ML062640572: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| issue date = 03/12/2002 | | issue date = 03/12/2002 | ||
| title = E-Mail from J. Creed to AMS Guys, Fwd: AMS 01-0176, Kewaunee, Aits No. S02-2131 | | title = E-Mail from J. Creed to AMS Guys, Fwd: AMS 01-0176, Kewaunee, Aits No. S02-2131 | ||
| author name = Creed J | | author name = Creed J | ||
| author affiliation = NRC/RGN-III/DRS | | author affiliation = NRC/RGN-III/DRS | ||
| addressee name = | | addressee name = | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:R__egion III -0_-0176, KEWAUNEE, AITS NO. S02- " From: James Creed To: AMS Guys Date: Tue, Mar 12, 2002 1:03 PM | {{#Wiki_filter:s,*s"Alle~gatins R__egion III -_Fwd"*' -0_-0176, KEWAUNEE, AITS NO. S02- " -Page 1I From: James Creed To: AMS Guys Date: Tue, Mar 12, 2002 1:03 PM | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Fwd: AMS 01-0176, KEWAUNEE, AITS NO. S02-2131 Attached is Terry's evaluation. | Fwd: AMS 01-0176, KEWAUNEE, AITS NO. S02-2131 Attached is Terry's evaluation. I agree with his conclusions and recommend 01 take a look at this. Terry has spoken with Rich Paul. | ||
I agree with his conclusions and recommend 01 take a look at this. Terry has spoken with Rich Paul. Jim Creed Please close AITS with this email. | Jim Creed Please close AITS with this email. | ||
, ion9Allegations Region III -AITS ' i g.WeD 1 March 11, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: H. Brent Clayton Enforcement/Investigations Officer THRU: James R. Creed Safeguards Program Manager Division of Reactor Safety FROM: Terry J. Madeda Physical Security Inspector Division of Reactor Safety | CC: " ADMN Foundation; Terry Madeda U' | ||
, ion9Allegations Region III - AITS ' i g.WeD 1 | |||
March 11, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: H. Brent Clayton Enforcement/Investigations Officer THRU: James R. Creed Safeguards Program Manager Division of Reactor Safety FROM: Terry J. Madeda Physical Security Inspector Division of Reactor Safety | |||
==SUBJECT:== | ==SUBJECT:== | ||
REVIEW LICENSEE INVESTIGATION REPORT FOR ALLEGATION NO. RIII-01-A-0176 (KEWAUNEE) (SERIAL #11) (AITS NO. S02-2131) | REVIEW LICENSEE INVESTIGATION REPORT FOR ALLEGATION NO. RIII-01-A-0176 (KEWAUNEE) (SERIAL #11) (AITS NO. S02-2131) | ||
This responds to Jim Heller's memorandum dated February 15, 2002, which forwarded a copy of a licensee investigation report, and request our review to determine whether the concerns were substantiated, to identify any unresolved technical issues, to determine if there were any NRC violations, and to determine | This responds to Jim Heller's memorandum dated February 15, 2002, which forwarded a copy of a licensee investigation report, and request our review to determine whether the concerns were substantiated, to identify any unresolved technical issues, to determine if there were any NRC violations, and to determine ifthe licensee's response was adequate and independently performed. | ||
Our review focused on the Fitness-For-Duty concern (No. 2) identified in the investigation report noted above. Concern: The Cl was concerned that supervisors employed by Day and Zimmerman Nuclear Power Systems (DZNPS) turned their heads when certain individuals came to work "Half-Blitzed." Review: On November 19, 2001, Mr. Brent Clayton, Enforcement/Investigations Officer, Region Ill, forwarded a request for information to the Nuclear Management Company (NMC) regarding welding issues and a fitness-for-duty (FFD) issue that had been received by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). After receiving this letter, NMC made arrangements for those issues to be addressed by an independent investigator. | Our review focused on the Fitness-For-Duty concern (No. 2) identified in the investigation report noted above. | ||
During the review of the noted concern the investigator developed information that four craft level employees of DZNPS had detected the odor of alcohol on the breath of a DZNPS general foreman, while inside the Kewaunee site protected area, but failed to take action. One of the individual's stated that he feared union reprisal if he reported the event. The remaining three individuals believed that the issue had been reported, or that other indications of intoxication had to be paired with the smell of alcohol.B. Clayton f,, | Concern: The Cl was concerned that supervisors employed by Day and Zimmerman Nuclear Power Systems (DZNPS) turned their heads when certain individuals came to work "Half-Blitzed." | ||
