ML20244D637

Rept of Investigation 1-83-008 Re Falsification of NDE Records by Pullman-Higgins QC Inspector.Investigation Closed

ML20244D637
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	10/20/1983
From:	Christopher R, Fortuna R, Hayes B, Matakas R, William Ward NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI)
To:
Shared Package
ML20137K732	List: ML20244D637
References
1-83-008, 1-83-8, NUDOCS 8601240205
Download: ML20244D637 (5)

Text

f \

I-,

}

g . . I

,# d, UNITED STATES '

g' ' + ' ,,. ,, T' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i g OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE, REGloN I

-l'

[ 631 PARK AVENUE KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406 -

REPORT OF INVESTIGATION

. TITLE: Seabrook Station Unit 1/ Falsification of Non-Destructive Examina-tion (NDE) Records SUPPLEMEljTAL: Docket Number 50-443 DATE: October 20, 1983 CASE NUMBER: 1-83-008 STATUS: CLOSED

]

REPORTING 0FFICE: Office of Investigations Field Office, Region I PERIOD OF INVESTIGATION: May 9, 1983 through June 21, 1983 )

REPORTING INVESTIGATOR:

R. A. Matakas, I, investigator Office of Investigations  ;

Field Office, Region 1 REVIEWED BY: . .

p ,c b R . K. Christopher, Director

(' , Office of Investigations F

id Offiy, Region I j REVIEWED BY: M2 ttilliam' Wrd, Di rector ,

Division of Field Operations '

gica of Inve+i;;+, ions _ ,

REVIEWED BY: /)

Rog rtun6,' puty D' ' tor .

Of f In s . 'o s  !

APPROVED BY: ( ./W /M/j#

%en B. Hayes, DirecKor Office of Investigate j k .,

-55 .

\  ;

O  ;)

SUMMARY

On May 9,1983, the Acting Regional Administrator requested an investiga-tion after the licensee (Public Service Company of New Hampshire) reported on April 29, 1983, that a welding inspector employed by the Pullman-Higgins Company (Contractor) was possibly involved in procedure violations during Nondestructive Examination (NDE) for both safety related and non-safety related welds at the Seabrook Unit I and 2, Nu~c lear Generating Stations.

i On April 18, 1983, approximately two weeks. prior to 'the licensee's not.ifica-tion, the NRC Seabrook Senior Resident Inspector (SRI) received an anonymous l

allegation that identified a Pullman-Higgins (P-H) NDE Technician as responsible for record falsification and further alleged that the technician's super-visors were attempting to cover up the falsification. Accordingly, this investigation was initiated to determine if there was actual falsification of P-H NDE records and if true, to determine what action the P-H management took towards identifying and reporting the wrongdoing.

f' The NDE technician (Subject) identified by the anonymous alleger was inter-viewed by the reporting investigator on May 22, 1983. He said that in April I

1983, he became, aware that the P-H management was investigating alleged improprieties concerning his NDE workmanship (liquid penetrant and magnetic particle exam-inations). He said that .on April 21, 1983, his P-H ,NDE certifications were pulled by P-H management and he was informed that he would not be allowed to perform any more NDE inspections until the P-H investigation was complete.

He said that during this time, P-H management indicated to him that they j suspected that he had completed inspection reports without ever doing the l actual inspections. When questioned about the allegations by P-H management, f Subject said he continually denied the allegations but did admit to occasional procedural violations regarding some of his liquid penetrant inspection. He said that on April 27, 1983, his employment was terminated for " poor workmanship".

Subject stated that he did not know of anything which could account for the P-H findings and further stated that he never falsified any NDE reports and "on l

y '

, ..) i every occasion" did his assigned work " accurately" and " honestly" and to l the best of his ability.

l Subsequent interviews with P-H onsite management personnel and P-H NDE j technicians, determined that Subject's questionable NDE inspections were l first brought to management's attention in January 1983 when a reinspection of a weld, previously accepted by Subject, was found to.have rejectable in-dications. Management and technician interviews indicate that this incident did not,'at the time, raise suspicions of record falsification or suspicions that Subject was not conducting his assigned inspections. However, in  ;

accordance with applicable procedures, on January 28, 1983, P-H~ reported the incident in a supplement to the appropriate nonconformance report to United i Engineers and Constructors (UE&C), the architect at the Seabrook Unit 1 l for corrective action. UE&C reviewed the supplement and sent back their I

disposition dated April 11, 1983. The disposition required P-H to " spot check other acceptable liquid penetrant inspections performed by the individual responsible for the initial liquid penetrant inspection performed on this weld ...

to verify that the discrepancy between the initial and subsequent liquid s penetrant inspections is an isolated incident." Prior to receiving the afore- j mentioned disposition, during the late March and April 1983 time period, j the P-H Quality Assurance (QA) Manager initiated reinspection of samplings of Subject's NDE work. The reinspection involved both liquid penetrant (LP) j and magnetic particle (MP) inspections and the res01ts of the reinspection in-dicated that Subject did not properly conduct his assigned NDE inspections and may ;

have falsified P-H NDE inspection reports; however, when interviewed on several occasions by P-H management personnel, Subject continued to deny that he had either falsified NDE reports or that he had not done his assigned work. The aforementioned information was verified through interviews of P-H management personnel and nonmanagement employees and through a review of related documenta--

tion. It was further determined that the licensee was notified by P-H in early to mid April 1983, that they (P-H) were conducting an investigation into a potential problem concerning NDE inspection violations by one_ of their  ;

(P-H) NDE technicians. The P-H QA manager said that based on Subject's  ;

adnitted failure to follow written procedures, and reinspection results,  ;

Qt -)

he terminated Subject's employment on April 27, 1983, and notified the licensee of the reasons behind the termination on the same date.

