation, which lasted about 30 minutes, the following facts were discussed:
- gjft, 4
.s.
'lt$'
1.
There had been a meeting that morning among Kemper, Mellor, Porrino, Nelson, Stafford, Force and Hadley to discuss the incident.
2.
At one point Force and Hadley were asked to leave the meeting and members of Supervision continued their discussion.
3.
Kemper stated that Earl Mellor indicated that fighting was a major infraction and we discussed the serious discipline that would result from that infraction.
Mr. Force could receive as a minimum, an Official Reprimand, which would stop his progression for a year.
I asked Don what step Bartlett would take and he advised that the technician would be fired for a major infraction.
4.
I further inquired as to supervision's opinion at to the seriousness of the matter and their feelings about the employees involved.
5.
Kemper responded that Force was not a problem employee and is not currently under any discipline.
He also stated that Maintenance Supervision feels that the involved Bartlett man is one of the better Health Physics technicians.
6.
I was familiar with the name Richard Force from his recent promotion to Steamfitter, 3rd class, and my involvement in having his assignment changed to Peach Bottom at the request of Earl Mellor and Don Kemper, which signified to me that he was an 1
acceptable employee.
Subsequently, I did review Force's, personnel file and verified that he was not currently under any disciplinary action except for some counseling for absent time in 1986 and for verbal abuse in 1985.
kf1-
LvYV 7.
I did question Kemper as to the feelings of the supervisors involved in the event and meeting and he related that they were all in agreement that both parties were equally to blame.
In our discussion of the situation, I decided not to consider the altercation a fight but rather an instance of I
improper behavior and verbal abuse.
There was some mention by Kemper that Hadley had been perhaps hit by a filter element but in any case that had been dismissed as accidental by Hadley.
I attached no significance to this event.
I specifically asked Don Kemper if an A-86 had been written, and if there had been any violation of nuclear plant rules.
Moreover, I asked him if Force had violated any HP regulations.
Kemper responded that no HP violations were involved and no A-86 created.
Had there been a violation of nuclear plant rules, this would have been a factor in the discipline to be administered.
During our conversation, Don mentioned that the NRC was not involved in this situation and the comment puzzled me because I saw no reason, based on the facts he presented, to involve the 4
NRC.
I then summarized the facts as related to me and directed that an Oral Warning be issued to Richard Force and that Bartlett take an equivalent step against their technician.
Don concurred l
with this approach.
I also instructed him to speak to the other involved supervisors and make sure they had no disagreement with w Ib '
l this discipline.
i l
Ls%d
- The following afternoon (August 27, 1986) Kemper informed me that the Oral Warning had been issued to Mr. Force by Earl Mellor and that when the Bartlett HP supervisor approached his techni'ian,.that he had resigned.
Don may have related that the c
HP technician did not like the discipline administered and I did not attach any particular significance to this event.
I At no time did I direct Mr. Kemper, Mr. Mellor or any other person to avoid disclosure of these events to the NRC or any other agency.
At no time did I direct anyone involved in this matter to change their statement or account.
I made no effort nor did I direct anyone else to whitewash j
or down-play this event.
It has been my experience that Don Kemper will not hesitate to speak up if he disagrees with my decisions in disciplinary matters.
I did not consider the fact that the employees involved were dressed in full anti-contamination clothing and masks at the time of the event.
Had I recognized this aggravating circumstance, more severe disciplinary action may have been taken such as Written Warning or Official Reprimand.
The decision on this incident, as far as the discipline administered, was solely mine based on input received from Don c
Kemper.
I consulted with no one else in this regard.
Subsequently, I questioned Don Kemper as to whether,he had obtained concurrence from the other supervisors on the level of a;fE'
s.
th-discipline.
Kemper told me that subsequent to our conversation of 8/26/86, he. called Mellor, Stafford and Nelson back to his office and told them of my decision and asked if there was any disagreement.
No one disagreed and the discipline was administered the following morning.
I have never seen or read any letters or correspondence from Tom Stafford of Bartlett.
During the NRC investigation into this incident by Thomas Dragoon, I spoke to him by phone and related my involvement in determining the disciplinary action to be taken.
I have also related my involvement to M. J. McCormick, D. C. Smith and J.
Cotton at approximately the same time.
I may have informed R. H.
Moore of my involvement within the last month, but I am uncertain of this.
In this incident, I wrote no memorandum of my conversation with Don Kemper because such calls seeking direction are common.
Documentation of disciplinary action is completed by local supervision and forwarded to Oregon Shops.
I have read the above statement consisting of this page and four other pages, and all the facts contained herein are true.. g..
a fug t/
ft ll
/~
WITNESSED:
hepe
/
e i,
i IE,h,I?f. d O,. 9 '
1 u u __ _
m_._.
c-
1 kY4 C knre*,yf f- /l
\\
\\
2301 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19101 December 10, 1986 11:30 A.M.
I, Ralph W. MacAllester, make the following voluntary statement to Joseph C. Rullo, who has identified himself to me as an investigator of the Claims-Security Division, Philadelphia Electric Company.
I was born on April 23, 1944 at Cooperstown, New York, and currently reside with my wife and children at RD #2, Felton, PA.
My date of employment with Philadelphia Electric Company is October 1971, and my payroll number is 448052.
I am a Senior Technical Assistant, HP Group, at the Peach Bottom Station.
On August 25, 1986 Marvin Hadley, an HP Technician for Bartlett Nuclear Service, stopped me in the change room outcide of the Decontamination Area, Elevation 135.
With me at the time was Gary Smith, a PE HP Technician.
I could not recall this fact but now have verified it through Gary Smith.
- Hadley, when we met, was changing his clothes, and he related specifics of an altercation he had with PE employee Richard Force.
Hadley was upset and went on to explain that he was threatened by Force, specifically, that as he was monitoring radiation of filter elements (poles about 4' in length, 3" in diameter,
2
' weighing 5 to 10 pounds) Force would place the pole on the pile and barely miss him with the narrowed end of the pole.
Simultaneously, Force was harassing him verbally.
Hadley',s account left the clear impression to me that Force was provoking an incident.
Eventually, Hadley believed that he had to stop Force from possibly hurting him (Hadley), thus he swung at him and missed.
Force then pushed Hadley down.
I believed by the conversation that Hadley at sometime backed off to cool down, but I cannot remember the sequence of events that took place.
After relating the incident to me, I indicated that it was unfortunate he had taken a swing at Force, and he agreed.
I told Hadley to report the incident to his supervisor, Tom Stafford, and may have mentioned reporting it eventually to Stu Nelson, Applied HP.
In reviewing the incident and the procedure, I can see a violation of nuclear plant rules, specifically, the section captioned " General," paragraph one, about conducting yourself in a responsible and professional manner.
Under section " Responsibility 5.1," the procedure indicates that a plant supervisor should be notified.
We do notify plant j
supervision through those who observe or participate in the incident, regardless of their rank or employment status.
That t
person is responsible for writing the cover sheet of the A-86.
f i
{
1
a As you read 5.2, under this section the procedure indicates that plant supervisors are responsible for initiation of Discrepancy Reports.
This instruction is accomplished through the plant supervisor reviewing the cover sheet, which is completed under 5.1, and, if applicable, forwarding it to a senior plant member.
Although contractors are not mentioned under 4.2 of the A-86 procedure, they are mentioned in section 5.1 under
" Responsibility" as personnel identifying events or problems.
On either late afternoon August 25, 1986 or early morning August 26, 1986 I contacted Stu Nelson, my supervisor, to insure that Marvin Hadley reported the incident to his supervisor and eventually Stu Nelson.
I did not participate in the meeting on August 26, 1986 nor did I participate in any subsequent meetings.
I did discuss the matter eventually with Stu Nelson informally.
I have been involved in the administration of discipline, involving counseling, but normally the matters involving disciplinary actions are administered by higher supervision.
I don't recall what I told Nelson about the incident, but it was apparent that he already knew about it.
I know this because he was scheduled to participate in a meeting between pE and Bartlett supervision, and others on the morning of August 26, 1986.
I i
_4_
I have read the above statement consisting of this page and three other pages, and the facts contained herein are true.
/s/ Ralph W. MacAllester Ralph W. MacAllester
}
December 10, 1986 Witnessed:
/s/ Joseph C. Rullo Joseph C. Rullo, PECo Security, 12/10/86
/s/ Edward M. Chiu Edward M. Chiu, PECO Securi' y, 12/10/86 c
9
Ndal7 mow k-/$
2301 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19101 December 10, 1986, 4:00 P.M.
/
I, C. Stuart Nelson, make the following voluntary statement j
to J. C. Rullo, who has identified himself to me as an investigator of the Claims-Security Division.
I was born on January 12, 1941 in Jamaica, New York, and currently reside with my wife and children at 1007 River Road, Quarryville, PA.
My date of employment with Philadelphia Electric Company is March 1978, and my job title is Applied HP.
On August 25, 1986 I met with Tom Stafford, Site Coordinator, Bartlett Nuclear, Inc., and his employee, Marvin Hadley, in the third floor lunch room.
Mr. Stafford wanted to have Hadley relate to me what had occurred that day within the Unit 3C condensate demineralizer (work area) between him and a PECo employee.
As best I can recall, Hadley related that he was having a problem with PECo employee Richard Force regarding the wearing and location of his dosimeter, and Force allegedly verbally and physically abusing him.
Eventually Hadley admitted throwing a punch at Force, and at the same time Force allegedly pushed him.
I cannot recall much of this scenario, except with the aid of Marvin Hadley's written account that was given to me by Tom Stafford f p
i O
+ - -, -,,,. -._, - - -,.. - - -
,,.n.-,.
