ML20132F027

Further Response to FOIA Request for Eight Categories of Records of E Kent Allegations Re Facilities.Forwards App D Documents.Documents Also Available in Pdr.App E Documents Withheld (Ref FOIA Exemptions 6 & 7)

ML20132F027
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades, San Onofre, Midland, 05000000
Issue date:	09/20/1985
From:	Felton J NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
To:	Rillo C THELEN, MARRIN, JOHNSON & BRIDGES
Shared Package
ML20132F031	List: ML20132F027 ML20132F082
References
FOIA-85-249 NUDOCS 8510010225
Download: ML20132F027 (3)

Text

4 gr.oteeg% UNITED STATES

[' ,

5 h

E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 70555 h1 s  !

..... +#

O(W SEP R E Mr. Christopher J. Rillo Thelen, Marrin, Johnson & Bridges Two Embarcadero Center IN RESPONSE REFER San Francisco, CA 94111 TO F01A-85-249

Dear Mr. Rillo:

This is in further response to your letter dated April 2,1985, in which you requested, pursuant to the Freedom of Infomation Act (F0IA), eight categories of records related to E. Earl Kent and his allegations regarding the Midland, Palisades and San Onofre nuclear power plants.

Copies of the documents listed on the enclosed Appendix D are being placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) in folder F01A-85-249 under your name.

The documents listed on the enclosed Appendix E are investigatory records

' compiled for law enforcement purposes and are being withheld from public' disclosure pursuant to Exemptions (6), (7)(A), and (7)(C) of the F0IA (5 U.S.C.

552(b)(6), (7)(A) and (7)(C)) and 10 CFR 9.5(a)(6), (7)(i), and (7)(iii) of the Cocynission's regulations. Disclosure of the information would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy and interfere with an enforcement proceeding.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 9.15 of the Comission's regulations, it has been detemined that the infomation withheld is exempt from production or disclosure and that its production or disclosure is contrary to the public interest. The person responsible for this denial is Mr. Ben B. Hayes, Director, Office of Investigations.

This denial may be appealed to the Secretary of the Commission within 30 days from the receipt of this letter. Any such appeal must be in writing, addressed to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conr:ission, Washington, DC 20555, and should clearly state on the envelope and in the letter that it is an " Appeal from an Initial F0IA Decision."

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,

. M. Felton, Director Division of Rules and Records Office of Administration

Enclosures:

As stated 8510010225 850920 PDR FOIA RILLO85-249 PDR

I

. Re: F0fA-85-249 APPENDIX D

, Documents To Be Released i'

s

1. 03/02/82 Investigation Data Input Form. (1 page)

2. 03/24/82 Letter to J. W. Cook from G. E. Norelius transmitting Inspection Report No. 50-329/82-04. (8 pages)

~

3. 09/20/82 Memo to File form P. E. Baci; Midland /Zack: GAP Allegations, j (1 page)

4. 10/29/82 Consumer Power Company News Release. (3 pages) l 5. 11/04/82 Memo to J. E. Foster from C. H. Weil; Contact with

Congressional Administrative Assistant. (3 pages)

6. 06/23/83 Testimony of Billie Garde (GAP) and Thomas Devine (GAP) before i 4

the House of Representatives. _(26 pages)

7. 09/01/83 Letter to J. Martin from L. Bernabei re: Sunmarization of

. Impressions and Requests. (2 pages)

8. 11/31/84 Newspaper Article from the " Californian Peporter" captioned "Nuking the Whistle-Blowers." (1 page)

9. Undated Investigation Status Record. -(1 page) i I

i l

i

Re: F0!A-85-249 4

APPENDIX E Withheld Documents Memo Foster'to Files. 7A 1.

2. Memo Foster to Files. 7A

3. Memo dated 03/05/82, Foster to Files. 7A

4. Memo dated 03/03/82, Foster to Files. 6, 7A, 7C

5. Investigation Status Report. 7A

6. Lettir dated 05/12/82, Stamiris to Foster. 6, 7C i

i l

}

a l

I

- . - . - . . _ - . _ . _ _ . . _ _ - . . - . . . . _ _ ~ , _ . _ . , _ . . ~ - . , , .m, -._.. ... ,,_....r, .-_.,...,__-,.._.,c... . . . . - . . ,

m*,

.Tazz.zw. MAmmin.Jounson o B;xpoca -

.. .oo,. . .. ..