(

All of the P-H NDE site management personnel, supervisory personnel and NDE technicians were interviewed and other than the instant investigation, all denied being aware of any other actual or suspected falsification of records.

Information obtained during several of the aforementioned interviews indicated that Subject may have provided false information on his P-H job application and resume regarding his formal education and previous employment. Contact l with en educational institution and a past employer listed on the above men-tioned documents, determined that Subject did not have a college degree or previous NDE certifications as listed on these documents. It was further learned that Subject's employment with a' previous NDE employer resulted in temination for a " falsified radiographic' film report".

I On June 21, 1983, Subject was reinterviewed by the reporting investigator and initially denied that he had falsified P-H inspection reports or that he had not

[

done all of his assigned inspections. After approximately 35 minutes of being interviewed, Subject admitted that he had falsified "a good number" of P-H MP and L'P NDE inspection reports. He said that he did actually perform, and accurately documdnt .all of his assigned safety related NDE assignments; however, he said he did not perform all of his assigned non-safety related NDE as.signments but did submit the reports which falsely documented the work j as being compit ted ar,d asceptable. He further admitted that he had lied on his P-H job 491icat'on and resume regarding his formal education and previous i NDE certificatjen. lie said that no onc, to include P-H management, was aware that he nr.d ft1sif ad P-H NDE inspection reports.

l This investigation determined that Subject, a P-R NDE technician, did falsify {

I P-H NDE Inspnction Reports, however, there was no indication that P-H manage-ment was citter hware of, or attecked to cover up, the wrongdoing by Subject.

i P-H reported tt;e irst noted'indection discrepncy to UESC on January 28, 1983; i

t .,

t-i 6

k

)

(i i

commenced investigating the discrepancy in late March 1983, prior to receiving L f' UE&C's corrective action; when t, heir -(P-H) investigation raised suspicions ,

'm. of wrongdoing, they promptly notified the licensee of the ongoing investiga- j tion; and when their invesitgation was complete on April 27, 1983, they I immediately notified the licensee of the results. ' Interviews with all' of the technicians in.the P-H NDE Department indicate that the falsification 4 I

, was an individual, isolated incident. . This investigation is CLOSED. 1 I

J e

a

'l 9

4 i

(

l

'f

4

.)

t l

i 1

0 J

l l

l i

1 1

1 1 1 ,

1 l

l l

l I

l 1

l DET' AILS i e

i u

f

'k A

i l

' ~ '

- 5 4 ,)

Purpose of Investigation This investigation was initiated to determine if there was actual falsifica-tion of Pullman Higgins (P-H) Nondestructive Examination (NDE) records by James V. PAD 0VAND, P-H NDE Technician (Subject), as reported in an anonymous allegation and, if true, to determine what action P-H management took towards

~

identifying and reporting the wrongdoing.

i l

]

b l 1

. 1 I

I I

(

l

(J 3 d

Backgr'ound

(  !

On May 9,1983, the Acting Regional Administrator requested an investiga-tion after the licensee (Public Service Company of New Hampshire) reported on April 29, 1983, that a welding inspector employed by the Pullman Higgins '

(P-H) Company (Contractor) was possibly involved in procedure violations during Nondestructive Examination (NDE) for both safety _ related and non-safety l related welds at the Seabrook Unit I and 2, Nuclear Generating Stations.

Attachment (1) is the licensee's Preliminary Notification Report. On April 18, 1983, approximately two weeks prior to the licensee's' notification, the NRC Seabrook Senior Resident Inspector (SRI) received an anonymous a'11egation which identified a P-H NDE Technician as responsible for record falsification and further alleged that the technician's supervisors were attempting to cover up the falsification. Attachment ~(2) is the SRI's Report of Allegation.

This investigation was initiated to determine if there was actual falsifica - 4 tion of P-H NDE records and if true, to determine what-action P-H management took towards identifying and reporting the incident.

)

e j

1

~

8 e

i 1

9 I

I, I

. i I 4

-Interview with James V. PADOVANO (Subject)

-( James Vincent PADOVANO, former Pullman Higgins (P-H) Nondestructive Examina-tion (NDE) Technician, was interviewed.by the reporting investigator on May 15 &

22, 1983, in Dover, NH.

PAD 0VAND provided Attachment (3), a sworn statement wherein he denied ., .

falsifying P-H NDE Inspection Reports stating that on every occasion he did his assigned work accurately, to the best'of his ability and honestly reported his findings.

I i

6 I

r i

i i

)

1

)

Interviews with Pullman Higgins (P-H) Nondestructive Examination (NDE)

( Supervisors / Management Personnel i The P-H onsite NDE management structure is depicted as follows:

P-H Quality Assurance (QA) Manager Richerd DAVIS P-H Assistant QA Manager Raymond DONALD l The NDE Department has two first line supervisors (Edward BOWLES, first shift and Bohdan MUT2, third shift). The department works three shifts with the first shift being the daytime shift. The second shift has only two employees and does not have a first line supervisor assigned directly to it.

f.

I s

/

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - J

~

v '

6.

