ML20212M959

Final Response to FOIA Request.Forwards Document Listed in App B.Documents Listed in App a & B Available in Pdr.App C Documents Withheld (Ref FOIA Exemptions 5 & 7)

ML20212M959
Person / Time
Site:	Braidwood
Issue date:	03/09/1987
From:	Grimsley D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
To:	Whicher J ROGER BALDWIN FOUNDATION
References
FOIA-87-21 SECY-86-292, NUDOCS 8703120282
Download: ML20212M959 (5)

Text

- . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

U.S. NUCLEAR CE!ULATORY COMMISSION mRC - ouwt nu tRisi

. *e. . -O)b ,

~

s'~b-~s s I RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF l l " ^'

h'*'"^' W WU (e ees e

/ INFORMATION ACT (FOlA) REQUEST DocnET huusERisi ur apowsom PART 1.-RECORDS RELEASED OR NOT LOCATED (See checked boxes)

No agency records subject to the request have been located.

No additional agency records subject to the request have been located.

Agency records subject to the request that are ident6ed in Appendix are already available for public inspection and copying in the NRC Public Docurnent Roorn, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC.

Agency records subrect to the request that are identthod in Appendix are being made available for public inspection and copying in the NRC Public Docurnent Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC, in a folder under this FOIA number and requester name.

The nonproprietary version of the proposalls) that yea agreed to accept in a telephone conversation with a member of my staff is now being made avalable for public inspection and coying at the NRC Public Document Room.1717 H Street, N W., Washington, DC, in a folder under this FOlA number and requester name.

Enclosed is information on how you may obtain access to and the charges for copying records placed in the NRC Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC.

Agency records subject to the request are enclosed. Any applicable charge for copies of the records provided and payment procedures are noted in the comments section.

Records subject to the request have been referred to another Federal agencyties) for review and direct response to you.

In view of NRC's response to this request, no further action is being taken on appeal letter dated PART li.A-INFORMATION WITHHELO FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Certan informaton in the requested records is being withheld from public disclosure pursuant to the FOIA exemptione described in and for the reasono stated in Part 11. sec-tions B, C, and D. Any released portens of the documents for which only part of the record is being withheld are being made available for public inspection and copying in the NRC Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC in a folder under the FOIA number and requester name.

Wts 07031gO282 870309 PDR A

~

WICHE -21 PDR S

AVG MSi[AfURE. 4Z DIRECTOR. MON OF @ AND RECEOR

~

a. a NRC FORM 464 (Pan 0 l thes)

. 1

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT CESPONSE FOIA NUMBEQ(SI: -

DATE: h M)

. . PAET 18.8- APPLICAELE FOIA EXEMPTIONS Records subject to the request that are described in the enclosed Appendices are being withheld in their entirety or in part under FOIA Eaemptions and for the reasons set forth below pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(b) an3TO CFR 9.5(a) of NRC Regulations.

1. The withheld inforrnaton is properly classifed pursuant to Executwo Order 12356 (EXEMPTION 1)

2. The withheld informaten relates solely to the intemai personnel rules and procedures of NRC. IEXEMPTION 21

3. The withheld information is specifically exempted from public dsclosure by statute indicated: (EXEMPTION 3)

Section 141-145 of the Atomic Energy Act which prohibits the disclosure of Restncted Data or Formerly Restricted Data (42 U.S.C. 2161-21651.

/

Secton 147 of the Atomic Energy Act which prohituts the disclosure of Unclassifed Safeguards information (42 U.S.C. 2167).

4. The withheld information is a trade secret or commercial or financial informaton that is being withheld for the reason (s) indicated: (EXEMPTION 4)

The information is coreidered to be confidential business (proprietary) information.

The information is considered to be proprietary information pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(ditt).

The information was submitted and received in confidence from a foreign source pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790tdH2).

