ML20137H265

Forwards Copy of OI Rept Where Investigation Did Substantiate That Seg Technician Deliberately Failed to Perform Response Checks in Accordance W/Procedures.W/O Encl

ML20137H265
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Saint Vrain
Issue date:	08/25/1995
From:	William Jones NRC
To:	Beth Brown, Callan J, Collins S NRC
Shared Package
ML20137H118	List: ML20137H113 ML20137H133 ML20137H173 ML20137H237 ML20137H247 ML20137H255 ML20137H265 ML20137H295 ML20137H311 ML20137H320 ML20137H353
References
FOIA-96-434 NUDOCS 9704020114
Download: ML20137H265 (2)

Text

_

'f~tlE August 25, 1995 NOTE TO:

1.

Joe Callan 2.

Sam Collins 3.

Bill Brown 4.

Russ Wise l

S.

Gary Sanborn 6.

Ross Scarano 7.

Chuck Cain CCen2plTJiaisoEQS,[f 8.

4 FROM:

William Jones, Enforcement Specialist

SUBJECT:

OI 4-95-015 ALLEGED DELIBERATE FAILURE OF CONTRACT EMPLOYEE TO l

PERFORM DAILY RESPONSE CHECKS ON PORTABLE CONTAMINATION MONITOR (FORT ST. VRAIN)

The attached is a copy of an 01 report where the investigation DID substantiate that an SEG technician deliberately failed to perform response checks in accordance with procedures. We need to review this matter to determine whether any enforcement action is warranted.

Please contact me if to see any of the exhibits. As is our practice, a discussion of this case will take place at%PREDECISIONAL"ENFORCEMENTIPANElfschedulsdsfoF?3iOO?psm?

.1 A~ Predecisi' nal ErffofEembnt' Board'(ak~dstWmisd (CDT)lon Augustl31;i1995.

r o

i by"thb~~ pins 1)~wil1~b's" set'up following this meeting.

cc:

Joe Gray wjo a4M.d 4

4 9704020114 970324 PDR FOIA SAUR096-434 PDR

PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE AGENDA

1. BM d PueWOf H

PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE WITH g,,

yp fg, PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO (PSC) gg g, g g SCIENTIFIC ECOLOGY GROUP, INC. (SEG)

AUCUST 29, 1995 g

NRC REGION IV, TRAINING CONFERENCE ROOM E

F HenLused'"f/t Dh COA & C w kndets 1.

INTRODUCTIONS - NRC and PSC, rec u e.c s %

2.

OPENING REMARKS k J rdlins, Deputy Regional Administrator

"' 5 "

deserghed 4 curnh remsd W

3.

ENFORCEMENT PROCESS - G. F. Sanborn, Enforcement Officer res cu r._

4sm P ese4% A

^

' = ^

(T APPARENT VIOLATIONS & REGULATORY CONCFDNS - C. L. Cain, Branch Chief g

% Gneves me,am,o%u, pg,ge,a deco ~uu.m7 ='..

.a p,ceu 5.

LICENSEE PRESENTATION - A. Clegg Crawford

• < ~, +

a; a

6.

BREAK (10-MINUTE NRC CAUCUS IF NECESSARY) pc 7.

RESUMPTION OF DISCUSSION g,

8.

CLOSING REMARKS - LICENSEE Gshuul 9.

CONCLUDING REMARKS - S. J. Collins cess,, ant &, nccarek a<.1k

~

,g 6<< tr a

Fo6, "syw,w,wg

" Cmy1+k a a red kcurm 4 4%6te" ON B <II b

/

p\\I Y

1

1 i

i 1

fCfSoMel involocc!

~

h' 1

\\,

beackda ted. release Sa rscy 5"*'

l

\\

- 2m=d Zghr+ (Superassc,r) $NS' hCf disfra sp frc{fcqFr i

i

\\

Otershen sapeva c

- s uyer (for -4, a 35,4)

{

u e

i y

y ( {-cc kMc q n }

~ $txh s

ockclq4cd RuaP Shwey orMS S

i RP ops i

- 29fd F (Suferdssor) i

- Snuy er ( dgy sk:roemn)

C+

j

_ %)( ga3

(@, N8thF5k44 Gunn)

- (2e n kin (kc.k) i

$ O[

Cc

~

H9kh (& chi f

i

- Bidy (tccb}

Beer 9eierte (fccM 2..

Hesserssee F~c<lst f'q y

hs.y Shef+

- Scouyer (Fcman3 t

i 4

l m

.+

y

.c

I 1

>8 U GOg UNITED STATES

[

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

{

R EGION IV e '

.t' 611 RYAN Pt.AZA DRIVE, SUITE 400 4 '

/

9 AR 8.lNGTON. TEXAS 76011-8064 October 30, 1995 h

l l

l IA 95-047 l

Mr. Roland Sawyer

[Home address deleted from I

copies pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790]

SUBJECT:

NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC INVESTIGATION NO. 4-94-010)

Dear Mr. Sawyer:

This is to inform you that the NRC has found you in violation of its i

regulations prohibiting deliberate misconduct, specifically 10 CFR 50.5(a)(2),

" Deliberate Misconduct," based on your involvement in creating or approving false records of radiation surveys at the Public Service Company of Colorado's (PSC) Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station (FSV),

Until March 1994, you were employed by the Scientific Ecology Group at FSV as the Radiation i

Protection Operations Shift Supervisor and were responsible for supervising Radiation Protection Technicians (RPTs) and implementing SEG's radiation protection support of the FSV decommissioning project.

The NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct states, in part, that any employee of 1

a contractor or subcontractor of any licensee may not "[d]eliberately submit to... a licensee, or a licensee's contractor or subcontractor, information that the person submitting the information knows to be incomplete or inaccurate in some respect material to the NRC."

Our conclusion with respect to your involvement in deliberate misconduct is based on our review of the investigation conducted by the law firm of Stier, Anderson & Malone (SAM) on behalf of PSC as documented in its December 1994 report, the results of which were subsequently confirmed by the NRC's Office of Investigations (01).

Briefly, the investigation found that several SEG supervisors and technicians had participated in falsely documenting two categories of radiation survey records associated with the decommissioning project. These included survey records associated with the release of material from the facility in late 1992 and survey records to support work conducted under various radiation work permits at FSV in early 1993. The involved records were created substantially after the surveys were purported to have been performed, but were dated and signed to make it appear they had been prepared by a radiation protection. technician (RPT) and reviewed by a supervisor at the appropriate time.

Furthermore, the created records contained numerous inaccuracies, such as survey instrument usage and calibration dates, that could not be supported by factual information.

The SAM investigation concluded that you falsely documented a post-decontamination survey of a Hot Service Facility block on a survey form dated September 27, 1993, and concluded that you did not do the survey.

In addition, the SAM investigation concluded that you prepared 2 of some 20

(

falsified RWP-related survey forms, all of which were created substantially

)

M H H & tty % f

4 i

Mr. Roland Sawyer after the surveys were allegedly performed, and that you participated in the backdating activity by reviewing and signing several survey documents prepared by other RPTs which you knew to be false.

Noting that "[n]either the RPTs who prepared the backdated survey forms nor the supervisors who reviewed them made 1

any notation that would have alerted an outside observer that the documentation came into existence at a much later date than the alleged survey activity described on the forms," the investigation concluded that "[t]he weight of the evidence supports the conclusion that the backdated RWP survey forms were intended to mislead."

Despite these records being falsified, and despite your failure to perform the survey that you claimed to have done on September 27, 1993, it appears from the investigations that surveys were actually done to assure that materials were properly released from the facility, including the Hot Service Facility block, and that workers were adequately protected from radiation hazards during these work activi, ties. Nonetheless, such widespread falsification of required radiation protection-related records is a significant regulatory concern to the NRC.

It is of particular concern that individuals entrusted with assuring radiation safety would attempt to resolve a concern about missing survey documentation by creating false records and, furthermore, that they would conspire to do so with supervisory involvement.

j Therefore, the NRC has decided to issue the enclosed l%tice of Violation 5

(Notice) to you based on your violating the NRC's rule regarding deliberate misconduct.

In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG-1600 (60 FR 34381, June 30, 1995) the violation has been classified at Severity Level 111.

In determining the sanction against you, the NRC gave considerable weight to the evidence indicating that surveys were performed and to the fact that you resigned from your position with SEG; otherwise the sanction most likely would have been J

more severe.

Should you become involved in NRC-licensed activities in the future, further violations or misconduct on your part may result in more significant action.

You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice of Violation (Notice) when preparing your response.

In your response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional actions you plan to prevent recurrence. After reviewing your response to this Notice, the NRC will determine whether further NRC enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," enforcement actions are placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR).

A copy of this letter with its enclosure and your response, with your address removed will be placed in the PDR.

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

j-i Mr. Roland Sawyer ;

The enclosed Notice is not subject to the clearance procedures'of the Office

-of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction _ Act of 1980, Pub.L. No.96-511.

Sincerely, L. kl. Callan Regional Administrator

Enclosure:

Notice of Violation cc w/

Enclosure:

I Scientific Ecology Group, Inc.

ATTN: Mr. Don Neely Vice President 628 Gallaher Road Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37763 l

t f

t i

y 8

k

l NOTICE OF VIOLATION Roland Sawyer IA 95-047 During an investigation conducted on behalf of the Public Service Company of Colorado, and subsequently confirmed by an investigation conducted by the i

NRC's Office of Investigations, a violation of NRC requirements was i

identified.

In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG-1600 (60 FR 34381, June 30, 1995) the violation is set forth below:

{

10 CFR 50.5 states, in part, that any employee of a contractor or subcontractor of any licensee may not "[d]eliberately submit to... a licensee. or a licensee's contractor or subcontractor, information.that the person submitting the information knows to be incomplete or inaccurate in some respect material to the NRC."

Contrary to the above, in February and March 1993, Roland Sawyer, an employee of SEG, a contractor to a licensee (Public Service Company of

)

Colorado), prepared and approved records of radiation surveys that he knew were inaccurate in some respect material to the NRC. Specifically, Mr. Sawyer knew that the records, which were required to support the release of material from the facility and work conducted under various radiation work permits, were dated and signed to falsely indicate that they had been created substantially earlier.