) '

Interv'iew with Pullman Higgins (P-H) Quality Assurance (0A) Manager

(" Richard G. DAVIS, P-H QA Manager, was interviewed by the. reporting investiga-tor at the Seabrook Station on May 23, 25 and June 7,1983.

DAVIS provided a sworn statement, Attachment (4), wherein he discusses 1

the sequence of events surrounding the P-H investigation into the alleged  ;

i falsification of P-H Nondestructive Examination (NDE) Reports by James

, PADOVANO. DAVIS provided the following attached documents, to the reporting.

1 investigator:

Attachment (5) - PAD 0 VAN 0's P-H resume, job application ~ and pro-

~

fessional qualification form; Attachment (6) - Correspondence.between DAVIS and Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory, a previous employer of PAD 0 VAN 0; Attachment (7) - Weld history of Weld Number F0101 (Field Weld Process Sheet)- Weld Shrinkage History - Liquid Penetrant (LP)

{, Examination Reports to include PADOVAN0's July 14, 1982 LP Inspec-i tion);

Attachment (8) - Nonconformance Report (NCR) 1147; Supplement to NCR 1147 to include 1-25-83 LP reinspection documents; and Non-conformance Review Board Response, dated 4r11-83, received by P-H on 4-18-83. .

Attachment (9) - P-H Field Weld Process Sheets and corresponding LP inspection reports prepared by PAD 0VANO which were later reinspected and were found to have rejectable . indications (first two pages are work sheets of technicians doing reinspection);

Attachment (10) - P-H reinspection scenario; Attachment (11) - P-H Notice of Termination, RE: PAD 0 VAN 0;

(

4 .r -)

t l INVESTIGATOR'S NOTE: . DAVIS provided other documents, as mentioned in his statement, to the reporting investigator that are not attach-( ments 'to this report due to their limited. value to.this investigation; however, these documents will be retained in-the case file.

l l

l 4

( .

• e 4

h a

gM" 4

- r g )

Interview with the Pullman Higgins (P-H) Assistant Quality Assurance (QA)

( Manager -

Raymond R. DONALD, P-H Assistant QA Manager, was interviewed by the report-ing investigator at the Seabrook Station on May 25 and June 7,1983. DONALD provided a sworn statement, Attachment (12), wherein he discusses the sequence of events surrounding the P-H investigation into the alleged ,

falsification of P-H Nondestructive Examination -(NDE) Inspection Reports by James PADOVANO.

l l

t l

i

/ l

( l l

)

j

- - 4<t -

g

)

l

. 1 Interview with the Pullman Higgins (P-H) Nondestructive Examination (NDE)

Department First Shift Supervisor

( l l

Edward R. BOWLES, Jr. , P-H NDE Shift Supervisor, was interviewed by the reporting investigator at the Seabrook Station on May 23 and June 7,1983. j BOWLES provided a sworn statement, Attachment (13), wherein he discusses j the sequence of events surrounding the P-H investigation into the alleged falsification of P-H NDE Inspection Reports by James PADOVANO. ,

i l

1 1

i l

l

( 1 l

)

~

Interview with the Pullman Higgins (P-H) Nondestructive Examination (NDE) I Department Third Shift Supervisor Bohdan (NMN) MUTZ, P-H NDE Third Shift . Supervisor, was interviewed by the reporting investigator at the Seabrook Station on May 24, 1983.

i MUTZ advised that his shift performs very few liquid penetrant (1.P) or  ;

magnetic. particle (MP) NDE inspections and is mainly responsible for radio- l l

graphy (RT) inspections. He said that' PADOVANO had never worked for him )

l on the third shift and he could not provide any pertinent information regarding alleged falsification of. inspection reports by PAD 0VANO. He said that during the April 1983 time frame, there were quite a few mana-gement meetings (just about everyday) concerning the PAD 0VANO issue and

^

he opined that there was never any indication that management attempted ,

to cover up the PADOVANO matter.  !

MUT2 stated that P-H did not have an NDE internal audit program which may have alerted management to problems such as those currently being investigated.

He said that neither P-H, the licenses nor United Engineers 'and Constructors (UE&C) perform NDE work audits that go back and check NDE jobs that' have already been completed and accepted. He said they do perform NDE audits '

of ongoing NDE jobs and do " document reviews" of completed inspections.

MUTZ did not provide any additional pertinent information.

1 l

l 1

f

)

m

)

11 Interview with the Yankee Atomic (Licensee) Construction Field Quality Assurance (QA) Manager

(

Mr. Jamie W. SINGLETON, Yankee Atomic Construction Field QA Manager, was interviewed by Investigator R. A. MATAKAS at Seabrook, NH on May 23-24, 1983. SINGLETON advised that he has been in his current position for six or seven years.

SINGLETON stated that around the middle of April 1983, Richard DAVIS, Pullman Higgins (P-H) QA Manager, informed him that he was having problems with the work of one of his (DAVIS') Nondestructive Examination (NDE) ins pecto rs . He said that DAVIS did not identify the inspector by name at this time but said that he was investigating the matter and would keep him informed. He said that DAVIS never mentioned the subject of falsi-fication of records but described the matter to him as a. potential procedural violations by the suspect NDE technician. He said that DAVIS subsequently identified the suspect NDE technician as James PAD 0VANO and he (DAVIS)

, told SINGLETON that PAD 0 VAN 0's emp1.oyment with P-H had been terminated for poor worknianship". SINGLETON said that after discussing the matter with DAVIS, he apprised Gerry MCDONALD, Yankee Atomic QA Manager, of the matter and that' MCDONALD made the appropriate NRC notification. He said that MCDONALD works out of the Yankee Atomic Corporate headquarters.

