ML20199E406
| ML20199E406 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 02/05/1986 |
| From: | Grimsley D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Fowler L SPEARS, B. |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-42 NUDOCS 8603270204 | |
| Download: ML20199E406 (4) | |
Text
~
T PDR-olb
[ -.% 4 UNITED STATES 8 % NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g j WASHINGTON,0. C. 20555
% , , , , +* FEB 0 5 SNi 1.aurie Fowler, Esquire Suite 220 - Grant Building 44 Broad Street, NW IN RESPONSE REFER Atlanta, GA 30303 TO FOIA-86-42
Dear Ms. Fowler:
This is in partial response to your letter dated January 15, 1986, in which .
you requested, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (F0IA), all records related to NRC's investigation initiated in May 1983 regarding silegations that Pullman Power Products employees intimidated and harassed quality control inspectors at nuclear facilities, including the Vogtle plant.
The NRC has previously responded to an FOIA request for records containing information similar to that identified in your letter. Copies of that request and NRC's response letters, listed on the enclosed Appendix A, are enclosed.
We are enclosing a notice which explains procedures and charges for obtaining records from the PDR.
The documents listed on the enclosed Appendix B are already available in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) located at 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555. The documents are also available in the Vogtle Local Public Document Room (LPDR) located at the Burke County Library, 412 4th Street, Waynesboro, Georgia 30830.
Copies of the documents listed on the enclosed Appendix C are being placed in the NRC PDR. They will be filed in folder F01A-86-42 under your name.
The NRC has not completed its search for and review of documents subject to
- your request. We will respond as soon as those actions are completed. ,
Sincerely, bb$ }
Donnie H. Grimsley, Director Division of Rules and Records Office of Administration
Enclosures:
As stated 8603270204 860205 PDR FOIA PDR FOWLER 86-42 J
Re: F0IA-86-42
.A_PPENDIX A F01A-83-510
- 1. 08/23/83 Request letter to NRC from A. H. Domby
- 2. 10/19/83 Response letter to A. H. Domby from NRC
- 3. 06/04/84 Response letter to A. H. Domby from NRC
~~.
M e
G l
1 l
l l
F Re: F01A-86-42 APPENDIX B
- 1. 06/14/84 Letter to Georgia Power from Dance forwarding Inspection Report Nos. 50-424/84-05~and 50-425/84 ANO 8407180197
- 2. '07/23/84 Lett' to Dance from Foster - AN0 8409240383
. 3. 03/04/85 Letter to Georgia Power from Walker forwarding Inspection. Report Nos. 50-424/84-36 and 50-425/84 ANO 8504170570 ,
1
~
l 4. 09/25/85 Letter to R. J. Kelly from J. N. Grace forwards Enforcement Conference Summary Reports 50-424/85-49 and 50-425/85 ANO 8512050219
- 5. 11/15/85 Notice of "iolation based on results of investigation on l 830519-0709 - ANO 8512050222 l
o l
I i l
Re: F01A-86-42 J
APPENDIX C
- 1. Undated Summary of Enforcement Conference, with OELD comments.
(4 pages)
- 2. Undated Handwritten Notes - chronology; questions for Holler.
(2 pages) 4 I
i l
l
. ..,y,- ,
UNITEo STATES
[pCfogDo
- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMtsSION y "i n REGION 11
- y 101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
- Ij ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323 k.....s[2 OLc _ .'.. 1585 Georgia Power Company ATTN: Mr. R. J. Xelly Executive Vice President P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA - 30302 Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
PLACEMENT OF DOCUMENT IN PUBLIC DOCUMENT ROOM Enclosed is a sumary of an investigation conducted by the NRC Office of Investigations, Region II field office. The subject'of the investigation is "Vogtle Nuclear. Plant Alleged Intimidation /Harrassment of QC Welding Inspectors and Possible Falsification of QC Inspection Records by Pullman. Power Products, Inc." This Document has been placed in the Public Document Room and may be of use to you in preparing for the conference on September 25, 1985.