In addition, in September 1993, Mr. Sawyer created a survey record supporting release of the hot service facility plug to indicate that the survey had been completed when in fact it had not.

These records were material to the NRC because i

they were required to ensure compliance with the regulations in 10 CFR l

Part 20. (01013)

This is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement Vil).

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, you are required to submit a written response to this Notice of Violation to the U.S Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region IV, 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas 76011, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting i

l this Notice.

This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include for each violation:

(1) the reason for the l

violation, or, if contested, the basis for disputing the violation, (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, (3) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violr.tions, and (4) the i

date when full compliance will be achieved.

Under the authority of Section 182 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2232, any response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation.

Because your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), to the extent possible, it should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, 4

or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the PDR without redaction.

However, if it is necessary to include such information, it should clearly indicate the specific information that should not be placed in the

-f5,6 ei3T o,7?

7

)

4 1

1

\\

1 lh Notice of Violation i l

l l

PDR, and provide the legal basis to support the request for withholding the information from the public.

Dated at Arlington, Texas this 30th day of October 1995 l

l l

l t

l l

l l

l i

4

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

-. ~

- ~

f i

1

• t.-

$b

, pS Houg UNITED STATES t

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

\\

s j

{,

.g R EGION IV l

4 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE. SulTE 400

• 19 ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76011-8064 October 30, 1995

(

IA 95-048 l

Mr. Michael Miles

[Home address deleted from 1

copies pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790]

l

SUBJECT:

NRC INVESTIGATION NO. 4-94-010

[

Dear Mr. Miles:

This letter is being issued to you based on your involvement in a violation of l

the NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, i.e., approving false records of-l radiation surveys at the Public Service Company of Colorado's (PSC) Fort St.

4

]

Vrain Nuclear Generating Station (FSV)..You were at the time of this

[

violation, and still are, employed by the Scientific Ecology Group at FSV as a Radiation Protection Operations Shift Supervisor and are responsible for

{

i supervising Radiation Protection Technicians (RPTs) and implementing SEG's radiation protection support of the FSV decommissioning project.

l The NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, 10 CFR 50.5, states, in part, that any employee of a contractor or subcontractor of any licensee may not-

"[d]eliberately submit to.... a licensee, or a licensee's contractor or i

subcontractor, information that the person submitting the information knows to be incomplete or inaccurate in some respect material to the NRC."

1 i

Our conclusion with respect to your involvement in deliberate misconduct is t

i

based on.our review of the investigation conducted by the law firm of Stier, Anderson & Malone (SAM) on behalf of PSC as documented in its December 1994 9

report,-the results of which were subsequently confirmed by the NRC's Office of Investigations (01). Briefly, the investigation found that several SEG l

1 supervisors and technicians had participated in falsely documenting two categories of radiation survey records associated with the decommissioning project. These included 14 survey records associated with the release of material' from the facility in late 1992 and 20 survey records to support work conducted under various radiation work permits at FSV in early 1993.

The involved records were created substantially after the surveys were purported i

to have been performed, but were dated and signed to make it appear they had i

been prepared by a radiation protection technician (RPT) and reviewed by a t

supervisor at the appropriate time.

Fu'thermore, the created records r

contained numerous inaccuracies, such as survey instrument usage and j

}

calibration dates, that could not be supported by factual information.

The SAM investigation concluded that you participated in the backdating activity by reviewing and approving several RWP survey documents prepared by RPTs that you knew to be false.

Noting that "[n]either the RPTs who prepared i.he backdated survey forms nor the supervisors who reviewed them made any-4 notation that would have alerted an outside observer that the documentation i

1 came into existence at a much later date than the alleged survey activity described on the forms," the investigation concluded that "[t]he weight of the

[

i 4

4

' Wi6 b */f.

_ = _ _

1 j. )

1 $

.I Michael Miles 4 evidence supports the conclusion that the backdated RWP survey forms were 1

1 intended to mislead."

Despite these. records being falsified, it appears from the investigations that surveys were actually done to assure that materials were properly released from the facility and that workers were adequately protected from radiation hazards during these work activities. Nonetheless, such widespread i

falsification of required radiation protection-related records is a significant regulatory concern to the NRC.

It is of particular concern that individuals entrusted with assuring radiation safety would attempt to resolve a concern about missing survey documentation by creating false records and, furthermore, that they would conspire to do so with supervisory involvement.

Recognizing that your rol.e in this matter was limited, and the actions already

~

taken by SEG and PSC to address this matter, the NRC has decided not to impose i

any sanctions against you beyond the issuance of this letter. However, you are on notice that further violations or misconduct on your part may result in j

more significant action.

You are not required to respond to this letter.

In accordance with 10 CFR

}.

2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice,'" enforcement act. ions are placed in the

.NRC Public Document Room (PDR). A copy of this letter with its enclosure and your response, if one is submitted, with your address removed will be placed in the PDR.

Sincerely, 1

L.

. Callan Regional Administrator cc:

Scientific Ecology Group, Inc.

