ML20212K931
| ML20212K931 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Fermi |
| Issue date: | 04/22/1985 |
| From: | Kalkman J, Pawlik E NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212J657 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-86-202 Q3-84-020, Q3-84-20, NUDOCS 8701290241 | |
| Download: ML20212K931 (7) | |
Text
.
- * ' di D
UNITED STATES 4
p" i',
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE oF INVESTIG ATioNS FIELD OFFICE. REGloN 111 GLEEtSN!ELUNIS W REPORT OF INQUIRY Em ico Femi 2: Alleged Discrimination of a Nuclear Contractor Employee by Wismer & Becker Company Licensee:
Case Number: Q3-84-020 Detroit Edison Company Report Date: APR 22 $85 Detroit, Michigan Control Office: 01:RIII Reported by:
Ap ved by:
b n,a n XM.
nm m)
Y-
/
/ James N. Kalkman,, Investigator EUMe T.f dawlik, Director Office of Investigations Office of Investigations Field Office, Region III Field Office, Region III Participating Personnel:
R. E. Farrell, NRC Reactor Inspector B. H. Little, NP.C Senior Resident Inspector J. McComick-Barger, NRC Reactor Inspector 1
870116 241 PDR 8 - 02 D
i
SYNOPSIS On May 23, 1983, the NRC Office of Investigations initiated an Inquiry into an allegation of enployee discrimination of a Wismer & Becker Company welder at the Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Station. Wismer & Becker was subcontracted by Daniels International Corporation, the general contractor at Femi, to perform the piping installation at the Femi 2 project.
This report provides information indicating the allegation of employee discrimination by a contractor as defined by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, is unsubstantiated. Based on the available evidence, it appears likely that the alleger, although terminated from Wismer & Becker's employ, was not terminated as the result of his identification of nonconformance items or quality cencerns, but rather because of a personal confrontation with a fellow local welder's union member.
It has been established that the alleger, by his admission, maintained a personal dislike for the alleged violator (a Wismer &
Becker welding supervisor), who was stated to have fired the alleger.
It has so been established that the all r worked for Wisner & Becker at Fermi 2 the last tem of employment rom sequent to the alleged wrongful y
temina ion, wi e s ipu lon that he not work under the supervision of the alleged violator. The alleger did not file a Department of Labor action resulting from his temination, nor did he wish to pursue the tennination issue with the NRC.
Numerous attempts by 01:RIII to locate the alleged violator have failed.
Therefore, the conclusien that the allegation is unsubstantiated is based on the alleger's statements and his employment record at Wismer & Becker Company.
No further investigative effort will be expended relating to this concern.
This Inquiry is considered CLOSED.
I l
1
i TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Synopsis...............................
1 Appl icabl e Regul a tions........................
3 Interviewee 4
Details of Investigation.......................
5 Allegation - Alleged Discrimination of a 5
Wismer & Becker Company Welder List of Exhibits........................... 6 G. F-4 1
h I
i i
)
?
2:
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 10 CFR 50.7 Employee Protection (a) Discrimination by a Commission licensee, permittee, an applicant for a Commission license or permit, or a contractor or subcontractor of a Commission licensee, permittee, or applicant against an employee for engaging in certain protected activities is prohibited. Discrimination includes discharge and other action that relate to compensation, terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. The protected activities are established in section 210 of the Energy Reorganization of 1974, as amended, and in general are related to the administration or enforcement of a requirement imposed under the Atomic Energy Act or the Energy Reorganization Act.
(1) The protected activities include but are not limited to:
(i) Providing the Commission information about possible violations of requirements imposed under either of the above statutes; g,
\\
a 9
3
6 &
INTERVIEWEE r
i er & Becker Company Welder Y.
k l
l l
l l
l i
4 l
l
DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION Allegation - Alleged Discrimination of a Wismer & Becker Company Welder Or May 3, 198 NRC Reactor Inspector R. E. Farrell was ap roached by g
, former Wismer & Becker Company
~ relating to his qua ity c erns during the late 1981 time period a emi 2 Nuclear Power (Exh'[ bit 1) agreed to discuss his concerns on a more formal basis Station.
with the N On May 9, 1983, NRC Senior Resident Inspector B. H. Little contacted and received several allegations as to potential hardware deficiencies. Little also received n allegation of wrongdoing relating to employee discrimination, in that was allegedly fired for identif confonnances or defi-ciencies in construction. More specifically, 11eged that he was terminated for refusing to rework welds in the reac or recirculation system, which had already been approved by nondestructive examination.
(Exhibit 2)
Between May 10-20, 1983, B. H. Little conducted an inspection of the alleged construction related deficiencies including the weld rework, and determined l
that the technical allegations were unfounded (Exhibit 2).
IF.
'D On November 19,198?,, NRC OI:RIII actively began to inv 1e matter of wrongdoing, i.e criminatory termination of I OLwas unable to locate until Feb
- 85. On that date, 6 )
was interviewed I, at whic advised that he was fired by a Wismer & Becker Supervisor, or refusing to rework welds in the d area without the appropriate ocumentation to perfo hat work.
also inferred that he had a personality conflict with s mi om differences at the Local Welders Union, Monroe, Mi an.
stated that he went back to work for Wismer & Becker at e in ate ith the provision that he would not have to work under superv on.
85, 01 determined from Wismer & Becker employment that had worked for that company at Fenni on s 3 and 4).
1 01:RIII made several attem ts although unsuccessful, to locate former Wismer &
Becker Supervisor the alleged violator in this inquiry.
During his February 4,1985 OI interview, also offered an additional allegation that copper tubing in the contro rod drive system was improperly soldered. That allegation was brought to the attention of the Re n III staff, and on February 5, 1985, OI & NRC staff contacted
_to obtain more specific information.
oject Inspector J. McConnick-Barger researched the additional echnical allegation and determined it to alsobeunfounded(Exhibi
).
5
LIST OF EXHIBITS 1.
N morandum dated June 1, 1983, from R. E. Farrell to Region III 2.
NRC Memorandum dated May 23, 1983, from B. H. Little to Region III Files.
3.
Report of Interview with dated February 4,1985.
4.
NRC letter to Wismer & Becker Company dated February 26, 1985.
l 5.
NRC Memorandum dated February 27, 1985, from J. W. McCormick-Barger te Region III files.
t b
6