^""""*^'M*

Two c eaaeaoeao cc ,ea

. .... ...,~.

.,...c.

.o......o

. .. ....o m*....-.,e

'* * ^l** f ,*.* * * * " s*~ raauceseo cA e4m

,1................. .m m..no -

.. uo. . ...,,.... ,.,.............. ....

..<,,. .;;;;~;n,'.;;

a

......... ,,oo,..................

. . . . . . . . . , .... ..... ,,oo,

..... . .......... April 2, 1985 0 f Administration FREEDOM OF INF0hMAT10N United States Nuclear ACT REQUEST Regulatory Commission [O7g fy g y Washington, D.C. 20555

% 'd 4 /F Re: FOIA Request-Dear Sira Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA")

5 U.S.C. 5 552 and the regulations of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") 10 C.F.R. 5 980 (1984), I hereby request copies of the following documents and records:

I

1. All documents or all records in possession of the NRC, including, but not limited to, Region V, Region III, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ("NRR"), the Office of Investigation ("OI") and the Office of Inspector and Auditor

("OIA*) which refer or relate to Elmo Earl Kent, a/k/a E.

Earl Kent, a/k/a Earl Kent (" Kent");

l 2. All documents or records in possession of the l NRC, including, but not limited to, Region V, Region III, l the NRR, the OI and the OIA which refer or relate to Kent's allegations, comments or complaints concerning the Midland niin Nuclear Power Plant (" Midland") during the time period October 1, 1980 through the present; i

3. All documents or records in possession of the NRC, including, but not limited to, Region V, Region III, j the NRR, the OI and the OIA which refer or relate t'o Kent's allegations, comments or complaints concerning the Palisades

( Nuclear Plant (' Palisades") during the time period October 1, 1980 through the present;

4. All documents or records in possession of the NRC, including, but not limited to, Region V, Region III, the NRR, the OI and the OI'A which refer or relate to Kent's p, y; f. - %y 'ai/6

, _y t

. 3

~

y . ses UnitGd StCtoc Nuclo;r .

'. R;gulttcry Commiccien April 2, 1985-Page Two

]

allegations, comments or complaints concerning the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (" SONGS") during the time period October 1, 1980 through the present;

5. All documents which pertain or relate to communi-cations concerning the Kent's allegations or comments regarding '

SONGS, Palisades and/or Midland, made by the Alliance for Survival, the Government Accountability Project, Miguel Pulido, i Timothy Carpenter, Billie Pirner Garde or Louis Clark, with any division of the NRC, including, but not limited to, Region III, Region V, the NRR, the OI, the OIA, the Commissioners or staff;

6. All documents or records which pertain or relate

• to the NRC's, including, but not limited to, Region III's g or Region V's, investigation of, findings regarding or disposition of, Kent's allegations or comments concerning SONGS, Palisades or Midland;

7. All documents which pertain or relate to any investigation by the NRC's OI A, OI or NRR concerning the NRC's investigation of, findings regarding or disposition of Kent's g communications and allegations made to the NRC regarding Midland, Palisades or SONGS;

8. All documents which pertain or relate to investigation of Kent's allegations regarding the Midland ,

Twin Nuclear Power Plant made by Region III and the Brookhaven i National Laboratories.

i I hereby authorize the photocopying of those y$

documents and the payment at the standard rate established by regulations. Prepayment will be fdrnished upon request.

If you have any questions regarding this request , please ,

direct them to Steven L. Hock of this office or to the undersigned at (415) 392-6320.

Sincerely, THELEN, MARRIN, JOHNSON & BRIDGES Y L^d/ N .

f Christophe J. Rillo CJR:cf

f'l J&

. /g:A as49'o, UNITED STATES

! ,, ^t NUCLEAR REGUL ATORY COMMISSION

- O E REGION 111

% 7eo noosEVEtT ROAD

, g

[ GL EN ELLYN. 0LLINOIS 60137 -

p ~

November 4, 1982 .