,,,,--,,,n..,
.~-
However, I wanted to resolve the matter as rapidly as possible.
There were no demands placed upon me by Tom Stafford.
At that time I had no knowledge of Richard Force's work record.
I met with Don Kemper and John Davenport around 3:50 P.M.
that day.
Mr. Davenport directed Kemper to get statements from the Maintenance people who witnessed the incident.
He wanted the statements taken before the men went home that evening.
We then were all to meet at 9:00 A.M. on August 26, 1986 to discuss the matter.
I cannot recall if Bill MacAllester advised me about the incident before the August 26, 1986 meeting.
However, it is possible that he did.
I did not take any further action at that time and did not consider the relevance of the A-86 procedure.
On August 26, 1986, before going to this meeting, I attended a 9:00 A.M.
Institute of Nuclear Power Operators (INPO) meeting.
I did not consider sending someone else to the Hadley/ Force meeting since I knew Tom Stafford would be present
'[
to consider issues relating to Health Physics and the interest of his employee, Hadley.
After the INPO meeting I attended the meeting between PECo and Bartlett supervision and employees which was already in progress.
It was about 10:00 A.M. when I arrived.
About five minutes into the meeting Force, Hadley and Porrino were told to leave the meeting and return to war A.,
l
~
i
o The remaining attendees--Kemper, Mellor, Stafford and I--discussed the incident.
Since I had missed most of the meeting I relied on the others to apprise me of the proceeding.
The attendees agreed that Force was abrasive and probably verbally harassed Hadley.
The group reached a conclusion that Force and Hadley were equally at fault and should receive the same punishment, provided Bill Casey agreed.
I did not challenge this action, because I thought Tom Stafford would represent Hadley's interest.
His failure to object meant to me that he agreed with the course of action.
Before the meeting ended I was of the belief that everything was summarized, including the content of the testimony, that was given in my absence.
i Also during this meeting I was asked by Don Kemper if an A-86 report was written.
I told him no, and there was no further discussion on this issue.
We did not talk about it again.
I cannot recall attending a meeting in the afternoon but did learn that Kemper had talked to Bill Casey, and it was decided to give an oral reprimand to Richard Force.
I did speak to Tom Stafford that afternoon, and I believe I told him to give Hadley an oral warning, to be consistent with the l
Maintenance Division's action.
Based on my past experience, f
A-86s have been written by contractor or PECo HP Technicians, i
and I have reviewed them.
Rarely have I created the A-86 in the five years I've been on site.
As I recall, possibly I have 9\\
created only two or three A-86 g
O
~~
=,
1 1
_4_
\\(J s I retiev the A-8f procedure dated April 16, 1986, I see A
'that the responsibi.11ty for initiating (creating it) an A-86 in this particular case was the responsibility of Bill MacAllester, my subordinate, or me, and not the contractor.
The A-86 was not filled out because I did not think of it.
At the time I thought that speed in resolving the problem was the most important factor.
I did communicate verbally about the whole event, specifically to Allen Hilsmeier and John Cotton.
On August 25, 1986 Hilsmeier was advised of the incident and on August 26, 1986 he was updated on the outcome of the meeting.
John Cotton was informed of this matter on August 27, 1986 when I told him of the incident and its disposition.
In my meetings with Allen Hilsmeier and John Cotton I related the information which I knew at that time and which I feel is accurately represented in this statement.
Hilsmeier and Cotton received my input as a matter of information only.
They gave me no instructions and did not bring up anything about an A-86.
Based on what transpired during the August 26, 1986 meeting, I could not gather just exactly what had occurred between Hadley and Force.
At this point in time I still do not know if the push by Force occurred before the punch by Hadley, or vice versa.
However, it is clear that the incident and conduct of the men required the initiation of an A-86 report as specified in the procedure and pECo Nuclear plant Rules.
9.
I have read the above statement consisting of this page and four other pages, and the facts contained herein are true. h f
f C_ Ak L
C.
tuart Nelson Date N, IfIb Witne_ssed:
~
4 9
%m J. D. McGoldrick, PECo Security, 12/11/86 G-s e CM6e
.~:?eph t. Rullo, PECo Security, 12/11/86 V
9 9
5 W N ~b EGIIOIT A-3G-1 A-36 Page 1 of 4, Rev. 3 Report No.: 8G-RQL (ProvideTFy CEinpliancag.')
Part I - Identificaticn:
Date of Occurrences _ f/s y/rf, Time of Occurrence: enee e : re!
Iocaticn of Occurrences u3 'd ' eous pave es
.u ed4 Individual identifying the discrepancy: s/ / pe a s / 4 er e/
t (Print)
Personnel Involved Organization 9marvisor o.,. u s pise oserdser aunexx wil
-r.s. rext/pp.p
- p. foxa m o n a r.
- 3. xterix
- n. rea awe nu m.x r
>. xsmn x Deceriptie. of Discrepancy: A t m,,,j r.40/ L J 'A k.w Ja:. J'- 4 's Jx.<w*u b,v ku.a swAi).a -
~
-<mL fnK AL A />./o/.$w & */ M J %*.
a 4
W r n seeos.vi f.<,< % ' ~.fm e * - ? d ) m.a. A vnid2C
~
--n nen 3 ~c ~d.LA K.2th P
- - yhw 14m /.
Ibr Cantaminaticn Related Events, fill in a) and b) below:
a) Area of Body Affected:
- 4. A.
b) Ievel of Cantaminatim:
4.A.
Immaliate Corrective Acticn: 7Afd M, 8.7xQ sta t<2 X./m' 4 A n -tAs.<Asa.
&/ _b
/
Plaht Supervision Copy of Report forwarded tor M
(Senior Plant StafNr)
Investigation assigned to NI/9,
[
,p.Sh
m _
i CGIIDIT A-06-1 A-96 Page 2 of 4,.%v. 3 Part II - Investigation (ccm1pleted by Investigator)
Persmnel Contacted Organization / Group sss F4:1 z A er Y Investigatim Results:
A w w a a nArt V. z-57'4 zeq f A z.OatM Al As Report Investigator (Print)
Signature Date Organizatims Involved:
P!rO Vendors:
. Operations
. EER
. Catalytic
. Maint.
. Storcs Div.
. HP
. Security Div.
. Henkels & McCoy
. Chemistry
. I&C
. Reactor
. Training
. Test Ehgineers I
d
,7
--m-.,, - -
_,--.-_w.
e,,,
.,n,,
,,_.___,---,,-.__,4,,,,,,--,-m..,..,,.,,..-r w
en---e..
-._e
3m,.-
s J /M J/- 4
-r x s - r 4 s. o, n - a nd t,
,.n2nx, -m-L J x 7
y ba
- lF'Am - y_- ! --. - -Ye'f
)&x.
4 y4.,4oasa?p
)4.;pyy C
h, L,u -
L,-
2,L ts. L -162._. w bG. >1w 1,.
BL f & J. &.
.ri n 1.
2/._s e 1..
,...~,
.L n A:.L z n_2. >-ess,_A,
f
=
la jw,:J
. n rs - /..r a si.,
M 1.h
- 1. a J - a s,
_,nj,. n, _.-1.,s:J. ra, t, 1s.
s.rt.n'.g,
- n.. -i :. L. -,, J.
f
~
v h.
I',
i :2 J v, -j *2 :-. -rs.i=,,n rr g
/ - (
i.
se A
_ n GL-
- x. MJA la n sAw 6Lv L u) t s
h y -r,J n-2,?)._-} A NP %_U,l-d. D - J N71,=L,,.rA 9
n.w. sr.a. AAkt n 1L aL AL JA,,. > sl%J-rle 14 -sa,~ Aa ua so 1-
"t. m. M, /, e - A J -A L:L 2 A A n fA & L.A ~ Jht ta *-.s tn f. -r.n. Ad ALA, +,,-+*4,
- 3. 7m n Wer/94.
,a m.$JL J r.s.2? M.-n 4 f x L.,' u.
t A A A,A1 )
3.
f
/69fA. AJ,
- >*>2 A,- w' U '/fm ~ r,/z.r./rf..
i i
y 4.,,3.pr.. 1.41...~ 9,b =
- h t *5.**
4 N,
.9 W.
- s 7
..,,---e..
u -
8 O C..)
- . n i ~;
D M. 14 ef Y Im r
'I f> L =^ - _ _^ ! - ^ ^ -.
AA,BL.o ?- >Yo E_2f$/ftpMA or. h4. JA.
Bu-t/, H 2fw A_w /NP)
N "f. A.
/k !)Y 8e4)b W }{.u.s/n s
'A & AE fe~
f n*..
s" n
A. fr.w
/ste m *M
- 1 O
R. 75 7240 J.u. 'M, I
s H. mA rseo e, M.
- p. k. -,
.n r z u jti-
-t,
&.S. A}&
74dO 4> /*,) /,l.G J M.
wsIA m.
22
-)
.a,
A - - - ~ > ~. % A,1 />- d 2, u m f A An $ = r_-
f/2 $~/f$
,,a_ niiU s
( O MA y
--,lA:fA>A_-a m -)>ldaf9AMn 9't(,,/Ed,
/
,su M.,JA.A 2 -
x-n e - m L *L = v a
-/ L L / s.
~
/
~
/
- 1rxc,
,,&_..,421.