_Region_.ll/AT.S | Review: On November 19, 2001, Mr. Brent Clayton, Enforcement/Investigations Officer, Region Ill, forwarded a request for information to the Nuclear Management Company (NMC) regarding welding issues and a fitness-for-duty (FFD) issue that had been received by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). After receiving this letter, NMC made arrangements for those issues to be addressed by an independent investigator. | ||
'1.WPD .. ... ... .. ... The investigator's review of the licensee's FFD training and testing program showed that both aspects adequately described actions to be taken when an individual detects the odor of alcohol on the breath of a plant worker. The investigator interviewed the general foreman and the licensee supervisor to whom the general foreman reported. | During the review of the noted concern the investigator developed information that four craft level employees of DZNPS had detected the odor of alcohol on the breath of a DZNPS general foreman, while inside the Kewaunee site protected area, but failed to take action. One of the individual's stated that he feared union reprisal if he reported the event. The remaining three individuals believed that the issue had been reported, or that other indications of intoxication had to be paired with the smell of alcohol. | ||
The foreman indicated that he had been told by another individual that someone had complained about the smell of alcohol on him. He offered to be tested, but was not tested. The licensee is continuing to review this issue. The licensee's supervisor had no knowledge regarding the smell of alcohol on the general foreman, nor was he aware of any impairment of that individual. | B. Clayton f,, Allegatio0ns _Region_.ll/AT.S '1.WPD | ||
After reviewing the investigation results and determining that a failure occurred in the implementation of their Fitness-For-Duty program, the licensee took action through the Personnel Access Data System (PADS) and the NMC fleet access review list to suspend access for all involved personnel. | ,_ions .. ... . .. .. . . . | ||
PADS was updated to reflect their current status. In addition, corrective actions were implemented to improve fleet-wide and specific site performance to address the concern noted above. NMC management is also considering contacting the contract organization and the local union to assure that craft personnel clearly understand and meet their responsibilities in the area of fitness for duty. | The investigator's review of the licensee's FFD training and testing program showed that both aspects adequately described actions to be taken when an individual detects the odor of alcohol on the breath of a plant worker. | ||
The investigator interviewed the general foreman and the licensee supervisor to whom the general foreman reported. The foreman indicated that he had been told by another individual that someone had complained about the smell of alcohol on him. He offered to be tested, but was not tested. The licensee is continuing to review this issue. The licensee's supervisor had no knowledge regarding the smell of alcohol on the general foreman, nor was he aware of any impairment of that individual. | |||
After reviewing the investigation results and determining that a failure occurred in the implementation of their Fitness-For-Duty program, the licensee took action through the Personnel Access Data System (PADS) and the NMC fleet access review list to suspend access for all involved personnel. PADS was updated to reflect their current status. In addition, corrective actions were implemented to improve fleet-wide and specific site performance to address the concern noted above. NMC management is also considering contacting the contract organization and the local union to assure that craft personnel clearly understand and meet their responsibilities in the area of fitness for duty. | |||
== Conclusion:== | == Conclusion:== | ||
The licensee did substantiate that during a recent site outage four workers smelled alcohol on the same co-worker (general foreman) and failed to take action as required by FFD program requirements The licensee took corrective action to prevent reoccurrence. There was no evidence of wide spread programmatic failure. | |||
The licensee did substantiate that during a recent site outage four workers smelled alcohol on the same co-worker (general foreman) and failed to take action as required by FFD program requirements The licensee took corrective action to prevent reoccurrence. | Based on the licensee's finding that four plant workers took no action after detecting an odor of7,: | ||
There was no evidence of wide spread programmatic failure. | alcohol on a co-worker, we determined that this action was in Violation of NRC FF0 regulations.V | ||
