ML20236C205
| ML20236C205 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 10/23/1987 |
| From: | Grimsley D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| To: | Fowler L FOWLER, L. |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-42 NUDOCS 8710270055 | |
| Download: ML20236C205 (4) | |
Text
_
F0IA-86-42 gg k
MSX)N5t TYrt
)
i 5
' RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF l '* *'
IXU^*'
(%**/
.i INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST L
00T 2 31987 1
hY 5EQUESTER Laurie Fowler; Esauire Gn a?a/a?G PART 3.-RECORDS RELEASED OR NOT LOCATED (See checked bonest No egency records subject to the request have been located.
No additional egency records subset to the request have been located.
Agency records subiect to the request that are identifed in Appendix are already availatne for public eispectaon and copying in the NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washmgton, DC.
Agency recorde subsect to the request that are identifed in Appendix are being made.eveilable for pLelic inspection and copying in the NRC Public Document I
noom,1717 H Street, N.W., Washem DC, in a folder under this FOIA number and requester name.
The i v.-
wy version of the proposake that you egreed to accept in a telephone conversation wth a enomber of my staff is now being enede avaiable for pubhc sinoecten and coying at the NRC Public Document R,oom,1717 H Street, N W., Washington, DC. in a folder under the FOIA number and requester name.
Enclosed is information on how you twy oc': sin access to and the charges for copying records placed in the NRC PutSc Document Room 1717 H 6treet, N.W., Washingen, DC.
Agency records subsect to the request are enclosed Any applicable charge for copies of the records provided and payment procedures are noted in the comments section.
)
Rxords subsect to the request have been raderred to another Federal agencybes) for review and direct response to you.
In view of NRC's response to the request, no further action is being taken on appeal letter dated PART ll.A-INFORMATION WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Certain information in the requesand records is bang withheld from public disclosure pursuant to the FOIA exempoons desc4ibed in and for t% reasons stated in Part 11. sec-I t>ons B. C. and D. Any released portions of the documents for whch only part of the record is being withheid are bosng made available for pubhc inspectmn and copm in the NRC Public Document Room.1717 H St+eet, N.W., Washington, DC. in a folder under the FOIA number and requester name, f
Comments The nonexempt portion of the record listed on the enclosed Appendix 0 is also available in the Vogtle Local Public Document Room (LPDR) located at the Burke County Library, 412 4th Street, Waynesboro, Georgia 10830.
4 1
l l
/~)
SIGN (CTOR. DrVISION OF E
RE A1
]L s
s
/
f s
M 871'027'0055 871023~
NRC FORM 464 iPFt h 149'
1 007 21198T l
F01A-86-42 F;';EEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT RESPONSE FOIA NUMBER (S):
.1 PART 118-APPLICABLE FOIA EXEMPTIONS RNords subject to the request that are described in the enclosed Apoendices 0&P ar, being withn.ie in ine;, ont,,,c, c, m part under FOIA -
Ergotjorgand for the reasons set forth below pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(b) and 10 CFR 9.5(a) of NRC Regulations.
i
- 1. The wrthheld information is properly classified pursuant to Executrve Order 12.356 IEXEMPTION 11 2 The withhe6d information relates solely to the internal personnel rules and procedures of NRC. (EXEMPTION 2)
J i
' 3 The withheld information is specifically esempted from pubhc disclosure by statute indicated: (EXEMPTION 31
)
'i Section 141146 of the Atomsc Energy Act which prohibits the disclosure of Restricted Data'or Formerly Restncted Data (42 U.S.C. 216176
/
Section 147 of the Atomic Energy Act which prohibits the disclosure of Unclassified Safeguards information (42 U.S.C. 2167).
s
- 4. The w6thheid information is a trade secret or commercial or financial information that 's being withheld for the reason (s) iridicated: (EXEMPTICN si e
I The information is considewd to be conf <lental business (propnetarvi information.
