ML20136B878
| ML20136B878 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 08/13/1982 |
| From: | Renee Taylor NRC |
| To: | Madsen G NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20136B196 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-84-779 NUDOCS 8511200306 | |
| Download: ML20136B878 (3) | |
Text
_. _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _
l l
! l 1, b
, August 13, 1952 l
iMORANDUM FOR: G. L. Madsen j THRU: T. F. Westermar M FROM: R. G. Tayler SUSJECT: Alleged Iry oper Weld Practices At CPSES Re.f e rence : Report of Inquiry dated August 2, 1982 (04-82-0005)
, a ger was i e5 s 1
Labor Classification: Pipe Welder fio f A review of the welder qualification files indicate that the party had qualified or, twc carbon steel pipe welding procedures, one for ASME/B31.1 work and one for AWS work.
i Relative to the specific' allegations contained in the reference:
A. Welders not properly trained: There are no requirements relative to the amount of training to be given a welder. Our only requirement pertains to welder qualification by test as in Section IX of ASME or to AWS as in 5.3.The alleger as well as all other welders inspected in the past have passed such tests.
E. QC welding inspectors did not have appropriate background in welding: We have no requirements pertaining to QC inspector background except as in ANSI N45.
2.6 which is not specific as to the discipline representing adequate .
experience. All welding inspectors examined during past inspections have been trained and tested within the Brown & Root or licensee programs which have been revierced and censidered adequate.
! C. Poorest quality weld rods: The quality of weld rod varies considerably fron vendor to vendor even though all materials inspected in the past have met .
the requirements of either the ASME code or the AUS (which are the same thing).
The writer believes that the allegation deals with the ease of welding'with a given vendors rod. Some welders will experience difficulty in using a given rod but another welder may not have the same problem. Not withstanding, all .the I
rod examined during our inspections; has met the code requirements.
D. Inaccessible welds not welded: Assuming this allegation were true, it would i
then be very difficult to hydrostatically test the pipe since it would appear
) that it would leak pretty badly, i
E. Heliarc versus stick welds: The failure of the welders to follow the combinatior l procedures has been identified by our inspections but in reverse. Most of welders here in tha safety are'a are much more skilled with TIG (heliarc). Most.
l of the combination processes call for a TIG root and hot pass followed by a j stick fill. We identified a case were the welder also filled with TIG which l
(./
l GARDE 84-779 PDR l
I violated the procedure but probably provided a better weld. It has beer, my observation that very little stick welding has been done on pipe in the safety j area. fiost such welds have been made using TIG at least for the root with stick used only wher. a lot of fill was requirec as in the MS and FK pipe.
Most of the welders here would have some difficulty making an open butt weld with stick electrods although I know that some can. The alleger may have been y one who could since he qualified on procedures that se required.
F. Welding of 52 inch " chrome-moly pipe: Tne only 52 inch pipe I have been able to find is the line connecting the outlet of the high pressure turbine to the moisture separator and according to the Project Welding Engineer is of the
- 2.5 chrome type in welding group P-5. The same gentleman indicated the rod type used was 9018.versus the much more common 7018. In my estimation, the allegation may well be true. No such pipe exists in the safety area wners all the carbon steel pipe is of standard alloy and in the F-1 groups. This particular pipe is within the scope of supply of the turbine vendor and it is uncerstood that the turbine vendor supposed closely supervised the installation work of B & R. Not
- withstanding, the work was not in the safety areas and not witnir, the Appendix 5 program area. Additional note: The wsiding engineer also just informed me tr.at there were documented instances where the wrong procedure and material was used on some turbine chrome-moly piping. When found in the review cycle, the welds have been corrected.
Writer
Conclusion:
Allegations A, E, and C have no regulatory basis and are simply the alleger's opinion. Allegation D appears to be foolish at face value. Allegation D is not at all consistent with my observations. Allegation F is not in safety area and was not subject to the QA program. Given that his allegations have little merit within our scope and are substantially on the order of four years old, I suggest that the time required for direct interview and/or more followup is not warranted.
-m_
- y **
,/ , / .
-1lV~ -
? o i
4
(' y e
- "**6
- o n em y e , , , , , _
- -, - . . , , ,. .m
Allegation No. A-82-55 (Date opened: 8/30/82)
, ALLEGATION REVIEW l
l i
SUBJECT:
IMPROPERLY INSTALLED ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS FACILITY AND DOCKET NO.: CPSES D5 TELE. NO.. l POSITION / TITLE: Former electrical journeyman for B & R SOURCE OF ALLEGATION: Letter from CASE DETAILS: Allecer has stated that as an electrical journe p an, and later as a termi'.ation inspector, for B & R at the CPSES site he did improper work and fals;fied inspection records, which throw the quality of this safety-related electrical work into quustion.
ACTIdNASSIGNEDT0: Investigators 4-82-0012 ,,
DISPOSITION: ELOSeo eer sq_d ,, p 1. , ,,
1 l
l e
. _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ ., . _ . _ . _ ______..._.___.__..____.__.___________._____.,..____._.,.__.i
e -
September 29, 1982 MEMORANDUM FOR: J. E. Gagliardo b- Ol- M FROM : R. G. Ta g i'
SUBJECT:
Allegation Regarding Irregularities in Comanche Peak Radiographic!
Operations At approximately 0915 this date, the writer was contacted by telephone by who would identify himself only as
- John" with some interesting allegat site radiography operations,
- a. Changing the film automatic processer speed so as to get the correct film density.
b.
"T" holes in pentrameters have been reamed to a larger size to give
. the appearance of adequate film sensitivity.
- c. Defective repairs. welds have been masked out when shooting adjacent thin wa
- d. Others
" John
- indicated that he could be contacted at I told " John" that I would forward the allegation to the Region IV office and either lierr, Driscoll or cyself would get in contact with him in the near fu .
" John" stat'ed that he was still employed at the site but was on o sch ,
which was why he refused to give his last name.
Assuming that " John" is currently employed a radiographer , I have (as he stat ~
deduced that his name is thru the use of the personnel roster and b site I telephng directory.
L Allegation b. could-be a "biggy" and sove on as soon as possible . could
- a. and c be legal if somewhat irregular, i
I will take no action in this matter unless directed to do so. ._
i i
' Note:
Please copy this to Madsen/Westernian h*A$
~
' a u i y __ .
g O,oSEO ALLEGATION REVIEW -
CASE NUMBER 4-83-A-06 DATE OPENED 01/20/83 FACILITY NAME CPSES 50-445 50-446 SUBJECT Alleged Defective Pipe Hangers SOURCE OF ALLEGATION (from Gap) i NUMBER OF ALLEG. 1 ASSIGNED TO RPS D CROSS REF. NO. A4-83-01 ACTION SCHEDULED Inspection report in typing FIRST/LAST NAME D. Hunnicutt DATE ASSIGNED 02/28/83 REPORT NUMSER Ist: 83-10 2nd:
Lst:
FUNCTIONAL AREA FTS NUMBER 8-728-8100 DUE DATE 00/00/1983 ALLEGATION SUBSTANT 01/01 SORT CODE X DATE CLOSED 03/23/83 ACTIDN OFFICE RIV DETAILS: Combs alleges that some hanger welds at CPSES are faulty. Details as to locations have been provided'to RIV.
Substantieted that one weld was -
faulty. This weld was performed by Mr. Combs himself. A Notice of Violation was issued. -
l d
ee
ALLEGATION REVIEW -
CASE NUMBER 4-83-A-13 DATE OPENED 02/23/83 FACILITY NAME CPSES 50-445 50-446 SUBJECT Improprieties in Constru- )
ction-Drilling through )
Pabar SOURCE OF ALLEGATION Robert L. Messerly I (From Case)
NUP.EER OF ALLEG. 1 ASSIGNED TO Inv.
CROSS REF. NO.
ACTION SCHEDULED Inquiry-Make contact with alleger FIRST/LAST NAME R. Herr DATE ASSIGNED 02/24/83 REPORT NUMBER 1st:......
2nd:. ....
Lst:. ...
FTS NUMBER 8-728-8100 DUE DATE . ... ....
ALLEGATION SUBSTANT .
SORT CODE O DATE_ CLOSED ACTION OFFICE RIV DETAILS: Messerly's af fidavit states that he has knowledge of holes cut intc concrete wails at CPSES that penetrated recar and that these were never reported.
The affidavit is not specific, we need (I) to make contact with Messerly to get his log book and other documents; and (2) to get specifics from nie. a ~
techr.ical inspector can be provided to assist. -
.>.0 .! s/ .' ' *l?" " ' "
A' f:y.,g3 g ( - :< .- r up g... . . . np . . . . ~ . , ;, , .
- a4 .
me%m ry files ' L>by 6
.j t_ s[, -
h $ S--A O Y
, S L I Lp6 s . Po2 L N Lan se, exse 7522L
-] c ~~_n (CITIZENS ASSN f Oft SOUND ENERGY)
April 13, 192.3
[
The liunorat.le Idward Mitri ev ~~-
20L Cannon House Of fice L uilding '
4:a shington, D. C . ?0515
Dear Mr. Marley:
StBJECl: Comanche Peat i;uclear Po. er Plant Affidavit of Robert L . Meg.serly Anc Supporting Docur.entation As discussed with Richard Ucell today by phone, ve would appreciate yoJr seeing that the attached dactrentation regard ng the use of "rebar eaters" gets into the hands of the proper ?GC of ficial in Washington.
Our ac tion is not bas ed on any desire to be une oo;.erative with the f;RC or to avoid providino the IRC with the documer.totion. To the contrary, it is an ef f ort on t'io part of U.E! and Mr. I'es*.erly to be absolutely certain that Mr. Messerly's concerns will be ti.orcaphly investig6ted and proper pction talen if needed. WC felt that this action was warranted due tc recer.t deselopi.ents regarding the IRC's invewt igation cf ".r. !'esserly's concern .