MEMORANDUM FOR: James E. Foster, Acting Director, Office of Investigations Region III FROM: Charles H. Weil, Investigator

SUBJECT:

. CONTACT WITH CONGRESSIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT On November 1, 1982, Dean Wilkson, Administrative Assistant to Congressman Kilde of Michigan, telephoned the Office of Investigations, Region III. Wilkson advised Congressman Kilde had been contacted by a constituent who demanded an investigation of welding activities at the Midland Nuclear Power Plant. Wilkson was reluctant to release the identity of the constituent.

Wilkson var asked if the constituent had provided any specific concerns or other information. The constituent did not provide any specific informa-tion in the letter to the Congressman. Wilkson believed the constituent had read recent newspaper articles concerning welding allegations (by E. E. Kent) at the Midland plant and had subsequently written to the Congressman.

i Wilkson was apprised, in general terms, of the current investigation of welding at Midland (3-82-012). No further action is recommended.

Charles H. Weil M Investigator cc: W. J. Ward, OI J. G. Keppler, RIII R. F. Warnick, RIII W. D. Shafer, RIII R. J. Cook, RIII W. B. Menczer, RIII R. J. Strasma, RIII I

f

, W^ , f e .

_f, ),(

ge 1 i

~ ^ -' -- - --- - - _ - - . , - _ - , , _ , , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

r ueil j'& $)}

November 4, 1982 MINDIULNDUM FOR: James E. Foster, Acting Director, Of fice of Investigations Region III FR0tl: Charles 11. Weil, '!nvestigator 513 JECT: CO iTACT WIT 11 CONCRESSIO*:AL AD!{INISTRATIVE ASSISTNTT On November 1,1982. Dean W11Laon, Administrative Assistant to Conrressman Kilde of Michigan, telephoned the Office of Investigations, Region III. Wilkson advised Congressman Kilde had been contacted by a constituent who demanded an investigation of welding activities at the Midland Nucisar Power Plant. Wilkson was reluctant to release the identity of the constituent.

Wilkson was asked if the constituent had provided any specific concerns or other information. The constituent did not provide any specific informa-tion in the letter to the Congressman. Wilkson believed the constituent had read recent newspaper articles concerning welding allegations (by.

E. E. Kent) at the Midland plant and had subsequently written to the Congressman.

l Vilkson was apprised, in general terms, of the current investination of welding at Midland (3-82-012). No further action is recormended.

Charles 11. Weil Investigator -

l I cc: W. J. Ward, 01 J. C. Emppler, RIII R. F. Warnick, RIII V. D. Shafer, RIII R. J. Cook, RIII ,

W. B. Mancrer, RIII  ;

R. J. Straama, RIII i

OI:RIII Weil/qg I

s O' M . ,, y  :

i *idirnd D:lly N:ws, Midirnd,Michhan

' 't' ( - 'd"r- obe,29. ies2 0@

3 ,

Consumers

, n, ,

beginsinspection .

of _ cables at Mi'dland plant JACKSON taps - Consumers Power months,Koschik said, addmgthe utihty e tt." l Co. has begun an inspection ofsome 9.000 does nof Anow kw moth at will cost. ' Koschik said the cable mapection is an safety-related electrical cable at the TheOAPaffidante wew theniniste "efTort to make sure that all the work was Midland nuclear plant, a Consumers June to the U.S Nuclear Regulatory done proper!>.or if st was not done prop-spokesman said Wednesday. Commeon.whichhaerettettempleted erly, to correct it. Notxidv has a greater The utthty decided to inspect all the an investigatiort.3b7RC in keeping the interest m anakmg sure the plant 2 com-cables involsed in operating the plant , adentity of the former Midland workers pleted and operated m a safe mannir nuclear reactors and safety aystems in **ho made the charFes confidential than us the wake of allegations by a former Mid. SunnEk 4iald Connurne~rs le%eginning ,