The information is considered to be proprietary information pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(dHI).
l The information was subtrutted and received in confidence from a foregn source pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d42).
l
'l
- 5. The withheid information consists of interagency or intraagency records that are not available through discovery dunng litigation. Dere of preescisionalinformanon would tend to inhibst the open and franit exchange of ideas essential to the deliberotrve process. Where records art wrthheid in their eneroty, the tacts are inextricably l
XX intertwined with the oredecisional information. There also are no reasonatidy segregable factual portions because the reloese of the facts would pomet an
-J mdirect inquiry into the predecisional process of the egency. lEXEMPTION U XX
'h' """*d i"' '** " '"'**d * '"*
d' ' " **"
d'' '" * "'d " '" * *' ""**' rant ed inv a si n f pers nel anvaev. (EXEMPTION 61 -
g
- 7. The withheld mformation conasts of investigatory records compiled for law enf artement purposes and ts being wrthheld for the reason (s) indo:ztac. (EXEMPTION 71 Disclosure would interfere with an enforcement proceeding because it could reveal the scope. direction, and focus of enforcement efforts. rd tNs could possibly allow them to take action to shield potential wrongdoing or a violat#on of NRC requirements from investigators. (EXEMPTION 7(A l
Declosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal pnvacy (EXEMPTION 71CH I
g The information consists of names of individuals and other informata:in the disclosure of which would reveal identities of confidential sources. (EXEMPTION 7100
.l PART 61 C-DENylNG OFFICIALS Pursuant to 10 CFR 9.9 and/or 9.15 of the U.S. Nuclest Regulatory Commission regulations it has been determined that the information withheld is exempt %rn sproduction or disclosure.
are that its production or disclosure is contrary to the public interest. The persons responsible for the denial are those officials identified below as dervimg ai'fciais and the Director.
Omsson of Rulee and Records, Office of Adminstration, for any denials that may be appealed to the Executive Director for Operations (toon DENylNG OFFICIAL TITLE / OFFICE RECORDS DENIED APPE1. TATE OFFICIAL 0-1 Partiallys secas e im Ben B. Hayes Directors OI P-1 Entirely XX t
PART ft D-APPEAL RIGHTS i.
The denial by each denying official identNied in Part ll.C may be appealed to the Appellate Officialidentified in that section. Any such appeal must be in j
wetting and must be made within 30 days of receipt of this response. Appeals must be addressed as appropriate to the ExecutNe Director Ibr Operations or to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and should clearly state on the envencipe and in the letter l
that it is an " Appeal from an initial FOlA Decision oc po;.u aos leert a U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION m2 FOlA RESPONSE CONTINUATION 1
- s.
T
- RE:
...,s>
' APPENDIX 0:
1 I
RECORDS. PARTIALLY.WITHHELDL 1..
10/14/83
-- Note to Cathy.Cochran from Jeanne' Hunt,'re:
Transmittal of' g.
L 6 pages and cover containin of Investigation" (7 pages)g an undated.. attachment, '.' Report Exemption 5 (Transmitting cover. sheet released;: attached report withheld)-
1 l
l 1
Li
?
[
C____m__
i s e;
$,,(
-RE':
F01 A'-86-42'
'l
.i a:....
i.
o l
dPPEllDIX P L
'l
' RECORDS TOTALLY WITHHELD l
i
- 1. 'Various Investigator'snotes'(handwrittenandtyped),'re:. Craft Dates requirements, manpower analyses, flRC interview schedules -
andsynopsesof. interviews (143pages) Exemptions 5, 6,:7C, 7D n
H q
.j l
i 1
2
T I
Law Offices of.
BRIAN SPEARS -
SUITE 220-GRANT BLDG:
ATTORNEY AT LAW 44 BROAD STREET, NL j
BRIAN SPEARS ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30M3 LAURIE F0WLER.
- (404) $22 0694 January 15, 1986 Office of Freedom of FREEDOM OF INFORMATION -
Information Act Requests ACT REQUEST hM $ g Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
1717 H Street, N.W.
h[gg Washington, D.C.
20555 Re:
Freedom of Information Act Request NRC Investigation of. Intimidation and Harrassment by Pullman Power Products, Inc..
j
Dear FOIA Officer:
)
Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act
('FOIA,
-5 U.S.C.