- 2 ;r J M J,Ja L J A * :Ji 3. A/k, n.
d'
/
,-. 4, 71L m L,A21,;%,JFmL_~ m M ).3 y
l >, x A w A n 'A w-2 sr am m M
--..,.0 X L., w M f_
- t
- f. Ye mA
, b,a
^_
A- - = =
YA-2 A "-
r A_a 1
s* A 2*As.
>>>?-*$ - )> ~'$ -> $n J "1') 2A-.'f N>. M i*A~_- m
'w Q'.
~ ~
/
, A Jps,ikA..J J:
99e.m wu.w f
Ms-2-2AJ2 a
/
e 5tl ;w n J sL JL x Mm>la fl r
- _2, -
2 *2 a }.
~$2 &
.,w 22 f
fT.M.22J U l L xf%J_-MdJe.!*0.aufa~>> 2_,n'zG( x'A-'
sr i
L = "l- ' !=_-2) & _$1-2
'YmY&
e. ba A A> ' > - -
r
/
\\
w
->>A 'd h
r'
~
p it k
fYN M ^
- he y -
^"f."
$2 3, 22_1,h a..
e
1 Q C,,J
,. Q l ') ].
'e 9
B $f e.
G fg I'o./. L.._. - 2 A A A.-,'.,j'_rs-r / m~
,,,,/2 m,*ia, / d i
f af l
l b KAn_a_ n*-
s.
Il ~
ef fl m
lt
- MgY, k
$2 f,i 3de.k
- m,- D.f,=>,f,Atf.jl & W h,,
s.s.
+
.,a, J.f,H.ils -.. 7" dia/ k2-M. -n ) $,- 1 ' _> p. L JA,, s,w d ]
y
-f h---.,a-ifa. A J,: L. 1 1 L -11 1.;1.L e
s m /J m >>~ L.1a --} 2,% li),'s,.
l i
r2 _ Anil z.v. swL.
Mr. A4 2L ml-w).
r f
f 2As-m]< el fl9lP
. fl>
ddfA)Kd.,.
_,Aw = > d -. if 2 21.J__JD__*
j t
>/ Akalfl. A l.0 2, w1-$_ kis a 9 PBA/s J,. 2,. > $.=fXtk t Lit l_d
, p MA b,a n f AL,M a b, YA * *2 r&
?AJ 2-
" ^ k, A n i l if*f.
J Let
- n p
6 s r.: f ~ m M sil x YA 0 2Su l,)s 8.
~
e f
A,f M*A ~ naas n
m Wu/rt,. -r x. ltDJ A,J24 c.n. s_ :hi,-.Cs:8.dl,L a,
NW Y^
f
,J A*2 A'
N-"--
Y D_
_^
e a
y-ir
_L., A J - A - uJ Mn. yfu 2Ar /rt m M,.rL 2./.;z,t -t m J n,
/
d' Oli >
/,' 1 ~l$1 le ~_1 YA l'Yl ? Arwh%
42_ diY
/.
=m As,+ gg=yp y,u.RMh :r/ah ub, -..., 2, J.L2 s,,JxLct _a.J. h 944.;.c:
r A D)../ nJA
-kJ _-st-+ -rR,/,im.o J~,. A m
._>f12' f. d.
A r.
J> > N& Y,. A t.Wo.u -- _ W f2_ ~f M 0 ) _
/_
y n > 2 se t%. -th.,2 mT f,] o - A-fd.
- J-p l
Om $l/ 3-Eb A. $nb>
be b
-, ^ A l* N* 5A> u m,1* Y
/YYA-.
s
,J.
f
-o -w- & J M.d 2/$8s-4. >$$ A,M,.2% jess _d k FAA f'S f
i H
v
$ k m.. *. t*
.a D ' *,
- _ >l $ m,, d fL. & /2). fA, ';** m,
I.x A -
w
,#$, 2 $ CA f a
\\
'~
/$ Sh A -- Y Y, Mfm k >> ad Y ${A, $ fn W
11
_Ac- & Al i n '_f g-_
Ma i
$A. fhl-l}'d. M. M $ $m-Il dAAn' A Y }eL * "b~~ a n. N'" Y' ? -
i
/
Y_ > a l> ' A> W ) in >> > >rs 8
2n-a & - --,$
e aL 2A 1
A
,'>> - e _, >- s,
y A-k A, & Yfb u *A > -
n._ A _=jsn 12 2 sr 4y.
2 n--
x
-na r
s V
si N W131 $*2a J A>m m $-l x - -_ r U > ',- AA ~_ - ^ _ N ~ M, dL 7
hs,#
-- - a > A
>^'^^ >
u, a
b, l
$ls9 ['b
\\la be
--l
- ^ ^
m *
$0 Yo N.
W )1A A
n Y.
ll
- & f Ja -. eis.ac A Y A -
//, h
-l-
- jb_,
,, foqJ_f
/,12--
n o
i u
/
,No na M.&2 4 Au Y ". i. __,AmY n, s 2
_ - YA Ysj 1*
i
- m)) M 4l- _
s' L - ^-
- as
)) //ma ) $ m,%$- r sa I
e
'w,_ f r /a f ' A A HA 21--h e - 1 A *J 21 7)54PL
(
t l
I 9f/1/h/
a &A Ma
- - / 'N
^lL
) $. b A-aa>>
m
,g, r-4 w
I/s), / $ 2 Al E, s 2 2, *. $ a &n'$aYw a A > &,*
- L,g> >,, n f
- y W 1A>
is p
N.
), fM_e i- -l A n A 21 A
_h
?2) a 11 -
m _1193 j_
- ' ^,
- e., -a p-r
- ? IJ,-, k -fD -+ - 9,JA gj,,,,--k L&
M
- 2)
- N A
,m._
ifi m >> )W 1.a >> a l l ',3 'a l *.e > > } d a.o a km > ~
. $J)w a a swi. $
r g
u 2L Y ui Ann m at AC' _ > a k.~2 of.e L ~,% J n st"i-t A JJ ~f o
o
$,, s & 1_
Y
?-- Y a
i & ---> Y, 4), }'. $2 2 >,, aYf$8h w Y l l' O
s' i-A AA J L" Ms 211$/L, - M /,>--
3'-
a n A ~l
- 4 4.is A J'3>l< J-G -
4
- J __
0 A A&
^
-,--A p
L,J A - ' " - -
=
, ' ' " __4 h A-A s
d d 2 "fA, f/tf/8d m13Y,* w %+2 - d -f $ i_ -- w /e/ d f a u
n
- >*^>Jo f /,..--,," 4 />xt.,-l & m 'd ~ =,_/ W,4 y b_ M.
&Y I
1865561950 Pd. z 3 et: 9
>> Ai
- J M w b 1 " iji i. n., a, ~,. A n *-r 11 J i u,4 A >> - - lid- -n J J/ - & stn & L J1.
~
o i;ri, 2,11. + _..:. a J 34 A
r1. L - / ',,,.,.. s M e p
f. M 'Am _.1 '. 1 st 47f_
) /2.- n _ n >> J # t, ~ J./ _
y r
(
(
A>..-- m,ntlA
-.s r 1. +
,n.. ~
a -... 2,,
J,, A., ) 11. +
.- -, As Y _A 2 A
_3$A
$,lA J Y A_
q_
A A 21_, ex,,) j _,
i f
i6 Ws.s/s4. 4). A'n. 2 M,J M D. A'.
~, >-
J. '-.
R _, f f-. 1
-=
y
,As..--jh Y /g/-l Y---
> ],.
->%,Aj, a >
J.' > 1. YA> [ Zhkb eenJe
.j
- a 7/ss/M.. J. 3. &M rt1As.0A 7). A'
- A > -. l. A:%1 i
D 9/a /r4 o.A.--.~f./la) M J.?3.6 L.e n/d m.p.'% >.'A9
/
!.2,,:.
.. J.2 si, s -t X. L u is b y r,
L. w-rix x :
L.
' IAfin K m -,_}R+~
A*.11'.
_ '/s la e 1J, Jx v
f/'
f w._, L
- 1.,,-t '
You m roux wrur.
/
k
% _ 9/r.v/r4,/. n. 6 &.4 JA> J
't$ r. r..osL s -- J ' zL >>> A r
s L
A
&J A.
A A A A
A s-A Y h AM A
h AA_^y v...
r
.y.
s'is; _*1-2I&w
, ' >- +.2C }'_ d> - < f$. TN d'E*se.d.dEm ito
- / %.
s f
f
- :,,,, T % g.. 5;% 5M+_. -k,,,J. -. Ad,a.,* -f..,, L%*,-,,.n -- >}
4 A_'. ;
- 4A>
/s /f f,n o b,
i
/
k l-
\\ b t '...:.
EXIIISIT A-as_1 A-8G Page 3 of 4,.%v. 3 Part III - Corrective Action:
Discrepaq Cause:
JA gu_ J A g y'.
Recommended Corrective Actim:
(Use additional sheets for additional items)
Acticn Item i
An +y 3A H 4 (8(,,-22.4 Yat-04)
Individual or group responsible for Acticm:
lDateactioncompleted:
Actica Item Approval:
Acticm Item Individual or group respcmsible for action:
Date action coupleted:
Acticn Item Approval:
~
Action Item A
Individual oc group responsible for Action:
Date action ocupleted:
Acticn Item Approval:
Accepted:
Senior Plant Staff Member Date 6
,.-y.
,m y_
.-,.-,,w,,
,.e
-.m-~.-
.y e
g e
M
.gz g
g O
Ed W y' -/
r, l",
i' f
ag A
hA v
rs.--..- w 21 h 6 :J..-2, -,.
t.L -
r, Y - f- &2 8 ) s 1 -= x--
2, 1,*
f 1"-.Y". f*/,"_ j e) 12 is hl
. - - ~.> Y _ ).._ & _Al 2- _l M h ) o l-n p
/
Y&m*&,
n a 4,:tu a a m.