Sincerely, i
~
- M -
O lJ.NelsonGrace
. f Regional Administrator
Enclosure:
Cover page and sumary, dated 10/26/83, 7 pages cc w/ encl:
R. E. Conway, Senior Vice President Nuclear Power D. O. Foster, Vice President and General Manager Vogtle Project H. H. Gregory, III, General Manager,- Vogtle Nuclear Construction G. Bockhold, Jr. , Vogtle '
Plant Manager L. T. Gucwa, Chief Nuclear Engineer , y@ i Ruble A. Thomas, 1 Vice President-Licensing Vogtle , ' ,, )
Project cc w/ encl: (Cont'd on page 2)
- . - - --- - - - _ _ . . . . _ _ . ._- _ __ #_ .=
/
f Georgia Power Company 2 SEP 12 M
cc w/ encl: (Cont'd)
Ed Groover, Quality Assurance Site Manager C. W. Hayes, QA Manager J. T. Beckham, Vice President
& General Manager - Operations J. A. Bailey, Project Licensing Manager
- George F. Trowbridge, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge Bruce W. Churchill, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge Ernest L. Blake, Jr., Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge James E. Joiner, Troutman, Sanders, Lockerman and Ashmore
' James G. Ledbetter, Comissioner Department of Human Resources Charles H. Badger, Office of Planning and Budget, Management Review Division Deppish Kirkland, III, Counsel Office of the Consumer's Utility Council Douglas C. 7eper, Georgians Against Nuclear Energy Laurie Fowler Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation Tim Johnson, Executive Director Educational Campaign for a Prosperous Georgia Morton B. Margulies, Esq., Chainnan Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Dr. 0 scar H. Paris, Administrative Judge ,
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr., Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
uNrTEo STATES tacwsung
, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I '- oFracE oF INVESTIG ATIONS FIELD OFFICE. REGloN II
/ * 'i^uW^.FEo'aVi.%"
Date: October 26, 1983 i
REPORT OF INVESTIGATION -
TITLE: V0GTLE NUCLEAR PLANT ALLEGED INTIMIDATION / HARASSMENT OF QC WELDING INSPECTORS AND POSSIBLE FALSIFICATION OF QC INSPECTION RECORDS BY PULLMAN POWER PRODUCTS, INC.
SUFPLEMENT: 50-424 CASE NUPSER: 2-83-005 CONTROL OFFICE: 01: Region II STATL'5: CLOSED REDORTIN3 0FFICE: OI: Region II FERIOD OF INVESTIGATION: May 19 - July 9, 1983 REPORTIN3 INVESTIGATOR: 44 )
' RhoeN P. Bu Investigator Officeof'InvestigitionsFieldOffice,Regier.11
/
REVIEWED BY: .
E.'LIWilliamsN,Ac[ingDirector g
OfficeofInvestiqtionsFieldOf .ce, Region II.
i
// f s
if bffiut1 -y v ,
William J. Wardi Director .
Division of Field Operation gi*
Office of Investigations I k
2
^ l r &, . ,I R, . I--
e tor Roger oftuna,DeputyD Of of Inve ati APPROVED BY: b d B. Hayes, h tor Office of Investi ati@ s
- I l
l
. i i
i
\
s e
ae e
, .,. , . . - . . - , . - - _ _ _ . .--,p-..,,,.,.y_._,m,, wm,, , . . . . , - - , . ., ,,e-m,.w,,e _,.w,.,-,,..w..
1
. i i
i i
(
l l
l l
l i
l l
I .
J l
SUMMARY
1 G
e s
(
l i
e
'~ ' ' ' - - - - - - - - , ,, ,, , __ * ' ' " * **"-W-4an -,.g._, , , _ _
" *'*'""Ww*'es e esse wyem_n,, ,
m.
w
~
p 1 g
PO'c'$'s G O . ..
, gis' investigation was initiated to identify and document. alleged intimidation and harassment of Pullman Power Products, Inc. (PPP) Quality Control (QC) welding inspectors by the company's construction management personnel. PPP, head-quartered in Williamsport, PA, is under contract to install all piping and piping supports associated with the construction of the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant "
(VNP), in Wdynesboro, GA, a licensed facility' of the Georgia Power Company.
Additionally, it was reported to the NRC that the intimidation and harassment , f l
experienced by the QC welding illspectors may have resulted in possible improprieties regarding inspection records prepared and maintained by these individual ~.
s The allegation pertaining to intimidation and harassment of QC welding inspectors by the Project Manager at the VNP was first reported to the Senior Resident Inspector (SRI), NRC at the facility. This initial allegation was substantiated by the SRI ~during the subsequent interviews of four additional QC welding inspectors employed by PPP. Additionally, a Confidential Source alleged vast PPP material storage problems, records improprieties and incidents of intimidation by the Project Manager and his construction superintendents. The SRI obtained information that QC inspectors were being manipulated by the Project Manager through threats relating to adverse personnel actions affecting employment and salary matters. Additionally, the Project Manager allegedly interfered with the utilization of OC welding inspectors and attempted to influence the reassignments of inspectors whose work histories did not favor production and scheduling. An l onsite incident of assault in August 1982 upon a OC weiding inspector by a
'donstruction superintendent, both employees of PPP, was ilso reported tc the SRI.