The baclground r(garding this r.6 ter is this: On 2/3/F.2, CASE filed a Sup-lement to our 1/24/03 "ot ion f or Protec tive Orders for Foy Combs, Les ter Smith, and T ri ddy T ey !.arrc il. (CI.5E's 1/?4/f ? an:' ?/3/65 f*otions wc re la ter s trici.er., along witt. c,thers, by our then-1 icer: sing Coaro Chairr.an, who recently resigned from ous proceeding ( due te, eye problems..) Attached to our 2/3/23 Supplet.sr.1 was the af fidavit of Ecaert L. Mc'sserly (the original.
' affidavit was'for sarded to the IP.C's D0:hting' and Service Section). .
tle have attached e ccpy of car 2/2/83 pleedirO .-long with a copy of Mr.
Meyerly's affidavit (2109; with a du;lickte c ny so that you can retain one for yocr files 6:.d send cr.t to the p.c;.er :.*% of ficial) . As can be seen from Mr. Messcrly's affidavit, hit pri :ary, concerns s.c re the pulling .
of a 3?-inch r.ain sica:. line ;.ipe with :ht polar crane about f," or so to fccTe it into position, and the use of rebar caters under orders from '
superic.rs to drill ti. rough concr ete and rear v.ithout the proper documenta- .
tier, and authoritatinn by engineering. As stated in his af fidavit, Mr. ,
Messerly kept sort of a diary with about a ycar-and-a-half of documer.tation about what peicent was cut out of the rebar, when it was done, the date, etc. --
It is the documentation which is our primary concern at the mo:.ent. Accord-ing to Mr. Messerly, the utility company officials have tried to get the docu sentation from him. Hooever, he felt that he should retain the, docu-nientation ur.til he was contacted by the ISC investigators regardinglis
- co ncerns . We had made it plain that we would be requesting to have Mr.
f4csserly appear as a CASE witness in the upcon:ing operating license hear- ~
ings (see p. 4 of CASE's 2/3/83 Suppler.ent), and copies were sent to the several f4RC individuals listed on the service list of our 2/3/83 pleading Q (including the Regional Administrator of liRC's Region IV otfice). GASE's /
va ri ou- pleading: we .
- tro:5 Iv $8- I. card en M.wdi 1.1903;.
It was not until af ter T.E had filed its 3/2P!EfMt. tion t eAl l o.s 1:itnesses Regarding G:'s Investigatior of Allegations of k*nistleblo. ers (copies also atteched).that.Ms. M"si.erly wa. cnntacted by thr NRC invest igator'. regarding his, concerns.
In our 3/29/10 isleading. LASE s tated that Mr. Messerly "Is c>.pec ted to testi fy regarding his ?/3/i',3 Af fidavit (attached to Supplea.ent to CASE's Motiore for Protec tive Ord.crs for Roy Combs , i. ester Smith, and f reddy F.ay Earrell -- striten t y 1. card's th"orandn and Order of March 1, 1983), and ine fact that, althoug. the concern egressed in that Affidavit -
were very serious and althougr. the i.BC Pepion IV of fice and other IRC representatives reccived copie; of it , he was never contacted by the IRC regarding i t. '
I was contacted by Mr. Messerly ty phone on llednesday, April 6; he stated that he had been cor.tected by T Region IV inve:tigator Brool.s Gri ffin, who sought 10 set up a meeting br t. teen the IRC and Mr. Mer serly for the ne>.t day, April 7, a t 2:03 P.. Mr. Messerly asled if I would acco cany him to his neeting t.ith the LL'. .rre sone s t ranor. coinciden e, CASE had beer. contacted on Tuesday, April 5. regae cing a conf er( nce call wi th the 1.icer. sing Ecar d and ell partie". for April 7 begira.ing at 1:30 P.M., which happened to be the sa te:. day and alnost the Lar.e tint ter.ich was suggested by. the HRC investigator for Mr. Messerly to r.cet with t he "RC inves tigator.
Mr. Mes serly contacted the fM and pos .;.oned tS t n.eetir.9 till Friday, Aoril E, at 7:03 P.!'. :
hr had suar. thing elic he t.eeded to do on 'nursday ar.d also wanted me to accompany him.
a Dr. f ri day afic rno:in, Ap.-il E , et 1:30 P .M. , my h m. ba nd .ie r ry a nd I trie t Mr. Messerly at the agreed-upos. tacetirr; ! pot. Denr.r-y's Restaurant ir. Fort l'or th .
I?c w.r.ri -j:ined : hortly thc rf after L.y ;;F Eegior !V investigator Erooks Grif fin and int hei.d of the GC Region lY inves,tigators , f.ichard Herr. According to Mr. .esserly, as the two ir.vestigators were t.eing st ated, Mr. herr said ir. an 2. tide to Mr-. Popi.s sora thine about we war.'t "
be able to co WSat we had wanted to a.d r.odded to card rE and my tape re- -
corder which tras f itting or, the table. Mr. Mes t,r rly mr.tioned this to Mr. E rcot.s and t hi s it part cf t hc 12pc re:Or ding. I'r. Griffin ar.d Mr.
Herr bDih indicated ti.at they did not La"et to t+.11 to ut et all uith us i t.d the tape rec.vde r itcre i.it'. oat ibt. ir LM n;. a tapc- recc-rder or a s ter.0graoher t'are alse. I t w.! agNe:' that i ney woair' co . tact l'. . Mesa t riy
,~
4- for a rieetin; carly the ncyt utet and t.at ey husband End 1 (and our tape "
recorder) could ale.o a: tend.
After the abortcd meeting, we discussed what had happened with Mr. Messerly.
1.'e all felt that, under the circinsta' ices, we would prefer to send the docu-n.entation direct to the URC in L'ashington rather than turn it over directly to the NRC F.egion IV incestightors. .There is a meeting scheduled acain with the NRC investigators for to crrow, April 14, at 2:00 P.M. It is our intention to give theT a ccny of this letter, including a copy of Mr. Messerly's docu-centation which is atiached hereto, and for Mr. Messerly to tall, with them .
candidly about his concerns. L'e all feel much better I.aving sent this on to you as well. L'e appreciate your assistance. -
.%- w.p-ee . - ~ -
_ _- *e __
D g ge...e...,- .. - ng.1 4: frm e .., r,,, ,. rl .c . w. ai . a l .'i .i t t ar.l. i ng a . er.ginal et s iva s i t s.. e Ats.ii . 1. " D i l l e r. fun. , Jr . Mr. billingham has contacted CASE last beret'er i n we har talen an af fidavit f rcr. him at that tim. F rue v' r w< v' c'- o"a*>1r to oet hact i n t oJ c h wi t h h ir.
f rA Wi rc - t u i.' < e svi t a mt i . .,l 's em re . n. .e..eha t ot e loss a' in u$at to da with the af ficavit. ik wes t.oncernt d about his personal saf ety and we w.fre unable to reach hin ard had to wai t for hin to get bacl. in teach with us. He did contac t u:. again on Marco 31, and we incorporated th'. ir.forr.ation fro . hi!. original e f fidavit and in;lud .d some additional information unich he supplied in ss into another af fidavit. It is this af fidavit which is attached.
it was Mr. Dillir.g'.am to whan CASE referred in our 2/21/03 Mot ions to: (1)
' Respond to Applicants' Charges of Misconduct by CASE; (2) Stril.e Applicants' February 8,19E3 Answer to CASE Metion (and Suppler.ent) for Protective Orders; and (3) Ir. pose Sanctions Agains t A;glicants, on-page 35, first full paragraph.
(See copies attached. Our 2/11/83 Motions and Applica nts ' 2/8/03 A1swer were part of the items strici.en by the Board in its March 1 Order.) CASF and Mr.
Dillingham had rc as orabic assurance that the !E was a..are of the 1/7/03 r.ews-paper article regarding his allegations, and that they v.culd inverligate the specific con: erns mentioned therain. This has noa been verified.
- t. ad we a re attaching a copy of the PC't inrestica tion reonet 50-445/03-D? m ': ' cf /E3-01, which includes the !RC's investigation of those allegations.
Mr. Eilling.ar's c enternr. include : rejected ac;regate was r. ired with cor. crete that was su'sec.,ertly poured to for.. the base for the nu:icar reector; hs was pra ver.ted f ror cl( 2*.ing out drill s ha vi ng f rw u*s; r. tater' la-.p;.:s is (ft.r tN-p;.cis s urr:c.dirg th( reactor' ar.f. that :he'e :havings couic tt asshec into tSt reac .or daring refcalin; and cou,1c; y 1* e futl cell! and c e;.l c' c ver.
f ase to the contr:i rod:-; and the f ractice of crilling holes througe. siecl-i reinforced cor. crete reisining walls at Ce ianche Peal. thereby possibly weal.(ning the v. alls. (This is the sa .e concern expres, sed by Mr. Messerly --
reprding the use cf rebar eaters.) ~
C
- x.sr: ASE p is cor.:ernsc' r' C "o reprding one particular state ent made in the IF.C's 1!.E M g rding c.thtr ite n pr ding the alleptions by Mr. Dillir.gha - (pages !-12).
. hite. P.r. i iiii n s ta tes (pace '.l. f.irst f ull raragra: .)ghr. : re; ueled to the utili ty, tha report -
. "h;.'C Eigion l'.' d tc r.tinef -that the sileptions in the ne.Vs article should b0 in.'e: tigated b.i. thbt 1%Dse r adt in-the ieGhan letlOr and in the telep:.one con.ersatier, with 1%'.D should not. This decision t.as based on the pre. mise inat Mr. Dillingha.- has had his earlier concerns satisfied except for those ap;. caring in the article."
~
Ho.vever, there is no indication that any attempt t as cade by the HRC to contact Mr. Dillingham to verify that he was indeed satisfied by the utility's
~
handling of his allegations or that thare wEre no othar concerns which he had regarding Co .anche Peak. CASE believes that these additional concerns which the utility addressed should also be investigated by the HRC.to be certain that they have been adequately ' dealt with. .
After he. contacted us again,-CASE discussed with Mr. Dillingham thn need for hi'm to turn his concerns over to . the IRC. He agreed to allow-us. to
,m y .,pp, g .- . - , .e-.-- ---.-%4 y y -- - - - --- ,, -
. o
, .L.
i send the af ficiavit to you to furt. nver in the propor I.pr officic] j,2 We.hington .
f or investigation. The e-itached of fidavit dots tot purpurt to be all of the
' concerns which Mr. Dillinghat has regarding Comanche Peal; they are the ones which he was able to thint of the riay he prepared the affidavit.