. r
,, v.a. :-
g e
an,2s1. A
~
of E
A_>. N P m -- J'23 />e 1.-__-1 -- -_ - :. r,x.__ %
_1 s
e M A.s.
An A 2 s 12-- A e
f f
9)
%,'),, s. A ff,,g //F G 1
.*._> 4.s s,sl,,,*b - w 4 <*,.- bff, c
M 2$ h alb "I ~
MIde I 'm -
l
/
m.
01
~ R. f m m e>*-'
ed 4)& J&ws AAAm J. L - 1 ~.,
f V
nn.
I o i in,. -t.
3,:...: -...., -.:..._. - a, n -, c j1,,. / su /_; A, e
Y fa a 2
-A A
'^ ^^ m, jhYYA aY A 121 O
A
- a.y p y
r I
Yb2 Y
2 A ffm/ fk $
~}". - > W YJ
,m u -
a_m.2 1
', K M -r, 1 : >*- - n -. f la._fA J s':-r a -.,.
1i.-:
u.w. a.sz x.
il ncv r
& *- n 9/ N.:ts.4a. dom _.
'L-~/rx.2A>LJ m -., M s g ;p.
~
c
- MLV2h u. a. a,:r. _2-L > > >.,, t J L i s e_ m 12. L 2-h.
a I T. g. ". w "
Ir v'
r d^ 'BA~ '* $ N YA ' Y -reA A"'
fad & Y 4_- )
2-
_.>=
f 2l.
e.
f I
1 l
1 1
I I
l
ICOC;O;;
j e+
CGIIBIT A-3C-1 1
A-SS i
Page 4 of 4, Rev. 3 1
Part IV - Ebliow-up & Closure (conpleted by Coupliance Engineer)
Categorization: Md; 4RL'*~~*4Jw 4 NM AL); f.K(,44' u.j pk Activity code:
Cause code:
)
A. Maintenance A. Procedural Deficiency I
B. Modification B. Lack of or inadequate C. HP Administrative Cm trols D. Chemistry C. Design Deficiency by:
E. Surveillance hsting Elec. Prod.
F. Plant Operation PEb (other than EP)
Routine Operation Vendor Transient Response D. Equipnent failure G. Radwaste E. Fabrication, Installation H. Security or Maint. Error I. Fire Protectim/
F. Persmnel Error 1
Housekeeping G. Failure to follow established J. Training Procedural omtrols K. Energency Planc H. Lack of awareness or training L. Trouble Shooting in procedural controls M. Pre-Op % sting I. Lack of or inadequate N. Procurement commnication O. Fuel Handling J. Lack of or inadequate P. Other equipnent identification Specify Other Specify Status / Closure:
Closed by:
lo 3l SG Signatutt Da'te '
t l
8 1
i 4
_.-__...---,.~,,,r.,._
-,.-,-_,.,._,--__y_7.-_,_y_
-_,m.,,,
i;..
077 1865361950 Wef/c?
- 7A-h !
4 t
5
/ 7o Y
e.-7 & s 6
k /k ed?
fec
&l
~
f c
3d A
C-u 2
/
60 Hnstey Y fo / dr r 6/ rat,.g, m /;
e 4 /7 &
C ink n h'sf ams eesf
,y2 4
ax-de rd w ca su >'Ps??d>78.s r
n br4 ~
C a/
SA 0 s
Hl PNer/
AZ oy sy g r
ce cV3 4s ee
/706eh S ec/7dd y A //fy e
\\
S s&
if/"O e
Sr sud c' 4 CVS dW <r f'C'5 7%
A-?r> e A. ->76 ' c *s &
ce i
/ / / ',,e
/4Ce i
ass' N
c3W/ 47 a e.s*J Hi"
+</#J 0
SA>"D oe.de'r / vf/~8
/S W/
0/S
- /'s e
/'AfchArA< ' c 'f hiec%ce5s/9sf.s d 7
u e
i A
p/scecff/jpc e e
s l a fe,,
?- /
4s / euJ)s
- f sxfx r
f fs Mc/
h//er d o s e Ade
,J
.WA t4 ccd do & j Se 8/c/rpe sds ffe dW' e/
cc '9s s
.D
// /
- f. A r y ec
/$ m > w., en
- Ne.r sies a6.r t e / a y
Csk&Ck sx6 ' ar
/KP re%
e 7
doe 2 $ ( t-u d /' k f/ ohre,cse d s('
c 4echeJ e
/ /b )S' /s6ed f 'S f
Adc m <d.s/&/ e Y.4/?d e /e d/srye /df C
e d
G n&S f'Ab//
~ys fi /c' e -
/sr y\\ c/essc/ed' 4d c
6b
/72#/
mesi 6
/'/
/t,, ctts'/)-
7 Saf for& p/ecsu->'4' /P/i%
e.
H/# ER D /e v
,y
~
i 1865361950
/6ll SfCf
".Z l~ ysu $/Y ec z%t I
am p s g do kn+ ysar sui W ass'T Psme fushed the #8
- /
Sw Wi< CAP / aY/> s t f o,- c e enc /
o,$^
H/reder48
&<c e 1
dem, sos.ee:deu/9 e oey' ecfdo o zWe.
no
-,- l eey%
a At z%a di n? e woc /ftl &Wf do
\\
X A#W d e' e s fe.&d oc/d M4&
verds./
s.p d,, sashed, A ?s/ss/,y s. dure /
4 6e<
n-s/ der
,ae4 ea c720 rnend esso 4-w z me ds' ~n y/sves, R ke m y b e: 4, p c s,4 e c fth m
me n-v4,ph.r W y
v We,x e csunt/e.rS d-:n es, 3 'of,,oe d
,d,y ' $n+>o s/s/ wns 7
z2A e yA s p e, w :so,
ood' dotc/
do Ze u
zf4 e se u.
fs -c e m
6sc<'/ me,zw n Ae c1.cc)l/ de aw, h+,
6/f deeSSoc)6 on.
/77 e a6
& en 66e sees 2-d,'posp
- e. c y Y
ah drSou&
we ?c
&c cde drCA f., 7/ N.e i
e nesu wpr4 idaa-Mc
/ 1 7c # 4 1 w Y:'
/
rd
,o.e nssgm e.
d y Om.M we e e am vere-:>
in d/
.wdsc4' 4.3 /33 ' 4 &
~
E /or y
/-.-
o/ 8dem 24 # ku d< ~'
% %h).#4 /d6? Y eMru
)
/S30 M't!-
.,----------,e---
- -,, - - - - - - - -,. -,,,,,n-----,nn--
~
.a.
...I.
mm 11 Artae Amw/ 0-I
\\
Septacher 11, 1986 FROM:
Tom A.
Stafford TO:
John Cotton
SUBJECT:
Event Involving Physical Violence Which Occured on August 25, 1986, at Peach Bottom Station in a High Radiation Area.
Mr. Cotton, Per our meeting today, please find attached my report of an incident which occurred on August 25, 1986, here at Peach Bottom Station involving an act of physical violence between Mr. Richard Force (P.E.Co. ) employee and Mr. Marvin Hadley (Bartlett Nuclear) employee.
This report'is to be considered dccumentation of what I observed, heard and took part in following the event.
As you stated today at the meeting attended by Me, Mr. Hilsmeir and Mr. Leitch, the N.R.C.
Inspector who is presently _ investicating an allecation made, by Haaley_ relative to the event, said N.R.C.
intenas to issue
-a violation against P.E.Co. for f ailure to write a discrepancy reocrt in accordance with the station Administrative Procedure
~A-86.
This report contains data which may be considered un-lawful with respect to some federal regulations with regard to the terms and conditions of the station operating license, technical specificatior3s.
An attempted " cover-uo" and g
" falsification of records" did in f act take place by P.E.Co.
Maintenance supervision to make the event seem less serious enap it actually was and to prevent the possibility of discovery of this action by N.I(.C. audit or records.
I am not making allegations as such, nor do I intend to take this matter to N.R.C.,
I am simo'.v providina to you exactiv what you recuested from me i.e. a report attached to an A-86 stating exactly wha t I know about this matter, you may at your discretion use it as you see fit.
A final note of concern on my,part is, the information contained in this report is not to be considered a personal attack on any named individual named in the report.
It does however, show that the attitude of some individuals in their performance of handling problems of tnis nature _is extremelv ocor.
Further, this attitude has existed for quite some time based on personal observation.
Respectfully submitted, r
Thomas Allen Staf f ord
LEve' t1 Involving Physical Violence which' occurred on August - 25, 198c,.
n at Peach Bottom, Station in a High Radiation Area.
Page 2
.THE EVENT OF Aucust 25, 1986 j
At approximatly 15:00 hours on August 25,,1986, Marvin Hadley (Bartlett Nuclear) Senior H.P. Technician reported to me that he had received significant verbal abuse and had been physically attacked by a Mr. Richard Force (P.E.Co. Maint.') while doing his' assigned job providing H.P. coverage 'at the Unit 3-C Condensate Demin Area.
At
'd 3,
my ' request Mr. L Hadley documented what had. happened 'at _ approximatly ot 14:00 hours.
His. statement (2 pages) is attached to this report.
7 Af ter he signed ' his. name to it,.I also signed and dated it and indicated the time.
I-then took.Mr. Hadley to Stu Nelson and explained what had occurred.
A copy of the statement was given to Stu and a copy u
L was placed into Mr. Hadley's file and Hadley kept a copy.
