ML102740524

ROI, Case No. 4-2008-016

ML102740524
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	06/30/2008
From:	Fitzgibbon W, Holland C NRC/OI/RGN-IV/FO
To:
References
4-2008-016, FOIA/PA-2010-0245, RIV-2007-A-0039
Download: ML102740524 (16)

Text

Title: COLUMBIA GENERATING STATION:

DISCRIMINATION AGAINST A FORMER CONTRACT SUPERVISOR FOR RAISING SAFETY CONCERNS Licensee: Case No.: 4-2008-016 Energy Northwest Report Date: June 30, 2008 P.O. Box 968 (Mail Drop 1023)

Richland, WA 99352-0968 Control Office: OI:RIV Docket No.: 50-397 Status: CLOSED Allegation No.: RIV-2007-A-0039 Reported by: Reviewed and Approved by:

Win. Michael FitzGibbon, Sr. Crysta D. Holland, Director Senior Special Agent Office of Investigations Office of Investigations Field Office, Region IV Field Office, Region IV

• WARNING DO NOT DISSEMINATE, PLACE THE PUBLIC DO I ENT ROOM OR DISCUSS THE CONTENTS OF TH REPORT VESTIGATION OUTSIDE NRC WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF TH OVING OFFICIAL OF THIS REPORT. UNAUTHORIZ LOSý E MAY RESULT INADVERSE ADMINISTRATIV ON AND/OR CR1 AL PROSECUTION.

OFFICIAL USE ONLY -01 INVESTIGA N INFORMATION

CNAL E SYNOPSIS This investigation was initiated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Office of Investigations, Region IV (RIV), on December 5, 2007, to determine if a former contract l(b)(7)(c) Iemployed by Williams Plant Services (WPS) at Energy Northwest's Columbia Generating Station (CGS) was discriminated against for raising safety concerns involving the conduct of cooling tower fan blade maintenance.

.IAH on the evidence developed during this investigation, the allegation that a former contract at CGS was discriminated against for raising safety concerns involving the conduct of cooling tower fan blade maintenance was not substantiated.

NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OUT APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFF OF IN TIGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-016 OFFICIAL USE ONLY - 01 INVESTIGA ON INFORMATION

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSUR THOUT APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFFI F I ESTIGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-016 .2 OF USE ONLY - 01 INVESTIG ION INFORMATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS Paae S YNO P S IS ................. ........................... ........................ .......................... ...... !1........................

T E ST IMO NIAL E V IDE NC E ..................................................................................................... . ..5 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE .................................................. ............................................ 7 DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION ............................................ 9 A p p lic a b le R eg u latio n s ........................................................................................................ 9 P urpose of Investig atio n ............................................................................................. .. 9 B a c k g ro u n d ................................................................... ..... ................................................. 9 Agent's Analysis ................................................ 10 C o n c lu s io n ......................................................................... .. ............................................ 14 LIST OF EXHIBITS ... ................................................ 15 NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSU I OUT APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFF OF INV IGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-0163 OFFI USE ONLY - 01 INVESTIGA N INFORMATION

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSUR IT UT APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFFII OF INVES GATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-016 4 OFFICI SE ONLY -01 INVESTIGATI INFORMATION

FICIAL E0 IG N NFORM N TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE Exhibit r .........

(b)(7)(C)

WPS, CGS ........................ 2,11 (b)(7)(C)

WPS, CGS ............................... 7 (b)(7)(C)

W PS , CG S .................................................. 3 (b)(7)(C)

WPS, CGS ......................... 4 W P S , C G S ................................................................. 5 (b)(7)(C)

W PS, CGS0...................................... 6 (b)(7)(C)

W PS , C G S 8.........................