SINGLETON said he also apprised both Tony CERNE and Bob GRAMM, NRC Resident Inspectors, of the matter.

SINGLETON said that ont of the functions of the Yankee Atomic QA program was to perform a second level surveillance over P-H activities and that Yankee Atomic QA records reflect that PAD 0VANO was written up on January 14, 1983 by a Yankee Atomic Inspector for a NDE" procedural violation. The report, Attachment (14), indicates that PADOVANO shortened the required developing time during one of his inspections.

SINGLETON concluded stating that, other than the matter currently under investigation, he was not aware of any other alleged or suspected falsi-fication of records at the Seabrook Station.

{

)

12 Interv'iews with Pullman Higgins (P-H) Nondestructive _ Examination (NDE) f Department Employees All of the permanent employees of the P-H NDE Department were interviewed during this investigation. All of the employees were asked if they personally had ever falsified any P-H NDE records; if they were aware of any other alleged or suspected falsification of records; and did they have any infor-mation indicating that the P-H supervision / management was aware of any falsification of NDE documents that had not been properly reported to the NRC. In each case, the individuals interviewed responded "no" to the aforementioned questions. Many of the NDE technicians felt that there was a great deal of pressure put on them by both the P-H and the United Engineers and Constructors (UE&C) management during the first few months of 1983, to clear up the NDE backlog and that during this time, there was a great deal of emphasis on " production"." However, none of the individuals interviewed felt that they were being intentionally asked to either ignore

" quality" dJring their inspections or to take procedural short cuts. Several

(, of the interviewees commented that they felt that P-H management would not knowlingly allow falsification of NDE records to happen.

INVESTIGATOR'S N0TE: The reporting investigator does not feel that " management pressure",during the above mentioned time period was a factor relating to the alleged falsification of NDE Inspection Reports by PAD 0VANO. During the subsequent interview with PAD 0VANO infra, he admitted falsifying P-H NDE records both before and following the aforementioned time period.

In addition, most of the P-H NDE technicians were asked if they were aware of any formal audit programs by either the licensee, UE&C or P-H which review ,

actual NDE field work that has been completed by the technicians which may have surfaced the allegations against PAD 0VANO that are currently under investigation. None of the technicians questioned were aware of any such audits.

(  !

l

(. .

13' d

Interv'iew with Donald M. DANIELS, Pullman Higgins (P-H) Nondestructive f-' Examination (NDE) Technician Donald M. DANIELS was interviewed by the reporting investigator on May 23, 1983, at the Seabrook Station.

DANIELS provided details of his reinspection effort of work previously inspected by P-H NDE Technician James .PADOVANO.

A Report of Interview with DANTELS is Attachment (15).

e h

G u

. yi ...) ..

o -

p

. 1

. . . Interv'iew with Charles F. WILKINS, Pullman Higgins (P-H) Nondestructive

Examination (NDE) Technician l

l Charles F. WILKINS was interviewed by the reporting investigator on May 23, j 1983, at the Seabrook Station. l 1 -

WILKINS provided details of'his reinspection effort of work previously  ;

inspected by P-H NDE Technician James PAD 0VANO.

A Report of Interview with WILKINS is Attachment (16).

I l

4

.I l

i I

l

(

u_-_________-_-______ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _

-1 O! j~

1 25 . l

' Interview with Michael D. ACREE, Pullman Higgins (P-H)~ Nondestructive I

.f -

Examination'(NDE) Technician 1

Michael D. ACREE was interviewed by the reporting investigator on May 23, 1983, at the Seabrook Station.

ACREE provided details of his reinspection effort of work previously.

. inspected by P-H NDE Technician James PADOVANO.

A Report of Interview with ACREE is Attachment (17).

( ,. .

t

~.

O

~

j l

J l

)

)

(I ~

g )- '

Interview with Michael A. TERPENING, Pullman Higgins (P-H) Nondestructive x.

Examination (NDE) Technician .

)

TERPENING was interviewed by the reporting investigator on May 24,1983,.at the Seabrook Station.  ;

I TERPENING provided details of his reinspection' effort of' work previously -

inspected by P-H NDE Technician James PAD 0VANO. In addition, he reported an incident involving an inspection that he accompanied PAD 0VANO on.

l A Report of Interview with TERPENING is Attachment (18).

I 1

• • j i

1 j

l J

l 1

i r

O , l} ,

, i i

A_dditio'nal Pullman.Higgins (P-H) Nondestructive Examination (NDE) Depart-' I

. ment Interviews

~

The following P-H NDE Department employees were interviewed on the dates indicated and did not provide.any additional pertinent information other- .

than that previously mentioned at the. beginning of this section: )

J

. William R. HINZ, Level 3 NDE Technician (5-24-83)

Terence G. STROMMER, NDE Trainee (5-24-83)

Howard J. WATSON, Level 2 NDE Technician -(5-23-83)

John C. O'NEAL, Level 2 NDE Technician (5-23-83) j

- 1 Michael J. ANDERSON, Level 2 NDE Technician (5-24-83) I Robert W. D0YAL, Level 2 NDE Technician (5-24-83)

ScottD. REED, Level.2NDETechnilian(5-24-83) J Richard L. CRAM, Level 2 NDE Technician (5-24-83) i W. Jeffrey HUDSON, Level 2 NDE Technician (5-24-83). j Kenneth T. BURKINSHAW, Level.2 NDE Technician (5-24-83)

Shane INMN) KALARIOTES, Assistant Radiographer Technician (5-24-83)L I

Darrell A. MOREAU, Assistant Radiographer Technician (5-24-83)

Daniel K. CASSIDY, Jr. , Level 2 NDE Technician (5-24-83)

]

William T. STIGER, Assistant Radiographer Technician (5-24-83) 1 l William G. GOOD, Level 2 NDE Technician (5-24-83)  !