land plant worker that some cables, wes, the cable ms "W,e would have hked to have done thu tmproperly substituted for thow ruiuired exactly wha %pection bokin's for.%e without knowang utibty inspation program m a more systematu, m the plant's building specifications. said has sen only news accounts of the allega- lem. time <on.ummg aod le expenmi spokwman %chael Koschik. tions sntitartwn'tnttng theHRC to way , but w e has e had no cooperation from "These charges were first made last complete its. probe and release it, anyone with information That's disap June," he said "To this date we don't finding, pointme to us know that the' specific charges have. ""WeNeh4 trying for Artnonths to been

• pet specific mformatien and have not got- .e isve bwn atruned of lene than  !

he charges o'riginally were made in adequate per rman e there ithe Nid ten any cooperation from anv knowledge- land plantt When we try to determms affidavits collected from I'ormer plant able indmdual er orgarusation, wo the whether our performance was in fact ad, workers by the Gosernmental Account- only sharnative in to an.put all 9,000 of quate. n abihty Project IGAP), b.u.ed in Wash. them,* Ko.chik said y w all help us." ho . chir ad ington.D C , and recently wcre repeated lie said Cons.umers has checked wu Qnc* dcd

'" in thet group GAP. th, ,

by the newe rnedam, Koshik said eral areas of the Midland plant to verify 6 he person who made the allegations the accurney of other allegatione, but that em am a ut es cable syg. tem, j wrote that the improper cable sub. the table charges repriment an unre- Inspection in the Midland nuclear plant The new j m all inv lse 9.OW cnble.- ,

statutions could lead the nuclear plant to solved

• question mark." Konchik saad. a hich are nada! to operate the tuo tw

• nd to erroneous control sigr.als.' ' ~ .Tou aarne she ellegetson end we eh ntrol rystem3 and backup e impection wijl take about, ais cpe,cked g fwal thess,asao -M-- so $

t-l' 9 tt $ tdL9J!

[N-plantsoll W~ NW

> hea,ringsdelayed j

s. .<- -

i aus/Ln trative111nans judge haasuffered krmd the postpone- by a faleral admi-d ment of WWhearing on soil problems at i i theWdlandnuclearplant.  :

Dr. Jerry Harbour, one tf three 3dmi-I nistrativejudges on an Atomic Safety and i licensing Board penet, entered the hon-  !

e pital Thuzaday for en eareperation,  !

according to Charles Bechhoefer, chair-

.- l man.. of th,e. >ASLB panel for the Midland

+'

' plant.

Harbour willbe prevented fromiravel- l ing for several areeks after the operation.  !

Bediboefer said be tonaldered asking a  !

former Ast2)udge to replacellarbour as l 8

the board's,espert am soil and aclamic issues,butsbeided againstit.

The soil tearsag was to resume

.' Wednesda'y in Midland. nat portion as

, well sa a Nov.1-5 bearmg segment have been cancelled. -

he beastag,will now resume on Nov.

' 15 sund Nov; , then from

. 20, oleter said.

f hof .

pernalathe maine as at p .

Mdt.M " " '

. z 3-D-O W FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE MIDLAND, October 29, 1982 -- Consumers Power Company has reported to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Co==ission that its quality assurance department engineers have identified four improperly installed electric cables at the Midland Nuclear Plant.

The cables were found during an additional inspection initiated by Consumers Power Company to verify that all installed safety-related cables conformed to design requirements. To date over 425 cables have been re-inspected. This inspection is only one of numerous inspections and tests now underway or planned. The ultimate objective is to certify and document that the plant has been properly constructed and is rea'dy for operation, according to J W Cook, company vice president in charge of building the project.

The cables, which have been replaced, were installed in July and August 1931, but had not yet been energized. The four cables, containing about 600 feet of wiring, are part of the plant's 10-million-foot electrical system.

The specific error discovered in the four cables was the substitution of a smaller wire size, number 14-gauge conductor, rather than the number 10-gauge specified. The 10-gauge wire can transmit higher electrical current than the smaller wire size. All other cable characteristics; insulation voltage rating and thermal qualifications, number of conductors, shielding, were appropriate.

