ML20134J215

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Two Communiques Re OI Case 2-95-008.W/o Encl
ML20134J215
Person / Time
Issue date: 05/30/1996
From: Dockery J
NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI)
To: Evans C
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20134B508 List:
References
FOIA-96-485 NUDOCS 9702120051
Download: ML20134J215 (1)


Text

_ _._ _.._ -. - _ _ _ _ _ -. _ _ __.. _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _.

i l

From:

JamesDockery/0[

(EVA A).s, R g To:

CFE j

Date:

5/30/96 2:28pm

Subject:

OI Case 2-95-008

'i

Carolyn, Attached are two communiques I sent you and then failed i

to follow up on.

(Frankly, I completely forgot about them until j

recently when I started to try and write an ROI!)

j Notwithstanding the DOL W&H finding that " discrimination...was a i

factor in the actions which comprise his complaint,"

I doubt that the alleger has articulated a prima facie case in either his complaint letter or his OI testimony because there doesn't seem i

to be any identifiable " adverse employment consequence" that he suffered.

I'm even more confident that he has failed to establish any realistic causal nexus betwwen his " protected activity" (which the licensee concedes, by tca way) and the perceived

~

discriminatory treatment by s (largely unidentified) management

" conspiracy."

Mostly, I think he's right that some people did not want him to work in the plant; but it's because he has an i

abrasive and overly rigid personality.

There's no indication that anyone at all cared about any " protected activity" he may have engaged in.

Any thoughts on the matter?

Am I completely off target in your reading of the documents?

Thanks, Jim D.

9702120051 970210 PDR FOIA BINDER 96-485 PDR

_.