}

ATTN: Mr. Don Neely i

Vice President i

628 Gallaher Road Dak Ridge, Tennessee 37763 a

1 i

i e

4 n

4

i

[gA HGOg$

UNITED STATES L

t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I

g REGION IV 0,, i j

G11 RY AN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 400 W M 9

AR LINGTON, TE XAS 76011 8064 October 30, 1995 l

IA 95-049 Mr. James Bixby

[Home address deleted from copies pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790)

SUBJECT:

NRC INVESTIGATION NO. 4-94-010

Dear Mr. Bixby:

This letter is being issued to you based on your involvement in a violation of the NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, i.e., preparing false records of radiation surveys at the Public Service Company of Colorado's (PSC) Fort St.

Vrain Nuclear Generating Station (FSV).

You were at the ti.me of this violation employed by the Scientific Ecology Group at FSV cs a Radiation Protection Technician and were responsible for implementing SEG's radiation protection support of the FSV decommissioning project.

The NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, 10 CFR 50.5, states, in part, that any employee of a contractor or subcontractor of any licensee may not

"[d]eliberately submit to... a licensee, or a licensee's contractor or subcontractor, information that the person submitting the information knows to be incomplete or inaccurate in some respect material to the NRC."

Our conclusion with respect to your involvement in deliberate misconduct is based on our review of the investigation conducted by the law firm of Stier, Anderson & Malone (SAM) on behalf of PSC as documented in its December 1994 report, the results of which were subsequently confirmed by the NRC's Office of Investigations (01).

Briefly, the investigation found that several SEG supervisors and technicians had participated in falsely documenting two categories of radiation survey records associated with the decommissioning project.

These included 14 survey records associated with the release of material from the facility in late 1992 and 20 survey records to support work conducted under various radiation work permits at FSV in early 1993.

The involved records were created substantially after the surveys were purported' to have been performed, but were dated and signed to make it appear they had been prepared by a radiation protection technician (RPT) and reviewed by a supervisor at the appropriate time.

Furthermore, the created records contained numerous inaccuracies, such as survey instrument usage and calibration dates, that could not be supported by factual information.

The SAM investigation concluded that you participated in the backdating activity by preparing all 14 falsified material release survey documents and by preparing several falsified RWP survey documents.

Noting that "[n]either the RPTs who prepared the backdated survey forms nor the supervisors who reviewed them made any notation that would have alerted an outside observer that the documentation came into existence at a much later date than the t

alleged survey activity described on the forms," the investigation concluded h

r y1

-n

I i

Mr. James Bixby that "[t]he weight of the evidence supports the conclusion that the backdated RWP survey forms were intended to mislead."

Despite these records being falsified, it appears from the investigations that surveys were actually done to assure that materials were properly released from the facility and that workers were adequately protected from radiation hazards during these work activities.

Nonetheless, such widespread falsification of required radiation protection-related records is a i

significant regulatory concern to the NRC.

It is of particular concern that individuals entrusted with assuring radiation safety would attempt to resolve a concern about missing survey documentation by creating false records and, furthermore, that they would conspire to do so with supervisory involvement.

Recognizing that you had no supervisory role in this matter, and the actions already taken by SEG and PSC to address this matter, the NRC has decided not to impose any sanctions,against you beyond the issuance of this letter.

However, you are on notice that further violations or misconduct on your part may result in more significant action.

You are not required to respond to this letter.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," enforcement actions are placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR). A copy of this letter with its enclosure and your response, if one is submitted, with your address removed will be placed in the PDR.

i Sincerely, 1

). Callan L.h,ionalAdministrator Re cc:

Scientific Ecology Group, Inc.

)

ATTN: Mr. Don Neely i

Vice President 628 Gallaher Road Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37763 l

l l

3' atic%

UNITED STATES 4

r k

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

.e 4

e s

g

g REGION IV

1. '+9

,O'J' 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE. SulTE 400 AR LINGTON, T E XAS 76011 8064 October 30, 1995 IA 95-050 Mr. Robert Rankin

[Home address deleted from copies pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790]

SUBJECT:

NRC INVESTIGATION NO. 4-94-010

Dear Mr. Rankin:

This letter is being issued to you based on your involvement in a violation of the NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, i.e., preparing false records of radiation surveys at the Public Service Company of Colorado's (PSC) Fort St.

Vrain Nuclear Generating Station (FSV). You were at the time of this violation and currently are employed by the Scientific Ecology Group at FSV as a Radiation Protection Technician and are responsible for implementing SEG's-radiation protection support of the FSV decommissioning project.

The NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, 10 CFR 50.5, states, in part, that any employee of a contractor or subcontractor of any licensee may not

"[d]eliberately submit to... a licensee, or a licensee's contractor or subcontractor, information that the person submitting the information knows to be incomplete or inaccurate in.some respect material.to the NRC."

Our conclusion with respect to your involvement in deliberate misconduct is based on our review of the investigation conducted by the law firm of Stier, i

Anderson & Malone (SAM) on behalf of PSC as documented in its December 1994 report, the results of which were subsequently confirmed by the NRC's Office i

of Investigations (01).

Briefly, the investigation found that several SEG

]

supervisors and technicians had participated in falsely documenting two 3

categories of radiation survey records associated with the decommissioning project. These included 14 survey records associated with the release of materi'; from the facility in late 1992 and 20 survey records to support work 1

conducted under various radiation work permits-at FSV in early 1993.