The improper cables lead to two motor operated valves in the plant's decay heat removal system, part of a backup safety system used to cool the nuclear reactor. "The .14-gauge wire would probably have done the job should it have ever been needed," said Cook , "but it would not have provided the l

safety margin that is designed into the circuit." ,

(

I M

P" . .

2 He added that "Whether or not the wire would have performed the design function would have been fully demonstrated during the plant system's testing progra= scheduled to begin shortly and be completed prior to plant operation."

The discrepancy occurred when the cables were improperly marked af ter they were cut from larger reels in a separate building and sent into the plant to be installed. The inspection check which occurred after the original tcgging did not identify the difference between the cable jacket markings and the taggir.g information.

The cables in question are among more than 9,000 safety-related cables that will be e<a=ined as part of this investigation of all safety-related cables installed at the Midland Plant. The investigation, which will take approxicately eix months to complete, is being done to verify that each cable is in fact the ,

crble called for in the design and shown in the plant records. The company plans to periodically issue progress reports of the inspection program.

The investigation was organized following allegations of improper ccble substitutions in some parts of the plant by an anonymous former worker.

These charges were initially made last June, but no specific details have ever b en provided to Consumers Power. However, recent media coverage provided enough detail so that an inspection plan could be generated, Cook stated.

Cook said utili' y officials have tried repeatedly over the past four months to obtain specific information on which to base an investigation.

"The company is co=mitted to determine whether any allegations re-gording the plant are valid and to correct any problems identified" he said.

"The first results of our reinspection program are inconclusive regarding the cliegation as we understand it, but as noted, the program has identified at Icast one cable package which contained erroneous cables."

l .

I

I. .

3 Consumes Power has tried to obtain information f rom the self-styled whistle-blower organization, the Governmental Accountability Project, which initially publicized the charges last June, from the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission which was given affidavits but has not yet conducted its cwn investigation, and from news representatives who have seen the affidavits cnd have periodically over the past four months aied the company to respond to the charges.

l I

I i

.. M o e_.s k , od o o n M ct_- d 'r b " ,

MLM umm gsG..v ba 'Tlasu./E t h /

mq ,hw PctJuul LLtunuJ WMtlETEIIIi-L.

h r.

fl.2 4) t #

b!3!42M4 ,,

I

/: >

%K+ 'ir.

e mu 'bect, wz o '

bl67.k"D 312l@ l l l I l 6dM,80IIll l I. !~

,, t, .. .

hW'ut sbdgn fortu 'officLgsci eis r' .WiLQ' . _ _; 11 l ! , c -

l1 n.

Cte-t* e 3 3 red dc,% bwCAh clot _

t z!#.a!

u IHo: W r/ o'#M --

i n'43bl3g21 !II i!

Le hh La.L4  % W.40 ..-

1I i i i ! ! .!

.II "

1 1 '(u,ac,bery,2) ,

Gdulr\c +

a_l i t..i _ L. L i i iiiIiL: ;! ;i i:  !

~!'iiiil iij  :'.!jl!l i t- :

63 "t 4 \t LaTO'b' es O '.k4*CLA N b d w  !

BI ' i : i l ; ; l il I til lill bA i cm u -

MC'"'f- ) ' "f ' @ fr 'E dt E Q %L4 .1.h I. sYa *J h 11ill Illi-l lilli l!I il 11 a w e u, 6e Guv@- ,

& LU 4 Ill tiililitli: iii !.>i i'i-a u ,

t I

_W__

/. -..,iq, UNITED STATES ria.Poe

• ! NUCLEAR REGULATCRY COMMISSION

. y 'k ftEGION iil '

g Foo noostvetT moao g ,/ otaw eLLvw. Luwois sont

f. AR 2 4 32 ,

• a-  !' .

.. s.

Docket No. 50-329(DETP) .

~ .