Since it was i;
end of shift i.e. 16:00 hours, it was too late to take any further action on the matter.
The'next morning at approximately 09:00 hours a meeting was held to determine what had actually happened the previous day.
.THE MEETING OF Aucust 26, 1986 @ 09:00. hours The meeting was attended by:
Don Kemper, P.E.Co. Maintenance Supervision Sandy Miller,'P.E.Co. Maintenance Supervision Ron Porrino, P.'E.Co. Maintenance Supervision Richard Force, P.E.Co. Maintenance Stu Nelson, P.E.Co. Health-Physics Supervision Marvin Hadley, Senior Health Physics Technician (Bartlett Nuclez Myself, Site Co,ordinator (Bartlett Nuclear)
Note:
Due to commitments of higher priorty Stu Nelson was not present at the start of the meeting, however, he did come in later as the meeting progressed.
Mr. Hadley was the first to tell his side of the story.
Next, Mr. Force told his side.
Their was a conflict between Hadley's version and force's version relative to who actually started the sequence of verbal confrontation which led to physical confrontation.-
Mr. Force and Mr. Porrino both stated that Hadley had provided excellent Health Physic's coverage.
At one point during the meeting Mr. Force offered to " shake hands" and forget the whole' matter.
Hadley refused tne offered.
Af ter approximately ona hour Mr. Porrino, Mr. Force and Mr. Hadley wep. told to go back to work.
I asked Mr. Force prior to leaving the meeting if he had ever been involved in this type of problem before, he said "Yes, but it was nothing".
I also asked the same question to Hadley, he said "No".
Myself, Don Kemper, Sandy Miller and Stu Nelson remained to discuss the matter further.
My concerns that I expressed were:
1.
What if one or both of the individuals would have fallen into the Demin Pit or vessel and been severly injured?
w -_.
4 f
s.
Event Involving Physical Vicience which occurred en August 25, 198c, f
at Peach Bottom' Station in a High Radiation Area.
I Page 3 2.
What would be appropriate disciplinary action for each individual?
i 3.
Since Force had prior documented problems of this nature, was he fit to work at a licensed facility?
4.
I asked Don the following questions:
Do you think that Force is a threat to his own safety d
or the safety of others who work with him?
Do you think Force is a security threat?
Do you feel Force is a threat to the safe operation of the station?
The answer to all the above was "NO".
iNote:
Attached to this report is documentation of an incident C
involving Mr. Force ' making threats to and '*. erb' ally abusing another cu November 7, 1985.
(2 pages)
During the course of coversation.that followed the subject of athe A-86 discrepancy was raised.
It was determined by Maintenance Supervision that An A-86' documenting this event would not be written
.'}because"theNRCmightseeit"andfurthertheentireproblemwas going to be " white washed".
Mr. Kemper said he was going to take the matter up to higher supervision to determine what action was going to be taken with regard to corrective or disciplinary with Mr. Force.
I was told that whatever the outcome was I had to take s
the same measure with regard to Hadley.
The meeting ended with no final decision as to v' hat would be done to either Force or Hadley.
2 Later on the same day, a second meeting was held with myself, Stu, Don and Sandy.
This meeting was to convey what the final corrective actions would be.
It was, explained t me that P.E.Co. has strict policy with regard to infractions of mompany rules.
As I understand it, there are various levels of severity which have specific levels of required disciplinary actions.
It was explained to me that'
" fighting" on company property was a major infraction (most serious) and required a mandatory repr,apand with time of f.
The time off could be a few days to perminent termination.
I was told that no one wanted to see Hadley lose his job.
The impl:, tion was if Force goes so does Hadley.
So the point of the discuss.
was that forcewould be given a documented verbal warning for " Inappropriate Conduct".
{There would not be any mention of the event nor any documentation 1 showing that physical violence had take place.
I was instructed to give Hadley a verbal warning and document this by putting a memo in is file.
The meeting ended.
m..
m..
. Event Involving Physical Violence which occurred on August 25, 1986, i
at Peach Bottom Station in a High Radiation Area.
Page-.4 Auaust 27, 1986, HADLEY-QUITS HIS JOB:
At approximately 07:00 hours on the morning of August 27, 1986, Marvin_Hadley reported to work as usual.
Upon entering my office he came over:to my desk and stated, "I'am quitting".
He was still visibly upset with the event which had occurred 2 days prior.
I asked him to sit down and let me talk to him before he made a final decision to resign his job.
He agreed.
We, discussed his problems for approximately one hour.
He stated that he knew that even though he had been physically abused 'by Mr. Force, he was certain in his own mind that Mr. Force would not receive any meaningful disciplinary action because Mr. Force was a P.E.Co. maintenance person, and he also stated that his experience here at Peach Bottom had shown him that on several occasions, lue had either personally witnessed or' head of numerous incidents of seventverbal abuse and blatent disregard for the requirements of RWPs, procedures, l
instructions and other guidenance documents used to control vork in radiologically controlled areas th d. cut the plant.
His next question was to the effect that.he was going to take his concerns to the NRC and.
he wanted my opinion as to what the'effect would be on him.vith regard to future employment in this field of Health Physics.
My response to him was that thera "ould be no effect whatsoever on him.
At this point in our meeting I.s.de the following information perfectly clear:
1.
You do not have to quit your job, you will not be terminated or laid off or,harrassed in any manner by anyone at this site.
2.
There is a resident NRC inspector on site whemyou can talk to if you wish.
3.
Federal Law provides pr.otection for anyone who wishes to report any allegation to NRC.
This " protected activity" applies to anyone working at any NRC licensed f acility.
The point of the above was to make it clear to Mr. Hadley that if he wanted to report an allegation to NRC it was his decision, and that I nor anyone else here at Peach Bottom would hold it against him.
He stated that he' knew this already and that he had already made up his mind with regard to making a formal allegation.
I did not di'scuss this with anyone else until I_was contacted by NRC and told that an allegation had be received.
At the end of our meeting, I called the H.P.
field office and requested an exit interview for Mr. Hadley.
I do not know
-who proctored this exit interview.
Next, Mr. Hadley came back to this office where I filled out his termination papers.
Attached is a copy of his termination paper.
The reason indicated is "for personal reasons".
Information with regard to individual performance of the pe'rsonnel l
involved in this event and the subsequent handling 6f the problem.
A.
THE H.P. TECHNICIAN:
(Marvin Hadley) 1.
According to his statement, his first problem on the day of the event was the verbal abuse he received f rom Force when he first asked and then ordered him to relocate his self reading dosimeter (SRD).
At that time, it was in his power to shut the job down, in accordance with
+
1
..____m,_,_
u-a
=
s Event Involving Physical Vicience which occurred on August 25, 1986, at Peach Bottom Station in a High Radiation Area.
Page 5 the "stop work authority" that all H.P. Technicians have when it is clear to them that the job they are covering is not being done in compliance with the applicable RWP requirements, procedural requirement Alara requirements or is not being done in a safe manner or any other condition which has or most likely will violate station policy, rules, regulations, etc., etc.
This option was not done for reasons unknown to me.
2.
The H.P. Technician did take a swing at Mr. Force, this was wrong no matter what the conditions were.
(
3.
After.the H.P. Technician swung at Mr. Force he retreated and did not show any signs of further aggression.
B.
THE MAINTENANCE PERSON: (Richard Force) 1.
Mr. Force verbally abused Mr. Hadley early on at the start of the job.
He admitted this.
2.
Mr. Force admitted that he physically abused Mr. Hadley after Mr. Hadley had retreatdd from the confrontation (initial) and had regained his composure _(Hadley).
3.
Mr. Force admitted having prior verbal abused problems.
(documented)
C.
HANDLING OF THE PROBLEM BY MAINTENANCE SUPERVISION:
1.
Not writing a discrepancy report for fear of NRC discovery of a serious event, is not only wrong, under some conditions it is in f act illegal.
The regulatio,ns require that any one employed at a licensed facility who witnesses an incident or event which could effect the safe operation of that facility or has potential to cause excessive exposure to radiation is required by lav to report that conditi'on.
2.
By not reporting a fight in a posted high radiation area at a licensed facility could be considered'a violation of the requirements of 10 CFR 19, etc.
3.
The decision by maintenance supervision to not write the A-86 was based on the fact that they would have no choice but to give Mr. Force a reprAmand with some amount of time off.
The problem with this is if you consider that supervision made this decision, and the regulators discovered what had occurred, then the regulators may take the position that if'" supervision /
management" persons condone this type of action, what other events have been covered up.? Or, they could
Event Involving Physical Violence which occurred on August 25, 1986, at Peach Bottom Station in a High Radiation Area.
Page 6 take the position that in the future, serious violations, should they occur may not be reported.
The bottom line is maintenance supervision thinks that it is "OK" to handle a problem any way they can as long as they protect their own.
I do not believe that maintenance supervision realizes what the consequences are or could be for willful violation of the applicable regulations.
My Own Comment on the' current status of this facility as I see ~~
it
~ ~ ~
based on personal exoerience and where I see it coina.
1.
NRC has publicly stated that Peach Bottom Atomic Pouer Station is mismanaged.
This appeared on the front page of the local neuspaper a few months ago.
2.
Sometime back, NRC targeted 14 commercial nuclear power reactors as having among other things severe problems with management.
Of these 14 reactors, 12 to this day have been voluntarily shut down by the affected utilities or shut down by order of the NRC along with show cause order as to why they should be alloved to restart.
3.