l 1
A review of pertinent regulatory documents, stancards, procecures and contract i requirements was conducted pursuant to the investigation. It was disclosed that PPP committed to cooperate with the licensee to ensure QC standards for the VNP are enforced at all times. Further, this review disclosed that the line of authority regarding administrative matters for the QA/QC manager at the fielc office site of PPP is through thp Project Manager. It was aeterminec that PPP or
_ . _ _ _ _ ~~---_-.-----
a 2
a subsidiary company was the subject of previous inquiries regtrding intimidation and harassment of QC inspectors at the Seabrook Nuclear Plant, Seabrook, New Hampshire and at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant, Avila Beach, California. A licensee initiated self evaluation in late 1982, utilizing Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) criteria, identified that the QA/QC administrative reporting to the Project Manager is an area of weakness in the PPP field organi-zation. .
During the investigation, nineteen field level QC welding inspectors in PPP's '
field office at the VNP were interviewed regarding intimidation ahd harassment, interference by the Project Manager and inspection records improprieties. .Five of these individuals confirmed vast material storage deficiencies which are compounded by the overt refusals on the part of construction management to divert craft efforts to correct the problems. These inspectors viewed the construction superintendent's negative attitude toward Storage Inspection Report deficiencies as a forc of intimication. Some of these inspectors also related instances of interference and intervention into QC inspector assignment matters by construc-tion management to favor scheduling and the production effort. All except one of the QC inspectors interviewed reported variously that the Project Manager nas attempted to influence the utilization of, and decisions rendered by, inspectors; that the salary administration and other benefits for QA/QC personnel controlled by the Project Manager is unfair and inecuitable; that he arbitrarily adjusts recommended salary increases based upon subjective criteria; that he is f requently publicly non-supportive and negative towards the QC function; that he anc construction superintendents publicly chastise and embarass inspectors and that he employs remarks which threaten job security as a geans of intimidation
'and harassment. The lone dissenting 0: 'nspector was oeterrined to be a personal friend of the Project Manager and had been the recipient of preferential treat-ment regarding a job assignment on' site. lnnse inspectors with knowledge of an ll onsite altercation, in August 1982, between a fo-mer PPP Construction Super-fl intender,t and a QC Welding Inspector indicatec that the superintendent disagreed with the inspector's perception of the non-confo" ming item being discussed. One inspector reported an offsite altercation in December 1952 between a Construction Superintendent and a QC Inspector Supervisor during which the superintendent held ar. open knife on the QC supervisor.
j
. 3
. Two ' current and one former QC supervisory personnel were interviewe substantiated the claims and perceptions of field inspectors regarding incide and acts of QC negativism by construction managers, intimidation, harassment ,
adverse interference, verbal threats, embarassment and chas'tisement of these individuals by the Project Manager and his subordinates.
All of these individuals indicated that production and scheduling appear to take precedence over the quality functions, an attitude nurtured by the Project Manager and his construction staff.
Authorized Nuclear Inspe'ctors at the VNP also confirmed '
intimidation ment. and harassment of QC welding inspectors by PPPe-constructio Incuiries engaged were in visual also conducted among the OC inspection personnel who al inspection practices which were nct in accordance with existing procedures or who signed inspection reports without hao been completed. One Q: assuring corrective actions welding inspector admitted that he occasionally failed to conduct visual inspections within the distance requirements as
~
specified in'PPP and ANSI /ASME procedures.
Except for this one procedural violation, all inspection personnel who were interviewed regarding record preparation and maintenance improprieties advised forthrightly that they had never signed or initialed an inspection document without first performing the actions in the manner prescribed by the applicable procedures.
Ten welders or pipefitters employed by PPP were interviewed ano, except for one reporting tnat a 0; inspector had occasionally failed te visually inspect wi requi rement thin the distance set forth in the PPP and'ASME procecures, none were aware of record teoroprieties by CC welding inspectors.
'he Prcject Manager and two construction superintendents we e irte .
iewed and all ategorically elding denied any form of intentional inticidation anc harassment of C:
inspectors.
The Project Manager anc one Superintencent admitted actions hich could be interpreted as interference into matters whichurely u n c t i'on s .
are QA/Q p
The Project Manager denied any improprieties regarding the adminis-ation of QA/Q: personnel matters.
All claimed to be supportive of the QA/Q mction but acknowledged that they had failed to de so openly in a public nner.