8 (b)(7)(C)

W PS C G S ........................................ 12 (b)(7)(C)

(b)(7)(C) W P S , CG S . ................................................ ................ 9

ý/ P S , CG S ...................................................................... . . . 10 NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE HOUT APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFFICE I ESTIGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-016 5 OFFICIAL U ONLY -01 INVESTI TION INFORMATION

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSUI APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE

ATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-016 / 0 6

)NLY -0OI INVESTIGA" INFORMATION

• Iý!CIAL ýE ý-OLIN ýSTIGýA ýINF ýR I1 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE Energy Northwes (b)(7)(c) dated March 8, 2007 (Exhibit 13).

Handwritten Statement b dated March 21, 2007 (Exhibit 14).

ic, Energy Northwest Letter to Harry FREEMAN, Senior Allegations Coordinator, Allegation Coordination and Enforcement Staff, NRC:RIV, dated May 23, 2007 (Exhibit 15).

Handwriting Exemplars from undated (Exhibit 16).

NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSUR HOUT APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFFIC F IN TIGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-016 7 OFFICIIAL ONLY - 01 INVESTIGA N INFORMATION

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OUT APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFFICE IN TIGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-0168 OFFICIAfSE ONLY - 01 INVEXSTIGA N VIN FORMATION

FICIA NILY -01 IýNVES ION IN'FOR ýI N DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION Applicable Regulations 10 CFR 50.7: Employee Protection (2007 Edition) 10 CFR 50.5: Deliberate Misconduct (2007 Edition)

Purpose of Investigation This investigation was initiated.by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Office of Investigations (01), Region IV (RIV),, on December 5, 2007, to determine ifl(b)(7)(C)

(b)7)() Jor:Williams8PlantServices (WP'S) at'Energy Northwest's Columbia Generating Station (;GS),f wS discriminated against for. raising safety concerns involving the conduct of cooling tower fan blade maintenance [Allegation No. RIV-2007-A-0039] (Exhibit 1).

Back-ground On March 23, 2007, Judith W. WALKER, Allegation Coordinator, Allegation Coordination and Enforcement Staff (ACES), NRC, RIV, was notified by that he had been the subject of discrimination for reporting safety concerns and -that heha ben erminat~d from his employme~nt on (b)*(7c) According on[(ix2t 0 Lj

__J he was working at

'.C- CGS on Cooling Tower Fans No. 7 and No. 11, when he noticed .that the work package had discrepancies with the angle degr~e~ifth( an blade. He reported that 8 of the 10 as-left entrie forTower Nuerifible*bc mentioned theediscrepancy t (b)(7)(c)

(b)(7)(c) ps CGS, althoughl)( 7)(c) instructe im(C to sign the wo"rk packa.a;vwa* and that on Monday mornin an engineer would make revisions to the work package (b)(7)(') he questione (b)(7)(c) bout signing a te docum ihe t(b)(7)(c) told b "you do tatement asa threat to his jobI'lland it or getsigned anotherthecraft to do it." work package.

inaccurate Ireported (b)(7)(C) noted he did not enter as-found data in jobthe work e d package signdtaint and left that package.

portion of the work package blank.

(b)(7)(C) _________________(b)(7)(C)

(b)(7)(C) 7)()

that n(b)(7)(C)

• PS, CGS, an* 7 *-eporte-he m (b)(7)( C) enied directing him to falsify

..the work'package. Accordingt (b))() Is employmentwas terminated at the conclusion of the meeting for falsification of a document.

I. * . J(b)(7)(C)' .

On A r' RIV MAl n' Revie Bord (ARB* met. lhin ARB (b)(5)

(b)(5)

NOT FOR PUBLIC'DISCLOSUR 1T T APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFFICEU0 ESýTIGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-016 9 OFFICIAL U ONLY,-01 INVESTIG ION ,INFORMATION

0 LU ONLY- ESTIGATI RM I N (b)(7)(C) his supervisor. (b)(7)(c) [as offered participation in the agency's Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process.

On December 5, 2007, WALKER contacted OI:RIV and reported ADR had failed to resolve l(b)(7)(C) iconcern and tha (b)(7)(c) requested 01 initiate an investigation into his claim of discrimination.