~

Docket No. 50-330(DETP) j Consumers Power Company f9 ATTN: Mr. James W. Cook Vice President Midland Project 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, MI 49201 Gentlemen: ,,

This refers to the routine safet9 inspection conducte'd by Mr.' K. D. War of this office on March 2-4, 1982, of activities at the .idland Plant, Units 1 and 2, authorized by NRC Construction Permits N CPPR-81 afr No. CPPR-82 and to the discussion of. our findings with Mr. . ( and othr.Is Ar, thp..c,pqc,(usion of the inspection.

The enclosed copy of car inspection report identifies areas examined during the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel.

No itees of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room. If this report contains any information that you (or your contractors) believe to be exempt from disclosure under 10 CFR 9.5(a)(4), it is necessary that you (a) notify this office by tele-phone within ten (10) days from the date of this letter of your intention to file a request for withholding; and (b) submit within twenty-five (25) days from the date of this letter a written application to this of fice to withhold such information. If your receipt of this letter has been delayed such that less than seven (7) days are available for your review,

[ -

g7m- -

)@)V) y l

l l

l l

k g

e Consumers Power Company 2 UA3 E E please notify this office promptly so that a new due date may be estibt / 4,,

lished. Consistent with Section 2.790(b)(1), any such application must /.

be accompanied by an affidavit executed by the owner of.the information which identifies the document or part sought to- be withheld, and which contains a full statement of the reasons which are, the basas for the ,

claim that the information should be withheld from public disclosure.

This section further requires the statement to address with specificity the considerations listed in 10 CFR 2.790(b)(4). The information sought to be withheld shall be incorporated as f ar _ as possible into a separate part of the affidavit. If we do not hear from you in this regard within the specified periods noted above, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the Public Document Room.

We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection.

Sincerely, ,

/f

-- .. . ,ftp. E. Norelius, Director

Division of Engineering and

( - Technical Programs

Enclosure:

Inspection Report No. 50-329/82-04(DETP) and No. 50-330/82-04(DETP) {

cc w/ enc 1:

DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS)

Resident Inspector, RIII The Honorable Charles Bechhoefer, ASLB The Honorable Jerry Harbour, ASLB The Honorable Frederick P. Cowan, ASLB The Honorable Ralph S. Decker, ASLB Michael Miller Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Myron M. Cherry Barbara Stamfris Mary Sinclair Wendell Marshall Steve J. Gadler l

,1 s

.' ~

, U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III n  ;

Report No. 50-329/82-04(DETP); 50-330/82-04(DETP) ,,

l Docket No. 50-329; 50-330 License Noi CPPR-81; CPPR-82 l

Licensee: Consumers Power Company

• ~

1945 W. Parnell Road Jackson, MI 49201 Facility Name: Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2

. Inspection At: Midland Site, Midland, MI Inspection Conducted: March 2-4, 1982

/n ac J L .

Inspector: ,K. D Ward, . .

- ' ' d.k Approved By:

suLi(L-D. H. Danielson, Chief.,

3p/ ,..

,, Materials & Processes Section

.f

~

Inspe~ct' ion Summary Inspection on March 2-4, 1982 (Report No. 50-329/82-04(DETP); 50-330/82-04(DETP))

Areas Inspected: Reports and radiographs of shop welds; previous inspection findings; nondestructive examination (NDE) personnel certifications of CPCo individuals; allegation. The inspection involved a total of 30 inspection-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.

Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

s y/T r; f ; - q l

.. .y f .-liy .

l .

V, ., ' V:;

• 3, DETAILS Persons Contacted l' .

. 7  ?.;

Consumers Power Company (CPCo) .* *;

• B. Marguglio, Director QA ,.

• W. Bird, Manager QA .

• R. Whitaker, Section Head'- Fluids and Mechanical QA

• R. Davis, NDE/ Welding Group Supervisor QA M. Curland, QA Superintendent Bechtel Power Company (BPCo)

• E. Smith, QC Engineer

• M. Dietrich, Project QA Engineer D. Fredianelli, LWQCE W. Creel, LPMQCE ..

A. Van Den Bosoh, CQCE

A. McClure, PQAI .i The inspector also contacted and interviewed other licensee and contractor employees. ,

~~ ... . ~w

• Denotes'those attending the exit interview.

Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Deviation (329/80-01-02; 330/80-01-03): "No positive way of track-ing design changes and assuring that completed work is modified in accordance with design changes and no procedure for handling design changes made after ccepletion of work." The inspector reviewed the final response to RIII from CPCo dated May 15, 1980 and the following procedures which state the required information.

f

. Bechtel, Design Change Packages Interim Drawing Changes Notices' ,

EDP14.47.1 i

. Bechtel, Functional Turnover of Systems, Subsystems and Items, AAPD/PSPG-11.1 (Open) Unresolved Item (329/80-17-02; 330/80-19-02): " Radiographic linear indications of welds in two borated water storage tanks." In the Summer of 1982, the tanks may be drained and made available for radiography.

(0 pen) Unresolved Item (329/81-21-01): Possible altered radiographs.

Waiting results of RIV inspection of Grinnell. Four welds of altered radiographs were found out of 46,505 shop radiographic views reviewed~

on site.

i 2

( .

Functional or Program Areas Inspected

1. Allegations

s. Region III received allegations indirectly from an individudf who '2 e .:

was previously eeployed at the Midland site by Bechtel Power /, 81 Corporation for the purpose of training to be 4 Level I weld

• inspector in accordance with Bechtel Quality Control Instruction, Level I Fabrication, Welding, Heat Treatin's and Nandestructive Examinations of ASME Section III - Piping', PW-100. The individual failed the Level I test two times and was terminated.

The allegations were as follows:

. Socket welds not being completely welded.

. A steam line weld had concavity.

. Problems in containment liner plate weld radiography. ,,

BPCo had prgyiously ide:Ttified questionable ' areas in the inspec- l tion efforts of one QC welding inspector assigned to inspect '

socket welds. CPCo was notified of the problem" March 2, 1982.

BPCo is going to review 1007, of the one QC welding inspector's h

_effor.ts and s random sample other inspector ef forts in inspecting '

/ socket wefds. CPCo may monitor the BPCo program. This is con-sidered an unresolved item (329/82-04-01; 330/82-04-01) and the inspector will review this in depth at the next inspection.

o The inspector visually examined the following socket welds in accordance with ASME Section III, 1971 Edition, Summer 1973 l3  ;

Addenda. 'i fi Line # Field Veld # Diameter FSK-M-lHBC-58-2 W50 2"  !

51 2" '

56 2" I 61 1" 62 1"

" l 63 1" 64 2" 65 2"  :

88 2" -

89 2" L 90 2" t 91 2" FSK-M-1MBC-57-5 10 2" I 11 2" i 12 -

2" .[

13 2" t i

a i

3 i

l

, , , - - , . . - , . - ~ - _ _,_ _, . . . - . .

., [

x Line # Field Weld # Di amete r i FSK-M-2HBC-57-1 118 2" 122 2" 123 3". 5' .

124 .

• 2" /' j.)

125 2"  !.

126 -

2" 127 ,

~ '

2"

. FSK-M-2HBC-57-1 128 2"

129 2" 130 2" 131 2" 132 2" 133 -

2" The inspector visually examined steam line 2ELB-11 field weld 1, 36" diameter, nominal wall thickness 2.375". There is a slight j offset which met ASME Section III, 1971 Edition, Summer-1973 .

Addenda. The veld has been blended for inservice inspection

• and appeared, to be accep't'able.

l' CPCo recently contracted Hartford Steam and Boiler /NDT Engineering, a company with-qualified / certified radiographic film interpreters, to interpret the shop weld' radiographs of Units 1 and 2 containment

{

--- y line r- pi st e s 100%. This consisted of approximately 900 views. The I results of the review found that approximately 20 welds had weld ,

quality or radiographic technique problems. The results are docu-mented in.nonconformance report #M ,01-9-2-025 issued February 19,  !

1982. [

i

b. CPCo received four allegations concerning B&V NDE work from an '

individual previously employed at the Midland Site (File 16.0, .