I i
I
- T- i- . _ _ _ _ . _
4 Eight licensee management officials and QC ' inspection personnel at the VNP were interviewed regarding their- knowledge of intimidation and harassment of QC welding inspectors employed by PPP.
No disclosures pertinent to the investi-gation were revealed during these interviews. Observations of PPP material storage areas tended to support remarks reported by QC inspectors regarding the general disarray of materials and common utilization of these areas by several cajor contractors onsite. A review of QC welding inspector salary data disclosed that there does not appear to be a specific correlation between the amounts of recent weekly increases received and longevity, related experience and education ,
levels of these individuals. __
- e S
et
, , . ~
.p-P ?h *
- N UNITED STATES 8
q%}. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION gt WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 ,
s...../ e Report Nos.: 50-424/85-49 and 50-425/85-36 Licensee: Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Docket Nos.: 50-424 and 50-425 License Nos.: CPPR-108 and CPPR-109 Facility Name: Vogtle 1 and 2 *
(,.f . Ca8 ._
Inspection, Conducted: September 25, 1985 Inspector:
E. ll. Gi rard Date Signed Approved by:
J, J. Blake, Section Chief Date Signed Engineering Branch Division of Reactor Safety
SUMMARY
Scope: This report documents _ the in office evaluation effort and enfor.cenlent conference held with Georgia Power . Company Officials on September.25, 1985 concerni.ng UnresolveLLtem 425,-4 84~ 05-01,~"Insuf ficient Organizational Freedom /ControT of Services Throu. gh Effective Audits."
3 Results: One violation was identified; " Insufficient Organizational Freedom /
Control of Services Through Effective Audits," paragraph 2.
e 1
l 1
. ClI 1
1 d
REPORT DETAILS
-1. Enforcement Conference An Enforcement Conference was held at the NRC Region II Office on September 25, 1985, to discuss concerns regarding possible harassment /
intimidation of Quality Control (QC) welding inspectors by Pullman Power Products, Inc., (PPP) management in and prior to the Spring of 1983. The specific issue discussed was the subject of an NRC Office of Investigation (01) investigation conducted during May 19 to July 9,1983. Ihis issue was latet_followed up and documer.ted in a Region II Inspection Report No. 50-424, 425/84-05. A summary of the investigation was forwarded to Georgia' Pow 4r Company by NRC letter dated September 12, 1985.
The following personnel were in attendance.
- a. Georgia Power Company
- D. O. Foster, Vice President and General Manager, Vogtle Project P. D. Rice, Vice President and General Manager, Quality Assurance (QA)
H. H. Gregory, III, General Manager, Construction C. W. Hayes, QA Manager B. C. Harbin, Quality Control Manager L. B. Glenn, Quality Concerns Manager C. M. Honakler, Jr., Senior Personnel Representative R. A. Bell, Salary Administrative Manager C. W. Whitney, Legal Counsel, Troutman, Sanders, Lockerman and Ashmore Law Firm R. T. Walter, Director, Mechanical Construction Operation, PPP B. L. Edwards, Site Resident Manager, PPP
- b. NRC J. N. Grace, Regional Administrator, RII R. D. Walker, Director, Division of Reactor Projects (DRP), RII A. F. Gibson, Acting Director, Division of Reactor Safety (DRS), RII J. A. Axelrad, Director, Enforcement Staff, Office of Inspection and Enforcement (OIE)
G. R. Jenkins, Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordination Staff, RII A.. R. Herdt, Chief, Engineering Branch, DRS, RII M. V. Sinkule, Chief, 2D Project Section, RII J. -Y. Vorse, Director, Field Office, Office of Investigation B. W. Jones, Regional ~ Counsel, RII S. G. Burns, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of the Executive Legal Director
,- , - , -, s ~ ~ -
2 E. J. _ Holler, Enforcement Specialist, 0IE E. H. Girard, Reactor Inspec.or, DRS, RII L. P. Modenos, Enforcement Specialist, RII S. J. Vias, Reactor Inspectnr, DRS, RII ;
J. F. Rogge, Senior Resident Inspector, DRP, RII R. J. Schepens, Resident Inspector, DRP, RII W. H. Rankin, Acting Project Engineer,'ORP, RII During the meeting, the Georgia Power Company representatives presented the results of their investigations and assessments and the corrective actions -
taken regarding alleged intimidation of QC welding inspectors by PPP -
management. .