The j

involved records were created substantially after the surveys were purported 1

to have been performed, but were dated and signed to make it appear they had been prepared by a radiation protection technician (RPT) and reviewed by a supervisor at the appropriate time.

Furthermore, the created records contained numerous inaccuracies, such as survey instrument usage and calibration dates, that could not be supported by factual information.

The SAM. investigation concluded, based on your admission, that you prepared 8 4

of the 20 backdated RWP survey forms at the direction of your supervisor.

Noting that "[n]either the RPTs who prepared the backdated survey forms nor the supervisors who reviewed them made any notation that would have alerted an outside observer that the documentation came into existence at a much later date than the alleged survey activity described on the forms," the M

o

\\]

)

y

i

\\

b Mr. Robert Rankin investigation concluded that "[t]he weight of the evidence supports the-conclusion that the backdated RWP survey forms were intended to mislead."

Despite these records being falsified, it appears from the investigations that surveys were actually done to assure that materials were properly released from the facility and that workers were adequately protected from radiation hazards during these work activities.

Nonetheless, such widespread falsification of required radiation protection-related records is a significant regulatory concern to the NRC.

It is of particular concern that individuals entrusted with assuring radiation safety would attempt to resolve a concern about missing survey documentation by creating false records and, furthermore, that they would conspire to do so with supervisory involvement.

Recognizing that you had no supervisory role in this matter, and the actions already taken by SEG and PSC to'ad, dress this matter, the NRC has decided not to impose any sanctions against you beyond the issuance of this letter.

However, you are on notice that further violations or misconduct on your part may result in more significant action.

You are not required to respond to this letter.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," enforcement actions are placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR). A copy of this letter with its enclosure and your response, if one is submitted, with your address removed will be placed in the PDR.

Sincerely, L.

. Callan Re ional Administrator cc:

Scientific Ecology Group, Inc.

ATTN: Mr. Don Neely Vice President 628 Gallaher Road Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37763

.._c

~.

- - - ~ _.

I

)-

pmtac%

UNITED STATES l

I j

f..

t.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

{,

REGION IV S

f 611 RY AN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 400 I

%,, '*..../

AR LtNGTON, T E XAS 76011-8064 October 30, 1995 i

i IA 95-051 Mr. Craig Thorp

[Home address deleted from copies pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790]

SUBJECT:

NRC INVESTIGATION NO. 4-94-010

Dear Mr. Thorp:

This letter is being issued to you based on your involvement'in a violation of the NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, i.e., preparing false records of radiation surveys at the Public Service Company of Colcrado's (PSC) Fort St.

Vrain Nuclear Generating Station (FSV).

You were at the time of this violation and currently are employed by the Scientific Ecology Group at FSV as a Radiation Protection Technician and are responsible for implementing SEG's radiation protection support of the FSV decommissioning project.

The NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, 10 CFR 50.5, states, in part, that any employee of a contractor or subcontractor of any licensee may not

"[d]eliberately submit to... a licensee, or a licensee's contractor or subcontractor, information that the person submitting the information knows to be incomplete or inaccurate in some respect material to the NRC."

Our conclusion with respect to your involvement in deliberate misconduct is based on our review of the investigation conducted by the law firm of Stier, Anderson & Malone (SAM) on behalf of PSC as documented in its December 1994 1

report, the results of which were subsequently conhrmed by the NRC's Office of Investigations (01).

Briefly, the investigation found that several SEG supervisors and technicians had participated in falsely documenting two j

categories of radiation survey records associated with the decommissioning project.

These included 14 survey records associated with the release of materi&' from the facility in late 1992 and 20 survey records to support work conducted under various radiation work permits at FSV in early 1993.

The i

involved records were crehted substantially after the surveys were purported' l

to have been performed, but were dated and signed to make it appear they had l

been prepared by a radiation protection technician (RPT) and reviewed by a supervisor at the appropriate time.

Furthermore, the created records-contained numerous inaccuracies, such as survey instrument usage and calibration dates, that could not be supported by factual information.

i l

The SAM. investigation concluded, based on your admission, that you prepared 1 l

of the 20 backdated RWP survey forms.

Noting that "[n]either the RPTs who prepared-the backdated survey forms nor the supervisors who reviewed them made l

any notation that would have alerted an outside observer that the documentation came into existence at a much later date than the alleged. survey activity described on the forms," the investigation concluded that "[t]he t i'i; c 5 O W 3 -- W V

b h

i j

j Mr. Craig Thorp weight of the evidence supports the conclusion that the backdated RWP survey forms were intended to mislead."

3 Despite these records being falsified, it appears from the investigations that surveys were actually done to assure that materials were properly released from the facility and that workers were adequately protected from radiation hazards during these work activities.

Nonetheless, such widespread i

falsification of required radiation protection-related records is a significant regulatory concern to the NRC.

It is of particular concern that

]

individuals entrusted with assuring radiation safety would attempt to resolve l

a concern about missing survey documentation by creating false records and, furthermore, that they would conspire to do so with supervisory involvement.

i 1

Recognizing that you had no supervisory role in this matter, and the actions already taken by SEG and PSC to address this matter, the NRC has decided not l

to impose any sanctions against you beyond the i.ssuance of this letter.