5. The withheld information consists of interagency or intraagency records that are not available through discovery during istigation. Osclosure of predecisional information would tend to inhitut the open and frank exchange of ideas essential to the deliberatwo process. Where records are withheld in their entirety, the facts are inextricably intertwined with the predecsenalinformaton. There also are no reasonably segregable factual portons because the release of the facts would permit an indrect inquiry mto tne predecisional process of the agency. (EXEMPTION 5)

6. The withheld informaton is exempted from public disclosure because its disclosure would result in a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. (EXEMPTION 61

7. The withheld information consists of investigatory records comoded for law enforcement purposes and is being withheld for the reason (s) indicated. (EXEMPTION 7)

Disclosure wouw interfere with an enforcement proceeding because it could reveal the scope, directen, and focus of enforcement efforts. and thus could possstWy allow them to take action to shield potential wrongdoing or a violation of NRC requirements from investigators. (EXEMPTION 7(A))

r Declosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal prwacy (EXEMPTION 7(Cl)

. f! The information conssts of names of indwiduals and other informaton the declosure of which would revealidentites of confidental sources. (EXEMPTION 7(DI)

) PART ll.C-DENYING OFFICIALS Pursuant to 10 CFR 9 9 and/or 9.15 of the U S. Nuclear Regu'rory Commesion regulatons. .t has been determined that the information withheld is exempt from producten or disclosure.

and that its production or declosure is contrary to the publec sr,terest. The persons responsible for the denial are those officials identifed below as denying officials and the Director, Dwision of Rules and Records. Office of Adminstration, for any densats that may be appealed to the Executwo Orector for Operatens stoot DENYING OFFICIAL TITLE / OFFICE RECOROS DENIED APPELLATE OFFICIAL SECRETARY EDO

@,, l%1Q C g

p MI5demA$um - --

yb/b b j , g

.Y PART la D- APPEAL RIGHTS The denial by each denying official identified in Part ll.C may be appealed to the Appellate Official identified in that section. Any such appeal must be in writing and must be made within 30 days of receipt of this response. Appeals must be addressed as appropriate to the Executive Director for Operations or to the Secretary of the Commason, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and should clearfy state on the envelope and in the letter that it is an " Appeal from an initial FOIA Decision."

NRC FOftM aos trert at U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ensi FOIA RESPONSE CONTINUATION

Re: F01A-87-21 APPENDIX A DOCUMENTS ALREADY IN THE PDR

. 1. 8/14/86 . Attachment 6 to SECY-86-292: Commonwealth Edison Company's Brief Concerning A Pending Matter of the Office of Investigations, (PDR Accession No. 8608190149)and 7/21/86 Applicant's Response in Opposition to Intervenors' Motion for Subpoena and Other Alternative Relief. (PDR Accession No.8607250069)

2. 8/21/86 Attachment 7 to SECY-86-292: Intervenors' Brief Supporting the Decisions of the Licensing Board to Compel Disclosure of Relevant Documents from Office of Investigations' Files and to Issue A Deposition Subpoena.

(PDR Accession No. 8608290091) s

,e- = .- -- . - - , - . - - - - , , , - -w, - - . - - - - . - - , . , - - . - ~ - - - - . , , - - -

s Re: F01A-87 I -

' APPENDIX B DOCUMENTS BEING PLACED IN THE PDR

- 1. Undated Attachment 2 to SECY-86-292: QC Inspector Harassment' Contention.

T L

4 -

4

+

e --:e - --

~,,-,-9 ---g,m rw---- -

,~~aenn,ow- g -e me,--w y,,,r-,,--wg,.- , -,- ,r,v, -y-e,-

Re: F01A-87-21 APPENDIX C DOCUMENTS BEING WITHHELD IN THEIR' ENTIRETY DATE DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION EXEMPTION

1. 10/6/86 SECY-86-292, Memorandum from Parler 5 & 7A to Commission, subject: Braidwood Draft' Order for Resolution of Dispute Between Braidwood Board and 01 Over Disclosure Of Investigatory Information.