David P. OUIMET, Level 2 NDE Technician (5-24-83)

Kenneth G. MACIVER, Level 2 NDE Technician (5-24-83)

Geraldine A. MONTANEZ, NDE Clerk (5-25-83)

INVESTIGATOR'S NOTE: P-H does their radiography NDE inspection in teams. PAD 0VANO did perform radiography NDE inspections, how.tver,

^

those technicians interviewed who had performed radiography 'in-

,. \

~ '

, _)

LI yg

~

spections with PADOVANO stated he always performed his assigned

( inspections in accordance with the required procedures (i.e. HINZ, O'NEAL, D0YAL, HUDSON and CASSIDY).

1 l

l l

. 1 Additi6nal Pullman ~ Higgins (P-H) Interview -l

'~

Jeffrey B. TAYLOR,' P-H Quality Control Office Coordinator, was interviewed l l

at the Seabrook. Station by the reporting investigator on May 23, 1983.

TAYLOR related past conversation he had with PAD 0VANO regarding falsification  ;

of Nondestructive Examination (NDE) certification and experience. A Report of Interview with TAYLOR is Attachment (19).  !

w vv E t'

) )

h SEABROOK TSON N 1 2 Ofnese 1671 Worcesser Road huseinghom, Moseochusens 01701 (41P) .572 8100 Puble Service of New Hampshire October 12, 1983 .

SBN- 570 T.F. Q2.2.2 t m United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Attention: Mr. Richard W. Starostecki, Director Division of Project and Resident Programs

References:

(a) Construction Permit CPPR-135 and CPPR-136, Docket Mos. 50-443 and 50-444 (b) PSNH Letter, dated June 3,1983, "Interia 10CFR50.55(e)

Roport; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. DeVincentis to R. W. Starostecki (c) PSNH Letter, dated July 5,1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(e) 1 Report; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. DeVincentis to I R. W. Starostecki j i

(d) USliRC Letter, dated June 22, 1983, " Combined NRC Meeting I Nos. 50-443/03-10; 50-444/83-07", R. W. Starostecki to '

R. J. Harrison (e) PSNH Letter, dated August 4,1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(e)

Report; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. DeVincentis to l

l R. W. Starostecki (f) PSNH Letter, dated August 16, 1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(e)

Repert; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. DeVincentis tc.

R. W. Starostecki (g) PSNH Letter, dated September 9, 1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Report; Suspect NDE Examinations", '

J. DeVincentis to R. W. Starostecki i

Subject:

Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Report; Suspect NDE Examinations

Dear Sir:

In a meeting conducted at Region I Headquarters on June 7,1983, we committed to provide periodic Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Reports on the status of the Pullman-Higgins reexamination / reevaluation program relative to suspect nondestructive examinations performed by a former P-H employee.

Reference (g) indicated that an additional report would be submitted by October 7 ,1983, t 1

b 7 .4

___m _ _ ____ -

lWS *'*

• r;, %',3, ; 7pj ,

,o We7 ,

"'N <%4 4 .( . g6., ( 7 7 l

[.f. i-s ws

',4

,3, _

, A.

y - ,,  :. . g g.; , ;g 5 s ,d 3 p gA '

D n ;- T .1 y .. ,

L. United States Niclear Ragulatory Commiosfon .' October 12,.1903 I i' '? Mr. LichacQ W. Starastecki; - ~ '

Page d l

% , Attention: ~.

s

• 7 .i ,,c '

l. N ,

i

) .. ;76e status as of October 12,198,b' of the reexamination / revaluation

• d 'progens f6r t.he 2399 suspect NDE,Jxamiadtions (1978 items) iu'as follows: i l' b, j .

t ,, 1 *

.N o' - Welds / items initial %y ace'epted by reexas.ination -

1277 e j . s. - <

!. t r

o( Helds/ items inliially rejected by reexamination -

94 j i

Qretit Statuk oL94 Aejected Welds /Itse  !

. 1,( O<  !

, 43 -

repaired, reexamined, and accepted.

6'-

~

cut out per ECA, FTR, cr HCR 45 remain to be repaired 1

o Examinations accepted'as is -

88 0 w i

o Examinations remaining to be eviluat<4 on a case-by-caseEtrois (entainations performed on '

itsas whic~n are nmr innecessibic)' -

148 . l Total Y.xaminatiort  ;--

2399 )

An additional report will be submitt.ed to Region I by November 30, 1983, s

Very truly yours, -

Y.ANKEE ATCHIC ELECTRIC COMPANY .

h pf

. . . ,, 3 wf2 "

l J. DeVincentis 3-broject Managet  !

/

21J.]yf 7, .ce . Accraic Safety. sad Mbe.ksing Board Serv.tce List l  !

u i s r

1 4 er

(

l8 9 $ 4 1

%s . y .