Agqent's Analysis Protected Activity (b)(7)(C) that on 3stated (b)(7)(C)nr i tower fa-n-m-aiptmnf~nmc*,ln I in r (b)(7)(C) l(Exhibit 13). (bF( P recalled that, asi (t a eviewed pnd signed off on work order packages for the cooling tower fan maintenance (b)(7)(j) advised that when he reviewed the work order package for cooling tower fan 1B, he found that the WPS contract millwrights who had worked on the cooling tower fan during the week, I(b)(7)(C) had not dated and initialed the work-orderL tckage he signed for work onnay (b)(7)(c) said that since (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)() (b )(7)(C) ný were not ~present o he()7()Iae n initialeth work order packare w indicating (hewb, 3 had been completed.

h ba7)sFC- admitted he did not know whether or noý (b)(7)(C) nd ý(b_)(7)(C) had complete-dthe-rqaintenance .steps in the work order pa' aoigb t he signed off on them an becaus (ay h(b)(7)(C) instructed him to do so. According tý (b()C when he questioned (b)(7)Crgrigteacr--j,,h found data entered under step 4.7 of the work order-pa kage (Exhibit 13 o. 7)(b7(c old him, "That's what we're going with" (Exhibit 2, p. 13). b()O added thatb()c st ou gotta sign it off or I'm going to find somebody else to sign it off" (Exhibit 2, p. 13)T(b)(7ý)r(c) initially stated that the only information that was already entered into the work or Ln;-,k ge stated(b)(7)(C) when he reviewed it was the as-found data in step 4.7. He subsequently provided him with the data to enter into the as-found section and that, although he protested, he eventually entered the data himself so he would not be terminated (Exhibit 2, pp. 7-18).

[(b)(7)(C) claims he raised an issue witlb- regarding the accuracy of the as-found data in the cooling tower fan work order package. This activity would constitute protected activity.

Management Knowledge I/b()C

](b)(7)(C)

(b)(7)(C)

Ialleged was aware of his (b)(7)(C) reluctance to enter questionable data in the as-found block in the work order package because e discussed it withr March 17,

}b)j7jj on 2007 (Exhibit 2, pp. 12-15).

Adverse Act (b)(7)(C) stated hewas-d ected by to enter the questionable as-found data in the work orrpackage.[,7c) statede - told him, "... you gotta sign it off or I'm going to find NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE IT OUT APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ESTIGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-016 10 OFFICIAL US LY- 01 INVESTIG ON INFORMATION

OFFIClA EOýL - VýETI`T O .

(b)()(C) (b_)(7)(c-)

somebody else to sign it off' (Exhibit 2, p. 13). If true, the threat by t ould constitute an adverse action.

(b)(7)(c) was requested to provide handwriting exemplars for comparison with the questioned writing in the cI tower fan work order package (Exhibit 16). A comparison of the exemplars obtained fro (r)(7)(C) ith the questioned writing in steps 4.7 and 4.9 in the wxrLwdeor package revealed distinct similarities between the handwriting exemplars obtained fron*2¶7)i2 and the data in step 4.9. There are no obvious similarities ir 7 )(c) Iwriting and the data in step 4.7.

Whbnsh own the similarities between the writing in step 4.9 and the handwriting exemplars,

()))admitted he had most likely authored the information in step 4.9, not step 4.7 (Exhibit 17).(b)(7)((C)() h

) ( bc)(7)( IWP OS, CGS, testified that on ( he assis ein signing o on thssOoii tower fan maintenance work order packages.