2. 8/2/83 Attachment 1 to SECY-86-292: Memorandum 7A & 7D from R.C. Knop, Region I to Files, subject: QA A11egaticns

3. 7/22/86 Attachment 3 to SECY-86-292: ASLB Notice 5 & 7A Of Intent to Require Disclosure Under Protective Orcer

4. 8/5/86 Attachment 4 to SECY-86-292:. Certificate 5 of Limited Service

5. 8/7/86 Attachment 5 to SECY-86-292: 01 Opposition 5 & 7A to Board's hotice of Intent to Require Disclosure Under Protective Orcer

6. 11/4/86 SECY-86-292A, Memorandum from Malsch 5 to Commission, subject: Revision of Draft Order on Board /01 Dispute in Braidwood Proceeding (SECY-86-292)

7. Undated Attachment 1 of SECY-86-292A: Draft Order 5 & 7A

8. Undated Attachmen. 2 of SECY-86-292A: 5 Draft Protective Order 9 Undated Attachment 3 of SECY-86-292A: 5 Draft Order

10. 11/7/86 In Camera Order Resolving Dispute 7A & 7D Between the Office of Investigations and the Board

1S :-is?ONS E , LE

[ , j,,,\' UNITED STATES REFER PO: M8 11

.! g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -

- E W ASHIN GTCN, D.C. 2C555

• e

'% .' .' . . . #j November 17, 1986 OFFICE OF THE stcat Any MEMORANDUM FOR: William C. Parler, General Counsel hN FROM: d.[ Samuel J. Chilk, Secretary r'~

SUBJECT:

STAFF REQUIREMENTS - AFFIRMATION / DISCUSSION'AND VOTE, 1:00 P.M., FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1986, COMMISSIONERS' CONFERENCE ROCM, D.C. CFFICE (OPEN TO PUBLIC ATTENDANCE)

!. SECY-86-325A - Licensing Decision for Perry-1 The Commission, by a 4-1 vote, approved an order which autherizes the NFC staff to issue a full power license for Perry-1 Nuclear Power Plant and explains the Commission's decision in the matter. Commissioner Asselstine disapproved and provided separate views.

(Subsequently, on November 7, 1986 the Secretary signed the Order . )

~

II. SECY-86-292/292A - Order on Board /OI Dispute in Braidwood Proceeding The Commission, by a 5-O vote,.approvedran order in which the Commissi'on rules agai'nst disclosure of th'e OI materials and against issuance of'a , subpoena to the alleger. Furthermore, applying the cri~teria by which.la.te, filed contentions are te be judged and the policy statements on disclosure, the Commission rules against the~ admissibility of the late filed contention based on the alleger's claims. In, order,to protect confiden-tiality and the ongoing investigation the order imposes certain

~

restrictions' on the , parties future pleadings and is being issued to the parties.under a' protective order.

(Subsequently, on' November 7, 1986 the Secretary signed the Order . ) ,

cc: Chairman Zech '

Commissioner' Roberts Commissioner Asselstine Commissioner'Bernthal Commissioner Carr Commission Staff ~ Offices EDO R - Advance..

S - 016 Phillips

,-6eAaL,00,3 estis7 5 oo PDR 10CFR -

In PT9.7 PDR' -

f?

c . .

Attachment 2

{

w ouru sun twrMScm vud,cm w[

~ ~ ~

~

Centrary to Critorien I, "Organizat' ion" of 10ATTACHMENT 2

'- . C.F.R. Port '50! Appondix B, and 10 C.F.R. Soction 50.7, Commonwealth . Edison Company and its electrical contractor, L.K. Comstock Engineering Company have failed to provide sufficient authority and organiza-tional freedom;and independence from cost and sche-

.dule.as:oppo. sed to. safety considerations to permit the~effe.ctive identification of.and correction:of

' quality and' safety significant deficiencies.

Systematic and widespread harassment, . intimidation, retaliation and other discrimination has been direc-ted against Comstock QC inspectors and other employ-

- .ees,who express safety and quality cone' erns by Comstock manage. ment. Such misc'onduct discourages the i

.. idencirication and. correction.or.deficienciss in

- safety related components and systems at the ~

Braidwood Station. -

Instances of harassment and intimidation include at leNilowing:

asz- --

1. At various times since at least August 1984, including in March 1985, more than twenty five (25) 4 Comstock-QC inspectors have complained to the NRC

.. about harassment and intimidat, ion by Comstock super-

, ' visors. Such harassment and intimidation has been carried out or participated in by QC Manag'er Irv

('. .

DeWald, Assistant QC Manager Larry Seese, QA Manager Bob Seltaan and QC Supervisor R.M. Sakalac. .