L%%[ 'a i , x 3x A --"

r y

~l

., '3

- ] SEAasoc.,) Anon O i,, omem, I 16F1 Womener Road fhuninghani Massachusetts 01701 (417) - 872 8100 Put$c Service of New Hampshire

/

September 9, 1983 SEN- 562 T.F. Q2.2.2

.. ~* S *

,, y 7 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 631 Park Avenue l

King of Prussia, PA 19406 Attention: Mr. Richard W. Starostecki, Director Division of Project and Resident Programs

References:

(a) Construction Permit CPPR-135 and CPPR-136, Docket Nos. 50-443 and 50-444 l (b) PSNH Letter, dated June 3,1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(e) i

. Report; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. DeVincentis to R. W. Starostecki (c) PSNH Letter, dated July 5, 1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(c) l Report; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. DeV!ncentis to R. W. Starostecki (d) USNRC Letter, dated June 22, 1983, " Combined NRC Meeting i Nos. 50-443/83-10; 50-444/83-07", R. W. Starostecki to R. J. Harrison (e) PSNH Letter, dated August 4,1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(e) l Report; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. DeVincentis to l R. W. Starostecki (f) PSNH Letter, dated August 16, 1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(e)  !

l Report; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. DeVincentis to R. W. Starostecki

Subject:

Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Report; Suspect NDE Examinations l

Dear Sir:

l In a meeting conducted at Region I Headquarters on June 7,1983, we committed to provide periodic Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Reports on the status of I the Pullman-Higgins reexamination / reevaluation program relative to suspect '

nondestructive examinations performed by a former P-H employee.

Reference (f) indicated that an additional report would be submitted by September 9, 1983 ,

I r

smisga2e af0 v

,ylua- bl

)

)

.- . m u

Unit d Sectos Nuciscr Regulatery Commission September 9, 1983 Attention: Mr. Richard W. Starostocki Page 2 The status as of September 6,1983, of the reersmination/ reevaluation program for the 1,978 suspect itemt is as follows:

a. One safsty-related veld remains to be reexamined and this will be accomplished as soon as necessary stagiug is placed.

b. .The present disposition of the 203 (see Reference (f)) welds requiring Engineering avaluation is es follows:

yrv a  :

1)I 'UE&C has recommended that all but two of the~ safety-related welds should be " accepted-as-is" based on the results of acceptable volumetric examinations performed subsequent to the suspect inspections,

11) Two safety-related welds which are embedded require further evaluation, and 111) UE&C is in the process of classifying the remaining i non-safaty-re.leted velds based on service severity levels.

An additional report will be submitted to Region I by October 7, 1983. I I

Very truly yours.

YANKEE ATOMIC ELI'CTRIC COMPANY jJohnDeVincentis j Froject Manager l ALL/pf i

ec: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Service List i i

-s

W "U

SEABROC )3TATION I

. om.i. i 1471 Worceser Rood Framingham, Massachusens 01701 l (617) - 872 8100 -

Put2c Service of New ik,6perke i

August 16, 1983 SBN 551 T.F. Q2.2.2 United States Nuclear RegtJ.atory Commission j Region I 631 Park Avenac King of Prussia, PA 19406 Attention: Mr. Richard W. Starostecki, Director Division of Project and Resident Programs i Refereaces: (a) Construction Permit CPER-135 and CPPR-136, Docket l

Nos. 50-443 and 50-444 l (b) PSNH Letter, dat.ed June 3,1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(e)

Report; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. DeVincentis to i R. W. Starostecki i l (c) PSNH Letter, dated July 5,1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(e) l Report; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. Devincentis to l R. W. Starostecki (d) USNRC Letter, dated June 22, 1983, " Combined NRC Meeting No. 50443/83-10; 50-444/83-07", R. W. Starostecki to R. J. Ecrrison l

(e) PSNH Letter, dated August 4, 1983, "Iuterim 10CFR50,,55(e)

Report; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. DeVincentis to R. W. Starosre cki

Subject:

Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Report; Suspect NDE Examinations

Dear Sir:

In a meeting conducted at Region I Headquarters on June 7, 1983, we committed to provide periodic Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Reports on the status of the Pullman-Higgins reexamination / reevaluation program relative to suspect nondestructive examinations perf orme d by a former P-H employee.

l Reference (e) indicated that the " current schedule for the completion of j the reexamination / reevaluation program is August 5,1983"; however, the j program has yet to be completed.

I The status as of August 12, 1983, of the reexamination / reevaluation program for the 1,976 surpect items is as follows:

a. 2,439 KDE operacions (reexaminations / reevaluations) have been performed. / 1 l{L.h%eE' -

[ l "Q

_)

. Unit 3d Statas Nucicar R2gulatory Commission August 16, 1983

' Attention: Mr. Richard W. Starostecki Page 2 i

b. 1,316 areas have been determined acceptable by reexamination. -

)

i

c. 826 areas have been determined acceptable by Engineering 2 evaluation.

d. 41 areas required repair by polishing, grinding, or blending and were subsequently accepted.

I

e. 53 areas will require repair by grinding, blending, welding, j or replacement.

]

l f. 203 areas will r2 quire Engineering evaluation on a case-by-case l basis. >

g. 1 area requires reexamination.

An additional report will be submitted to Region I by September 9,1983.