As we have indicated previously, we are very much concerned about the _ manner in w'aich NRC Racion TV's investicatnr! have conducted their inves tigations and the attitude of whistleblo crs and potential whistleblo.ters regarding thc regional of fice. Many of the individuals to v.6om CASE has spoken simply do not trust the regior.al office to ade;uately investigate their allegations and concerns. The co nent r:.ade by .r. M rr in to. _ Gri f fir. within Mr. Messerly's _
hearing, however innocent the coment cay r. ave beer., did nothine to re-ins . ire
- the- confidence of Mr. Messerly or CASE.
1 Again, thanks very much for your assistance ir. this r.ht ter.
Sircerely, CASE (Clll?EN5 ASSOCI ATION FOR S0JO EFERGY)
.,/.$ M g.st & b L y,1:rs.) Juanita Ellis President cc: Mr. Richard Herr /E,rcots Griffin - tar.d dGlivered 4/14/E:-
copy citiched for N:!, itashir.g en Attachments 1
P. 5. -
It should be rated that rot all of the items on the attached listina were in the categ:.ry of unapproved by er.gineering. This is si . ply a listihg of the rebar driiling d ne on the dhys indicated. / 15 0 . it dnes not r. :rr. ort .
to be a co plete iisiine of all tno itt.cr drilline wnicr. w3 s d:.ne, but is rather only t$.en dm c . which Mr. '-:esserly was able to ; ecp a record. -
g
-f es i
i 4
.y:-_, -- -
er em~g g gr--. +q+y. +,W .
g -- y- -2N4'w -** *--N= >7-.,a y v4~-y_-.9 w .g=, y rm y - e--m-p -q y--.r= yv-9'
s, .:..
. . r . . . . s. _ r - r.. ...-.-
3 n . .
My na,e i s A rvill Dillir phar., .ir . a bet to - I nown a s ".1.R .
- 1 live in Gle cost. 1<>as. ' wori e d W i rowr.1. koot f or apprenic.at ely ten years , including a bo.,1 seven y.-ai
- s t t h - ( n. .wri r i cal n:n l...r oowr plant buring that time 1 was a boilermet er, and latei a boilernate. General Ioreman for about three or four years. Unilt ; t.a c. prriorning my dutiet. as c general f orenan, I saw a it,t of things a t tne t om.:nche Pral plant v;bicn were not in t.nrding to procedur s _
and travelers, many of whic.h could jeopar dize tne health end saf ety of the publ ~c t
1 kne,. that soncthinc reeded to te done bef ort th( fuel came in for the plant. I thought it o.er and dec ided that ] would go to liouston to the Brown I, Root main of fice and report these viclations to the Tresident of Broan 1. Root direct, Mr. Tho as f eehan. I went to Houston and met with Mr. f eehan. I told him of some violations tr.at were going on and told hirr that af ter ten years of experience, I thought so*.e of these peopic r ight I.no.. bttier end s how better craf tstr.anship and intelligence than they had used at the nuclear plant in Sou thport, fbett. Carolir.a.
1 told him about worLing at the fiorth Carolina plant on some weld scans that viert not supposed to IDse reare than an ounce of radiation per year (we viere told). These seams, some of which viere appro).ir:.ately 100 feet long, were in str.e instanrei lcaling af m;ch as 65 lbs. cvery three seconds; according to
, wha v;as it.dicand i.+.c r. we tu. ner t he gnuoe of f and v. itched the gauge drop.
At first .:s too; tr.e tet.1 channel of f and !. tarted rc;. airing the bad wilds, C ich tool itveral days. We s.tre cetting appro>icately 2E pin holes and indi-calic".s ;>e- foot. 'his ws! tri i 0 t oo r.uc h t ii t te re . air proptriy, a;+arently, so s o .c-body i r, i.ro..n '
f a:.;'> Up: iratior c ar.e ut v.'.t.. the brair.y idea of having et 16 e tr.e fitti foot o. td,'.t.ci. inche: of f . r e;.." .- the weld, rcolace the eighteer in:hes of test channt1, blo:4 i t of f , a nd ju * '9 dro the c.r.::-f oot area. 0: assuned we had the v. bole 103 feet under pretsure and l.oJght it of f as is. In my opinion, that is lack of craf tsr.anship or experiente or ju!! dor.r.right shbotage. Per.sonally, I think ione of these ; e:ple sho;1d go to ,eidon f or this, and ] told Mr. Feehan that.
j
' cise gave l'.r. i(ehan r letter t;it h so m 18.ings 1 1.nce: about and that other
- q l e b e d t ol t' r.e a t N t . + t aid he wo ld =.e..d ar. it,s e .;igation c re.. to ir ves ti-ci te 1% f e .3t.rhe Ic a+ c%arges , F.d r.e did. I l.no.: ef nach mor( that ! dic not t eil hir, er tr.e .nve:.t ipt ivt i r et. and '. ave rat in t.e pas t reported it, ii e 10 61 lK of ficc H-taase I fecl thi *;:-r is not i nt eresteo it. per tectis.c the people's wel f are a nd i t v.ill be cou reo u:- I have been told by CASE (Citirens A.ssociatic.r.
f or Sound Er.croy), th( intervenne ir. the ( o'..anche ital operating license haarings, tiint I at icquit ed by law to re-; ort ar.y problems which i ight af fect the health and safety of t he public to the f;uclear Legalatcry (-ocr.ission. I an.therefore - -
asking CASE to send this af fidavit to the IM as my n.ethod of reporting it, in
. the hope that by doing se it _veill force tha r:of to really look at the problems I've identified. I would lile tc. get this information to Congress or soneone wl.o's really interested in the safety and welfare of the people 'of Texas.
~
o t n'd 1
+
O2 up AJ^W 3[s) .
g
Y Scy of th stuff t l.; t c r ". Dr. . for i n* : a n: o t*< s u;n ri r.t e r.dt r.t had us ir stali saw 1m: :.A c v e .01 ~ .n r nu l . u t . > 1 N'.t- it..1'A the .tair.. '
less steel liner aro;ns te.e reactor casity. 1h 6 a e use6 unen unloading the r(actor underwater so the people.can see w' at they are doing. They are nothing but stainless steel Pipes with one end (anned ef f end hules drilled in them, As we were drillir.g the holes, drill shaving; fell in:idc the pipe. We also f E used sone cuttin; oil. M.< superintendent cane out to tne shop where we had ,
the holes drilled and said ")ou don't have those pole- in thc hole yet?" And '
I said, "f;o, we're going to tatt a pencil grindei e.nd d-:barr then, and tale (
a steam hose and s tean all the oil ar.d shavinos out."
he said, "That's bull. dt Get those poies on down to the hole so the electricians can install the lights on the pales ." E.) our not tahing 2:. cat 15 riinutes a pole to clean them right, the pales arc no.: installed in the proper location. They pose a serious safety problem. Unen they're refueling, the shavings can be washed out of the pipe by the current uSen removing the reactor head under. ater, and also, renoving the old fuel cells causes a current. The shavings can be washed inside the reactor, which can jam the fuel cells, could even fuse to the cor.troi rods and possibly cause a meltdown. I fsel that their doing that is laci of sense, lack of ex-
- .erience, or sabotage. Maybe Erown f. Poot 's got an e> planatior for it, but I'd like to hear it.
~
l also have in'ormation which indicetes that during the early stages of construction around the time when thE reactor, cavity was being poured, concrete Eg;regate r.aterial from a reject pile was used. My co.cern is that if the 700 ton reactor is sitting ori rejected con:rets, it could result in the weight n shif ting to the 100; pipe, causing it to cract or shear of f, which could result in a msitd:q:n.
I a ctr. vie. ed inat Stri.ust ! rent it. the i.roer..'. ;oct Hou; ten effice ,-
..ith ray con:ern; about tht saftty C.f the Co .anche Nai ;iar.1 and also thE one in North Caroli r.3, I ar. no longer employed with Broan !, Eoot. They already had my name pulled off the b:.ard as General Foreman chen I got t.act fro- Mouston tiicre the investigation greup ever got tcLthe plant. My future was airc ady (iecided before 1 eu r got bucl and before the investicatior, s.as ever started.
.ater I was confined to one area of the shop for five teets. I called Mr.
- ice in Hna: tor. end asled hir. here long 1 i.as poing tc. be cor. fined and told in that if 1 was going to 1.t confir.ed, th( ;.cople I had r.hdc the charges
?;ainst Ih:cic ;ise ce ron'ine: ' e: ruse th y were s ilii violating pro:ed.:res.
. had calic itm ii f ore 1 r Eilt c : c.:s ten nr.: te.e,s re ned re fre standing i r, the shcr an: ;: I r+ in a littic icol reon. it, the s h:: . "r.
. F. ice said, ' As far as I'r ccn:erre:. thc investip; ion r.at been over with and furtherrore, you !g cF11ed TtGCO. If I cori ed for Brown f. Foot. ! 'd cail .Erown 1. F. cot. If I wailed for. Tl'GCO, I 'd call it'GCO. If I worked for the federal coverrrnent, I'd call the federal goverr.nent. But you called 1UGCO." I said, "I tried to call you gays first, but you weren' t there." He replied, "You thini we're going to sit by this G.D. phone and wait for you to call?" I said, "ileil, maybe they're try-ing to discourage rue here until 1 quit." He said, "Maybt you're finally getting the idea." I said, "As long as you guys can pay me General Foreman's wages, I'll sit in this little tool roon, forever." And he said, "h'e'll see about that."
Then the nes. Monday raorning, I was given the choice of either worLing as -
a pipe suurneyman, which would have greatly reduced my salary and relieved me of all my responsibility as a supervisor. 50 they ROF'd me (laid off as part of reduction of force). But they were increasing my departmc.it at thr> same time and after.1 lef t.