552 as amended),
the Georgia office
'o f the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) requests:
copies of any and all NRC records and information,. including,'but not limited to:
- notes, letters, memoranda, drafts, minutes,
- diaries, logs, calendars,
- tapes, transcripts, summaries, interview reports,' procedures, instructions, engineering
- analyses, drawings,
' files,
- graphs, charts,
- maps, photo 8raphs, agreements, handwritten
- notes, studies, data
- sheets, notebooks,
- books, telephone
- messages, computations, interim and/or final reports, status reports and any and all other records relevant to and/or generated in connection with the NRC's investigation (initiated on May 19, 1983) regarding allegations, findings and orders that Pullman j
Power Products employees intimidated and harrassed quality control inspectors at nuclear facilities.
(See attached Atlanta Constitution article for reference.)
This-request includes, but is not limited to, investigations of intimidation and harrassment by Pullman employees at Plant Vogtle.
This request also
- includes, but is not limited to, the NRC Conference of September 25, 1985, on the investigations.
(See attached NRC memo reference.)
for Because the ACLU is a non-profit organization established to protect the civil liberties guaranteed by the Constitution of the United
- States, we believe it is appropriate for you to waive copying and search charges, pursuant to 5
U.S.C.
522(a)(4)(a).
In this
- case,
" furnishing the information can be considered as primarily benefitting the general public."
For any documents or portions that you deny due to a specific FOIA exemption, please provide an index itemizing and describing the documents or portions of documents withheld.
The index should provide a detailed justification of your. grounds for claiming each exemption, explaining why each exemption is
_gyarl$t1V
j
~
re1evant to the document or portion of the document withheld.
This index -is required under Vaughn
- v. Rosen (I)2 484 F.2d 820 i
(D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 977 (2974).
I look forward to hearing from you within 10 days as the law stipulates.
Sincerely, M
+w Laurie Fowler i
Cooperating Attorney, Georgia ACLU LF:jy cc:
NRC, Region II l
l
{
I i
4 2
3 4~
Group'sa:sV6ktle 4 inspectors harassed d
andintimidat d
.,,..e%it,"
d t,.r co..
,I _
added.
forward with M/ W.*r.
Grace became regional ademie.
The head of the Neelear Rege-letrator last opting, replacing latory Commiss!on's Atlanta' office James P. O'Reilly, who joined said Wednesday that he was em Georgta Power as its sealer vice t>arrassed at the length *of tiene it - president is charge.d emelser op-was taking his offlee to reach as erstions.
. enforcement decisies concerolag
. Grace and members of his z
the intimidation and harassment of staff met Wednesday with officials from the Georgta Power Co. con-C, quality control inspectors at the- - corning an NRC investigation into p
Vogtle nuclear power plant.'
o Nelson Orace, adelaistrator of. allegations that enestreetles so-H E
the Atlanta Regional Offlee of the f ' parvisors barassed and latimidated 5
12 NRC, said that the problems at
' ty control inspectors at Vog- -
W Vogtle had been eersected, bewev ' -
in 'an attempt to manipulate h
4 er,and esalas charges esse.
C.)
that his staff is suelear
~ De lavestigaties was began le.
bover plants to be bei t la the 1968 and completed dur the otheast without proper regard,'snouser of 1964, with N5 for safety.
.1' rs reaching the e 2
4 Meanwhile, [ Weeklagloe-
' employees of Pullmaa jd
[-
t,ased public intettet ergseienties lac., which is lastalling charged Wednesday that inspectors pipes at Vogtle, were intimidatlag
.c r.a at Vogtle are coettQto be ha-and harassing sona of their ogrn.
.~.,
rassed and in
'me group,.
@is who were responsible H
the Government tability ' asr goality and salety inspections i
W Pre) set, tes opened 96
.at the plast.
fice to investigate Yi,;M _ _ that Puuman transferred its project subcontractors are psaishing work-mar.ager to a new assignment, and ers who report constracties or to.'
the NRC investigattoo ladicated spection practices that could be - that the actice was suffleiset le
" Vogle's safety..
