ML20093D972
| ML20093D972 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 10/09/1984 |
| From: | Bernabei L, Bradford L GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT, THREE MILE ISLAND ALERT |
| To: | GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20093D971 | List: |
| References | |
| SP, NUDOCS 8410110494 | |
| Download: ML20093D972 (5) | |
Text
r:
7
~
TMIA'
'10/9/84 ggWED CORiinsFONDENCS -
- UNITED STATES:OF AMERICA
. NUCLEAR FEGULATORY COMMISSION Before=the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ~
D
'In the Matter;of
)
4
)
NIi Afi':i2
. METROPOLITAN ~ EDISON COMPANY
)
)
. Docket No. 50-289 crace cp (Restart-Management PhasefCrtE. Tar;gY.m,iC
~(ThrealMile Island Nuclear
)
Wictr
~^
- Station,: Unit 1)
)
-)
)
THREE MILE ISLAND ALERT'S THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL
. RESPONSE TO LICENSEE'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES
-Interrogatories T-4 ' and T-5
.Re : subpart- (3) o'f T-4 and T-5 of TMIA's Response to Licensee's First Set of Interrogatories:
-A. series of memoranda indicate that individuals are assigned as' training instructors even though it is apparentifrom their past' performance.that they are unqualified for those positions.
See cenerally the.-following documents:
(1).. Employee Performance Review for Mr. Olive, 10/19/83;.
(2)- Memorandum from Hukill to File re:
Discussions with Olive, shift foreman, TMI-1, 6/8/84; (3)
Memorandum to Hukill from.Toole re Olive, 6/14/84
'(4)
Memorandum from M. Maag.to Mr. Ross, 7/23/84 In support of subpart (5) of T-4 and T-5 of TMIA's Response F
i to Licensee's First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Pro-duction:
-Management is unable to respond to recommendations for re-form from within its own ranks.
In response to a request by i
Mr. Arnold, D.A. Ross wrote in a memorandum to Mr. Arnold and f
Y y
L
- 8410110494 841009 DR ADOCK 05000 y-c-e, r
.e, m
. Mr. Clark, dated 8/3/82, that he believed that instructors must have not only command of the subject matter but also be able to present knowledge so that students can understand what is being taught.
Mr. Arnold and Mr. Clark have not paid attention or responded _to Mr. Ross' suggestions.
In support of subparts (7) and (9) of TMIA's Response to Licensee's First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Produc-tion, T-4 and T-5:
GPU has not instilled an attitude in its operators that cheat-ing will not be tolerated and employees who participate in l
cheating will be appropriately disciplined.
The following series of documents indicate that GPU had not appropriately disciplined Mr. Mayhue and did not instill in him any attitude that his par-ticipation in the cheating incidents was not to be tolerated:
(1)
Ross to Hukill Memorandum with attached evaluations of Job Performance, 3/25/83; l
(2)
Ross and Toole Memorandum to Hukill, 5/12/83 re certifica-tion; (3)
Hukill Memorandum to Files, 5/19/83; (4)
Memorandum to Payroll, 6/14/83; (5)
Mayhue to Hukill Memorandum, 8/3/83; (6)
Hukill to Mayhue Memorandum, 8/3/83.
In support of subpart (6) of TMIA's Response to Licensee's First Set of Interrogatories T-4 and T-5:
I See Offshift Tour by S.L. Newton, 1/25/82, which indicates that OJT training does not occur in that supervisors on the back-l l
i L
. shift did not perform checkouts of trainees; 2/12/82 Memoran-dum from W. Wegner (BETA) to R. Arnold and P.
Clark re:
Initial Impressions I, Item B, at 1, concerning recommendation for rem-edial reading courses and the need for GPU to accept the respon-sibility for problems with the training program; 3/3/82 Memor-
.andum from Wegner to Clark re:
Initial Impression II, at 1, re-garding recommendatione to resolve BETA Report problems.
GPU management targets those employees who bring to their at-tention problems in the training program for retaliatory treat-ment.
See Hukill to Shovlin Memo, 3/16/83; Shovlin to Hukill Memorandum 3/17/83; Minutes of 3/17/83 meeting among Whitman, Newton, Shovlin, Natale and Hahn, concerning allegations an operator raised to Hukill during an off-shift tour.
His concern was that a foreman directed him to proceed with work in contra-diction to those procedures he had been instructed should apply.
In support of subparts (10) and (11) of TMIA's Response to Licensee's First Set of Interrogatories, T-4 and T-5:
Mr. Huk tll f ailed to certify Mr. Frederick on August 23, 1984, only after the issuance of NUREG-0680, Supp.
5, raised questions about his prior conduct.
Mr. Hukill appeared to have certified Mr. Frederick at a prior time, along with the approval of M.
Ross and R. Toole.
This indicates that management did not take ser-iously Mr. Frederick's earlier failures of the oral exam and poor performance until the NRC Staff in NUREG-0680, Supp. 5, specifi-cally criticized Mr. Frederick.
See 7/16/14 Final Certification Statementhsigned by M. Ross and R. Toole to certify Frederick and Final Certification which was refused by Hukill, dated 8/23/84,
e; with four-page explanatory statement by Hukill regarding his refusal.to certify Frederick.
Interrogatory T-19 See Response.tx) Interrogatory T-4,-subpart.(6) of TMIA's response.tx) Licensee's - First Set of Interrogatories T-4 and
~
T-5.
' Interrogatory T-24(c)
CPU should discipline and/or remove those employees identi-
- fied by TMIA in its response to Interrogatories T-4 and T-5, sub-part.(c), Three Mile Island Alert's Supplemental Response to Li-I censee's First Set of Interrogatories.
See also, 8/3/82 Mayhue to Hukill Memorandum in which Mayhue states that his acceptance of a two-week suspension does not con-stitute admission of his participation in the cheating incidents.
l:
Interrogatories T-4 and T-5
'TMIA raises this additional concern regarding the licensee's training programt GPU does not in fact ensure that the evaluations reached in the course of the training program are used to assign, discipline and/or remove individuals when these evaluations demonstrate they are not qualified to perform their jobs.
- See, e.g., Memor-anda regarding Mr. Olive, identified in response to TMIA's res-Ponse to subpart (5) of T-4 and T-5, subpart (c) in this Third l
Supplemental Response to Licensee's First Set of Interrogatories.
f I
i L
.5--
4-C Respectfully submitted,
/LM M
L n e Bernabei G
rnment Accountability Project
-1555 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Suite 202 Washington, D.C.
20036
~(202) 232-8550 a kA)&bllIS Me M
Louise Bradford TMI Alert 1011 Green St.
Harrisburg, PA 17102 DATED:
October 9, 1984 s
i l
s h
..