ML20238A692

Partially Withheld Rept of Interview W/R Spangler Re Allegations Concerning QA Audit Group

ML20238A692
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	09/03/1987
From:	Spangler R TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC)
To:
Shared Package
ML20238A433	List: IA-86-378, Informs of J Beck 841031 Telcon Re Investigation by Texas Utils Generating Co (Tugco) of Potential Misbehavior of Tugco Vendor Audit Group.Ofc of Investigations Will Followup on Matter ML20238A431 ML20238A484 ML20238A514 ML20238A569 ML20238A615 ML20238A672 ML20238A692 ML20238A720 ML20238A726 ML20244D109
References
FOIA-86-378 NUDOCS 8709090390
Download: ML20238A692 (2)

Text

- __ _ _ ___ _

?  ?

,,, REPORT NTERVIEW Robert SPANGLER On February 27, 1985, Robert SPANGLER, Texas Utilities Generating Co.

(TUGCO) supervisor of Quality Assurance (QA)' services, was interviewed by NRC Investigator H. Brooks GRIFFIN at the TUGC0 corporate offices in .

Dallas, Texas. SPANGLER said he had been working in the compacity of a TUGC0 Senior Engineer in August 1983, when William CLEMENTS, TUGCO Vice President-Nuclear, asked him to investigate allegations' related to a QA audit group. SPANGLER said that when his report of investigation was issued, KEELEY and he destroyed the notes they had taken during the interviews.

SPANGLER was questioned about a particular sentence contained in the report on page 7 which is as follows:

"On the other hand, the purist philosophy of some audit team leaders

.. is directly opposed to ttiat of management."

SPANGLER said he had constructed this sentence and that the reference to purist philosophy was his own opinion.

SPANGLER was questioned about the audit activities of the corporate QA auditors during 1983. SPANGLER confirined that at the time the incident involving TOLSON and the QA auditors occurred, field verification was

"- part of the QA auditor's function. SPANGLER said it was his

. h' understanding that the QA auditors had received some forin of training related to field verification. SPANGLER said he was also aware that TOLSON, during this time, had questioned the qualifications of the auditors to perforin audit functions. SPANGLER confirined that TOLSON would have been aware at that time that auditors were required by their QA supervision to perform the field verification.

When questioned about his interpretation of TOLSON's statements relating to political and physical harin to auditors, SPANGLER said he believed TOLSON had indicated auditors could be physically harined by craft if they argued with craft about potential deficiencies. SPANGLER said he did not believe that TOLSON's reference to political harin to the auditors was intended to adversely affect the auditor's job.

When SPANGLER was questioned about the results of their investigate as contained in their August report, he said that five auditors intervmd had basically two opinions of what TOLSON had meant by political harm.

SPANGLER said one group had indicated to him during the interviews, that they really did not know what TOLSON had meant by the statement referring to political harin. SPANGLER said the other group thought TOLSON meant they would be professionally embarassed by reporting deficiencies that were not valid.

-Information in this record was deleted in accordance with the r(edom of information

? Act,ex mptions '7 D 1 g o g o a m oa EXHIBIT (3)

CARDE86-378 PDR

4-84-050 SPANGLER was questioned about a particular sentence contained in the report on page 10, item 10, which is as follows:

"QA supervision does not feel that overall, it was intimidating to QA personnel.

SPANGLER reaffirmed his be 1ef that the results o the investigation performed by KEELEY and himself demonstrated that TOLSON had not intended to intimidate the

' auditors, nor had the QA auditors been intimidated.

i

. i I

O l EXHIBIT (3) l