ML20211Q109

Forwards Three Repts of Interview Containing Matter for Possible Investigative Followup.No Effort Made at Time of Interviews Due to Author Focus on Other Cases.Atchison Raised Possibility of Tangible Issues.W/O Encl

ML20211Q109
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	11/02/1984
From:	Rich Smith NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTOR & AUDITOR (OIA)
To:	Connelly S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTOR & AUDITOR (OIA)
Shared Package
ML20197G337	List: ML20197G331 ML20211Q059 ML20211Q070 ML20211Q075 ML20211Q087 ML20211Q101 ML20211Q109 ML20211Q117
References
FOIA-86-133 NUDOCS 8607230494
Download: ML20211Q109 (1)

Text

___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

.- O O

-[a, ,,,'o UNITED STATES

["T g ;j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

% ,,,,, Novanber 2,1984 MEMORANDUM FOR: Sharon R. Connelly, Director Office of Inspector and Auditor r

THRU: Hollis Bowers, Assistant Director for Investigations Office of Inspector and Auditor FROM: Ronald M. Smith, Senior Crimi M-Investigator Office of Inspector and Auditor

SUBJECT:

MATTER FOR POSSIBLE INVESTIGATIVE FOLLOWUP Attached hereto are three Reports of Interview which arose out of my efforts during the Herr, Frost, Griffin investigation (File 84-30) to learn Betty Brink's telephone number. Because we nor 01, Region IV, had a current number for her, I contacted Juanita Ellis (source of case 84-7) to see if she had a current number for Brink. She did but also wanted to raise other natters she thought to be within 01A's jurisdiction. Those natters are recorded at Attachment A.

Generally, no eftort was made at that time to further clarify her remarks because of my focus on the other cases I was working at the time. However, once back at the office, I did do some preliminary checking into Fouke's alleged concerns (Attachment B) and those of Atchison (Attachment C). .

As can be seen, the Ellis and Fouke complaints were somewhat vague and ,

generally did not indicate wrongdoing but rather a perception that certain matters had not been handled correctly.

Atchison on the other hand did seem to raise the possibility of tangible issues. However, his information was not further developed because I felt that the telephonic interview was not the best way to develop the infortnation he had to offer. Secondly, I did not know if we wanted to comit the resources to pursue a "possible" case - particularly in light of our case load at that time.

The whatadvantage (and how much of pursuing)the matter detail Atchison has now and then would be toinvestigation pursue get a clear record of thoseof matters, if warranted. The potential disadvantage is that he may be raising issues already being addressed appropriately, which we would merely confirm.

Having said that, from the political perspective and/or public and media interest in Comanche Peak, it might be prudent to get Atchison on record and go from there, i.e., investigate or explain where he is in error.

Accordingly, I recomend that a case file be opened and that he be interviewed.

A s e 72 4 860721 p GARDE 86-133 PDR