NRC after an extensive investigation determined that a former employee (George Fields) was terminated from his position here at Peach Bottom because "someone" here at Peach Bottom thought he ha'd taken a concern to NRC.
This type of violation is extremely serious.
The NRC report of the investigation showed that several persons in senior
- supervisory and management positions here at Peach Bottom were implicated in this problem.
The charge was discremination in violation of 10 CFR 50.7.
This type of charge by NRC is in fact criminal.
Note:
To show how serious this can be I am offering a classic example:
Several months ago NRC in region 2 investigated similar charges involv,ing resident NRC inspectors at a T.V.A.
station and supervisory / management personnel at the same facility.
Their findings shoved discrimination had occurred against several employees at the affected facility.
The result was 2 NRC. inspectors and several T.V.A.
supervisory and management personnel where
. arrested for violations of 10 CFR 50.7 which includes felony charges with regard to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, Energy Reorganization Act the'Faderal Civil Rights Act and other relevant Federal Laws.
4.
There are in fact persons here at Peach Bottom in supervisory or management positions who will do almost anything to protect one of their own.
It is a fact, they either do not understand or simply do not care what the consequences of their actions could be, with regard to your license.
f
_a2
+.. ~.. -
ie' Event Involving Physical Violence uhich occurred on August 25, 1986,
- at Peach Bottom Station in a High Radiation Area.
- Page 7 5.
There are people (anti-nuclear) who use the freedom of information act to acquire NRC. reports of incidents and events for this facility and make them public thru the news media.
(
6.
A group of your own employees at this time is threatening to go to the news media with their own charges of
, mismanagement a,t this facility.
7.
The news media would take an action like (6) above and twist it around, misrepresent it and then attack the NRC with a charge of "What,are you going to do about the problems at Peach Bottom"?
If the (anti-nuclear) public puts enough pressure on the NRC, the NRC is going to have no choice but to take action against the licensee.
8.
I~could go on for another couple hundred pages, however, it would serve no purpose.,
I believe that one big problem is that you have employees in various positions of supervisory and management status who have been with i
P.E.Co. for many years, long before P.E.Co. went Nuclear.
These personnel have worked their way up the ladder at Fosil or Hydro /
Fosil Station vs a Nuclear Facility.
What some of these people do not understand is that what is acceptable at non-nuclear facilities may not be acceptable at a Nuclear Power Reactor Site, due to the significant amount of regulatory implications.
When you have your own employees with an attitude of "I can do whatever I want to" and-they knou that if they get caught in violation of some requirement, they will most likely not be disciplined in any meaningful way.
You must ask the question "Why does this attitude exist"?
"Who is allowing this attitude to exist"?
This is when it becomes clear that supervision is the responsible party.
You witnessed the severe verbal abuse of Dan Kern, because he did his job.
Under the present conditions it is nearly impossible to project a professional attitude and maintain a posture of confidence.
Further, if changes are not mada in the future to correct some of the significant problem areas that are identifiable, it will only get worse.
As I stated on the cover sheet of this report, this report was written at your request,and the information contained herein is factual and true in every respect.
I take full responsibility for its contents and want you to understand that the comments or opinions expressed are mine only and do not represent in anyway or form Bartlett Nuclear, Inc., my employer.
,I knou that the problems can be corrected in time with sincera effort on everyones part.
If there is anything I can do to help in the corrective process, just ask.
I sincerely want to help.
I like working here i
at this facility.
Beginning next January, we are going into a 5
t
--c...y+-~e.
ae*
e Evant Involving Physical Violence which cccurred on August 25, 1986, at Peach Bottom. Station in a High Radiation Area.
Page 8 year of significant outage status.
It is not going to be easy.
However, if some changes are not made between nou and January-it may be impossible.
I honestly don't know if this report is~
vhat you had in mind when your requested it, however, this is how it turned out.
Respectfully submitted, i
Thomas A. Stafford O
O G
e S
4 e
G l
D D
e 9
9 I
i j
n.
-:_ Avmi M is:
..A.-..' 2.*
(.
.~
0 m wm G. cr.x.'
- c. g$.
5-4 5A3:iTLETT sacca ENIH PhtsIcs acn.s T-.;#. ' Pi c c:.s A m i m e.
I l
DE OF BIM: 4/2/60 SIIAL EECURI'IY NO.: 441-62--7786
_EXD2'ICN U.S. thvy Schools (1) Muunist's Mata "A" Schec1 (2) Nuclear Power S:lx:cl (3) Nbelear Power Training thit (4) Engineering Ial:cratorf.'Itchnician Echool (5) RadiolW!ml Ihs.uf Maintenance C::urse MER6CE 01/82 -
USS EIS2NHCHER _(CVN-69), Nuclear Powered Airt:= aft carrie 05/84 Idadina Dmineerine labcratory Wan of 52'Mi:r Plant
7
~
Duties dw h M : S2pervised Engineer'mg TaFeratcrf Technicians assigned to the 12 lb. actor Plant, schetaled, maintained, and an-signed Planned Md::tamnce System items asscciated with ndier logical c::ntrols, perfcmed routine and special surveys of Reactor kcza spaces.
Ecsimetr/ Sucerviser
'D;::ies included: Supervised the prccessing of all Calciun flucr-ide 'IteMuninscent Desimetry issued ontx:ard the USS EISI:UCcEP.
(CW-69).
LIC Y-"rHEIENE (AD-41), Destroyer tan' er' Nuclear Support Facility.?
t.
d 0
i RadicIceicialTCdit:?61s Ed.ft'AMA% ~
~ "
-~
De ies ircluded: ~ ProfiManit as Radiologicel O::ntrols Mcnitcr, c:-
ptr= rent access and controlled surface ccmtzmination area watch, F4.:'-
sennel desinet y precesscr, ma4~-he=d.f..rf and bciler water cred?t:.e analyst, radicactive liquid waste processing, radicactive wasta, c.:n-pacting, radioactive waste _eW4ficatien systerns cperatcr, rydic-active high efficiency filter testar (ECP), pure deineralized w.'-.-r systes cpter, hasic nuclear sW; facility cpenter, ard..uch supscrt facility security and roving wat:::h.
Ibacter Plant Cleanliness SaccrJiser n:-ics included: Ins,tecticn and superiisica cf traintenance cf the re.acter plant grade "A" cleanliness duri:5 nuclear werk.
l l
\\
l l
I I
pne mu=re ausse
-e n
--.. :.2 T:
w
'L a
CE. )
No i :'2 %===
1 800 2"! 'J.'35 Ptyrrituth: (G ;-) ;4G.G4S4 N :,J.G3 L gs.y;.rg iNmu.
- c...
P.O. BOX 1300 7.t..
.'. MAIN OFFICE: 60 INDUSTR!AL PARK ROAD
.s,'..; 'c v ", ' ~* : 2
'r'~
7
- '.'.N'
. Je. c.- '. ' '. " '
' Pt.YMOUTH INDUSTRf AL PARK n
- C.=:
PLYMCUTH, MA 023G0
.i,.. '.M...., @.,,, 4 s.
, ^
- a.:
.s-, r.,. ;1..
e,. s.
.,.,,.,.....'_..,,'a r
.,~...,~~.4.,
'.Y W. a..-.
.R'.s' y -,:,. Q ;'. *.. '.~.... o..,..*
.v.;..,,u,
...~n..s.,.;,.
._..........5.,.,
u..
a
-.am s.-
....-.,. ; :.. ~~-
!... :;.5.; ;...y
.,.s..e.
,.~<.s
,.... ::.....r.. : (-
....v:
.t.,
g.. a.
?.
~
..1;.. ~f.3.- - n g.;
s.. ~:..,. y. : ?.g..'.
a<. u.
~.
...t.
3, w.,, -.
. v.
.~.
a
.t..,
.. 3 :;j: 3: -. ;,....,.;
?
,. y,
.::w.. _. ::
g.
2 r.t.
.-,. : 7.
+
v 3..'.
~~..
^
c...
^
f,
.. C s..
., c. y,.:..
- ..... rt...+
.,'e,y.
7.~,., : ;.,.,
< 'Q.;i.;.Difector '. Security k.... -i 0.:.p.7 ! i.,.:;...y.:
.s
~' Tr.F.,....'. N. M R..y. :. F......
..s... :..
.,'c.4 3 W
t.--~--
2.<
~ ],.. -
Philadelc.hia Electric Cam.>.nv
.r Statien 1'
" '. ~ ".
l Peach Ecttcm At=ic Generatig.
~ ' '
...i.FD gl t.-
-- Delta, PA 17314
~
.'C,,oo.rdinatcr.- Nuclear Access P.r:gra::t.......
.,.c
- ,.. Att:
.... ;.p.-
4
Dear Sir:
Sccial Security
/NARWN 4DC6V It is nc lenger recuirrd that, e plcyed by Eartlet
~
. Nuclear, Inc.cf Plvtrath, M'-.
, Nu.ber 941-fo7 -777C,he authorized access to Philadelphia Electric Cw.ptny's Fe
~
[,',
_.~ Gene:atirq Staticn.
Revccatica cf Clearance Previcusiv Accreved b-U'b Date of Resignaticn:
Discharged /Te.:tinated en:
Reascn for Te=inaticn:
Vol.Ua7wn/ Qvi r Fd TMscN AL f?G A 5 EMS Other:
1 Clearance TypeAb:
r b if i
. Q..%."-
y nz c h~
7 /17 / FL date I
i.
e RI'KCCICN ?CCCE L '.
. s...
t v~
y. v:.
r.
- u s n...'. s a c..
s t
~'
g a.
.L
^
....-.v..t.-..