However, you are on notice that further violations or misconduct on your part may result in more significant action.

i s

You are not required to respond to this letter.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," enforcement actions are placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR). A copy of this letter with its enclosure and your response, if one is submitted, with your address removed will be placed in the PDR.

_ Sincerely, i

L.

. Callan j

Re ional Administrator 5

CC*

Scientific Ecology Group, Inc.

ATTN: Mr. Don Neely j

Vice President i

628 Gallaher Road j

Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37763 4

l I

I l

I

...~~

...-n

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

~

. -. - - -. =.

s e KEC%

UNITED STATES m

h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o

o F

g REGION IV j

f 611 RYAN PLAZA ORIVE, SUITE 400

/

AR LINGTON, TE XAS 760118064

)

October 30, 1995 4

IA 95-052 l

Mr. David Hatch j

[Home address deleted from copies pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790]

SUBJECT:

NRC INVESTIGATION N0. 4-94-010 i

Dear Mr. Hatch:

This letter is being issued to you based on your involvement in a viol en of the NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, i.e., preparing false records os p

radiation surveys at the Public Service Company of Colorado's (PSC) Fort St.

Vrain Nuclear Generating Station (FSV). You were at the time of this violation and currently are employed by the Scientific Ecology Group at FSV as a Radiation Protection Technician and are responsible for implementing SEG's radiation protection support of the FSV decommissioning project.

The NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, 10 CFR 50.5, states, in part, that any employee of a contractor or subcontractor of any licensee may not

"[d]eliberately submit to... a licensee, or a licensee's contractor or subcontractor, information that the person submitting the information knows to be incomplete or inaccurate in some respect material to the NRC."

?

Our conclusion with respect to your involvement in deliberate misconduct is based on our review of the investigation conducted by the law firm of Stier, Anderson & Malone (SAM) on behalf of PSC as documented in its December 1994 report, the results of which were subsequently confirmed by the NRC's Office of Investigations (01).

Briefly, the investigation found that several SEG supervisors and technicians had participated in falsely documenting two categories of radiation survey records associated with the decommissioning l

project.

These included 14 survey records associated with the release of material-from the facility in late 1992 and 20 survey records to support work i

conducted under various radiation work permits at FSV in early 1993.

The

-involved records were created substantially after the surveys were purported' to have been performed, but were dated and signed to make it appear they had been prepared by a radiation protection technician (RPT) and reviewed by a supervisor at the appropriate time.

Furthermore, the created records contained numerous inaccuracies, such as survey instrument usage and calibration dates, that could not be supported by factual information.

The SAM investigation concluded, based in part on an admission from your-supervis'or that you were directed to backdate I survey form, that you prepared 2 of the 20 backdated RWP survey forms. Noting that "[n]either the RPTs who i

prepared the backdated survey. forms nor the supervisors who reviewed them made any notation that would have alerted an outside observer that the documentation came into existence at a much later date than the alleged survey activity described on the forms," the investigation concluded that "[t]he 4

f

\\

l Mr. David Hatch !

weight of the evidence supports the conclusion that the backdated RWP survey forms were intended to mislead."

l

. Despite these records being falsified, it appears from the investigations that surveys were actually done to assure that materials were properly released l

from the facility and that workers were adequately protected from radiation hazards during these work activities.

Nonetheless, such widespread l

falsification of required radiation protection-related records is a significant regulatory concern to the NRC.

It is of particular concern that individuals entrusted with assuring radiation safety would attempt to resolve a concern about missing survey documentation by creating false records and, l

furthermore, that they would conspire to do so with supervisory involvement.

Recognizing that you had no supervisory role in this matter, and the actions i

l already taken by SEG and PSC to address this matter, the NRC has decided not l

to impose any sanctions against you beyond the i.ssuance of this letter.

However, you are on notice that further violations or misconduct on your part may result in more significant action.

You are not required to respond to this letter.

In accordance with 10 CFR l

2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," enforcement actions are placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR).

A copy of this letter with its enclosure and your response, if one is submitted, w'ith your address removed will be placed l

i.n the PDR.

I Sincerely, L.

. Callan l

Regional Administrator i

l CC:

l Scientific Ecology Group, Inc.

ATTN: Mr. Don Neely l

Vice President j

628 Gallaher Road Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37763 i

2 i

=

I Da 249 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e

A g,

REGION IV S'

[

611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE, SulTE 400

,8 AR LINGTON, TE XAS 76011 8064 October 30, 1995 IA 95-053 Mr. Dennis Beierle-

[Home address deleted from copies pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790]

SUBJECT:

NRC INVESTIGATION N0. 4-94-010

Dear Mr. Beierle:

This letter is being issued to you based on your involvement in a violation of the NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, i.e., preparing false records of radiation surveys at the Public Service Company of Colorado's (PSC) Fort St.

Vrain Nuclear Generating Station (FSV). You were at the time of this violation and currently are employed by the Scientific Ecology Group at FSV as a Radiation Protection Technician and are responsible for implementing SEG's radiation protection support of the FSV decommissioning project.

l The NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, 10 CFR 50.5, states, in part, that any employee of a contractor or subcontractor of.any licensee may not l

"[d]eliberately submit to... a licensee, or a licensee's contractor or subcontractor, information that the person submitting the information knows to I

be incomplete or inaccurate in some respect material to the NRC."