- J
. 3 Inc inf..r.M wr i n:rdir.a u n aiser,tr.(6' ii. i m f or: of ar. affidavit on December l!. 1 C . e.,n ci . I d'id. nut u.: r d t r,. - t o turt it ir, in the hearings or to turn it over to the LM or the utility. 1 9;vc int information to scoe rews paper re; sorters, and an article ran in the 100 3RTH STAR-TELEGRA': on g January 7,19E3. A conv ei that artic le is at tached. After that intervieve, #
1 vias shot at and have imen on the run ever i.1' ice and have been in touch with CASE a fe.-: times by phont- f rcni di f fei ent states . Ont night when 1 came ho,e, I found my cat; its br ad had been cut of f siv M'i m' i t s body s.as missing.
Since the article appeared in the pa;.e r , 1 Lc.c hd a front-end problem with three dif ferent vehicles (one trucl. and trio cart); t hey all appear to have the s aTie proLlem -- tht nuts were just about to fall off th( t i e-rod ends . I've been scared to go b6cl and sigr. up e very tix ceels for r.:y une@ lop.ent because I rr. scared soc. core r..ay sho31 me. --
So .e of the reasons ]'m scared is because of thc things 1 Ln7a about at Cor. ant.he Peal and another nuclecr plant where I 've war; ed , the South Fort, !;3rth Carolina, Erunswick froject f;uclear Plant. As I r.entioned before, there are )f; weld seams around the Reactor Cort and new spent fuel pools which we ware told k utre not supposed to lose 1/2 oJr.cs of Conta%inated liquid per ydar per seam. b Tr.ese sea:"s cerc appros.ima tely 100 fee t long. eben we tes ted these sebms, some of them w2re losing ap;>ro>.imately 60 lbs. a n:inate Insttad of repairing some l of these scans, the gauge was blotted off ar.d pressure viet put on the gauge only. !
k'.en the inspector passed the weld scan, he thought the c'.cle 103 feet was under y P essure, not just a few inches. Also, sore; of the itainieri lincr walls trole - p?
ioase f ro . e-Mdded plates that are in con retc i.cilt .1 i c t so e of these platts were it:; roperly welded. E.y these v.cil s br .2 Ling i: :;se t ..y trreng out sevcral h i r.ches f' a co .c re 1:- uali; %: re f or( , w'.cn vc f u< ii r.; i Sr.- re c: tors , the i1 air.less fR '
i .t ei iir.ert i.ere floc.ce d ti t'. 6.au r Oi cc .. < c , ; .e . ;~- cf the i.ater will rus- t.s lincr .all hact te the tem rcit. Ic ; e. - .
and v.ater is craired cui c.f the lir.c. , tht- vali c,il tg . .' ct ?eci c oc e: s i s c.ver out , which
(
ccaid result in welds cracting or walls splitting. L',e n : rcported thc se viola-ticos to Brown 2. F. cot's l' ice President, he told me he na n:.t that cen;erned about the gauges being bioci ed of f but he wts ton;s rned avut tha ualis t r eaLir.g loose. If I had told him of improper welding en these waiit, I wander if he -
co;1d have been cc.nterned at all? I feel thos e proble- s t ho::lc' he rep 3 ired Erg:-rding cut.hn ht Teal n.;;i c a r pl a nt , 15.ere E .: sa' . cicletitni su:h es
. ~. f r.g . Tc r i r. , te nce , c ua li ty c 4 r.t ec'l i s i ; pos e d t e . rify the tc r;.uv.g of firing ?.grt inat si%id h tor :ued at 13? los. The L ger is on 2 ?D foot ,
ceiling 'cith a scaffold built to ther 0.;3ii ty control i s on the ficar; the tor t .c w ren:h it sent do..n tc get U: to verify the nu:ber a nd st iting of thi 1; roue , '
wrench and carried baci up and placed on the nut before t orc.uing. Q: hears a torque uren:h clict twice on each nut and buys off (apprcves) the hanger. L'ha t 0: did not Lnow v.as that the cons truction penor.r.el had a tecond torque wrer.ch ~'
and also had a not welded on the scaf fold. The second torcue wrench has set at a low torque poundage such as 3 lbs. and they clicted it' twice. Therefore, the nut on the hanger vias never torqued; only the nut on the scaf fold was torqued.
There were also violations such as pipe supports aro;nd the pipe. For insic n:c ,
3/lf," cicarance is sup;:csed to be r.aintained on each side and on top and the pipe is supposed to be resting gently on the bottom of the support. For instance, a 2" pipe: a construction supervisor will clir6 on the pipe and get some of his creamen so when QC comes to inspect the support, the weight will push the pipe to the bottom. In some cases, the pipe was binding so tight they vould use a timber to jack the pipe doen fro:n the ceiling while QC bought off the pipe.
- E -
s .
In icm cases , w'g n t'ics c c'.
- ne t the ric.t clearana or. enh siot of the pipe, they tal e a grinder and crind tu tween the t>ipe and tube steel, d.ich in sot cases res ults in a~reductior, of wall thici n'bs! Of pip'e. I belicve this could result it, a rupture of the pipe. Cons truction has also tried to straighten ,
a pipe support by using a !.ledne hmener; this is done quite often. An employee t
told me that while hitting on the hancer he also hit the pipe and caved in the j side of the 2" pipe 1/2 inch cr nore. He re., cried it to his supervisor who said not to tell anjone and covervd it up with 1.p. tags.
I Another incident is irorc;er personnel designing and engineering pipe s up por ts . For initance, one heiper told me while he was employed at the plant he designed r.any pipe su;iport', for engineers. One cay he wondered if they were using his engineering and if they were then checking his, work, so he decided that he would desigr. a hanger im.roperly and send it to engineering. The engineer passed it on to construction which built the hanger and it is presently installed improperly. The helper said that he did not want to go to any NRC htaring but he would love to havc a sho. ing and he could show r.any things if he was allo.<ed to take investigators and actually 5.ho.: them the supports in the plant. Other helpers have also been involved in maling mNor i decisions for which they are not cualified. ;
Another violation is a sensor in a da n teas run over and brolen by a bulldozer 1
1 understand that' these scnsors are placed in the dam in a vertical position in erder to tell w5cthe r the dar moves or not. This sensor was not rcwed or rc-paired. It was held u; end cir: r. acted around it wr.ile bein; ca.edded in the dar.j The const rn: tion tv. pan , t ro<en I. F. cot . lest a 13 rillion contract at Crys tal F:iver Ft.- er Cr. pan,c it. Florida , t;. a dr treat iric, I was told by one c f the Vice prc t idtn;s cf
- rc.cn & Rott. * .at concerns mi is that if this da .
r
- r(al s , they will io: t ..cre t'.a r. a 5 3 millir.n cc.r.tenct . it vill endar.ga r r.ar.y iives.
There is also a violation that concerps me regarding the use of r ejected. I concrete material in the early stages of the plant when the reactor core was '
poured. A f riend of r.ine tcid Ero. n & Foot's Vice President's investigating crew that he was a front end leader cperator at the cce,tre te plant a id o.c day 2 Q" irspecir inid hit t h2 '. ti t cor :re te i.Sc ald be thrc..:, a.<ay br-ci .:s e i t
..as hard anc dd.M . nr. ir m: .y t all ed ; . a3 Er.d ny f rie nc s tar ted thr e. ing it a. cay c.d r 2 1 . e r v i .".. - t oi c r i . i t p.n it '.c L it and use it and 't.cy did. -
Mj friend aisc told the ir.ctstige ting crew cf so E type of sa-@ ling nachine that tells e. Ether there are sc:,d samples or r.ad sa ples in the con: rete. Il had .a wire rur, to it while O' natched the t.cci.ir.e to verify the use of good st. ples.
Persor.r.el wcold pull the wire tc. make it rcad good when it was not. My friend 1 also told of other people that ino<: of these violations and as far as 1 I now, d Brc> n & Root did not c.cotact any of these people, but talled with one of their W supervisors and his brother that worked at the batch plant; they, of course, told them that they inea nothing of this incident and since the superinter. dent is deceat.ed, j \ they did not see any further ir.vestigation of this. in ident. I am sure that t e f6 NRC is aware of_this stattmtnt, because iDias in th _F 0?T 1:0LIlL STAP. IfjJEE/F.
9 g +* Undout.teosy, they are not concerned about the situation.
article (attached). " ~
4 1 have not been contacted and neither has my friend. ~
a ..
, M iriceer a 70' Int. rtartur 11 s et tin; or, rt .ier ted c onc re te, you l. ave a J-very sc rious proble::. 25 J'it ea c t or ir.,.t s bu t .n il,,hern n'. t o,.rl.D ve a r ou nd , the i t co' c rt te ca r. give puttino s tres s or, th< reactor I.iping, which could cause it '
to stiear or crati, which could even result in a meltdown. This could also be
(
a problem in. case of an earthqual.c.
[
I 8
1 kno : of many, many c. ore problems and violations than } can renember right i noe. tinat is f unny te me it, t he big deal everyone made of I<ust.ia 's 300 lb.
nuclear satelite_, f alling t.act into carth's atn o:phere, when we have a possibility of a 700 ton reector sc tting on re,iected concrete and no one is concerned. If all nuclear po.er plants in the l'. 5. are tivill the way the ones that I have worled a t a re , we a re' in troubic. lle'd better r.al.e f riends with Russia so we will have sore,;here to 90.
But speaking seriously,1 think this shoaid be investigated by so eone with a little construction e>.perience or com .>r. sense. 11 has Lc er. dra.en to my attentier.:
that I am. not a civil or a r..echanical engineer anc that it is not up to re to i decide whether these plants are safe or not.
- ut 1 feel it do?E not tal:e a civil or r.echanical engineer. Even a 0-ytar-old would i noe t'.ese violations s.hould be c c,rrec t ed.
I have rc ed the forecoing 5-page 6,f fidavit, ii.ich was pre;,ered under my pc rsonal direction, anf it is true and correct to the f.est of r./ Inowledge
~
er.d belief. ihe inosp5tL and words c >. pressed t'.erein are ry own tho>gi.ts and wo-ci (with the e>.ceptior, c,i r.inor gra ::.htical cl.npes., tither to correct spsll-
- a. in; or it. clari fy that I r.: ar.1, ehich cia r.ct t'.an.t .ht it.t er.1 of r.j ihospr. s) .
i v.
-~
.--. ..'. & =.iz=E:.,(2:".