According to (b)(7)(c) when h(b)(7(b)(7)(C )reached the as-found data sectibOcLtbeiqork order package for fan 1 13, p. 7) there was no information entered.[=)(7) *said he h nrqr- versation wit (b)(7)(C) n the presence o.b___c_ regarding the missing data. He said L..-"stated, "But as we take them, we write the readings on the blades so we have a record if we need to go back and look at them. what it was..." (Exhibit 3, p. 14). Regarding the missing as-found datal(b)(7)(C) i(b)(7)(C) added, "Don't worry about it. We'll take care of it on Monday" (Exhibit 3, p. 19). (b) )C) advised he anb)(7)(c) the as-left data in step 4.9 of the work order package. He explained that when he an (b)(7)(c) completed step 4.9, they used the numbers written on the cooling tower fan blades -sw 1Las the pitch information they obtained when they installed two new fan bladesj(b)(7)(c) [stated that when he reviewed the work order package on March 19, 2007, the as-found data was still missing (Exhibit 3, pp. 14-19).

70 denied he instructe9(7) to enter incorrept information in the as-left section of the cooling tower fan maintenance work order package. (b)(7)(C) stated, "Inever told him about him signing nothing. He's to confirm that the work is done and if it's not been done, need to do it and then sign it" (Exhibit 12, p. 11; Exhibit 14).

(b)(7)(C)(b7)C Based o testimony anu (b)()(C admission that he was in error regardino what infonrm.tion he entered in the work order package, the alleged threat of termination b ()((C)to _

V(7)(C)j Icannot be considered an adverse action since ,.terIsinsufficient evidence that the threat was made. The witness testimony suggests that(b)(7)(cwas not directed to enter questionable data in the as-found section of the work order package under threat of termination aý) 7 jc *originally claimed.

(b)(7)(c) ]as confronted by WPS management on (b)(7)(C) regarding potential falsification of a work order nackaae- Followina a meetino with WIDI m;;n~n~mcnt 2ný craft el, ludin in (b)(7)(C) IS CGS;{b)(7)c).  :*(bC7GSC NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE 0 APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF IN TIGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-016 11 OFFICIAL US LY- 01 INVESTIGATI INFORMATION

SOFFICIAý ((b)(7)(C)

ýL-0 SIýT6N Mý (b)()C employment at CGS was terminated (Exhibit 15). ermination constitutes an adverse employment action.

Nexus: Was Discriminated Against as a Result of Engaging in a Protected Activity?

(b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) originally stateq_ forced hi data -found section of the work order package. Su seciuent testimony fro (b)(7)(G) and (b)(7)( as well as the handwriting (b)(7)(c exemplars, indicatc) -was in error regarding what information he entered into the work order packa qe and thai(b)(7)(c) I ely entered the as-left data. The question remaining is:

why wa (b)(7)(c) terminC) as th()-- ) -- was responsible for en the work order package was complete prior to signing it off. According tot(b)(7)(C) obtained the pitch information for blades 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 from th es and the pitch information for blades 2 and 5 from the data obtained when he and installed new blades. The information entered for blades 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9 was outside the acceptable range called for in step 4.9 of the work order package (Exhibit 13, p. 8). (b)(7)(c) subsequently identifid that tse seven bladsere outside the acceptable r in rijr a review on Monday (b)(7)(C) /and requeste~Ilook into it. Furthermore pointed out that if beenFhad involved in misconduct on Saturday in directingThc) to enter incorrect data in order package, it is unlikely he would then identify the problem a few days later S", and as (b)(7)(C) to determine how the errone dawas entered into the work order package (Ex ibi appears more likely tha*C)___ in order to sign off der package on(b)(7)(C) entered the pitch information left on the fan blades b, and

ý(b_)(7)

(b)(7)(C) b)(7)(C) w a q uestioned b yan was questone y(b)(7)(c) and

1. b)(7) regarding e as-left data. Accordingt(b)()(c) Initially denied entering the da ;in s-left section of the work order but had signed his namne-to the step, then k(b)(7)(C)claimed he had not entered anything into step 4.9()()claimed that w (bco7) confronted regarding the as-left data, he changed his story several times saidd )(c) also claimed he had slined for ste__4.7,_even though the as-found data was not entered (Exhibit 4, pp, 23-24) (b()()believed(b)(7)(c) was terminated for falsifying the work order package (Exhibit 4, p. 32).

(b)(7)(C) WPS, CGS, advised she was resento

?,(b)(/Y(UY_ (b)(7)(C) and worked on the cooling tower fan work order package. ýr (b)(7)(C) recalled c le

! as working in the cop1itqwhr_

()(7)(C) office most of ý(b)(7)(C) the da did not recall seeinm fin the area that dayl 7 ]stated that on . she overheard (b)(7)(c) state he did not "have a problem with..." entering erroneous numbers in the work order oackaoe (Exhibit 7, p. 12). She said that later, when the work order ob','hecame an issue, (b)(7)(C) claimed he had not enteLhe numbers. I(b)(7)(C) ()(7)(C bstatedn ultimately claimed

bh enhdirected bi(b)( )(c) er the as-left numbers in the work order package.

V(b)( 7 )(C)Irelated she informe (b)(7)(c) f these conversations (Exhibit 7, pp. 11-17).

NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE ITHOUT APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF I TIGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-01,6 12 oFFICIAL USE-ONLY - 01 INVESTIGA ON INFORMATION

0 AL S Y- INVES T N INýFO ATI N 1(b)(7)(C) advised he worked on the cMoein tower fan maintenance in March 2007 with I(b)(7)(C) recalled he and (b)(7 )(C) [obtained the as-found data for the fan blades on fan 1B and recorded the informati on field copy" of the work order package kept on a clipboard in the cooling tower office (Exhibit 8, pp. 10-11).

(b)(7)(C) recalled tha informed him of a problem with the reco datajrLac Sintenance work order package.()7)(c) ..... s he (b)(7)(c) and1b I()to discuss the problem. He recalled that ()(7(c initially state b))() ad instrutýe~im to enter the incorrect data in the as-left section of the work order package, although (b)(7)(c) subsequently stated he had, in fact fal.ifi.d th dnr-jent by entering the incorrect as-e ata (Exhibit 9, p. 13). According to 1told him that he had obtained the pii C for the as-left sectionLfrom th ata writen on the fan blades (Exhibit 9, pp. 17-18). (b)(7)() stated he informec(b)(7 )(c) that he would. e terminated for the advis fhnf iftszr e left the neetin with (b)(7)(C) and conta cah(b)(7)(cC and saib7 ad additional informatin regarding, the incidentb)(7 )(c) ]saidl(b)(7)(c) subsequently stated to him that h (b)(7)C) had not entered any information in the as-left section, but had only initialed that the s ep had been complete~d(.E~xbit 9, . 13-14 (b)(7)(c) Jsaid he discussed his intentio o.ter . te r- I(b)(7)(C) ]witl+(b)(7)c) an4(b)(7)(c) greed that termination was appropriate fo (b)(7)(c) falsification (Exhibit 9, pp. 20-21).

and thatb had entered advised he was informedb(b)(7)(c) _

incorrect information in the as-left section of a work order package and then had signed for the step. (b)(7)(c) believed this constituted falsification of the work order package, which in his opinion, was a trustworthiness iss (b)(7)(C) a(b)(7 )(c) also changed his sat IS a times reaardina what occurred on (b)(7)(c) [ _said he met witH(b)(7)(c) land (b)(7)(C) . WPS, CGS, and the decision was made to terminate employment for falsifying information in the work order package (Exhibit 5. pp. 8-9, 1-(b)(7)(C) ] (b)(7)(C) 1 (b)(7)(c)

(recalled thate and ssibly jinformed him of an incident involving here it appeared tha (b)(7)(c) had falsified data in a cooling tower f nance wor-ore*er packape. (b)(7)(c) said he learned that during a meeting between (b)(7)(c) l(b)(7)(C) I andl(b)(7)(c) ladmitd that he had falsified the as-left datar.(b)(7)(C) tated he determined that termination o ( employment was appropriate (Exhibit 10, pp. 5-11).