Very truly yours, YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY J.DeVincentis(drs-Project Manager

{

1 ALL/pf cc: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Service List l

1 1

1  :

i l

l t____

-__ -- , y. .

r w y u-w w w e

,. ..* j 4g SEAWtOOK KDON 5 4 , : ".,, 6 m es:

1671 Worcesher Rood fhuningham, Massachusetts 01701 (617).872 8100 Puble SeMee of New Hampshire August 4, 1983 SBN- 541 T.F. Q2.2.2 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 ,

Attention: Mr. Richard W. Starostecki, Dirr tor Division of Project and Resider.t Programs

References:

(a) Construction Permit CPPR-135 and CPPR-136, Docket ,

Nos. 50-443 and ',3-444 (b) PSNH Letter, de ed June 3, 1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(e)

Report; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. DeVincentis to R. W. Starostecki (c) PSNH Letter, dated July 5, 1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(e)

Report; Suspect NDE Examinations", J. DeVincentis to R. W. Starostecki (d) USNRC Letter, dated June 22, 1983, " Combined NRC Meeting Nos. 50-443/83-10; 50-444/83-07", R. W. Starostecki to R. J. Harrison

Subject:

Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Report; Suspect NDE Examinations

Dear Sir:

In a meeting conducted at Region I Headquarters on June 7, 1983, we committed to provide periodic Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Reports on the status of the Pullman-Higgins reexamination / reevaluation program relative to suspect nondestructive examinations performed by a former P-H employee.

The status as of July 26, 1983, of the reexamination / reevaluation program for the 1978 suspect areas is as follows:

a. 1340 items have been reexamined.

b. 1294 items have been determined acceptable,

c. 46 items vill require repair by grinding, polishing, filing, or welding.

d. 46 items have been repaired.

eepe w o

_ ~-- . . - - AAA"# b

,. r. - t

, t'  ; '

'.{} }

, , . Urd-tad States. Nuclear Regulatory Commissien August 4, 1983 Attention: Mr. Richard W. Starostecki Page 2 The current schedule for completion of the reexamination / reevaluation program is August 5, 1983 [ Reference (c) scheduled completion on July 30, {

1983). A report will be submitted to Region I by August 15, 1983. ,

Very truly yours, YJ E ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY

~ -

[ohb. .DeVincen Project Manage ) l ALL/pf cc: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Service List s

i l

1

.g,, t ) ./

' ~ ~ " ~~ ~

)

-( -

SEABROOK STATION j g i.,'.

c.g, Of5en: j 1471 Worcester Rood 3 me s.ne. or s.w u.r.ca. *='"a*"~*"  !

(417) - 872 - 8100 f

i July 5, 1983

, SBN- S27 f T.F. Q2.2.2 )

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I l 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 i

Attention: Mr. Richard W. Starostecki, Director  !

Division of Project and Resident Programs

References:

(a) Construction Permit CPPR-135 and CPPR-136, Docket Nos. 50-443 and 50-444 (b) PSNH Letter, dated June 3, 1983, " Interim 10CFR50.55(e)

Report; Suspect NDE Examinations," J. DeVincentis to ,

R. W. Starostecki

'(c) USNRC Letter, dated June 22, 1983, " Combined NRC Meeting {

j Nos. 50-443/83-10; 50-444/83-07," R. W. Starostecki to l R. J. Barrison f

1

Subject:

Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Report; Suspect NDE Examinations i l

Dear Sir:

1 1

In a meeting conducted at Region I Headquarters on June 7,1983, we committed to provide periodic Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Reports on the status of 1

the Pullman-Higgins reexamination program.

The status as of July 1,1983, of reexaminations is summarized below:

1. As of Friday, July 1,1983, of the 1968 suspect areas, 468 items have been reexamined.

434 have been determined to be acceptable.

34 will require minor repair by surface grinding, polishing or filing.

i

2. Pullman-Higgins has hired a NDE Service Contractor to perform the re examinations. This Service Contractor will work under the direction of a P-H Corporate employee who is certified as an NDE Level III Examiner. ,f l ncifnoadonc #

cp y < s q w s - '

\ \

jl[Eldab

_ ~ _ _ _ _ _ dl '

. ., , b, i* ,

G J q p Unitcd Stetos Nuclect Reguistory Commission July 5, 1983 i Athention: Mr. Richard W. Starostecki Page 2 l

3. Six (6) NDE Service Contractor personnel arrived on-site June 20, 1983. All six technicians completed training and certification on Friday, June 24, 1983, and commenced reexamination of the suspect )

areas immediately upon certification, mid-morning of 6/24/83.

4 The NDE-Service Contractor will be providing four (4) additional technicians July. 5,1983 for training and certification which is schedule.d to be completed by July 8, 1983. These additional technicians will commence work on July,11,.1983 for a total force of ten (10) technicians.

5. The total reevaluation program is scheduled to be completed by July 30,1983.

, j

6. The program for evaluation of inaccessible areas has commenced.

Each category will require analysis and resolution on a case-by-case basis. This evaluation program is also scheduled to be completed by July 30, 1983.

An additional Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Report will be submitted by August 3, 1983.

Very truly yours, YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY

. !u ; L . . ~ ..

/ John DeVincentu

• ' Project Manager ALL/pf cc: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Service List Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555

,- w _

e,

v. .  :

a,

. .)s ) ;i g J SEABROOK STATION h %N 1671 Worosaw Rood Pub 5c Sen4ce of New Hompshire M cF.m. W e 01701 (617) . 872 8100 .