Revision 1, Pace. 1 07/25/G5-
)
APPROVED M 2/
r PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY 2301 Market Street PHILADELPHIA, PA 19101
~
NUCLEAR PLANT RULES These rules which relate to nuclear. plant activities are in offect to assure that job safety and responsibility are maintained
- c. :: a high level.
Rules in effect at conventional plants concerning cafety and responsibility (e.g, wearing of hardhats, no horseplay) are also in force.
Your full cooperation in implementing all rules is requested.to ensure your safety and the proper operation of the plant.
Supervisors are required to enforce all rules.
Failure to comply with these rules may cause both you and your supervisor to be s;ubject.to disciplinary action.
Please read these rules carefully.
If yo6 have any questions, please ask your supervisor for clarification.
GENERAL 1.
You must conduct yourself in a responsible and professional manner at all times while on site includ.ing communications with supervision, management, other work groups / departments, and representatives of the NRC or other agencies.
2.
You must report to your supervisor any abnormal conditions, items of non-conformance, or deviation from procedure which you cbserve.
Individuals reporting deviations will not meet with disciplinary action.
However, failure to r'eport deviations and attempting to cover-up deviations are considered grounds for disciplinary action.
3.
You must obey the door rules, i.e..,1) pull doors shut, 2) keep water tight doors closed and dogged, 3) keep fire doors closed, 4) make certain that hi-rad doors are closed and locked, and 5) do not open a door if the blue light over the door is lit.
n L
Revision 1, Pa e 2 07/2 /85 APPROVED 5
4.
You must practice good housekeeping on the job at all times.
Tools shall not be scattered about and shall be returned to their place after use.
1 4
5.
You must not possess firearms or explosives on station property, excent at Peach Bottom Where legal firearms in vehicles in the parking lot are permissible.
6.
You must not possess alc6holic beverages on station property, except at Peach Bottom in unopened containers in vehicles in the parking lot.
7.
You must not use alc6holic beverages on station property, 5
includine use in vehicles in the, parking lot.
8 You must not use or possess illegal drugs on station property includine use or possession in vehicles in the parking lot.
SECURITY 1.
You must verify name labels on your security and dosimetry badges before leaving the guardhouse and wear them on the upper chest area at all times.
2.
An escort is responsible for constant accompaniment, I
guidance and safety of the person (s) being escorted at all times.
3.
You must follow the plant access rules:
e.g.,
use your keycard immediately prior to entering and leaving. security control areas; enter areas Where authorized only; do not abuse, tamper with, or bypass any security equipment; do not use another person's keycard; do not follow people through doors or let them follow your no tailgating., Be sure all doors are closed and latched after passing through.
If a door has to remain open for any reason, security must be notified immediately.
l 4.
You must never leave a vehicle unattended anywhere within the protected area unless it is locked and the keys are l
removed.
L
\\
B s.
Revision 1, Page 3 07/22/85 APPROVED WNNO HEALTH PHYSICS 1.
You are responsible for not exceeding daily permissible I
radiation guides.
You must check direct. reading dosimeter often.
If you have questions, contact Health Physics or your supervisor.
2.
You must not eat, drink, smoke, chew tobacco or gum except in designated areas.
3.
You must inform Health Physics immediately if.you suspect you may have contaminated a clean area.
e 4.
You must read the Radiation Work Permit (RWP), comply with its requirements, and sign in and out on the access and exposure control sheet.
You must perform a thorough frisk each time you exit a contaminated area and phenever you suspect 'that you may be contaminated.
5.
You must place trash, AntiJC clothing, and respirators in the appropriate containers when leaving contaminated areas.
6.
You must report the loss or finding of any dosimetry devices immediately to your supervision or Health Physics.
7.
You must make a pressure check of your respiratory equipment prior to entering the airborne radioactivity area e
to assure a satisfactory fit.
8.
You must not remove Anti-C clothing from the station propert{.
9.
You must place trash in apprcpriate containers (clean trash in green drums and contaminated trash in yellow drums).
Non-compactible trash and liquids must not be put into receptables.
Contact Health Physics personnel for disposal instructions.
- 10. You are not permitted to take non-technical reading material into the power block or other cperating ar'eas.
S 9
t
t Revision 1, Page 4 07/22/85 APPROVED lW$de SAFETY 1.
You must keep your work area clean; work areas must be policed at the end of each shift.
2.
You must store combustible materials in proper containers at specified locations.
A fire watch is required if accumulated combustibles cannot be properly stored.
3.
You' must not take fire equipment from assigned locations except in an emergency.
4.
You must not leave unattende'd fire doors open or block access to escape routes or fire equipment with tools,
(
equipment, or other materials.
5.
You must obtain and complete an Ignition Source Control Check List (A-12) whenever you are welding, burning, cutting, or using other heat sources in major plant locations.
I 9
9 9
e S
9 4
1
_w 077 f b ~lc?4
/J
//74O?8 S
/ 9d' O Y&l s/7h.'ef7 fdC0 0&< $ h /k)r c
3d V
60 hes,9,,,~
Y /Y
,f6 H.est-ey /3h LW/ccn?I4 ?c? v.c.,h s,h A9n N C
p
.d wde
,J/f ede 7
.. /. 4 ) d 4 r u&
es s/
7 SkP/??Cr?/s
.h 4 c '.
.A A 're l h A;;2 si syd
.Hl r
e C9 0 nc6ch SAP /0 5 <7deg A/ey As ae 6
M
/
o sdW in&
- $r f t u A c' 4 A.>n/s
.bs c 's sio C.
c f'C'5 fa e
/R
///'
C t' 38/ #,,eaeow N
.nso
- f
<t/#J 0
SAfD cede,e/ Wfjeff
/s
. Rec %cel7's fvfe 4gf. sed J/s Asw/S 7
u e
c
' e M 'e f 4<r/ eues,rvdc/s / afer,,p/scec! S
\\
A' 8
e j7 7e HP SWee a6se V
it'Je
.)
e fe IWA e4 &cd du &
,y Sethe%wem cc' NA f
o/'
/$n. /c.e #
f dW ye s w r y s' c 8/dsxen&.#//cr a$s
\\
-: rp
e
///' C fccec/4n
&3by.<' c:4I:7se c 4ec4ed'(15weoder,s'cAccdea/ /
t
.a(sse
/,/b N.iw6ed' e /e
,,4ff;
+
fe ?c-Y. 9/u/
4 d/ein e $dfG me<d.s s6s f'Ab'?
y p.,n-
.fs/c
,Q< ~/f ' d b y..+JJed' Ad C/eincir &
J. # ms/m-n.c/y Suf for&
su-P
' /) /r%
4 1
fi ece.
W ERD /'~
.._a_,.-
,., n e e, e m
,_,ww.mm_w.,
, _,.4s,4-
._.....,_.__.-_.-__,.__-..e___--._
~.seao
-i.-
n#
,a
-_a
,4 a
-.--w
.l;0ll kkf l ff o tY m{
A,i/ M 2%rt I am jog do fib + ysae sa" me fl pushed the #8 Sw WucAP ugn ni fo<ce S'irc e pa d clh A a/ 9 e #ey H / retre4dec/ &c o t/c no don >
rep m:
pssase-n t.
e d a, s n, <
z
' wod// 6Nf de d o/dv d e c) d M4&
. 3 AsW dee?
'ver,JO#y
,#.f?l ahu.sef,
./.s6er,/t.tdWfl<.4/?l.Sd,ra Cd' er-A/ der 43 Y e
c.4sko
$,x c72o ines
- Sves, A;;;
\\
m e ds~n e
uggeeG w?
my Au.+,
- d. h / e. a a -
- 7f s.w M,ph s, cs/
y wb/er>c e csu n t/c.r3 d+n ds, ses/ wn,s
$lCQ2l
,, $,y ' brrspo d.A e y A
\\
3% p er w :.so,
and do/d do Zco-<
\\
.f4,e se u.
' &<c e 6 o c d />> e d6sc f
/A. cud / &
kJ4 5 '
6/e dr6SSec.26 c77
/77 6 9 8 At en do&cn 6le eres ex:/
v'~
\\.
nese t;b*dssou&
.4.rdA cAe f./r/
M 4E' w r4
\\
42 rrdw ie' rc/x &
e
.c # 7c # 4 % f ?
- d C & y$rc c 2u#5'jen E.
dm.M w e,e ocn ve<<-:,
\\
en XA' c.v. /33' a c
\\
\\
J.<J{s&$
~Z-r/ $$ dos 88f bd(
f &,V o
f5,yM.
--,,,---,-,n,,-,,----
uu 4.
~
-g3 (j';Tachmen! 0-b october 24, 1966' J
FROM:
T. A. Stafford TO:
J. Cotton
SUBJECT:
Documentation with regard to my position on the matter of the incident of August 25, 1986, involving Mr. Marvin Hadley and Mr. Richard Force.
Mr. Cotton This memo is to document my offical position with-respect to the concerns I had expressed at our first meeting when we discussed the incident which occured on August 25, 1986.
Since our first meeting I have noted a significant improvement in all of the areas of concern.
Specifically the area concerning the negative attitudes of some individuals in dealing with Health Physics Technicians at various work locations thru out this facility.
I have not been informed of any verbal abuse or negative actions whatso ever since our first meeting.
This is highly commendable with respect to the person or persons who addressed this problem and took immediate corrective actions.
During our meeting of September 19, 1986, I was given the Discrepancy Report addressing the 1ncident of August 25, 1986.
After reviewing this document I am convinced the following positive actions occured, based on personal observation:
1.
