ML20247F112
| ML20247F112 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 01/23/1986 |
| From: | Mulley G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTOR & AUDITOR (OIA) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTOR & AUDITOR (OIA) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247F051 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-87-535 NUDOCS 8907270087 | |
| Download: ML20247F112 (4) | |
Text
_
)
. i:'..':b,,. - -,...,l
)
~'
t M L.,L
- ppa
'o UNITED STATES l'
I,,
g.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
)
y WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
]
Jantary 23, 1986
+
MEMORANDUM REPORT
)
{
l
SUBJECT:
COMANCHC PEAK - MISCONDUCT BY NRC EMPLOYEES DIA FILE:
INQ 85-35 BACKGROUND On March 28, 1985, Vincent S. N0ONAN, Director, COMANCHE PEAK PROJECT, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), sent a memorandum to the Office of or and uditor (0IA), NRC.
NOONAN stated in his memorandum that on during a close-out interview conduc ed members'of his l
COMANCHE PEAK PRO)ECT staff, CONANCHE PEAK PROJECT lM 6 claimed that he had been a see a
identified as COMANCHE PEAK PROJECT that two NRC employees had guaranteed ontinu or th next five or six years ifMagreed not to ther pursue allegations that
,had made concerningf. irregularities at the COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC ST N
(COMANCHE PEAK
SUMMARY
N0ONAN stated that dur g RC Technical Review Team close-out interview, n icated that had report-edly been ice of Investiga ons (01) In t
roo s GRIFFIN, and an unidentified 01 investigator, that would be guaranteed employ t for five or six years if d not er pursue allegations that had made concerning health safety problems at COMANCHE PEAX, Based on this information, N0ONAN sent a memorandum to the Director, OIA, requesting an investigation of the alleged mi.sconduct.
A review of t transcribed interview of disclosed that atee IFFIN, and another OI investigator, offered THIS REPORT IS THE PROP.iRTY OF THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR AND AUDITOR.
IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR PLACED IN THE PUBLIC DOCUMENT ROOM WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION.
Freedom of Information/ Privacy Act 5 USC 552(b)(6)(7)(C)
I e%deh%9072J0087890725
l
,,...n..,..--..
/MtA i)N u...
l
^
l )
j continued employment at COMANCHE PEAK for e next five or six years if would not further pursue allegations that had made.
verified the statement that had made to members he C0ftANCHE PE PROJECT staff during the in erview on stated that neither GRIFFIN, or any her NRC emp oyee, ever made any ro aranteed employment to if world not furth r pursue allegations that had concerning E
K. j fu ther rel ted that if claimed that $ was told hls by th n
~
is lying.
however, did state that as neerned about questions tha was as in front ofMsupervisor at COMA EAK an i
NRC repr 1ve.
This incident occurreTin either and invol eing asked by an NRC employee about all ations
- made, hasn certain the identity of the NRC emp e who sked he questions.
stated that the questioning in front of supervisors pro d to e embarras ing and -
ly tog Two weeks after was interviewed, was laid off.
Although was ventually rehired, it was in a job that p
$3.00 an hour less than w t nad t.een earning.
GRIFFIN stated that he and his utervisor, Ri rd K ctor 01 Field Office, Region IV, interviewed At no time-sither before,. durir g, or ter he interview id he or HERR 1
mention anytn to, about guaranteeing ive or six years employment if wou d not purs allegations cdace r.ing irregularities at COMANCHE PEAK.
HERR whatsoever to M S, stated that neither he nor GRIFFIN made any offe of con inued employment for five or six years if would not pursue allegations had made pertaining to COMANCHE PEAK.
R indicated that either John. COLLINS, Special Assistant to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, or Thomas F. WESTERMAN, Chief COMANCHE PEAK Group, eoion IV., m y have been the uni entified person who allegedly inter-viewed
<in the presence of
' upervisors at COMANCHE PEAK.
COLLINS stated that he has never had any occasion to interview at COMANCHE PEAK, and has never spoken to in front o supervisors.
Robert G. TAYl
, Reactor nspector, Region IV, stated he never had any meetings with at COMANCHE PEAK, and has nev:r interviewed in the presence o supervisors.
WESTERMAN stated he never ny meetings with at COMANCHE PEAK l
and has never interviewe n the presence o supervisors.
Subsequent to the OIA interview, WE RM N contacted Robert. STEWART, Reactor Inspec-tor, Region IV, and asked STEWART to contact DIA.
STEWART stated that on interviewe nd four other employees at COMANCHE PCAK about the There were no supervisors present during t se in erviews; iowever, contractor supervisor for assistance in locating the interviewees.
In addition, he asked that an office be made available for the intery ws. The five interviews were short and none of the inter fewees, includin stated that they had any knowledge of any
_ _ _. ~.. _ _-
.. g y
gg
.o,,,
o
. ~ STEWART did not realize that had any problems as a result of the interview.
'l CONCLUSION:
The OIA investigation did not identify any misconduct on the part of NRC employees.
The facts do not substantiate the allegations that two NRC j
employees offered a confidential alleger guaranteed employment for five or six yeers if he did not pursue his allegations.
Edward T. Campbell, Investigator Office of Inspector and Auditor i
. d.fU2 0 tn Georejf A. Mulley, Jr.,6 ting i
Assirtant Director for vestigations Office of Inspector and uditor Attachments:
As Stated 1
c<:
o m
Attachments c.
- 1. March 28, 1985, Memorandum from Vincent S. N0ONAN.
- 2. August 28, 1985, Interview of Vincent S. N0ONAN.
I
- 3. Excerpts from NRC Technical Review Team Feedback transcript.
4.
g of. COMANCHE PEAK Project 5.
ew of COMANCHE PEAK Project
/
- 6. August 28, 1985, Interview of H. Brooks GRIFFIN.
- 7. August 28, 1985, Interview of Richard K. HERR.
- 8. October 3, 1985, Interview of John T. COLLINS.
- 9. October 3, 1985, Interview of Robert G. TAYLOR.
- 10. Octpber 7,1985, Interview of Thomas F. WESTERMAN.
- 11. October 7, 1985, Interview of Robert C. STEWART.
J
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _. - - _