ML20248G775
| ML20248G775 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zion File:ZionSolutions icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/29/1988 |
| From: | Laird P COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | Christoffer G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20248G766 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8904130567 | |
| Download: ML20248G775 (2) | |
Text
~)p l
9 44 L.u- +,
/m
___. -__. _,m.m.
\\ Comm:nw:alth Edison
" = "-
^^ - - -- -
Y[IIIIIIcLD EEc'~:PUELIC D12CL93UnIc
( M~
l' L
72 West Adams Street, Chicago, Illinois j
V
/ Address Reply to: Post Office Box 767 k_/ Chicago, Illinois 60690 0767 lL s..
)
November 29, 1988 Ms. Gail Christoffer Safeguards Inspector U.S.N.R.C.
)
Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137
Subject:
Zion Allegation #AMS-III-88-A-0060 l
Dear Ms. Christopher:
Corporate Security offers the following replies to the questions, as we j
understand them, received by telephone on Wednesday, November 9, 1988:
1.
What was N position with 6 Corporation?
Response: M 's position at M Corporation was a laborer.
2.
What was the quality of M work when m worked at Zion Station?
Response: M job assignment was basically janitorial l
duties. There were no problems with e work.
l 3.
Was M ever drug tested? If so, what were the results?.
Response: To the best of our knowledge, M was not subject to a drug test.
l 4.
Why was M psychological test OK forMto work at I
LaSalle and Zion in 1987 but not acceptable by 6 to work at Zion in 1988?
Response: Our investigation reveals that M has taken three l
psychological tests for different emplorers. 6 was tested in M 1985, which included a written test and a clinical interview.M was tested in M,1986 and l
was tested by another employer in M 1988 which 0
included a written test plus a clinical interview.
k A review of the records available show thatM has had a l
CONQ problem with " passing written psychological tests".
In j
NO' 1985 E clinical interview recommended him for work at j
that time.
In 1988, the individual administering the mo clinical interview made a judgement that M as not w
suitable for work in a nuclear plant. Medical opined that I
a temporary event can occur which would change the outcome oQ of the test and clinical interview. Additionally, both the written test and clinical evaluation are subject to y
different interpretations of the values measured.
oso ru crn::.m raron=ler
'DEC 2 t988
- a^
wa a11cLn rnc= runuc n:::1. carn;
i-e A0 CFF. 2.700 ETF0EM ^. TION xcrr;;i!OLD F=! mm m "'~CLO.T'.
lh
" 5.
Did something happen to M between 1987 and 1988 that would make a previously accepted psychological test OK and then not be acceptable in 1988?
Response: Corporate Security has not uncovered any circumstances that would cause m,to pass a test in 1985 and then fail a test in 1988.
6.
What work did 6 do in 1986 at LaSalle and 1987 at Zion?
Response: M work assignment in 1986 at LaSalle was as a millwright and as a laborer in 1987 at Zion.
7.
What was the quality of 6 work?
Response: The firm that hired M in 1986 and 1987 is no longer working on Commonwealth Edison's sites. Corporate Security was able to contact M former employer but the personnel interviewed by phone have no direct knowledge regarding the quality of M work. This particular firm has no idea who W upervisors were during that time frame since they are no longer actively working in the M area.
Corporate Se.curity has attempted.to answer the NRC concerns to the best of our knowledge.
Since many of these inquiries go back over a number of years, it is difficult to trace individuals' work records who are not engaged in quality or safety related work.
h s
/
fIW7 N
patrick J. Laird p
g, Director of Corporate Security
., a m r m*
n
, smew
= = _ _
g g -,o p w m vium.. -