ML030920075
| ML030920075 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry, Watts Bar, Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 07/24/1996 |
| From: | VanBockern D V Tennessee Valley Authority |
| To: | NRC/SECY |
| Byrdsong A T | |
| References | |
| +adjud/ruledam200506, -RFPFR, 50-259-CIVP, 50-260-CIVP, 50-296-CIVP, 50-327-CIVP, 50-328-CIVP, 50-390-CIVP, ASLBP 01-791-01-CIVP, EE000087, RAS 6209, TVA-Staff-88 | |
| Download: ML030920075 (5) | |
Text
foRs o Sb3%-C I\'e):A a].DOCKETED USNRC TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Office of the Inspector General RECORD OF INTERVIEW 2003 MAR I I AM II: 55 OFFICE U>1i IC~1R RIJLEMAKINGS AND ADJUDICATIO.NS STAFF Name: Position: Office: Work Tel.: Residence:
Home Tel.: SSN/DOB: 9fiemistry Control., Tennessee-Y 4 I McArthur/was contacted at Chattanooga, Tennessee, advised of the identity of the interviev'ing agent, and interviewed concerning a Department of Labor (DOL) complaint filed by Gary L. Fiser. In Fiser's complaint, he alleges that TVA recently posted the job they offered him as a settlement for a previous DOL complaint filed in 1994. Fiser also had reason to believe that the posting of this position was done so with malice and was a smoke screen designed to hide TVA's true intentions-that of the preselection of another candidate, Sam Harvey. McArthur was interviewed and furnished the following information.
McArthur advised he was not aware of any previous settlement agreement between Fiser and TVA. McArthur had no knowledge of any previous DOL complaint filed by Fiser.McArthur first came to TVA in 1990. He became Manager of Technical Programs in Operations Support over the following organizations:
1 .2.3.4.Radcon Chemistry Environmental Fire Protection 5.6.7.Security Emergency Preparedness ERMI (Muscle Shoals)(Continued), I .. -Investigation On: July 24, 1 9961 By: SSA David V. Van~ockern:CH At: Chattanooga, Tennessee File: 2D-169 -13 24911 OIG:02 (10/93)EE00C087 This docurrioat contains nerther recornnendations nor Conclusions of the 01G. It is the property of the OIG "n is loanied to you. It and rts contents should not be disznbuted outside of TVA whout the permission of the Inspector General. s' cl-Of --Te np lo-4-e.! 5 cY--
i s ; u51 3 9 ti___________
IDENTIFIED e_____.__RECEIVED_
______'-____
.REJECTED-_. WITHDRAWN Dfri-E L?4.Wit.ness
/Clerk ____ L-, , C/
Coritinuation of Interview of Wilson C. McArthur 2 Approximately three years ago, Operations Support reorganized, and he became manager of the Radcon organization; Ron Grover was selected as the manager of Chemistry.
In 1996, they reorganized again, and McArthur was selected as the Manager of Radiological and Chemistry Control in Operations Support. Grover's position as Manager of Chemistry was eliminated, and Grover will be assigned to the Services organization.
The reorganization process basically combined his and Grover's positions into one position.
As Manager of Radiological and Chemistry Control, he will be over two positions in Radcon and two positions in Chemistry plus over the manager of ERMI in Muscle Shoals and over one Environmental Radwaste position.During the recent reorganization process he did have input into the new organizational structure.
During the restructuring process, they considered having two chemistry positions, two Radcon positions, and two other people-one in Environmental and one in Radwaste.
This structure was becoming standard throughout the nuclear industry.
He gave a presentation with this structural concept to Tom McGrath. In the nuclear industry, corporate positions are going away very rapidly.Prior to the reorganization and restructuring, there were three chemistry positions to handle the three nuclear sites. When they restructured, the decision was made to go from three chemistry positions to two positions.
Chemistry position descriptions (PDs) were rewritten by Grover and his people. McArthur did not know who specifically rewrote the chemistry PDs. McArthur said he helped rewrite the Radcon PDs.He worked with Grover and together they rewrote the Radwaste PDs.Previously, there were three Radcon positions, and they were generic in structure.
He helped write the Pds. The PDs became more specific, and they ended up with two specific positions.
Because the positions had changed, they had to post and advertise the positions.
McArthur said he understands the chemistry positions went from three to two, and they went to two sDecific positions-one as a PWR position and one as a BWR position.
He was not aware of any specifics of the PDs for the two positions; however, he thought it was right to post and advertise the two positions so it would give the existing chemists equal chance to apply for the positions.
He thought the previous positions were more generic in nature and now they were specific; therefore, they had to advertise.
McArthur was not aware of Fiser filing a previous DOL complaint nor was he aware that Fiser threatened to file a DOL complaint if his position was posted. During the reorganization process, he had absolutely no contact with Fiser. Corporate Human Resource made the decision to rewrite the PD and to post and advertise the position.McArthur had no input as far as the advertising or posting of the chemistry positions.
McArthur said he was not aware of any safety concerns ever raised by Fiser prior to the posting of the positions.
EEOCCOSS Continuation of Interview of Wilson C. McArthur 3 Preselection Process McArthur was selected by McGrath to be in charge of selecting a review board to interview and select the applicants for the vacant positions.
He wanted to use a Radcon manager, a Chemistry manager, and an Environmental manager from each site. It was brought to his attention by Ben Easley in the Human Resource office that it might be better to use managers who were slightly removed from the initial situation.
After talking with Easley, he made the decision to select the three site Radcon chemistry managers from each site. He thought he had discussions with the managers during the week of June 26-28, 1996. These managers are all the same level managers as McArthur.The three managers he was considering were Jack Cox at Watts Bar, Don Corey at Browns Ferry, and Charles Kent at Sequoyah.
He discussed the matter with the three managers at a Guntersville managers' meeting during the last part of June and asked if they would be willing to serve on the selection board. When a decision was made to schedule the interviews for the board, he had difficulties with Cox's schedule.He also learned that Cox had express an opinion previously on who should be selected for one of the chemistry positions.
Because of the problems with Cox, he talked with the human resource office and McGrath, and the decision was made to try and get someone from Watts Bar to replace Cox. He was unsuccessful in obtaining anyone at Watts Bar and eventually was able to obtain the services of Rick Rogers at the Corporate Staff.Rogers is from Technical Support at the Corporate level.McArthur was convinced this review board was a totally independent selection board.McArthur sat in on the selection process; however, he did not ask any questions.
McArthur prepared all the questions to be used by the selection board, and the board made the determination on which questions to ask the applicants.
All applicants were given the same questions.
The interviews took place on July 18, 1996, at Chattanooga.
The selection committee made their selection and provided the names to McArthur who in turn will provide a memorandum to McGrath. Easley sat in during the interview process; however, he excused himself during the interview and selection of the PWR position because of his previous knowledge and association with Fiser. McArthur was not certain of the name of the human resource person who sat in for Easley during the interview and selection process for the PWR position.McArthur said the selection committee was unanimous in the selection for the PWR position.
McArthur said Easley and the human resource office would have a list of all the questions and the tabulation of the interviews for the selection process.EECCO089 ContinUation of Interview of Wilson C. McArthur 4 In conclusion, McArthur said he was not aware of any preselection done for any candidate during the selection process. McArthur was not aware of any safety issues brought up by Fiser prior to or during the selection process.DVV:JCH 24911 EE000090