'servoet the Grace esid. -
g, Ne nuclear is beleg Det the has yet to decide t,allt nest Aug It's correst whether to take esferessnest ac-
. projected cent is $8.d tiltos..
ties agalest Georgia Power:as'a since laat November, the Gov-result of the setention. -
ernment Accountability Project "The problem's been fixed,"
has interviewed more than 80 Grace said. ' Tor some reases, ee-workers at Plant Vegne w6e have forcement setton was delayed no-charged that quality control la. til this spring. We could have fol.
spectors who cite safety concerns lowed up seceer," he said. "The -
at the plant often eed op being-tienetisees of eer soforcesnent ae-fired, demoted or transferred, ae-tion is embarrassing."
to Billie Garde, citan's' Georgia Power officials have
' clinie for the Project.
denied that harmaamane ever took lastead of res leg to the place at VI,'a contention com.
&#m!Ndiqlee d*
-"' '* ar ro,e the that the NRC's Atlanta off Ms. Garde said the Govern-respeeded to worker coceplaints *mest: Accometability ; Project, abset'seclear power plant eee-which is 10 years old, has re-stractlen p by contacting vipwed the way in whis each of the stolties tas in-the NRC's five repmal efflees re-stead of laitiallag spends to westers ceseerns about tions that inight result in uve suelear power pleet constreetion.
measures being taken the De response from Region 11's of-etinties., do not esD the stility,"
flee, the Atlanta office that adels-
'We.
laters NRC functions in the South.
said Grace. "I have sever dose east, has beca " absolutely that.,and if tlacy can fled evidence terrible," she said.
-q
~.:. _.. -
i pg 08G,D UNITED STATES 0
g_
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisslON.
o
.3 's REGION 11
.l 101 MARIETTA STREET, N W
't.
ATLANTA,OEORGI A 30323 g
bLi., ;; kN o
Georgia. Power Company j
ATTN:
Mr.' R. J. Kelly
')
Executive Vice President P. 0. Box 4545
-Atlanta, GA 30302 H
Gentlemen:
1
SUBJECT:
PLACEMENT OF DOCUMENT IN PUBLIC DOCUMENT-ROOM s
Enclosed is a sumary of ~an investigation conducted'by!the;NRC' Office-of Investigations, Region II field office. The subject of the investigation'n is "Vogtle Nuclear Plant; Alleged Intimidation /Harrassment of QC Welding Inspect' ors -
and Possible Falsification of QC Inspection Records by Pullman' Power Products,.
1 Inc." This Document has been placed in the'Public Document Room and may be-of use to you in preparing for the conference on September 25, 1985.
Sincerely, l
li r
L O
J. Nelson Grace
.[
Regional Administrator-
Enclosure:
Cover page and sumary, dated 10/26/83, 7 pages cc w/ encl:
e R. E. Conway, Senior Vice President Nuclear Power J
D. O. Foster, Vice. President
.and General _ Manager Vogtle Project H. H. Gregory, III, General Manager, Yogtie Nuclear Construction G.- Bockhold,:Jr., Vogtle '
J Plant Manager.
L. T. Gucwa, Chief Nuclear Engineer Ruble A. Thomas, VicePresident-LicensingVogtl8-Project cc w/ encl:
(Cont'donpage.2)
,e UU
- Georgia Power Company 2
jgy12 cc w/ encl:
(Cont'd)
'Ed Groover, Quality 1
Assurance Site Manager C. W. Hayes, QA Manager J. T. Beckham, Vice President
.&, General Manager - Operations j
J. A. Bailey, Project Licensing Manager j
George F. Trowbridge, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge Bruce W. Churchill, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge Ernest L. Blake, Jr., Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge James E. Joiner, Troutman, Sanders.