I
/ /
Date !brch II,19S3 -
^
STATE GT 1D15 2
~
- On this, thi 315 G. of !' arch,19E3, pers o
- .aily appt a red Arvill "J. P.."
.; P,i l l i n e',E , J r . , i n:..tr. to ra w 1i the pcrsco cW: e :.aw is subs crit.ed to the
- i forepoint it.strawr.t. and ati.no..ledged it. me ibn N e,.ecu.ed tht sarc- f or the
- purp:ser t'rert in. e). pre.t.ed. -
Subscrib>ed end sworn before me on the 3itt day (,1 !!erch, 1933'.
.._ k _.
!.otary Pu!)lic in and fsec.the State of Te>.as I y Co r.ission f>.pires: N' f.5 -
/ /
., e 9
_________..m_.___..____._____ ._______._______m____
N P i
i I
- r. - ..\ b. . . ns . ..., .3. ....
j .L ... .... . , ..s ... ,J..
l i
- 0. m.
t
, . s
. . . .. .*1.
. . . .... , t.... . .. . . ,.
,. ...c...
A: Ar.'i Dilli.#.t :, Jr. ("J.R.") v
-.; *. ;.'.n.
. *., 13
- s. . ..
......2,. .
1 r. . . r . *.
. . i . .- j . ,. '. s .
- 0. 5 g. , . :. y. .,. . r
- ( . ..q '. : * : t.. *. g :. .. . p r- *{. ,(- .. t. , . .. .... , L.;. -*. .z e,..'.. _y
.g,..
.s .-A . g r 1 g,. . . ; . , .. . . , .
p.a,*1
.. h u.s.. ,;
t I h :. . .e.'
- u. -:.>J.
.=
. . . - l .f. ..s%. .
,.3.
J, r ..,.f....,
. e- . . . .
<.,.s.. <!.,. O.e ,.
. . > . . . .m>
.s.
n.. .
?
ee f n P2. I e ,- g % ;, r '~ I. r. ;>
S 3 . g f. r*? * * *. h g }./ ** ~* * + .q j:.
- e 2., . . . -
6 5.. .
}{..n,>. = *r3
- 6
- n. .e. J- -a . . -
s r
r * %
- . . s .3 . r ', a .2 r .- I. . g- a . i. '.1. { .s ' 3 s.
< 4* . r<' r '. 4 2 ...
t,,,. s. . -s-
<.3 4 q '.
- s. *
> 2. . _J .
3 .j .3 .
- g., .*r. .. .
'f,5 j
- n. j ,, .- *. '. } j e. . ,- *g. . 4... ;. . ,
.,,3 .
4..,....- j . , .; .* .:, '. c.e, *. c f C,, s r. .W .
r . , . .
,. . .2 +3 v. . *.;. .,
1,* *6 > s., k. :.... .: y'.3 .s.: ..,.. .. ..., . . 3. , .
s ... .' . c. . , , . . ....3..*. 3 .r g'. i .3 . .: . . w .e.:.I . ..
. 6. .
c . 5.r.
v
~,s. es,: .
.s. r. . s , s'.; y < '. ,, 1s .. s. - u :. . .m p : E ., ;a t. . i..r.n..., c . 3
.e .sa t. p , y- ... t..a. ,. s 1..s. > .
.....s .
- c. .
.. . m. 'v..,'+>-
.,.. -:... ' . . * . 9 . . .e *, w c 's *. * :.
'a.'.,,
- . . r e. , t t, a. .....%...
f:e. s'. S 6 .s . . , e ' r ) ?. -y a.n.
6
+ } ... + '; j g; t' m. s. r.3. *, 58., .,. -3.+.j . ri s ' b- -- .> ';-*.
. r.-- .. .. r . . s ,, j. ,,-<f , :. ,,.t,ja'*..
w -- ,,
F-. L . . .
.u. ...: . . *e
- 1. .
.. . u. . s. ,' ;. . .e.,.ez. ). .
. . , . . . .' 5.. .;, .. O '.
\
S..,..)
.v
...! t c.e s. . . : f.3 . j f6 w.t . ..
i
- i-
~e < 3 ~. .', ..>. . p r :. y- s f* : '..:'.*.,- : . -. .* i -; .' .
s J S '. . #.- * ~ . ' ' . ' ' . >.'..'.3.'.
i r.r
. - 5 '. .e . )- '6 .o 5 '. .' '.' '. s' .". .' f e .
j e
]
i 9- .,
ts . n , e..,.. .... f .,. , t r..y. ,3..s (
. , .;. Q,
+g..a \ t..9 Q j.9
~
s.
.+.1 . . . . s ?.s '..g .3. r . .;;*......~:a
. C Y r.. ; . O . *.
- yf*..- .
f ,.? .;. t .> #...* . . ...',.s.....#
. *. n s. :. ,. . ...v: - .. 9 n., . . ~. v a s. 2
%.~. .
P-
'{ .. , . j ,, .s ; 2 '. ;.**4) .. . .- 7 j , . . .. ' ...* .- .
- i r, y j, a t..'....
s, . . .
- 2. a,,*......p;,.... . * , , ..
e e; ,, ,
6, 3 L *.g .,.f. , ., .3.- ....
.J + ., L ;,
J.}..3 .. . . ,. .,j, .., ..s . ,...e 7 ,
- i. . . ,
., s. 6 ., .
, #ev,. j .,, ;., a 4..
3
..'r..
E...'.-
- d.'i.'...,,.'..<. . f .
jq, .. .' r .~ .*' ' t .
a.
s . ,j
. 4.
- 7, * . ; *. J O .# #.
1 *.8
- c. .
s.. '..*...,
I
+
6r.>.i.e *
-. v.
t J / .; ' je... c ; .. *c .. a. t .- .e u .. L . *. .s. . T r. '* > 1 > '. r .a. ,,,. 3.....
I d r.' t. E : s *. .r / . Tr. 4 >;n U. t'. : u; , v l i'. :eli ru '.ra'.; c r tN <,6 <. n m
( .,o.
.. . .,..,.s. s h.p .,q. .p.: m o.u. . ;. .: a* ~, .r. . . s9M- c - C%m , ;n.,
P,n G
- - . , - , , . , , . . , , - - - - , . - - - , ,i--.--m,n
1 l
g- .
- ,n * 'a L.I.. -ss ~ a. '. .J ef<.. .:..
s., ..
...,. . .3 .
- .; . aJ ,
.e
$. : e a's a c r.:f t T i ..; i e s :; . . ; c.: f s , t ' . c r . . . '.
. c t s i : * :- d . .i QC l
1 i ;;.. t iors ; i n vt'.c r .,; 's , f;. ; . g "Le QC ' s; '.c ': r 's . .? . P.< : c - :s a's o !
.; i :; c r r'::: a .c '
-ti:n cf . .it ' s . - . e n .'s . I: r i r ' * - c ' , t' . . ': >s a s'e't t .9 .. r. ?; t o f a ' ; r i n . i t 2 . - d ; ' . .- 1 i n t. :t 1 d ';r t'.- . . ' ' s ' '. e
. ter a:.ce c c cc '.:I d ; .>i n t v.' : ch < 1s C Il l e d f. c t' e s ' t 't '. : 10 i ; '. 2. ' . d . . . s s i.], i d c i f Af s e: r # f '. c i- t 0 0 tf Q' .s' C n in f3 c t . i r; . ;i re *t . ; q a t'.:'t t .c : 0 1.re .as aisc s.'. . :-id' .; f .0 O n a va ? .c 15) t'.c ti' C - S t ci .
- ed. i l l -
., r t,. . . . s u,..:.n... ..a . .. S. .a
.. ::u.
. . .,,t .. .:: ,,...d . .
- i. .
.e : ,a 1 ...nc.;>o..e e- ..
. .. . ase.t
. . ,a
- 2. ,. ,s, . p c .a.
s.
..y :. t ,. s. r. ., ..s.r n . .s.e ,3,
.. f . .O . ;. ., g e.-. . '.2
. s. u. ). i s. , g g , a..s..y
- g - d it t.; 4 *.I ' i . a t' a r ; t 9.i it QC ii't ; c ' c r t o 5 .f i t cif.
v .- f i a:so s r. e a r eu ri .-a s a u- .. t fo a s-: :n : .i .- , ' . .: os .;ce .
. s . .,. . . , s.e. ( .~ . . ,3 < .. .,.
- z. . . g :..., .. :.. .e ..
r . , . .c ~ . ,, s. ..-p . . e- .. . . . .. .~ . s e ., .,
> :. -]
tt t it w:uldn't c.c n f;r a c:re.
g .
S c' i
.. . . ~
h.,
-s O
/
a-
.. , ;c. ., , .
. .e < , .
e .
- i.
. l
- . 4 e e ee o
e
- . e
i r ca '
i
/ . .
/
/
., , ..: . e :. < m
..e i. .e ...g 2 .<: .
, , , . c.. . . . c . . . .s .. . s t , s. ...s. . . u. <. s ., i . t .- . . . > >
.. .r ej ;en ;il diret 1501, a r.d i t i s t r:.c t d C . : r . . t to t' O ! t st Of:; I.
Ic' 0 a s :
. .n . 's . e f .
U.e f;w,:,i n) a f f id n ; t is ;.re, . i d . ..'. .r y s., : . c 21 c : t . t :0. ,, 1 .d t2 2 t'.
/. s e.' *. : r .f s .: . ; r c < : ci t'.c r e i. uc rj : , a t'.: ,f.* s t d . : e is ( o P.5 .
it.e .: .c..; ti ,r.
c.f t's.;r c: v. .u ti:a1 c! v , s , s i','a r t o .:: rrec t s;.c li i:q cr t:
c' e r i fy h. t i r.c h: t , ,.'. N.h did r.0t c' : .;e the i s t it c f ..j th:..p *. s ) .
'.s*: : m s ..:s t't es ..c re ; :.s.e d , tMy sc r e N d by C ME . ,
0, . . ' . ,/
,-l . . f ' ,-7.. p/) ,.
. < . . . .s
- .,il Ciiiir;'im, s'r.