Manag*ement took immediate and aggressive i
mitigating actions to correct identified concerns.
2.
All ef fected personnel have demonstrated a significant positive posture with regard to attitudes.
3.
The Discrepancy Report relative to the incident of August 25, 1986, is true, correct and complete.
4.
Mitigating disciplinary actions directed to the personnel involved in the incident i
of August 25, 1986, were acceptable with raspect to that specific event.
i I
5.
Events of this nature, should they occur in the future will be handled aggressively by responsible management personnel who
. 3 Incident involving Mr.,Marvin' Hadley and Mr. Richard Force Page 2 q
will initiate the existing company policy with full force and effect with regard to -
i disciplinary action.
I apologize for not responding sooner.
Let the record show that I have ne further concerns with regard to this matter.
My opinion is this matter has been handled by management in a highly profassional manner.
My position is,-this matter is closed.
Respectfully submitted, d.k.
T. A. Stafford Site Coordinator Bartlett Nuclear, Inc.
e e
e 9
./.
r.::nn u
' AkAmu' D -I grE 3 ' (
/;:
/l PHILADELPHIA ELIGIC COMPANY l
I Electric Productica Department - Maintenance Division NOTICE OF ORhl kVARNING This Notice is used to dccument an Cral %rning interiten with a haintenance Division employce. It is to be completed and sent to the appropriate Maintenance Superintendent at Oregon Shops.
l 1.
Employee's Name: Richard Force 43 5135 Date _8/25/86
~
2.
Employee's
Title:
Stesmfitter 3/c W rk Location PBAPS 3.
Description of the problem (infraction):. Richard Force is beino oiver an oral warnino for (imorocer behavior) verbal abuse to a Bechtel H.P., Marvin l
.Hadley.
4.
Employee's statement to supervision:
Richard stated that he would make
~
every effort to develoo a more orofessional stance when inter-actino with other oecole.
5.
Supervision's recommendation to employee:
Mr. Force'was instructed to develon less of an soitatine demesnor and become more orofessional in his J cliocs with cther nroues and occole. ~
6., Supervision's statement of the cohsequences if. employee does not t.?ke corrective action:
E nol: me sas told that very severe disciolinary action wcula t,c Nken if the e:::cInvee did not take corre_tive action.
f 7.-
Foreman /Assis::nt Foreman Etgnsture: [ / L, - # [.
.i
'A 7 - 7/.
6.
Higher lev'els of supervision reviewing this Motice:
Signsture t h.
_ Titich. / [.... _..
Da te f 4 / -) e
- ~
~
Signature d T/ I Title Stuw.,
.( _% Q.Date bM-b i~
9.
Remarks:
j i
""#'# h,
(.,.
D t
RECORD OF COUNSELING EMPLOYEE:
'b d I N d'~
[AYROLL #
b REASON FO.a CouNsettNo: PEX 64 C
- 5us,- o#
(, so /e>,<
EAD Scy e c,
a COMMENTS:-
%d ! N8 FO/P C E 7'/7-/ ~ ME#84 I Abf C 0 A-L'oTk&R SM$ Nue e o4 c o x1 D M rer Ptem t cf f
r
/
e l'
OR f,m phiw D,mn is
.4 M/pcf /p f x n-c h o of 'D?Tcn l g., g, i
/
/
{
hui ebhe7
/hJ to t b
,4'6 T kf N Uu< n-&
/~u 'rb re I/ / s in-Tica,.,- o f Tl c
)\\% l.,
p i tt ten / ni k 'tvr k e -
O a s e in (,lin - Ab&n
/
/
/
//
e #
EMPLOYEE'S COMMENTS:
W AW NA Yb YA, st.
aiMj /L sdsa Muda(JMah hA h 2 4' W-
/
g we id%A/Av %d. "OA/k'
/////hf 1
l J
COUNSELED BY:.
th--
TITLE:
f4 OATE OF COUNSELING:
M-[' W e
l l
t l
NOTE:
THIS FORM MUST BE SENT TO C. A. SAWICKi AT COMPLETION OF
.-n....-r.
- sv ffachaed E-!
On August 25, 1986 a crew of Maintenance men went in to work on the "C" Condensate Demin. After working on the Demin for about 10-15 minutes, I heard an altercation between Rich Force and the H.P.
I hollered for them to calm down.
They continued to argue and the H.P. proceded to throw a punch. Richy, on seeing him, ducked the punch, but the verbal abuse continued by both men for about five more minutes.
Next, the H.P. was walking b'ack and forth doing his job of checking alarming sod pencil dosimetry. Richy was continuing the verbal abuse. The H.P. stopped in front of Richy. They began to say what they were going to do to the other.
This action was taking place right in front of me.
I proceeded to break it up.
I grabbed Richy and pulled him away. As I grabbed Richy, he grabbed the H.P. and they both were thrown against the wall and told to calm down. After this I left them - not hearing or observing any other problems between them.
/6 Nathan Scott e
e e
4 1
I l
,u k N4&kmenf ' E-
^'
27 August 1986 During the case-in-point, I was engaged in removing three hundred and two elements from the Jjl Condensate tank.
In order to remove these elements I was not in a position to observe the incident in its entirety. Upon exiting the tank, due to the completion of the removal, I proceeded to cut the filters.
The work position while cutting filters is on your knees facing the floor.
While engaged in filter cutting, a body fell on top of me.
Looking through the mask lens, I noticed th'at it was the H.P. that had fallen on me.
Thinking that ha had fainted, I tried to offer assistance and help him to his feet.
After.atanding upright myself, I noticed Richard Force yelling at the H.P.
Having had-no idea what the problem was, I intervened and told Richard to exit the R.W.P. area. Richard expressed that he would not exit the area until the job was completed. Whereupon, I instructed the H.P. to stay by my side Lntil the job was completed. There were no occurances during the
,f,emainder of the job which was five minutes later.
L Ronald A.'Porrino Subforeman Pipefitter Job Leader e
5 9
w hS4Cbmestl SS
~
i s
s To Wnom It May Concern:
While working on SC demin filter the Bartlet HP repeatedly interfereed our working program causing unsafe conditions. At this time I told j
him to stay out of the way; at which time he informed me he would (Clean my clock) and took a swing at me.Greg Minnich,Nate Scott Kevin Kochenour stopped any further action by'the H.P. I went back to my job I was repeatedly harassed. It was very hot and humid in j
the areaf the H.P. confronted me just before exiting the area) at this point I became agdravatted and just pushed him put of the way and he fell to the floor. I then exited the area. The bectels on the job saw what happened their names are on thr R.W.P.
SIGNED Richard Force W
/W
r i.o kYACb/77ul S~ h To Whom It May Concern:
On August 25, 1986 I was assigned to the 3C Demin filter replacement job. While looking for the right tools in our hot tool box, the HP on the job informed me that my pencil dosimeter was supposed to be worn on the outside chest area of my anti-C's.
I then replied there is no dose in my area and went t'o the outside man and had it placed on the outside of my anti-C's.
I then returned to my work station with the proper tools.
The HP then proceeded to walk thru the area creating unsafe conditions for the workers; at which point I said "Will somebody please get this pussy out of the way?" The HP then stood over top of me.
I then stood up and he replied, "I'll clean your clocki," I laughed and he took a swing at me.
I ducked his swing and Greg Minnich, Nate Scott and Kevin Kochenour stopped any further action by the HP.
I went back to work removing the filter elements from the filter rods.
Approximately 5 minutes later, the HP walked in to my area again harrassing me.
At this point, due to the extreme temperatures, humidity and events leading up to this point, I became aggravated and told the HP to get out of my face and pushed him down. Fearing he would again swing or possibly strike me, I then left the area avoiding more confrontation feeling it was the best thing to do.
Richard J. Force 4
kh48b/Pr&7 f E-r 9
During the incident in question, I was involved in disassembling the Condensate Demin Filter Elements. This particular part of the job involves operating an electric nut runner to remove the nuts, washers, and spring from the rod assembly. Once this is complete, and the individual parts are distri-buted into their proper buckets, the filter is removed from the rod and passed on to be cut up.
This complete job is an assembly line type job which requires smooth operation of everyone concerned.
While I was involved in the process of disassembling the filters, I became aware of a distrubance to my right.
I then observed Rich Force and the HP in a shoving and shouting match. Having not known what provoked the incident, I grabbed Rich and told him to relax, that nothing was worth fighting for. Rich quickly restrained himself, and the HP was also restrained by others on the job. After this incident, work returned to normal.
Approximately 15 minutes later, as I was continuing to disassemble filters, I heard some shouting and saw a person fall on Ron Porrino as he was cutting filters. Again, not knowing what happened, I went to offer assistance.
Apparently, the HP and Rich had another misunderstanding and Ron Porrino (Job leader) was telling Rich to leave the area. However, Rich wanted to stay till the job was complete. Everyone returned to work and about 10 minutes later we all exited the area for the day.
Gregory Minnich uL 4
f L
~
s k Y A C b /?? d n b E - h o
To Whom It May Coricern:
The following is a written statement of_ what I saw occur on the 3-C Demin Filter job between the Bartlett HP and Maintenance Mechanic, Rich Force.
While removing filters from the vessel, the HP removed my dosimetry causing me to stop work. As a result, I was hit by the filte' ceing brought up from the tank. When the HP was asked to stay out of the way by Rich Force, both the HP and Rich exchanged words. Then the HP threw a punch at Rich. Several more words were exchanged. By this time, the group leader, Ron Porrino, was out of the " hole" and settied things down.
?
Kevin R. Kochenour 4
/d a
9 1
1
- - -