Lockerman and Ashmore 4
James G. Ledbetter, Commissioner Department of Human Resources-Charles H. Badger, Office of Planning and Budget, Management Review Division Deppish Kirkland III, Counsel Office of the Consumer's Utility i
Council Douglas C. Teper, Georgians Against Nuclear Energy Laurie Fowler Legal Environmental 4
Assistance Foundation Tim Johnson, Executive Director Educational Campaign for a Prosperous Georgia Morton B. Margulies, Esq., Chairman Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Dr. Oscar H. Paris, Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr., Administrative j
Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board j
~
Panel f
A
unnto stAtas.
phid [
~~~-
~
' ~
kUCLEAR REG'ULATORY COMMISSION:
I UmCE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD Omet. REGloN 11
~m:1,m:: =
Date: October 26, 1983 REPORT OF INVESTIGATION TITLE:
V0GTLE NUCLEAR PLANT ALLEGED ' INTIMIDATION / HARASSMENT ~ OF QC WELDING INSPECTORS AND POSSIBLE FALSIFICATION OF QC INSPECTION RECORDS BY PULLMAN POWER PRODUCTS, INC.
I SUM LEMENT:
50-424 i
CASE NUM ER:
2-83-005 CONTROL OFFICE:
01: Region II STATUS:
CLOSED REDORTING OFFICE:
OI: Region II I
PERIOD CF INVESTIGATION:
May 19 - July 9, 1983 REPORTING INVESTIGATOR:
441 ~ )
//
RfbeY H. B'u k Investigator Office of Investig tions Field Office, Region II REVIEWED BY:
E. L. Williams 8.,.. Acting; Director g
Office of Investi tions Field Of.de, Region II
/i h
/LA1 v
s u
y WilliamJ. Ward;;/ Dire: tor Division of Field Ope-ations Office of Investigations Nb d
F 2
[ '_ Y A u r D "
oftuna,DeputyD e ter Roger I
Of of Inve ati APPROVED BY:
M i
Office of Investi.),ati@ s l
I a
e k
6 l
i 1
4
p.
4
'.I t
l l
e I
s.
SUMMARY
i
^1
.1 i
re 4
'e e
O$
e t
i
- i y
1
\\
~
pbr.
l f
grs:
. investigation was initiated to identify and document, alleged intimidation i
and harassment of Pullman Power Products, Inc. (PPP) Quality Control (QC) welding inspectors by the company's construction management personnel.
PPP, head-quartered in Williamsport, PA, is under contract to install all piping and piping supports associated with the construction of the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant l
(VNP), in Wdynesboro, GA, a licensed facility of the Georgia Power Company.
l Additionally, it'was reported to the NRC that the intimidation and harassment experienced by the QC welding inspectors may have resulted in possible improprieties regarding inspection records prepared and maintained by these i ndividuai ss.
The allegation pertaining to intimidation and harassment of QC welding inspectors by the Project Manager at the VNP was first reported to the Senior Resident 2nspector (SRI), NRC at the facility.
This initial allegation was substantiated by the SRI 'during the subsequent interviews of four additional QC welding inspectors employed by PPP.
Additionally, a Confidential Source alleged vast PPP f
material storage problems, records improprieties and incidents of intimidation by 9.he Project Manager and his construction superintendents.
The SRI obtained information that QC inspectors were being manipulated by the Prcject Manage
- through threats relating to adverse personnel actions affecting employment and salary matters.
Additionally, the Project Manager allegedly interfered with the utilization of QC welding inspectors and attempted to influence the reassignments of inspectors whose work histories did not f avor production and scheduling.
An onsite incident of assault in August 1982 upon a QC welding inspector by a
' construction superintendent, both employees of PPP, was also reported te the SRI.
i A review of pertinent regulatory documents, stancards, procecures and contract requirements was conducted pursuant to the investigation.
It was disclosed that PPP committed to cooperate with the licensee to ensure QC standards for the VNP are enforced at all times.
Further, this review disclosed that the line of authority regarding administrative matters for the QA/QC manager a't thi field office site of PPP is through thy Project Manager. 'It was cetermined that PPP or
.\\
2
= a suostdiary company was the ' subject of previous inquiries regarding intimidation and' harassment of QC inspectors at the Seabrook'NuclearLPlant, Seabrook, New j
. Hampshire and at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant, Avila B6ach, California.
A
' licensee initiated self evaluation in late-1982, utilizing Institute of Nuclear power Operations (INPO) criteria, identified that the QA/QC administrative reporting to the Project Manager is an area of weakness in the PPP field organi-zation.