C'i t e :
I. . . 2. 7 . t) . .
.e...E
..>.5
' n t '. '. 5 , t'. e . ...; ?.: d d1y of . .. I
- e. ., ': .: ? 3, ; w. t ' '.y + ; ; i r ted
...: .,*e..
. . ...)
.r........ 1 '**r. .3~' o ' e a r -c - c ^' s e
. . . 5:3,.> .s - - .=
< s g..s., g.s, r <. .e.
. t . ,e .o s .6.e s
r
. ...,s.
. ,. 3
- s. r.s . r. ..- .e ,. t . 3. . a e. ..r. . ..e.,,..g ..,.~.e ,.;.s..
. , s
.g i. .s 1.e
- n-.s.
.e .c.. o s. 1.., 5. r . s e , s . .,. e. ..,s s
.u. e.. .. s. < . ...,,, . e .r r. s. .a., . .
c .,' s. ..r : $. : a.
.. s ,. s., e. .. . ., > s. r.. ,3 .
. . . .3 c.n 4 6.e 1..1 -,../r s. ., .e o f . .' r e .
... . . . - , m. . . .) .
- f. .- 7. . . ?.% K i .
.;;1ry F s:'. ic i n 13: //4r
.l. &.or s
e 5*tte cf 'sy... es u
- e . '
.~. . ,..
...,....e.. ?. , a *. . {
.t. .::. . .. _/*
?.? , */,). Q f~ Ds f */9 ei e
o e
e W _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - , - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - . - _ . - _ . - - - - . _ _ - - - _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - _ - - - - _ _ - - - - - - _ - - - - . - - - - - - _ . - _ _ - . - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - _ _ - - . - - _ . - - - _ . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - - - . _ - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - . - - - - - - --J
G ,
ALLEGATION REVIEW .
CASE NUMBER 4-83-A-66 DATE OPENED 08/29/83 FACILITY NAME Comanche i Peak 50-445, 50-446 SUBJECT Intimidation of Electri-cal Craft Personnel SOURCE OF ALLEGATION B&R Electrician NUMBER OF ALLEG. 1 ASSIGNED TO RPS A CROSS REF. NO. Q4-83-021 ACTION SCHEDULED Discussed with TUGC0 Management / Followup TUGC0 Findings.
FIRST/LAST NAME 0. Hunnicutt DATE ASSIGNED ,9/01/83 REPORT NUMBER 1st:
2nd:
Lst:
FTS NUMBER 8-728-8100 DUE DATE ALLEGATION SUBSTANT SORT CODE A DATE CLOSED ACTION OFFICE RIV DETAILS: L alleges workers not given time to read S-0910 manual and not allowed to refer to it during normal working hours.
S 9
e
['I
-_ \
e -. s - a -- 0 5 '
Ya .
/ z-/-pa
. . ~
f M=
p m " 1' y n g: ry .
- t. .
l -
l l
l .
y*l
1 .
h&
f **la*
i
// -
N i
l
/ 982 k-/973 .
O 09 e
O e
e I
I e
_ . _ . . _ . _ _ _ . . . _ . _ . , , . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , . - . . . _ _ . _ _ . _ . - - . . _ , , . _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ - , , . _ _ . .- _ I
' e's hj
~
COMANCHEPEAKALLEGATION-IMPROPERWELDPRACTfCES (Q4-870005)
BACKGROUND N' IL ~ d D An individual alleged that some poor welding practices (e.g., poor quality well weld rods, wrong m rod, wrong procedures) were employed at CPSES and that or weldersandweldQCinhect,ineswerenotqualified.
STATUS -
No investigation was performed; it was suggested that a technical evaluation ,
be performed to determine the need for additional inspection,W [T A ,. 1,_,5y.
w, .& & bld W. ,
O e
O 4 4 0 0
mD 6
e
- - - - - . , - - - - - , , - - - , . . - - - . - - - , -- - , - - . . , - , .- ,7-,-- .- - ,-- _ . , . - . - -
$ t-g ,
COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATI0s - B&R EMPLOYEE TERMINATION IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 210 (Q4-82-0011)
BACKGROUND An individual claimed he was terminated because he tried to file an NCR regarding improper Hilti bolt installation. A complaint to 00L was also filed.
STATUS Discussion with other B&R personnel and the alleger revealed that termination was not due to the attempted filing of an NCR but rather to another matter.
Mutually agreed upon corrective action was taken to resolve the NCR problem.
00L ruled against the alleger and the matter was considered closed 1
(as of August 2,1982).
1 4 4
I 1
4 9
4 9
.. =
1 l
e I e
6 < ..
Y1 -
' ~
COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - IMPLEME.'%TATION RADIOGRAPHIC OPERATIONS.
s- (Q4-82-025)
' BACKGROUND f80~N An individual alleged that certain actions were taken to modih the
, effectiveness of radiographic equipment.
STATUS The alleger could not be identified for further discussions. Inquiry was closed, but RIV may have performed a follow-up in a subsequent inspection (as of Nov 5,1982).
i 1
i i
4 f
e O
9
- e e e
- p 9
69 e
O se 9
- y COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - IMPROPER INSTALLATION OF POLAR CRANE
. (RIV-82-A-23)
BACKGROUNO:
A11eger. claimed in the ASLB hearing that shims were omitted from the polar y u rder crane 4 W and that clips were added contrary to the design drawing.
STATUS:
RIV performed an investigation (Report Nos. 50-445/82-11 & 50-446/82-10). A notice of violation was issued on 7/7/82. The matter has been closed.
1 .
t e
i a
e 4
e
- a S
9.
86 COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - TERMINATION OF A QC INSPECTOR (RIV-82-A-49)
- BACKGROUNO:
A QC inspector was fired for attempting to write an NCR. Discrimination was alleged.
STATUS:
DOL perfcreed an investigation and determined that discrimination was~ not a factor. No further activity was performed.
N e
e e
S e
O ' O y
e.
e a
1 -
/t$.
COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - B&R QC INSPECTOR NOT QUALIFIED (RIV-82-A-54)
BACKGROUND:
Alleger claimed B&R QC inspector is not qualified to perform Level II inspections STATUS:
i RIV performed an inspection (Report Nos. 50-445/82-11 & 50-446/82-10) and fue.1 determined that the individual)( could have been gified based on years of
.l experience. A citation was' issued due to inability to substantiate the i
amount of OJT hours. The matter was closed.
i 4
6 e
e
- e 1 i t
i e4 4
1,
- a t
t
- ____..e__~ _ _ . . _ , , , . , - - , _ _ . , . ~ 7_m... , -..w,,-._.__vm..__. _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . __, . .v,.,_,.-, .,
.-_..,_.3,., , _ . - - - .
1 hj l
COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - IMPROPERLY INSTALLED ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS (RIV-82-A-55)
BACKGROUNO:
An individual alleged that certain electrical components have been improperly installed.
STATUS:
Investigation by RIV (Report Nos. 50-445/82-29 & 50-446/82-15) determined 3 of the 4 alleged deficiencies were in non-safety systems and no deficiencies were found. No notice of violation was issued. .
6 0
e n.
U
, , , 9 e 9
- m
Y !
. ~
.s COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - TECHNICAL ISSUES FROM ASLB HEARING (RIV-82-A-56)
BACKGROUND:
Two alle'gations were raised regarding improper installation of electrical cabling and certain other installations not performed in accordance with the material building code. -.
STATUS:
RIV conducted an inspection (Report Nos. 50-445/83-03, 50-445/83-12, and M
50-446/83-07). The allegations were not substantiated M g-p == ,
O.
4
- O O ,
e*
4 f
e O
__ - , _ . - _ _ - - , - - - . _ . , . _ - . , ,.---_,.-_-...--y , _ _ , ,
/
COMANCHE PEAK A GATION - IRREGULARITIE N RADIOGRA'PHY
\ (RIV-82-A-57)
\
\
BACKGROUND:
Allegations regarding radiography i gularities was made to the Resident Inspector.
STATUS: !
Inquiry by RIV investig or' was to no avail alleger denied submitting allegation. Due to J ck of information, the se was closed.
/
/
I F
e J
e e
4
- g g D
o
) ..
1
+
9 0
f}
COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - ASLB HEARING ISSUE (RIV-82-A-60)
BACKGROUNO:
Alleger claimed he was unjustly fired.
- i 4
STATUS:
OI declined to followup on RIV request. Case was closed.
I i
e f
i e
9 8 0
- 8 ee e 4 9
e 64 4
d e
e
lllZsl13
- fa a.
SUBJECT:
Comanche Peak Allegation)( - Intimidation of Coating QC Personnel (4-83-001)
BACKGROUNO:
Concern has been' identified regarding the adequacy of coatings applied to surfaces (cement and steel) in the Skimmer Pump Room (Reactor Containment BuildingI)andontheUnit1containmentline[ plates. QC inspect k . '
le claim the coatings are often defective when examined closely, whi,e their
.w supervisor has directed that ad, distant inspection should be performed in which case considerably fewer defects are noted.
i S1ATUS:
OI has completed its investigation of the allegations and reported results (fasenumber 4-83-001) on August 24, 1983. The report concludes that the allegation of intimidation of QC personnel performing inspections of coatings by their supervisor was substantiated, that one inspector did -
not repo defects for fear of reprisal, and that the supervisor's manager woul take corrective action. .
z RIV has issued a draft to IE of a proposed CP to TUGC0 of $20,000 that is assessing the applicant to be at blame. RIV, sensing ASLB and Congressional ween pressure, feels the proposed CP should be issued soon (by next ===*h). In the.meantime,.one of the allegers a complaint has been fired and,
.to DOL which has ruled in his favor. The QC supervisor has been removed
- from the site. RIV is presently conducting an inspection of the coatings '
area. lu The procedure for inspecting coatings has been revised and it calls 4
e
8/9 b for " arms-length" inspections - apparently consistent with the QC supervisor's Q
direction, e rt RIV agrees that the main problem is the sundability of the QC supervisor to handle the problem properly. Rather than re-emphasizing the procedural controls (consistent with ANSI 101.4 regarding establishment of acceptance /
rejection criteria) and perhaps requiring additional training, he threatening firing and. withdrawal of certifications to obtain conformance thereby creating an atmosphere of intimidation. The QC supervisor appears to have been technically correct, but made inappropriate statements.
SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE: .
Protective coatings are significant to safety in the following ways:
- 1. Need for Coating - Coatings are generally not needed for safety reasons. They are utilized by applicants to facilitate decontamination in the event of spills, to identify systems, and to protect cre<l.c material from corrosion. If the appifcant assumes assened for a rIdhioninhydrogengenerationduringanaccidentsituationby
.m the use of a coating (oft' aluminum or galvanized (zine) surfaces, ..
then that coating becomes a requirement for safety.
- 2. Gereration of Combustible Gases - The chemical composition of coating materials is important'with regard to the generation of combustible gases especially from organic-type coating '
. materials. .
3.' Retention of Fission Products - The adherence of fission products ..
to surfaces during an accident situation is a function of whether or not the surface is coated. Therefore, the coating 6 *
.e
M/o c 3-and its type, and whether it remains in place has an effect on the 1 availability of fission products for release to the atmosphere.
~ 4.
Loss of Coating - During an ' accident situation, coating material may decompose or disintegrate to an extent that the debris could result in adverse effects on sumps, pumps, and piping systems. ,
- 5. NRC Inspections - Coating inspections are not included in the IE ..
i Inspection Program since coatings are not that important to safety.
TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS:
The staff's requirements for coatings are as follows:
- 2. SRP Section 6.1.2 " Protective Coating Systems (Paints) - Organic Materials"
- 3. Regulatory Guide 1.54 " Quality Assurance Requirements for Protective t
Coatings Applied to Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants."
- 4. ANSI N 101.2, " Protective Coatings (Paints) for Light Water Nuclear f Reactor Co'ntainment Facilities" (1972).
usAs j --Pr,sesseems requirements for the preparation of surfaces for ..
field coating.(Section 6).
- 5. ANSI N,101.4, " Quality Assurance for Protective Coatings Applied to Nuclear Facilities" (1972). .
--Establishes requirement to agree on the interpretation of standards "
' $4r
.% acceptance or rejection of coating work (Section 2.5.2) prior to .
start of work'.
udW
- r n. '
--SfaMhr preparation of subspes.(Section 4).
1
--Application of coating system,(Section 5).
--Coating inspection (Section 6); makes references to ANSI N 5.9.
1
_ = .r,-c -,m. -----m-- a - -- - y c - ~- - ---.- - -- - . - ___- -
h{O< .
i
' ~
_4
--Seuteur
^ preparation for field applications calls for blasting membe- ~ '
wFal -
surfaces to "whiteg mahd" and applying primerdefore the prepared surface rusts",(Section 6).
--Inspection of the finished product calls for determination of the dry-film thickness (by calibration or by a thickness gauge) and detection of holidays by eye and by the use of a holiday
- detect $ (Section 7).
l
- Holiday - a pinhole, skip, discontinuity, or void on coating film.
- 7. ANSI N 5.12 (1973), " Protective Coatings (Paints) for the Nuclear
- Industry."
d
--Not endorsed by R.G. 1.54, but committed to by CPSES in the FSAR.
f,' ell
--Surface preparation for,N work calls for "near white blast
=
cleaning.(Section 8.3.1),(a)).
--Coating inspection shall be performed through detection of holidays, ships and pinholes by eye and by the use of a holiday detector.
(Section 10.10.8). ..
--Deviations such as skips and damaged areas shall not be acceptable.
Acceptance. criteria for holidays sha'll be as defined in the project specification using NACE 6F166 as a guide.Of any deviations are .
detected, visually or by a holiday detector, thMareas shall be ~
w removed,, .by suitable means ,to the bare substyte or to the previously acceptable coat, and the areas shall be recoated". ..
(Section 10.11.2.2) d I
e 99
't
_ . - .- . , _ _ _ . _ , . _ . - . . - _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ . . . , , , - _ _ _ , , . , -_ _ . , _. , _ . , _ _ . , - _ ___- r m..__. _._r.
~
h(g t CPSES COMMITMENTS:
The FSAR contains the following commitments regarding protective coatings:
- 1. R.G. 1.54
- 2. ANSI N 101.4
- 3. ANSI N 101.2
- 4. ANSI N 5.9 .
- 5. ANSI N 5.12
, i, :t
- 6. Table 17A-1 identifies " Protective Coatings" as a Q-kuhts item to which 10 CFR 50 Acp. 8 applies (Item 44).
69 m
O e
me e
O
. t .
Document Name:
TALKING PAPER - COMANCHE PEAK Requestor's ID:
SANDY Author % Name:
Haas Document Comments:
M h
$ -e
)
no e
O 9
9 #
eC 0
S 5
o
. W 4
9 9 9
s-
f /[.
COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - DEFECTIVE PIPE HANGERS <
(A4-83-001)
BACKGROUND 3- M A B&R welder alleges certain welds were improperly performed. Oie involved a S/S pipe in a safety related system and the other were welds in several hangers.
STATUS ,,
No investigation was performed. RIV, however, performed an inspection and f - __issudninspectionreport(._ ^ -- -- , l ., ._ w .
( y Wo. s 0 -Hn5"l53 ~07 E-f_ vv6/ es-ov . d #
pn a. .
p M
4 M
c 9
eG 4
W v- -w w
- hj$
COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - POOR CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES (Q4-83-011)
BACKGROUND umere t t.
An individual alleges.that samoust a
crumbled when forms were removed, a certain structurewas75*outofplace,andtherewasnokrebarinconcreteofa certain building. He claims inspectors were bought off.
STATUS No investigation was performed. RIV was appraised of the information for their review and evaluation (as of May 23, 1983).
e 9
- e 4
DO 9 e
- D g a
W5
, - - p 9-,--9-c.---r, --
p y,ye-- -.- p -m,a .y. ,--
4 9 ( ..
a
_ . , ay ,y ,f g.
s '
L%
g- Tc - A - 07 f.&c :. u, ., a p .- .-
~~~
s' g { f* ** * "
c
- ~
, ) ps) "
$ 4
~
/ v.
/,.. u.,.e . -
e e#* - . ,
. (, -..i' e
. - .7
_f 'f ^ h 1, ,J, .
/g (.,-u - -
g . ..
3' .. l. . - , . . ~/,
// -.
4
, ;-u
.fio -
. y-w be * # -
4,n~%* W 4
ee er S
9 0
a . 9 4 >,
- 9 m
M I
f a t.
l e
e
. .e
N'/L
- . I COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - IMPROPER CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES (A4-83-005)
(RIV-83-A-0013) 8ACKGROUND An individual alleged, that unauthorized and undocumented holes were drilled c n W oc. tion in rebar, that a main steam line pipe was moved after sea 4emseeken by-a polar crane, that a cutting torch was used on hanger material in violation of procedures, and that welders failed to purge s/s pipes during welding.
STATUS An investigation was conducted in which 20 individuals were interviewed. The
~
allegation could not.be substantiated (Inspection Report 50-445/2-83-27).
The NRC efforts have been completed.
h 4
m e
e e
e O
@e G
e o
er ww-y -
y
F/9 BROWN & ROOT (COMANCHE REAK) ALLEGATION -IMPROPER TERMINATION OF A o t.
QC INSPECTap (4-83-016)
BACKGROUNO:
An allegation has been raised by a former QC inspector regarding his termina-tion as a result of notifying CPSES management personnel of improper QC practices. .
STATUS:
The OI investigation is still underway (as of 11/30/83).
- 0-.L S
- J --
2l e
O dP e e
- eb 4
o gp m- , -_- # _g., ,. - - c-e 4. - - - , y
.p.
4
. 6 .
h/(
1 COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - INTIM,DATION OF ELECTRICAL CRAFT PERSONNEL (Q4-83-021)
BACKGROUND ,
An individual allegeh that training of electrical craft personnel consists of reading the manual for installation of electrical conduit hangers in one day (manual consists of 400-500 pages). A voluntary 40 hour4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> course is..
offered, but only during off-duty hours without pay. The manual cannot be
~
read during working hours. Craft personnel have poor morale due to harassment by supervisor. Sabotage is also threatened.
STATUS No investigation was performed. RIV was apprised of the information for review, instruction, and action as necessary (as of August 29, 1983).
.}-% .. /.e- Z f, n-*-LG {Tco-~ U ~- -
e g
4
, J
.e I 9 6
=
es e--m, w u- - ~ - - - -ww- -g++ g-g -- 9 y+- q -
l
. l 1
. . . v'E
$1 COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION'- IMPROPER IMPLEMENTATION OF TECHNICAL PROCEDURES (Q4-83-022) l
~
8ACKGROUND p
An B&R QC inspector alleges that NCR's are not permitted to be written, and that only IR's can be prepared to identify unsatisfactory conditions. He also alleges that numerous modifications have been made to procedures f,or application of safety-related coatings that have not been verified regarding their effect on the integri'ty of the coating system.
STATUS No investigation was performed. RIV was apprised of ,the information for review, evaluation, and action as necessary (as of November 2, 1983). Y p' p h, ( & Wa3~~~)
- rv a k7 3
4 ..
Oe e
d e
O m
ea 1
.. .=
/8 COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - POOR MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (Q4-83-023)
BACKGROUND An individual alleges that a pipefitter was hired to perform electrical work and that electricians were made to perform pipefitting work. He furth r alleged that he was not given proper material to perform his work, was denied proper documentation for his work, and that certain cable tray hangers were not constructed per instructions.
STATUS No investigation was performed. RIV was informed and planned no further evaluation of this information (as of September 20,1983).
1 es a
W
, S e 9
- ee
. i i
)
- g
~
l COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - DEFICIENCIES IN COATlNG PROGRAM l I
(Q4-83-026) i BACXGROUND ( gg- 13 -A - 93)
/
An individual from an outside painting contractor had visited the Comanche Peak site and prepared a memorandum identifying problems in the coating program that he saw. The problems involved material storage, J$ workmanship, not satisfying ANSI requirements, and possibly coatingsintegrity. ..