Serial 98FWA80, dated April 11,.1960). Three of the allegations I were closed (Reference NRC Report No. 50-329/80-27; 50-330/80-28 and No. 50-329/81-06; 50-330/81-06). The fourth allegation has ,'

not been resolved to date. CPCo management in Jackson, Michigan is reviewing the allegation and has hired Teledyne Engineering .

Services to analyze the as-welded conditions for acceptability. P No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

2. Radiographic Peview of Shop Radiographs (See NRC Report No. 329/81-21; 330/81-21 ,,

The inspector reviewed several nonconformance reports on the 46,505 I shop radiographs reviewed in 1981. Approximately 50 items that were ,!

radiographed were found to be unacceptable in weld quality or radio-graphic techniques. The items are to be resolved in the near future.

1 No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

i 1

l 4

.l

,, I

)

3. NDE Personnel Certifications ,

0 i

The inspector reviewed the'following CPCo NDE personnel certifications &

in accordance with SNT-TC-1A,1975 Edition:

s+

, p, Name El PI MI s ..

R. Davis II II II .

T. Charette II II. ," .

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified. ,

4. Review of Shop Radiographs The inspector reviewed radiographs and reports of the fol'1owing shop components.

a. Radiography performed by ARMCo for Guyon Alloy Company in i accordance with ASME Section III, 1977 Edition, Winter 1978 , , .

Addenda.  ;.

l System Weld Diameter. Thickness Date RT SNO-8842 1P I L" 1.371" 8/8/80

_ , , SNO,,88,4Q ,, IP 12" 1.371" 8/8/80 t i

b., Radiography performed by Peabody Testing, X-Ray Engineering Company for Bechtel Corporation in accordance with AS!fE Section III, 1974 ,

Edition, Summer 1974 Addenda. - t Component Diameter Thickness Date RT 5346-14-1-8 Gate Valve 4" 1/8" - 1 1/2" 10/13/76 I

c. Radiography performed by Taylor-Bonney Division for McJunkin Corporation in accordance with ASME Section III, 1977 Edition, Winter 1978 Addenda.

Component Veld Diameter Thickness Date RT 90 Ell 802352 14 18" 0.395 12/17/79 i

d. Radiography performed by ITT Grinnell Industrual Piping Inc. for CPCo in accordance with ASME Section III, 1971 Edition, Summer f' 1973 Addenda.

System Veld Diameter Thickness Date Rt l 2CCB-6-S-604-9-L E 4" 0.593" 1/25/77 2HCB-2-5-613-5-11 CR3 18" 0.437" ~

8/9/76 i

5

. . .. r 2HCC-84-S-604-18-1 B 2 1/2" 0.192" 9/26/77 2ELB-11-S-632-1-1 BUZ - 36" 1.379" 10/30/78 2HCB-16-S-604-6-2 C 6" 0.156" 6/22/77 2FCB-18-S-604-5-9 A 6" 0.312" 4/25/77 .,

a.  !- .

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified. ,,' ,

Unresolved Matters .~

Unresolved matters are items about which more information is iequl' red in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, i or deviations. Unresolved items disclosed during this inspection are ,

discussed under the paragraph 1.a.

Exit Interview

• The inspector met with site representatives (denoted in Persons Contacted -

paragraph) at the conclusion of the inspection. The inspector summarized -

the scope and findings of the inspection noted in this report. The in-spector has been going on inspections to Midland since September 1978 and *' 3 this was the most hostilt. exit . interview ever encounteved. The acting g NDE and Welding superiisor, Section Head, Fluids and Mechanical QA and ,

the new Site QA Superintendent were very concerned with the socket weld

• problem noted in paragraph 1.a. The Site QA Superintendent informed the  !

inspector prior to the exit that CPCo'would establish an overview program  ;

to cTeTr2nto"tWV61 ding and inspection of socket welds and qualification of QC personnel. However, at the exit this program was completely;unac- -

ceptabl~e to the QA Manager and Director. This matter is an unresolved item and this area will be reviewed indepth during a subsequent inspection.

t t

a 4

l i

6

,