ML20212J981

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Partially Withheld Discussion Re Conflicting Statements Received by Inspectors During 820908-10 Inspection of Electrical Cable Raceway Installations.Nrc Investigation Recommended Re Firing of Alleger Immediately After Insp
ML20212J981
Person / Time
Site: 05000000, Fermi
Issue date: 09/27/1982
From: Little W
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To: Foster J
NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI)
Shared Package
ML20212J657 List:
References
FOIA-86-202 NUDOCS 8701280398
Download: ML20212J981 (1)


Text

y

.b-

=

>2 28c%

UNITED STATES o

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 8\\

,, ( [' g,

' g REGloN ll!

I. k )#

E 799 ROOSEVELT ROAD dv

/

I oLEN E LLYN, ILUNois 60u7 g

f e...*

SEP 2 7 1982 MEMORANDUM FOR:

J. E. Foster, Acting Director, Office of Investigation, Ch cago Field Office

]W THROUGH:

C. E. Norelius, Director, Division of Engineering and Technical Programs FROM:

W. S. Little, Chief, Division of Engineering Programs

SUBJECT:

FERMI II DOCKET 50-341.

INSPECTION OF ELECTRICAL CABLE RACEWAY INSTALLATIONS BY L. K. COMSTOCK COMPANY During an inspection performed at Fermi II during September 8-10, 1982, B. H. Little and K. R. Naidu, the inspectors determined that they received conflicting statements from L. K. Comstock (LKC QC Manager nd QC Super-visors and one QC inspector (an alleger) named relative to:

(1) the voiding of a Deviation Di osi 19, 1982; and (2) the firing of

~on Request (DDR) #1757 dated May for alleged administrative reasons, coincidental with learning of his contacting NRC regarding inaccuracies in electrical construction and inadequate QC.

Details of other construction and QC discrepancies are documented in Region III Inspection Report #50-341/82-14(DETP).

The inspectors, K. Naidu and B. Little, indicate that the above issues demonstrate imprudence on the part of licensee / contractor management and implicit intimidation of an individual who came to the NRC with issues he felt could not have been otherwise correctly resolved.

i Because of the NRC inspector involvement ear the entirety of the actions which apparently exacerabated relationship with his management, leading to his separation (firing) immediately after the con-duct of the associated inspection, we recommend an immediate NRC investigation.

. As i

/

fH

\\

W. S.' Lit le, Chief Engineering Inspection Branch cc:

R. L. Spessard l

B. H. Little K. R. Naidu C. C. Williams Keppler/ Davis l

8701280398 870116 PDR FOIA GARDE 86-202 PDR 1(

h

.