Based on the licensee's finding that four plant workers took no action after detecting an odor of7,: alcohol on a co-worker, we determined that this action was in Violation of NRC FF0 regulations.V .We also determined that the lack of action by the co-worker may have been contrary to 10 CFR 50.5, 'Deliberate Misconduct," in that, an employee of a contractor knowingly engaged in deliberate misconduct that is material to the NRC. Regulatory Basis: 10 CFR 26.24(a)(3) requires, in part, testing for-cause shall be initiated as soon as possible...after receiving credible information that an individual is abusing alcohol. | .We also determined that the lack of action by the co-worker may have been contrary to 10 CFR 50.5, 'Deliberate Misconduct," in that, an employee of a contractor knowingly engaged in deliberate misconduct that is material to the NRC. | ||
Regulatory Basis: 10 CFR 26.24(a)(3) requires, in part, testing for-cause shall be initiated as soon as possible...after receiving credible information that an individual is abusing alcohol. | |||
Contrary to the above, between August and November 2001, a for-cause test was not conducted on a contract general foreman after the odor of alcohol was detected on the individual by four co-workers. | Contrary to the above, between August and November 2001, a for-cause test was not conducted on a contract general foreman after the odor of alcohol was detected on the individual by four co-workers. | ||
We recommend that this issue be referred to 01 to determine if the co-workers action involved possible wronging and/or were motivated by a fear of union reprisal if the event was reported, and to verify | We recommend that this issue be referred to 01 to determine if the co-workers action involved possible wronging and/or were motivated by a fear of union reprisal if the event was reported, and to verify ifthe facts presented by the licensee are correct. | ||
Our review also identified one unresolved technical issues in that, the foremen alleged that he was not tested after he self-identified that another worker smelled alcohol on him. We | Our review also identified one unresolved technical issues in that, the foremen alleged that he was not tested after he self-identified that another worker smelled alcohol on him. We | ||
* recommend that this concern be forwarded to the licensee for their r view. The investigation appeared to be conducted in an independent manner. 4 | *recommend that this concern be forwarded to the licensee for their r view. The investigation appeared to be conducted in an independent manner. 4 | ||
Id .............. | |||
(Paae 31 B. Clayton | . .. . ....... . ...... . . ....... .... . ] | ||
kwNcate In the box: *C" .Copy wfthout 9ttechnet/encloure "E" ,. Copy with attachmet/nclosume N" | A!Lsýi2ons.Allegations Region W ATS l.WPD ...................................... Id .............. | ||
* No coo OFFICE Ril Ri11 NAME TMadeda:aa JCreed DATE 03/ /02 03/ /02 | ( Paae 31 B. Clayton Our evaluation and recommendations were reviewed with C. Weil, EICS, and R. Paul, 01. | ||
DOCUMENT NAME: G:DRS\AITS S02-2131.wpd To eceh ea cop f ttfs document. kwNcate In the box:*C" . Copy wfthout 9ttechnet/encloure "E",.Copy with attachmet/nclosume N" | |||
* No coo OFFICE Ril Ri11 NAME TMadeda:aa JCreed DATE 03/ /02 03/ /02 OFFICIALRECORD COPY}} | |||
Latest revision as of 13:56, 23 November 2019
| ML062640572 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Kewaunee  |
| Issue date: | 03/12/2002 |
| From: | Creed J Division of Reactor Safety III |
| To: | - No Known Affiliation |
| References | |
| 3-2001-A-0176, AITS S02-2131, AMS 01-0176, FOIA/PA-2006-0113 | |
| Download: ML062640572 (4) | |
Text
s,*s"Alle~gatins R__egion III -_Fwd"*' -0_-0176, KEWAUNEE, AITS NO. S02- " -Page 1I From: James Creed To: AMS Guys Date: Tue, Mar 12, 2002 1:03 PM
Subject:
Fwd: AMS 01-0176, KEWAUNEE, AITS NO. S02-2131 Attached is Terry's evaluation. I agree with his conclusions and recommend 01 take a look at this. Terry has spoken with Rich Paul.
Jim Creed Please close AITS with this email.
CC: " ADMN Foundation; Terry Madeda U'
, ion9Allegations Region III - AITS ' i g.WeD 1
March 11, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: H. Brent Clayton Enforcement/Investigations Officer THRU: James R. Creed Safeguards Program Manager Division of Reactor Safety FROM: Terry J. Madeda Physical Security Inspector Division of Reactor Safety
SUBJECT:
REVIEW LICENSEE INVESTIGATION REPORT FOR ALLEGATION NO. RIII-01-A-0176 (KEWAUNEE) (SERIAL #11) (AITS NO. S02-2131)
This responds to Jim Heller's memorandum dated February 15, 2002, which forwarded a copy of a licensee investigation report, and request our review to determine whether the concerns were substantiated, to identify any unresolved technical issues, to determine if there were any NRC violations, and to determine ifthe licensee's response was adequate and independently performed.