Our conclusion with respect to your involvement in deliberate misconduct is based on our review of the investigation conducted by law firm of Stier, Anderson & Malone (SAM) on behalf of PSC as documented in its December 1994 report, the results of which were subsequently confirmed by the NRC's Office of Investigations (01).

Briefly, the investigation found that several SEG l

supervisors and technicians had participated in falsely documenting two categories of radiation survey records associated with the decommissioning project. These included 14 survey records associated with the release of I

material from the facility in late 1992 and 20 survey records to support work conducted under various radiation work permits at FSV in early 1993. The involved records were created substantially after the surveys were purported I

to have been performed, but were dated and signed to make it appear they had l

been prepared by a radiation protection technician (RPT) and reviewed by a i

supervisor at the appropriate time.

Furthermore, the created records contained numerous inaccuracies, such as survey instrument usage and l

calibration dates, that could not be supported by factual information.

Although you declined to be interviewed by the investigators, the SAM investig'ation concluded.that you participated in the backdating activity by 1

preparing 3 of the 20 backdated RWP survey forms.

Noting that "[n]either the i

RPTs who prepared the backdated survey forms nor the supervisors who reviewed I

them made any notation that would have alerted an outside observer that the j

documentation came into existence at a much later date than the alleged survey i

activity described on the forms," the investigation concluded that "[t]he

[

[V

~%

~ +

\\

+

Mr. Dennis Beierle weight of the evidence supports the conclusion that the backdated RWP survey forms were intended to mislead."

Despite these records being falsified, it appears from the investigations that -

surveys were actually done to assure that materials were properly released from the facility and that workers were adequately protected from radiation hazards during these work activities.

Nonetheless, such widespread falsification of required radiation protection-related records is a significant regulatory concern to the NRC.

It is of particular concern that individuals entrusted with assuring radiation safety would ' attempt to resolve a concern about missing survey documentation by creating false records and, j

furthermore, that'they would conspire to do so with supervisory involvement.

Recognizing that you had no supervisory role in this matter, and the actions already taken by SEG and PSC to address this matter, the NRC has decided not to impose any sanctions against you beyond the issuance of this letter.

However, you are on notice that further violations or misconduct on your part may result in more significant action.

You are not required to respond to this letter.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," enforcement actions are placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR). A copy of this letter with its enclosure and your response, if one is submitted, with your address removed will be placed in the PDR.

Sincerely, L. J. Callan i

(

RejionalAdministrator i

cc:

Scientific Ecology Group,'Inc.

ATTN: Mr. Don Neely Vice President 628 Gallaher Road Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37763 l

l 1

l I

4 i

.... ~ ~. _

_-a

- -- - - _ ~.

-. _ = - -

4 A

poucoq$

UNIT ED ST AT ES I

t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

y, REGION IV S~

[

ARLINGTON, T E XAS 76011-8064 4

611 RY AN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 400

1. 49 *****

October 30, 1995 l

l IA 95-054 l

l Mr. John Ray

[Home address deleted from copies pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790]

SUBJECT:

NRC INVESTIGATION NO. 4-95-015

Dear Mr. Ray:

)

This letter is being issued to you based on your involvement in a violation of the NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct at the Public Service Company of

~

Colorado's (PSC) Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station (FSV).

You were at the. time of this violation employed by the Scientific Ecology Group at FSV as i

a Radiation Protection Technician and were responsible for implementing SEG's radiation protection support of the FSV decommissioning project.

l The NRC's rule on deliberate misconduct, 10 CFR 50.5, states, in part, that any employee of a contractor or subcontractor of any licensee may not l

"[d]eliberately submit to... a licensee, or a licensee's contractor or l

subcontractor, information that the person submitting the information knows to l

be incomplete or inaccurate in some respect material to the NRC."

l Our conclusion with respect to your involvement in deliberate misconduct is based on our review of the investigation conducted by SEG, the results of which were subsequently confirmed by the NRC's Office of Investigations (01).

l Briefly, our investigation found that you had deliberately failed to follow l

th'e licensee's procedures regarding radiation survey instrument response checks.

l Recognizing that you are no longer employed by SEG at Fort St. Vrain, the NRC has decided not to impose any sanctions against you beyond the issuance of this letter. However, should you become involved in NRC-licensed activities in the future, you are on notice that further violations or misconduct on your part may result in more significant action.

You are not required to respond to this letter.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice, ' enforcement actions are placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR). A copy of this letter with its enclosure and l

l i

f; 4

b 4

Mr. John Ray your response, if one is submitted, with your address removed will be placed in the PDR.

Sincerely,

-. Callan Reg onal Administrator cc:

Scientific Ecology Group, Inc.

ATTN: Mr. Don Neely Vice President 628 Gallaher Road Oak Ridge. Tennessee 37763

I NOVEtrlBEA /2, I 'l 'l 5 Rtpi.y To tvoncE ot' VloLGT/ON (4'RC Ilb 4-9'I~DIO D l'URSDA/UT To THE pro yiS low 0 F 10 L FR 2 s 20 I, THIS 15 fflYHIRITTsN RES PC/U.GE TO N67/CE O F L/tol A7716/U OUSC In)degr/Ga rtoN NO. 4-94-O/0) 1 HavE 6Estu ch'ARGED w 17N U lo 407YN&

7'N E /l/RC R E C,- U L A T/o/U.