During the investigation, nineteen fielci level'QC welding inspectors in PPP's field office at the VNP were interviewed regarding intimidation'and harassment, l
interference by the Project Manager and inspection records improprieties.
Five of these~ individuals confirmed vast material storage deficiencies which are compounded by the overt refusals on the part of construction management:to divert craft efforts to correct the problems.
These inspectors viewed the construction supe-ir.tendent's negative attitude toward Storage Inspection Report deficiencies I
as a fere of intimidation.
Some of these inspectors also related instances of interference and intervention into QC inspector assignment matters by constru:-
tion management to favor scheduling and the production ef fort.
All except one of the C inspectors interviewed reported variously that the Project Manager nas attempted to influence the utilization of, and decisions rendered by, inspectors; l
Shat the salary administration and other benefits for QA/QC personnel controllec by the Project Manager is unfair and inequitable; that he arbitrarily adjusts recossended salary increases based upon subjective criteria; that he is frequently publicly non-supportive and negative towards the QC function; that he and construction superintendents publicly chastise and'embarass inspectors and l
that he employs remarks which threaten job security as a means of intimidation.
'and harassment.
The lone dissenting QC inspecter was determined to be a personal frieid of the Project Manager and had been the. recipient of preferential treat-ment regarding a. job assignment on site. 'Those inspectors with knowledge of an onsite altercation, in August 1982, between a former.PPP Construction Super-intender.t and a QC.Weldingunspector indicated 'that,the-superintendent disagreed with the inspector's perception of the non-conforming item being discussed.
One inspector re. ported an offsite altercation in December 1982 between a Constructic.
Superintendent and a QC InspectortSupervisor during' which the superintendent held an ocer knife on the QC supervisor.
3 Two current and one fermer QC supervisory personnel were interviewed a substantiated the claims and perceptions of field inspectors regarding incidents and acts of QC negativism by construction managers, intimidation, harassme adverse interference, verbal threats, embarrassment and chas'tisement of the individuals by the Project Manager and his subordinates.
M i of these individuals indicated that production and scheduling appear to take preceden over the quality functions, an attitude nurtured by the Project Manager and his construction staff.
Authorized Nuclear Inspe'etors at the VWP also confirmed intimidation and harassment of QC welding inspectors by PPP constru ment.
Inquiries were also concucted among the OC inspection personnel who engaged in visual inspection practices which were not in accordance wi procedures or who signed inspection reports without assuring co'trective actio had been completed.
One 0C welding inspector admitted that he occasionally
.iI failed to conduct visual inspections within the distance requirements as j
specified in'PPP and ANSI /ASME procedures.
Except for this one procedural violation, all inspection personnel who were interviewed regarding record l}
preparation and maintena ce improprieties advised forthright'.y that they had never signed or initialed an inspection document without first performing the f
actions in the manner prescribed by the applicable procedures.
Ten welders or pipefitters employed by :Dp were interviewed ano, except for one reporting t OC inspector had occasior. ally failed to visually inspect within the distance a
requirement set forth in the PPP and ASME procedures, none were aware of rec improprieties by QC welding inspectors.
f
'he Project Manager and two construction superintendents we*e irter viewed.and all f
categorically denied any forrn of intentional intirridation and ha-assment of OC elding inspectors.
The Project Manager and one Superintendent admitted actions hich could be interpreted as interference into matters which are purely QA/Q unctions.
The Project Manager denied any improprieties regarding the adminis ration of QA/0C personnel matters.
All claimed to be supportive of the QA/QC, j
jnction but acknowledged that they had failed to do so openly in a public nner.
l l
i l
. l - _-- A
4 Eight licensee management officials and QC inspection personnel at the vw; were interviewed regarding their knowledge of intimidation and harassment of QC welding inspectors employed by PPP. No disclosures pertinent to the investi-Observations of PPP mater'al gation were revealed during these interviews.
storage areas tended to support remarks reported by QC inspectors regarding the general disarray of materials and common utilization of these areas by several major contractors onsite.
A review of QC welding inspector salary' data disclosed that there does not appear to be a specific correlation between the amourts of recent weekly increases received and longevity, related experience and education levels of these individuals.
i i
l i
,e
,