~
STATUS No investigatiojn was performed. RIV was apprised of the information for review, evaluation, and possible action (as of October 18, 1983). $[
pg h y~k ( % d)*'W= &,
4
- e 4
D sr 4
e ee l
O ee 9
-=
, 1,- y w- -ye---- - -- ,,,g--
ts COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATIONS - IMPROPER CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES (RIV-83-A-0001)
BACKGROU'ND An. individual alleged in the Fort Worth Star Telegram that safety hazards were covered up including that he was not permitted to clean metal clips from the Refueling Pool, and that holes were improperly drilled in concrete walls and through reinforcing steel.
STATUS The identified problems wer*e inspected (Inspection Reports 50-445/83-03 and 50-446/83-01) and efforts by TUGCo and B&W were found acceptable. One exception was the inadequate treatment of lights in the Refueling Pool (a notice of violation was issued). An additional inspection was performed (Inspection Report 50-445/83-27) with regard to drilling of holes in sament; the allegation was not substantiated (as of 11/30/83,- Tom Westerman).
cent,etc en e
9 e
e e
SS 4
e
. . ? .
f
' ~
COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - INADEQUACIES IN "AS BUILT" QC INSPECTION PROGRAM (Q4-83-009)
(RIV-83-A-0026)
BACKGROUND:
An individual alleged that "as-built" inspections were modified to downgrade the importance of dimensional deficiencies and useff general configurati.on checks only. The individual also alleged that certain inspection reports are generated in violation of the applicable procedure.
1 STATUS: ,
No investigation was performed. RIV was apprised of this information for their review and evaluation (as of April 8, 1983).
An inspection was performed by RIV and the allegation was determined to be unsubstantiated (as of 11/30/83, Tom Westerman)
O Om e
e 0
e 4
et e
O M =
-- - v-- - =,+--w-- - -y y a yv - w T' '- + * ' '*-n'v*=-v'= -
ED COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - FALSIFICATION ON CIVIL QC RECORDS (4-83-006)
(RIV-83-A-0032)
BACKGROUND: .
An allegation has been raised regarding the altering of QC records for concrete 1
pours at the site.
STATUS:-
OI interviews still underwa'y (as of 11/30/83).
L e
f 4
9 e
O.
O s
G + e 9
ea 3
4 e
et t
n .
4 -- v e _
p.- 7 y- p- - + + --wv.- g --m.s.--veww e '- --4m = 3.wge 9
'Z 3 COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - POOR QA PRACTICES (RIV-83-A-0034) l BACKGROUNO:
Same as 4-83-001 (RIV-83-A-001). Letter received from alleger on same subject (addressed to President R. Reagan).
4
<h STATUS:
A Alleger interviewed by 01. ' RIV (Projects Branch) following through Also 4
OIA conducting an investigation (2 reports issued on October 20, 1983, one on CASE concerns and the other on Markey concerns).(a,s of 11/30/83, Tom Westerean.)
i 1
=e o
g eG e
se f
e -
~ , ,
s -
l, , .
$2Y COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - FALSIFICATION OF QC RECORDS (4-83-011)
(RIV-83-A-0046)
BACKGROUNO:
e An allegation has been raised regarding the falsification of protective coating test records by management personnel.
STATUS:
OI still is in the final ph'ases of its investigation (as of 11/30/83).
D 4
e O
g 9
9 e
9 eG
+
- We 4
~ -- -
+ e---e - egr - ~
4 , n-r__m onrs :- -
h~l$
ors COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - INTIMIDATION OF QC INSPECTreR (4-83-013; A
Q4-83-025).(RIV-83-A-0052) s 7, 09 o l BACKGROUND: F (
Allegations have been raised regarding the discouragenent of QC inspectors from properly performing their QC responsibilities of reporting deficiencies !
ery through the discriminating-termination 4
of another QC inspector An ingtiry has also been recqived on a similar subject. r STATUS:
A total of 76 past and present QC inspectors were interviewed. None indicated o-he/she had ever failed to report a deficiency or document sur nonconforming condition (. Only one indicated that there were attempts to intimidate him.
No one indicated that knowledge of the discriminatory termination had caused him/her '_o improperly perform inspections, but three inspectors did state they were more careful in their inspections and writing of NCR's.
An inquiry was received (Q4-83-025) on a similar subject and additional inter-views (24 QC inspections) have been performed. Preliminary results indicate .
approximately 90% of these personnel believe they were intimidated from perform-
'~
5e ing their inspection activities properly. Their personnel were also intervenor witnesses at the Comanche Peak ASLB proceedings (as of November 3,1983). ,
O.
- 9 e
e O
[h COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - FEM 5LE STAFF MEMBER OF C(GMA 06 SERVED ORINKING WITH TUGC0 MANAGEMENT l
(RIV-83-A-0058) l 1
i .
] BACKGROUNO:
I e Concerned citizen sent letter identifying member of CYGMA staff drinking with
., a TUGC0 manager. ;
i .
STATUS:
RIV brought matter to licensee's attention and matter is considered closed (as of 11/30/83, Tom Westerman). .
2
~$
a j
A es
! . t i
i a
L 4
e ao
'4
.* -+**r
--a- e- -- -w. , -s-- , , - , - - -. ,,--p, -o - me ..r-,4r,.
+.
- g
- q COMANCHEPEAKALLEGATION-REACTORVESSkTOUCHINGSHIE (RIV-83-A-0059)
BACKGROUND:
A11eger believes shield wall is touching reactor vessel erroneously.
STATUS:
RIV conducted an inspection (Report Nos. 50-445/83-34 and 50-446/83-18) and determined shield wall was 'not touching reactor vessel (as of 11/30/83, Tom Westerman).
i I
's no I
- p.
e t
e 4
-- e-**eeee,=-- -e ur- - -a -. - - - w g y.. -m-* . . . es- -...m .-,- w y- - nv--e y.+-
4.'.
'*h5 o* .
COMANCHE PEAK ALLEGATION - CABLE TRAYS NOT INSTALLED PER DCA'S l (RIV-83-A-64)
BACKGROUND:
Alleger states that certain electrical cable trays have not been installed in accordance with the design change authorization (DCA).
4 STATUS:
Inspection to be performed.'
i 4
m Og I
i P
W
. O g
me o
9
-**eemer <s.,c- w e --. . , , ,
e--- - - = +-a m- - t-r-g e ,9--i e- eee -
J ---L,A- nA0 Aw asA ,&- -_m6& -,,m J-,a4m- J ,.
. . ?.' i y
W# -
l/
w.
( n Ae s A kAG
/ ,,
~
- A/an/r f ,7
. )
g' ~
lh '
& y & m S"u' A 9)wy< K6% 44 &
i d R./m n , '
- mne -
s% /
0 g s~ m 1
.dbu Whf,5* Q/Y Y' ?NG.
-ga& 9 vy %+Awwo
~
Gn p G
aguadAe d A l 9 d u %aru=ar!'ef zs nan4~Co &
,(/'N- jsT;al d ucw 7J s on A c% A A 4 ayr,~ & s.w,it'.
1 nwgr -
d , j r. ,
/ittvls'A-/ w I s c utrk p.. s , ph, L&cL/$ J f. '
&ZlO;6.a$ Obr <As>cas Ct a -
s f { $4 ~
it .
p+~
i
[ . .
G'j
- -'--~
- -- ,
7--,- , , , , . . . ,..
m.. ,
- - - --~ ----- .
, ~ . .
- ~~ * - ,: 7 ~
, n ry~ m G -- .- .
W,Jww=ma pa' v99 y>rm wpy -yl
.W WW, f n 2n ?p p p)7'
^ y w ? " y' P??'P p yMl pn .
or v p m ;g -
- yhy W9 nJ na
,a,>/yvypy-
- j god rg H /y g n w ~,f,.
yW -g J w.w 5
+ ?'J M f ydr9 ,%
n 2ggry#~ ,
v~ 2 -
9 y w z w ry 3,5 n ps pan y
-a ,,r, n y->r qp 29 y' ,
~
fenn 9 - fv. - Q, , , yyyy/r y-
)mm yvr,y ynm yn'. -
&/ v t p p<e f- -
& e*g d~,$( $l ~.
,) '1/".n%9L7D( Y'"7' V0 N'ff
~' M
}
l L?< 22l?g[)ridz$ ll?
> wnyglLgpmm
~
r!r9JW:n-tny- y . v W:1:va - m w a w+,w mwik?e 4
- e
r .
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO.TIPANY 2003 BRYAN TOWEH
- DA1.LAS.TEXAb 76203 MsCM& EL D. SPENCE December 20, 1983
, TO: All Personnel Assigned to Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station CPSES POLICY REGARDING INTIMIDATION, HARASSMENT OR THREATS All personnel assigned to the Comanche Peak project, whether employed by the Texas, Utilities System or con-tractors, are expected to conduct their activities in a p'rofessional manner. Accordingly, acts of intimidation, harassment er threats on the part of construction, Quality Assurance / Quality Control or any other functional organization personnel, will not be tolerated. Personnel engaging in acts of intimidation, harassment or threats shall be subject to' disciplinary action in41uding termination. The appropriate level of disciplinary ' action will be determined on an individual case basis.
g amb
/ ,
MDS:ln ,
l l
OO e ,
e h
L -
(-
~
w TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY 2003 BTWAN TowEM DALL.AS. TEXAS Tf,203
-ic-*c o s c~cc December 20, 1983 T0: All Personnel Assigned to Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station CPSES' POLICY REGARDING INVESTIGATION AND REPORTING OF QUALITY MATTERS RELATED TO NUCLEAR SAFETY It has been and remains the highest priority. of CPSES management to ensure the quality and safety of the plant.
To that end, all employees and supervisors are required to identify, document and report as soon as possible any condi.tions that they know, or have reason to believe, could compromise the safety and integrity. of the plant.
Any f ailure to report such conditions, knowingly with-holding information regarding such conqitions, failure to cooperate fully with other personnel investigating such conditions, or any attempt to harass or intimidate any employee attempting to report such conditions is regarded by management as a gross breach of employment respon-sibilities and may constitute. a violation of law. Any employee or supervisor who comits any of the foregoing ..
acts shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to and _
including discharge from employment.
a f )
. I aD 2D 3_: -_%
MDS:l n
( Y G
4>
- m. . . . .
L w