(b)(7)(C) t (b)(7)(C) L())C

• denied he instructed F to enter incorr. ainfrr in the as-left section of the ation cooling tower fan maintenance work order package. c stated, "I never told him about him signing nothing. He's ,, to confirm that the I(b)1(7)1(CL)I~1isdne ab)(7)c) and if it's not been don e.needtodoitand then sign it" (Exhibit 12, p. 11; Exhibit 14).1 ) advised that on Monday  !(b)(C during a review of the cooling tower fan maintenance work (bd7)(C)ckage, h se-g-eve-d-that the as-left data _ntwiffi erance. He saide_asedL(b)(7)(c) to look into the situation and on Wednesda (T(hClI he learned from' tha (b)(7)(C) had clainedihat_L hý(b)M(c) Ihad instr cted him to enter the incorrtzrt data i hsaid -t ft section.1(b)(7)(C) he IbC ently met with

!*,** (b)7)C)(b)(7)(C) can( (b)(7)(C) d.7..c. to discuss the issue and J*(b)(7)(C) again accuse ....... Iof directing him( 7 to enter the incorrect data. c NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE HOU APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF IN TIGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-016 13 OFFICIAL US LY - INVESTIGATI INFORMATION

LUS L ON OIINV TIG .IN R

• .(b)7)( ) / . . "(b)(7)(C) denied he instructed ,6toenter incorrect information in the work order package.(7 said( was subsequently terminated for falsifying the work order package (Exhibit 12, pp. 11-20).

F(b_)(7_)(C_) _

Althougb claimed that (b(7(C directed him to enter the incorrect data in the as-left section of the work order package, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim. On the contrary, the evidence revealed tha (b)(7)(c) on his own, decided to enter the as-found data from the fan blades in the as-left section of the work order package and initial the step as being complete. The evidence clearly demonstrates that the decision to terminat (b)(7)(C) was based on a compelling business reason (falsification of a work order package) an Mnoton any retaliatory animus.

Conclusion F(b)7) _C) I Based on the evidence developed during the investigation, the allegation that #as discriminated against for raising safety concerns involving the conduct of cooling tower fan blade maintenance was not substantiated.

NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSU HOUT APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTQR,*- E OF INMTIGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-016 14 OFFICIAL USE ONLY - 01 INVESTIG ION INFORMATION

LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit No. Description 1 Investigation Status Record, dated December 5, 2007 (1 page).

2 Interview o (b)(7)(C) Jated February 6, 2008 (51 pages).

3 Interview of dated February 6, 2008 (45 pages).

4 Interview o dated April 7, 2008 (51 pages).

5i (b)(7)(C) 5 Interview o dated April 8, 2008 (23 pages).

6 Interview oi dated April 8, 2008 (18 pages).

7 Interview o (b)(7)(C) ted April 8, 2008 (21 pages).

8 Interview oý ( dated April 8, 2008 (15 pages).

S Interview o(b)(7) ated April 8, 2008 ( pages).

19 Interview o(b7)C dated April 8, 2008 (26 pages).

11 Interview Report ot_)7_(c dated April 9, 2008 (1 page).

12 Interview o)( dated May 12, 2008 (24 pages).

(b)(7)(C) 13 Energy Northwest (23 pages).

14 Handwritten Statement b dated March 21, 2007 (2 pages).

15 Energy Northwest Letter to Harry FREEMAN, Senior Allegations Coordinator, ACES, NRC:RIV, dated May 23, 2007 (9 pages).

(b)(7)(C) I 16 Handwriting Exemplars from I undated (3 pages).

17 Report of Handwriting Exemplars of=_ undated (1 page).

NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE APPROVAL OF FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFFIC I STIGATIONS, REGION IV Case No. 4-2008-016 15 OFFICIAL USE ONLY - 01 INVESTIG ION INFORMATION