ML20237L355

Partially Withheld Rept of Inquiry Q2-83-023 Re Alleged Intimidation of QC Inspectors by Pullman Power Piping

ML20237L355
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	04/18/1983
From:	Williamson E NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI)
To:
Shared Package
ML20237L100	List: ML20237L097 ML20237L210 ML20237L222 ML20237L242 ML20237L294 ML20237L301 ML20237L319 ML20237L331 ML20237L355 ML20237L371 ML20237L405
References
FOIA-86-42 Q2-83-023-01, Q2-83-23-1, NUDOCS 8709080364
Download: ML20237L355 (2)

Text

.

2 l

REPORT OF INQUIRY I

0FFICE OF ORIGIN: 01: RII Atlanta FILE NO. 02-83-023 OATE OF INQUIRY: 04/07/83 STATUS: PENDING PREPARED BY: E. L. Williamson DATE PREPARED: 04/18/83

SUBJECT:

V0GTLE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT: ALLEGED INTIMIDATION OF QC INSPECTORS l On April 6,1983, Virgil Brownlee, Project Inspector, Region II, called 01:RII and reported that William Sanders, Resident Inspector at Georgia Power Company's (CGP) Vogtlefluclear Power Plant had called him and reported that a QC supervisor complained to him that Pullman Power Piping, a vendor, was putting pressure on the QC inspectors, and he felt the inspectors were being intimidated by this pressure. I On April 7,1983, a conference call was initiatedletween Sanders, Brownlee and i Investigator Williamson. Sanders related that an inspector supervisor for Pullman Power Pipp had ome to him on AprtT 5, 1983 and expressed his concern over what he considered to be pressure from his rnanagement. According to Sanders,' e ated that in March 1983 he was told by his supervisor, Pete Runion, to mo e a QC inspector because he worked to l slowly and hao a high reject rate.1he inspectors were inspecting pipe hangers l exclusively. According to Sanders, 7efusedtomovetheinspectorbutwas disturbed because of the prusure beTngTut on him and his inspectors. ' Sanders .

indicated that he feltI Jhould be _ interviewed by 01 and provided a list of ten QC inspectors given7o frTm by jthatcouldbeinterviewedforcorrobora-tion. l 1

Sanders related another incident that occurred in August 1983, wherein a QC inspector and his supervisor, both employees of Pullman Power Piping, were l cngaged in an altercation onsite. The QC inspector was fired and the supervisor was allegedly fired or terminated but was in fact transferred to another Pullman job at the Seabrook Nuclear facility.

Sanders was advised that based on what he had related there did not appear to be l any intimidation or harassment by management but OI would like to interview to ascertain any additional facts regarding the allegation. Sanders provided ~

On April 7,1983, William Ward, OI:HQ was advised of the foregoing, e- 1 On April 10, 1983, was telephonically interviewed and related that he had worked for Pullman"7_qwer Piping for eight years and had been a QC supervisor for two years. was questioned about his concern and he related what he had told Sanders,'the resident inspector. He said he had only been told to move someone on one occasion, which he refused to do, adding that his QC inspectors are doing a fine job and to his knowledge no one has accepted anything they should not have nor have they signed off of any hangers or welds that did not meet the requirements.

2,wa!:an in this rccord was deleted in cordante with the freedom of Information Act, exemptions .lo

• 3 e709080364 870903 pcg.Sfs-d2-

-.- PDR FOIA

_ FOWLERB6-42 PDR k

~

2 He said high quality work was being done but he and his people were feeling pressure to move f aster and have lower reject rates. He was Questioned about actual intimidation or harassment by supervisor and could not relate any incident wherein anyone ~had actually been threaten verbally or physically to either lose their job or be subjected to other job related changes, isuggested that NRC not take his word for what he is saying but talk to 7 the~F~ inspectors. He provided a list of inspectors that work for him and other supervisors. I told that his concerns would be reviewed and addressed if necessary. '

On April l'1, 1983, Carl Alderson, Director, Program' Support Staff, was apprised of the foregoing and agreed that the resident inspector should interview some of

.the Pullman QC inyectors and try to determine if they perceive this " pressure" mentioned by to be intimidation and harassment. If, af ter talking to the l inspectors t6e problem appeared to be pervasive then 01 would consider additional investigative action.

On April 11, 1983, Virgil Brownlee was apprised of the foregoing and agreed that additional interviews should be conducted by the resident inspector before any further 01 involvement. Brownlee askeo that 01 contact Sanders and provide some direction with regards to the interviewing of the QC inspectors.

On April 18, 1983, Sanders was contacted and asked to select three or four of the QC inspectors off the list provided by, Jndinterviewthemeitheronsiteor telephonically. Sanders was asked to ceter5Tne to what extent if any, were these individuals being harassed or intimidated by management. He was told to " pin them down" with specific examples if possible and let 01 know the results of his inquiry. -

.. ,,2. c m rard was de:eted m a:w;::an:e un the freedom of Information Act, exempes 4 4 7 b ~

FOIA M-O -

lei 26 r