Licensee representatives discussed: the methodology and results of investigations of PPP personnel practices . including salary administration and QC inspector job assignments; the PPP organization and policy changes; various corrective actions implemented by PPP such as the increase of QC inspector staff, assignment of lead inspectors, addition of problem solving teams, training in human factors, training in communication, training in the team building concept, the increase in corporate involvement, the establish-ment of biweekly meetings, and the addition of suggestion boxes; the results s_
cr and nethodology of interviews conducted with PPP QC Inspectors by Georgia i(-
Power Company; the establishment and effectiveness of GPC and PPP Quality c) , ,__ w Concerns Program; and GPC Quality Assurance factions which overview licensee ' +4 ,s programs such as contractor program review, audits and assessments. -
The licensee stated that on the basis of their review of salary admini-stration they had concluded that the PPP practices were fair and reasonable.
Ine, found, however, that the practices were not understood by the QC personnel i.nvolved and may have been improperly perceived by 'them. GPC s tatid ~ tha t ~ thef f investigatio'n of PPP personnel _ practices did not -
specifically identify intimidation /harrassment, however, they did identify a specific management style which could be perceived by the inspectors as intimidation /harrassment. To correct this problem, the PPP Project _ Manager
~~
was removed from the site.
The licensee representatives also outlined corrective actions that were taken subsequent ta-their issuande of the response _to_. Inspection . Report 50-424, 425'84-05
/ dated July 23, 1984. OnE of'these actions involved interviews of PPP QC welding inspectors by GPC in 1984 and 1985. The results of these interviews indicated that PPP personnel were apprised of salaFy administrative policy and. that no misuse of salary administration-or intimidation /harrassment of inspectors was occurring.
- 2. NRC Staff Evaluation Results Subsequent to' the Enforcement Conference described in paragraph 1, the NRC staff evaluated' the additional information presented. It was concluded that actions described in Inspection Report 50-424/84-05 and 50-425/84-05 and 01 Investigation Report No.. 2-83-005, constituted a violation of 10 CFR 50, 1 Appendix ~B; Criterion-I. Ho~w ever, due to the timely, extensive corrective l
l 1
m..u s . .s,<
, _ ~ 4. .sm _ ,_ . . .~,,m.s .ms. s..e ,, ,, . .
o . .
3 action implemented by the licensee, a civil penalty was not deemed appropriate. This violation is identified as violation No. .424/85-49-01; 425/85-36-01, Insufficient Organizational Freedom / Control of Services Through Effective Audits.
In that the presentation by the licensee addressed all questions related to corrective actions, no response is required and this violation is closed.
This also closes unresolved item 50-424/84-05-01; 50-425/80-05-01.
W s
O S
e
at a
~
9 i %
t b
$! 3k n
p QP s ,_ h O 4T e1 Q-
.D.*
T.% gz g
.N, h I[h '5
~
f (kkix .
$!4l i ~
0,~S D n o V " M~w f9*i gb ;' ' f . I
- p l 4
,m
$o
.z
- e a 5 b y- hF y, pg j C M hq 99 '
@d
-+ " %x e cl si n
- n w, t} h.L
,mg. fte ,
- #. ,s4g.
1,,!
- is ; ; . ,.
I ! i
\ !! , ,
=
w , g- *
.j
+ ,.
~ ,
. ,
- y
- 6
..i , . ' .
vs f .s D
'k W(
f. f f' d
' '} ~
y ~kAu - Le c ,'- f j. n.u.. ,
.;).
o c
]
%~ i p % .- W kk .?) ,
. c.
i ,
,c pWh ) 4
* .=..'- C L
) E V/'0s/
t aIj D- - i~ . i Q/
' - */
OL. -
^
.ej - - g I '0 Gl~c~ h[ * , .p. -
~~' s}':W '
w w lea 'l-c le ~L~-a N: ,x, a . .c :c-%dl ? % .:~ 6* g..+j o ,n. cm . ~ o nf w. ~ ,'v-
- . > u, g e. f,.,_ f , . - gg n j'~,}Q-
+.
]> pL
- _y,i :". i
. . i.:5
"% m.)v} , !'
' ,a >.
J. ,, ' - j[ j~j u .s J .
~.- . ._: %. < .m., n < ;was -
.tp-
. ,,g,:u,:
6
. gr~ < , Qu, :,w* ,-:
e
. m . _ __ _
*e -
kk' -
~~
n- -- h x; a-
' ^
Q,, [. M *~Q :
=, ab? ,, . a
~
;' ~-2'
. . mo -
*- , %g ,, #
-~ .~N.,. w vG'- - - - __
;) - =-
s I I 1 l _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ -____.______ _______-.}}