June 3, 1983 SBN-515

[b T.F. Q2.2.2 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Attention: Mr. Richard W. Starostecki, Director Division of Resident and Project Inspection

References:

(a) Construction Permits CPPR-135 and CPPR-136, Docket '

l Nos. 50-443 and 50-444 j (b) Telecon of May 4, 1983, A. L. Legendre, Jr. (YAEC) to l C. Holden (NRC Region I) l

Subject:

Interim 10CFR50.55(e) Report Suspect NDE Examinations I

Dear Sir:

On May 14, 1983, we reported a potential 10CFR50.55(e) deficiency

[ Reference (b)] regarding the suspect quality of NDE examinations performed at Seabrook Station.

It has been determined that this item is reportable under 10CFR50.55(e). j The following information is being filed pursuant to the interim reporting i provision of 10CFR50.55(e)(3).

l A. Description of Deficiency Based on the~ 1atest information provided by the contractor, it now appears that the inspector in question perfomed a total of 2,408 non-destructive examinations which affected a total of 1,966 welds.

The discrepancy in numbers'is based on the fact that many of the l examinations were performed on non-velded items (crane hoods, base material, etc.) and, in many instances, more than one examination was performed on a single weld joint. The validity of all these examinations remains in doubt, except where re-examined as.noted below.

B. Analysis of Saf*ety Implications Based on the latest inf ormation provided by the contractor, approximately 65% of the affected welds are non-safety related, 33%

are safety related, and 2% are other types. .

~82fb!7M-Apl&W

~ - ~ - - '

- ~ --- - a

,. ~~"{'-

f]&

,. y / . ' . ).

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission June 3, 1983  !

Attention: Mr. Richard W. Starostecki

.Page 2 i

.C. Corrective Action Taken The contractor has taken the following action:

1. A statistical sampling of the examinations performed by other NDE technicians was completed. This sampling detemined that the situation was restricted to one individual. .;

2. A plan has been established to re-examine.100% ef all readily accessible affected work performed by the inspector in question regardless of classification. This re-examination is currently underway. Of the 60 areas re-examined to date, 43 have been accepted and 17 have been questioned..

I We have yet to rece'ive information concerning the type of defects which caused these 17 welds to be suspect', nor do we know the safety classification of the items involved. J I

3. Efforts are being made to increase the contractors NDE staff'to l expedite the re-examination.

4. Inaccessible items will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. J Information for Analysis and Evaluation j D.

Our investigation is continuing. At present, it is not possible.to

! determine the safety implications of this situation. A follow-up l

report will be submitted by August 31, 1983.

Very truly yours, l

l YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY

/., dem a John DeVincentis Project Manager .

ALL/pf ,

cc: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Service List ,

Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement  :

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission  ;

Washing to n, D.C. 20555 2

1

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT 1555 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 202  !

Washington. D.C. 20036 (202)2324550 March 18, 1986 l l

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST Director Mi4Cae Of ittFORamTs. l AC1 epwp  !

Office of Administration Nuclear Regulatory Commission { MY [f Washington, D.C. 20555 g To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. j 552, the Government Accountability Project (GAP) requests copies of any and all agency records and information, including but not limited to notes, letters, memoranda, drafts, minutes, diaries,  ;

logs, calendars, tapes, transcripts, summaries, interview reports, procedures, instructions, engineering analyses, drawings, files, graphs, charts, maps, photographs, agreements, I handwritten notes, studies, data sheets, notebooks, books, tele-phone messages, computations, voice recordings, computer runoffs, any other data compilations, interim and/or final reports, status reports, and any and all other records relevant to and/or generated in connection with I.E. Notice 85-97, entitled " Jail Term for Contractor Employee who Intentionally Falsified Welding Inspection Records," dated December 26, 1985.

This request includes all agency records as defined in 10 C.F.R. 9.3a(b) and the NRC Manual, Appendix 0211, Parts 1.A.2 and i A.3 (approved October 8, 1980) whether they currently exist in the NRC official, " working", investigative or other files, or at any other location, including private residences.

If any records as defined in 10 C.F.R. 9.3a(b) and the NRC Manual, supra, and covered by this request have been destroyed and/or removed after this request, please provide all surrounding records, including but not limited to a list of all records which have been or are destroyed and/or removed, a description of the action (s) taken relevant to, generated in connection with, and/or issued in order to implement the action (s).

ObW b h

_g_

GAP requests that fees be waived, because " finding the information can be considered as primarily benefitting the general public," 5 U.S.C. 552 (a) (4) (a) . GAP is a non-profit, non-partisan public interest organization concerned with honest and open government. Through public outreach, the Project promotes whistleblowers as agents of government accountability.

Through its Environmental Whistleblower Clinic, GAP offers assis-tance to local public interest and citizens groups seeking to ensure the health and safety of their communities. The Environ-mental Whistleblower Clinic is currently assisting several citizens groups, local governments and interveners in Texas concerning the construction of the Comanche Peak nuclear power plant.

We are requesting the above information as part of an ongoing monitoring project on the adequacy of Region IV and the NRC's efforts to protect public safety and health at nuclear power plants.

For any documents or portions that you deny due to a specific FOIA exemption, please provide an index itemizing and i

describing the documents or portions of documents withheld. The index should provide a detailed justification of your grounds for claiming each exemption, explaining why each exemption is relevant to the document or portion of the document withheld.

This index is required under Vaughn v. Rosen (I), 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 977 (1974).

We look forward to your response to this request within ten working days.

Sincerely, 8 4 . P ~ ~ L.s _ .

Billie Pirner Garde Director, Environmental Whistleblower Clinic l

i l

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _