ML20133G881

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards OI Rept 1-93-021R Re Plant,Units 1 & 2,alleged Harassment,Intimidation & Discrimination Action
ML20133G881
Person / Time
Site: Salem  PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 11/04/1994
From: Fitzgerald J
NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI)
To: Martin T
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20133F923 List:
References
FOIA-96-351 NUDOCS 9701160199
Download: ML20133G881 (4)
v • d • e


Text

p aar

,. *,, UNITED STATES

$, p, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e j. WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

% ,,,,,* November 4, 1994 MEMORANDUM FOR: Thomas T. Martin, Regional Administrator Region I FROM: James A. Fitzgerald, Acting Directo Office of Investigations

SUBJECT:

SALEM GENERATING STATION, UNITS I AND 2: ALLEGED 1

HARASSMENT, INTIMIDATION, AND DISCRIMINATION (CASE NO. 1-93-021R)

Enclosed, for whatever action you deem appropriate, is the Office of

Investigations (01) Report of Investigation concerning the above igatter.

A copy of this report has been provided to the Department of Justice for prosecutorial review. Neither this memorandum nor the report may be released outside the.NRC without the permission of the Director, 01. Internal NRC access and dissemination should be on a need-to-know basis. Treat as

" Official Use Only."

Enclosure:

Report w/ exhibits ,

cc w/ encl:

J. Lieberman, OE L. Chandler, OGC cc w/ report H. Thompson, Jr., DEDS W. Russell, NRR B. Letts, 01:RI ic ,

T6-3 fll ~ ~ ,

6

/

9701160199 970113 EI 6-351 PDR x

e ct-o m . u cc o me m on . - m a - . :n c.uc oa CO Eh -

KE N CO and Ms. Coles and himself that may have shonly followed Mr. Moeller's telephone conversation with Dr. Boston, notwithstanding that both Dr. Boston and Ms. Coles described Dr. Mack as very upset by this unique request.

One possible explanation for Dr. Mack's imprecise recollection is that his memcr3 of this particular request is blurred by other discussions he had with Mr. Moeller. Dr. Mack recalls

that "Mr. Moeller and I have had a lot of discussions about Fitness for Duty," especially l l "during the formulation of this program." (Mack Tr.10-11). Dr. Mack believes that it is

" entirely possible that we did cover the subject matter" of whether some mechanism in the program exists or could be created to test individuals for whom there would not be an adequate i

"for cause" basis. (Mack Tr.11) Another possible explanation for Dr. Mack's lack of vivid l

l recall is that he dismissed the request out of hand; it was a "ridicul'ous idea" (Mack Tr.12) and i

Dr. Boston had already denied the request. Under these circumstances, it is possible that Dr.

1

Mack simply gave it no further consideration and simply forgot about it.

l Mr. Moeller's denial of the allegation. Mr. Moeller flatly denies that he requested j i i

someone to be tested under the auspices of the random testing program. (Moeller Tr. 21) He also denies < reg with Dr. Boston to request that an individual be selected for random testing.

j (Moeller Tr. 26) He denied making that request of anyone in the FFD Program. (Moeller Tr.

3

27) At the end of the first interview, Mr. Moeller was again flatly asked:

, Q: . . . . Do you recall at any time within the last 12 or 18 months

having asked Dr. Boston to select any particular individual for testing undeir the random program?

A: I have no knowledge of that; I do not remember ever asking Dr.

Boston to select someone for random [ testing].

THIS ATTACHMENT CONTAINS y ORM TO BE ic w FRO UB C D1 URE

.. , , UANT FR 2.790

, 1, & . i e:1 in E E " 'u i " ' '

a e, S *e i'??C '

" W

e m.. _

. = ..n.. ' c;_,  ;. . c . c& U -

y~

4 .; ..

as

~(MoeDer Tr. 36)

Inasmuch as Mr. Moeller had acknowledgedeneral . speaking topic to

/

of whether a mechanism could be created for testing or cause*

someo procedures, Mr. Moeller was asked whether he could recall ever h a conversation like that with Dr. Boston. He stated that he could not remember uch a conversation. He observed that he rarely communicates with Dr. Boston on a one to

- -one basis and deals with her "almost exclusively" through SAC acdvities. (Moeller Tr. 31)

At his second interview, however, Mr. Moeller recalled that he gt ave had some contact with Dr. Boston in the context regarding . of hisa means conversatio to select individuals for random testing. Mr. Moeller had some roug emory of Dr. Boston being - being involved at some point in this meeting " (Moeller II T

r. 5) Related to Mr.

Moeller's theoretical discussion of testing opdons with Dr Mack M

r. Moeller acknowledged that it is "possible" that Dr. Boston was there and that " h s e could have been a party to this conversation. She could have been a party to . . . professional conv ersations on . . . how can we take information that's not . . . gold-plated, not real firm and act on it. It is possible that we could have had those kinds of conversations, yes " (Moeller II T r 19-20) Mr. Moeller explamed that "Dr. Boston may have been there in the beginning d cussion." But he recalls "that my further discussions of the exploring of options (for oth er than "for cause" testing of employees] did not have Dr. Boston there, that it was just Dr Mack

) n myself." (Moeller II Tr. 9-10' Mr. Moeller summanzed as follows:.

I have no memory of ever goin instance, to have a discussion on [g to Dr. Boston's office, for some mechanism for selectmg k THIS ATTACHMENTCONTAINS / \

INFORMATION TO BE O FROM P PU CDISCLOS ANT 10CFR . O

., wa " " " ' ' "

4

~

  • gg y n F.ofuTT T l ..

3 f

i 4

Did a dotation of site procedures or policies occur?

A COPES i

{

Despite the attempt, the available data and recollection of th o ved establish that i

no violation of NAP-42(Q) occurred.s There .

random testing, isorno ev that of any other individual, was procured by any mea

{ procedures. ns other than proper random selection

l 4

SUMMARY

OF SIGND1 CANT FINDINGS

!- B' ased on its investigation, the investigative team sum

gnificant fmdings and a

conclusions as follows:

3 e

Protection, comm'micated with ,

Dr.

anager - SiteMarth sychologist in the Rizzo or some other individual uest be that Mr.includ

! omly selected for i drugs / alcohol testing because Mr. Moeller apparently sus drug testing.

cause" use or alcohol abuse, but believed there ec e t was an i of eindividual 4

nsufficient basis for "for e

i the auspices of the random selection n v ual under progr

\

Moeller's request to Dr. Ronald Mack, the Director of Medic e - Nuclear, e

1 Moeller that his reDr. Mack appropriately supported Dr. B ,

e o advise Mr.

General Manager quest was inappropriate or(

i Mr. George C. Connor General Managere ervices, of Mr. Moeller's reques,t. - Nuclear Sup e

j t i

resulted as a result of Mr. Moeller's request,No r policy acturdly

' ,e the random testing selection in oflieu ossibility using of "for t i

resulted to subvert it. from an inadequate understanding of the prograj n attempt 4 t k

\

4 THIS ATTACHM .

INFORMATIO PADdS  !
- PUBL IHELD '

PUR DISCLOS RE TO 10CFR1 k

TOTAL P.03

_ _ . _ _

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20133G881&oldid=2880312"