5 PEC / Plc ALL Y' 16 e FR 50 5 "OELil3GRarf n1/5 conduct " P999&a&PH' ("* W)!

1, //e.uwch./. 3etl46 do.

entb1 cl.La n d c?A l & b ea m -

ad v.idafdms Aoulil agaksimb DM 23 -z>It' cs>nphz2e d acceaafibnt)

Fennal m<s#

a ira m u n l e w rat sudc Au

. u o /z uz a e & '.

9.2

.n/2dsuspai,f u.a do Joas7Aan A?ams&

A o,rz ad chm &

ea of,upI A n'dC on non Mff-(2d THE CD/ffEC T/ui STEl'5 T//'d7' NA' uE BEE /U TAME /u

/?ivo THE #E 6oL7 S AC///EvEO O

SEC.5 Cen/llehSt $ BP.atao m y furn.hstn 5dr1 ad nemo val usm 1Ae fr. s7. unairv ensuct, b.) TAe niotdh adbalaua ao FA</;v-. h(.x t%d one anl a. A a yeses aAtra eny enmJ,42 s.ofit/

0%fG45't'l.I'M-

. ff.Ndtl b.5%? e kra, h &

NW -lL1W) anL_ a,d.su&2g.,

_/any.e,2,.- &

17a ad.Zdt A'/"O5. P.nht h) my for/,,y,za/cdr2.,

SEG use"en snariaument made irs erped b anacc d4. &2)&rt S Lt PPO2d /?tarw g-f.p{g j97agn j?,yjj,g I And broucr 20 lh e.

1ns.dzad,

.I.x.oas fcned, h

AuG7dd

') Y.472br$7I 4/2 -

e 4j d m a&l sduush-e meaom.nia Ae YY O T-6+fr7jrfdOt'u i f SEG l.</'Pt2 /??tZrW(6einsad dlatc/a)el tum no-t'

&faroes/.,

SEG}'Ofna dcxtL' l20

.A<A2 ')

a-J e.-

w su 9 1Sh

((' AGE /)

fk3iOD21to D//.

OJ "THE CO dREC T/ UE S TE l'.C T//d7 14//LL f5E 7Wk'EN TO Avrilo FLJR T//ER l//o/97/O/u_Gl' i

a.) onto b caeFudy CAomocjMPAal adexrMAAAd futk r$ 44e dvuisidtv sriau/dc ZALl?Io+nt ;

glov.b 9 AC)A 'Af#mi Aa m a <~4 f

f

\\

y y n, l( KenneNs L ZRWRT), 40f g*wu g,z,(af&o l.uly Asummb

.cuas b,,iafAfd Fcad'FbidN7G 8%d5 0-f b[d WW 07p

.Wo CL i

cawL,.T asn hh wltk /?o c.Ao2cb but Abtreid4, dAs /5ycaut-oF eits+nt'l<wf S az.,je.g, u.sm &iuge W* 06/'N.2l& /rtariy emo,7m gm(g

/llfktb (. /770RT, Sarn, ti/gc ) $ eriembd a

2WWW, I ta' csv yjat 9 Asw& k i

rntf yeb.gc.zy'cJr an y euf aAQ a,g, cad p

e g.s.ujff

,b(s Anfjest rl e td &./.2 $ d A -

THE D RTE hlHE/U fL)L L G O 177 (24. I RM./ C ISE RCt/lE V E D.

t

'i- )

/L/o uEmBER

/ 7_, / 9 C T f

h'E/v/l/E7H d ZAHR 7"

/('a wr 3/i W- } N

//- /2 - 9.S~

(FBGE2)

y&

November 17, 1995

~ NOTE T0:

1.

Joe Callan 2.

Sam Collins 3.

Bill Brown 4.

Russ Wise 5.

Ross Scarano

)

6.

Dwight Chamberlain 7.

Chuck Cain 8.

Linda Howell 9.

Len Williamson, 01 10.

Jim Lieberman, OE 11.

John Greeves, NMSS FROM:

Gary Sanborn, Enforcement Officer

SUBJECT:

ZAHRT RESPONSE TO NOV (IA 95-046)

Attached is Kenneth Zahrt's reply to the NOV we issued to him based on his involvement in survey record falsification at Fort St. Vrain. Mr. Zahrt also has been interviewed by Jonathon Armenta and Chuck Cain.

We will provide. the transcript of the interview to you as soon as it becomes available.

Both Mr.

Zahrt and Mr. Sawyer, the other former SEG supervisor who were issued NOVs, deny the violation. Mr. Sawyer apparently plans to request an extension of time to respond to the NOV. We will review their replies as well as the information they provided Mssrs. Armenta and Cain in determining whether the violations should be upheld or withdrawn. More to come.

i WA INGHATTACHEDTMATE YiCONTAINVINFORMATIO AT;SHOULD!NOT2BE d

'" DISSEMIN, ATE 3 DIS.C.

EDl00TSIDEiOFjT RC}

.- e