ML20101Q789

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests Investigation of Info Received by Region III in May 1982 That Alleger Employment W/Zack Co Was Involuntarily Terminated After Individual Notified CPC of Deficiencies Involving Zack Co Work at Plants
ML20101Q789
Person / Time
Site: Clinton, Midland, LaSalle
Issue date: 03/10/1987
From: Davis A
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To: Pawlik E
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
Shared Package
ML20101Q435 List:
References
FOIA-91-187 NUDOCS 9207150103
Download: ML20101Q789 (2)


Text

--

U LIMITEC

.STRIBUTION--NOTFORPUBLIC(lILOSURE Pequest No. RIII-83-A-0140 (Region / Year /No.)

i MEMORANDUM FOR:

Eugene T. Pawlik, Director, Office of Investigations Field Office, Region III FROM:

A. Bert Davis, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION Zack Company Non-Docketed Licensee / Vendor / Applicant Docket No.

Cicero, Illinois Facility or Site Location A. Bert Davis March 10,1987 Regional Administrator Date A.

Recuest What is the matter that is being requested for investigation (be as specific as possible regarding the underlying incident).

During May IS82 Region III received information that an alleger's employment with the Zack Company was involuntarily terminated after the individual notified the Consumers Power Company of deficiencies involving Zack Company work at the Midland, LaSalle and Clinton Plants.

B.

Purpose of Investigation 1.

What wrongdoing is suspected; explain the basis for this view (be as specific as possible).

l The Zack Company may have retaliated against the alleger for having identified deficiencies in Zack Company work at three nuclear power plants.

2.

What are the potential regulatory requirements that may have been-violated?

Section 210, Energy Reorganization Act (Employee Protection) 3.

If no violation is suspected, what is the specific regulatory concern?

l N/A 4.

If allegations are involved, is there a view that the allegation occurred? Likely occurred not sure X

If Likely, explain.

-LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION W/0 01 APPROVAL 9207150103 911030

)

/-

2// /

PDR FOIA

-lhD I'

fr s.

ZACK91-187 PDR o

1

m

.. ;.+.

LIMITEL *,STRIBUTION --'NOT FOR PUBLIC L' LOSURE i :

C.

Reouestor's Priority

-- r 1

1.

Is the priority of the investigation high, normal, or low? Low i

i 2.

What is the estimated date when the results of the investigation are needed? November 1, 1987 ll 3.

What is the basis for the date and the impact of not meeting this date?

(For-example, is there an immediate safety issue that must

,l be addressed or are the results necessary to resolve any ongoing i

regulatory issue and if so, what actions are dependent on the i

outcomeoftheinvestigation?)

i The November I, 1987 date does-not represent a milestone within the j

allegation file and can be adjusted accordingly.

3 i

D.

Contact i-1.

Staff members:

[

R. F. Warnick, Chief, Projects Branch 1 (FTS 388-5575) l 2.

A11egers identification with add ess and telephone number if not confidential.

(Indicate-if any confidential sources are -involved-and who may be contacted for the identifying details.)

Can be obtained from' Region III Allegation Coordinator C. H. Weil I

j-(FTS 388-5535).-

i j

F.

Other Relevant Information L

See enclosure and 01 Investigation No.. 3-82-025.

That investigation-pertained to the falsification of Certified Material Test Reports by the i

Zack Company and the allegation came from the same alleger.

i M

4 A. Bert Davis-i' Acting Regional Administrator-

Enclosure:

Memo'dtd'7/22/86, i.-

Weil to Keppler I -

cc w/ enclosure:

-R. H. Vollmer NRR u

.D. B.'Mausshardt, NMSS J. H. Sniezek, DEDROGR-J. Lieberman, 0GC

8. B. Hayes. 01 E. T. Pawlik, 01:RIII-

-LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION W/0 01 APPROVAL c

2

- - - -