Such harassment included widespread pressure to-

- approve . deficient work, to sacrifi'ce' quality for' production and cost considerations and to knowingly violate established quality procedures. Harassment and retaliatory treatment included threats of violence, C verbal abuse, termination of employment, transfer to undesirable jobs or work in areas where quality deficiencies could not be noted, assignments to perform burdensome or menial "special projects" and l

other adverse treatment. Such discriminatory action was taken because of the victim's expression of quality or safety concerns. Former,Le. vel II QC

.- inspector John D. Seeders' has knowledge of these .

widesp. read ' instances of harassment.' By letter of L August 17, 1984, Seeders c~omplained to the NRC, l Edison and Comstock management regarding instances of i harassment directed against him. Subsequently, Mr.

Seeders was involuntarily . transferred to the position of Engineering Clerk in retaliation for his -

expression of quality concerns. Such assignment was l

intended by Comstock to keep Mr. Seeders away from

I sensitive work areas. Although QC Supervisor R.M.

. \

l .  :- .

. . . a. . ' .

~ ~

l s . .

4 ,

- - . - - - - - - , - - , . - - ~ - - - - - - , . - , -

[

S3koloc was fin 211y toroinsted in 1985 for his sis-

! < tractoGnt of QC inopsetors and oth3r 'siccenduct, tho otracto of his,hornessant rGmain uncorrected and ~

systematic harksament continues at Comstock to the.

present. The existence of widespread harassment impugns the integrity and effectiveness of on-going corrective actLon programs designed only to address other widespread "QA failures at Comstock.

2. Comstock management, including QC Manager Irv DeWald and Corporate QA Manager Bob 'Marino -

harassed, discriminated and retaliated against, and ultimately terminated Level III QC Inspector Worley O. Puckett because Mr. Puckett made numerous complaints? abo ~ut. safety and quality deficiencies which he . identified in.the: course of his duties at i- Braidwood. .

Mr. Puckett was hired by Comstock in May 1984 in the newly created position of Level III QC Inspector whose duties included conducting a review of Comstock proceduras, tests requirements for the more than 50 Level II QC Inspectors, review of the Level II's inspection work, and the resolution of inspection disputes. Mr. Puckett was highly qualified with 20 years' nuclear Navy and nine years' nucl. ear power

, experience. See", Resumei-Exhibit B. During the course of his employment with Comstock Mr. Puckett

(* was shocked by the widespread deficiencies in procedures, qualifications and workmanship. He

. identified. numerous instances of improper construc-tion procedures, improper qualification of welders,

-and material traceabil.ity defi.ciencies. He ultimate-ly recommended a complete stop work order for all welding activity to permit effective corrective action. See, Menos of August 10 and August 17, 1984,

( Exhibits C and D.

Finally, he warned QC Manager Irv DeWald that "we are approaching a complete breakdown in our QC program." August 22, 1984 Meno, Exhibit E. Puckett was subjected to harassment and retaliation because he raised these safety and quality concerns and was terminated on August 27, 1984 by Dewald on the pretext that he should have scored higher than his 865 on a qualification test. He flied a complaint with the U.S. Department of Labor, alleging violation of the employee protection provisions of the Energy Reorganization Act, 42 USC 5851. Letter, September 5, 1984 Exhibit F. The U.S. Department of Labor Area Director sustained Mr. Puckett's complaint finding unlawful discrimin,4 tion by Comstock against

( .

Puckott cnd ordor0d rolior. Notos of Docisicn, Novoaber 6, 1984, Exhibit G. Mr. Puckott procontcd -

his caco at a h0ering b3foro en Ad31nistrativo Low Judge on Coastock's cppsal. See, Compicinnnto' Pro-Rearing Exchange, Exhibit H. Comstock settled Mr.

Puckett's claim before putting on its case. The terms of settlement are subject to a non-disclosure agreement between Comstock and Mr. Puckett.

e O

e

4 e

g. -

u .. + . .t

'Ud t ?

• b ,3 % * * ,1 -r.

i

,,- - - - - - - . . - . < , , - . - - . - . _ , , , , ,, , . - . . , - , , , ,.