Our review focused on the Fitness-For-Duty concern (No. 2) identified in the investigation report noted above.
Concern: The Cl was concerned that supervisors employed by Day and Zimmerman Nuclear Power Systems (DZNPS) turned their heads when certain individuals came to work "Half-Blitzed."
Review: On November 19, 2001, Mr. Brent Clayton, Enforcement/Investigations Officer, Region Ill, forwarded a request for information to the Nuclear Management Company (NMC) regarding welding issues and a fitness-for-duty (FFD) issue that had been received by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). After receiving this letter, NMC made arrangements for those issues to be addressed by an independent investigator.
During the review of the noted concern the investigator developed information that four craft level employees of DZNPS had detected the odor of alcohol on the breath of a DZNPS general foreman, while inside the Kewaunee site protected area, but failed to take action. One of the individual's stated that he feared union reprisal if he reported the event. The remaining three individuals believed that the issue had been reported, or that other indications of intoxication had to be paired with the smell of alcohol.
B. Clayton f,, Allegatio0ns _Region_.ll/AT.S '1.WPD
,_ions .. ... . .. .. . . .
The investigator's review of the licensee's FFD training and testing program showed that both aspects adequately described actions to be taken when an individual detects the odor of alcohol on the breath of a plant worker.
The investigator interviewed the general foreman and the licensee supervisor to whom the general foreman reported. The foreman indicated that he had been told by another individual that someone had complained about the smell of alcohol on him. He offered to be tested, but was not tested. The licensee is continuing to review this issue. The licensee's supervisor had no knowledge regarding the smell of alcohol on the general foreman, nor was he aware of any impairment of that individual.
After reviewing the investigation results and determining that a failure occurred in the implementation of their Fitness-For-Duty program, the licensee took action through the Personnel Access Data System (PADS) and the NMC fleet access review list to suspend access for all involved personnel. PADS was updated to reflect their current status. In addition, corrective actions were implemented to improve fleet-wide and specific site performance to address the concern noted above. NMC management is also considering contacting the contract organization and the local union to assure that craft personnel clearly understand and meet their responsibilities in the area of fitness for duty.
Conclusion:
The licensee did substantiate that during a recent site outage four workers smelled alcohol on the same co-worker (general foreman) and failed to take action as required by FFD program requirements The licensee took corrective action to prevent reoccurrence. There was no evidence of wide spread programmatic failure.
Based on the licensee's finding that four plant workers took no action after detecting an odor of7,:
alcohol on a co-worker, we determined that this action was in Violation of NRC FF0 regulations.V
.We also determined that the lack of action by the co-worker may have been contrary to 10 CFR 50.5, 'Deliberate Misconduct," in that, an employee of a contractor knowingly engaged in deliberate misconduct that is material to the NRC.
Regulatory Basis: 10 CFR 26.24(a)(3) requires, in part, testing for-cause shall be initiated as soon as possible...after receiving credible information that an individual is abusing alcohol.
Contrary to the above, between August and November 2001, a for-cause test was not conducted on a contract general foreman after the odor of alcohol was detected on the individual by four co-workers.
We recommend that this issue be referred to 01 to determine if the co-workers action involved possible wronging and/or were motivated by a fear of union reprisal if the event was reported, and to verify ifthe facts presented by the licensee are correct.
Our review also identified one unresolved technical issues in that, the foremen alleged that he was not tested after he self-identified that another worker smelled alcohol on him. We
- recommend that this concern be forwarded to the licensee for their r view. The investigation appeared to be conducted in an independent manner. 4
. .. . ....... . ...... . . ....... .... . ]
A!Lsýi2ons.Allegations Region W ATS l.WPD ...................................... Id ..............
( Paae 31 B. Clayton Our evaluation and recommendations were reviewed with C. Weil, EICS, and R. Paul, 01.
DOCUMENT NAME: G:DRS\AITS S02-2131.wpd To eceh ea cop f ttfs document. kwNcate In the box:*C" . Copy wfthout 9ttechnet/encloure "E",.Copy with attachmet/nclosume N"
- No coo OFFICE Ril Ri11 NAME TMadeda:aa JCreed DATE 03/ /02 03/ /02 OFFICIALRECORD COPY