ML20214F483

Intervenor Exhibit I-ROREM-39,consisting of Forwarding R Saklak Re Discharge from Lk Comstock Engineering,Inc for Response.Detailed Response Best Handled by Lk Comstock

ML20214F483
Person / Time
Site:	Braidwood
Issue date:	06/11/1986
From:	Shamblin D COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:	Marino R COMSTOCK ENGINEERING, INC.
References
OL-I-ROREM-039, OL-I-ROREM-39, NUDOCS 8705260114
Download: ML20214F483 (2)

Text

'

} f) Lj f f /4/$-@W ]-QX -

[

r Mons 6/)/jf 1n..

s',

• Commonwealth Edison Co. i Braidwood Station RR 1, Box 81 k l gE Bracevine. IL815/458 604072801 *p M 22 P6 :53

• r g Te ephone June 6, 1985' 09

• kR  %

@_ k., 1:

M 4 5. _ , .BR/PCD 85-496 ,

an_ g, 5i Ej e a b 8  :- Ed sg3 j jy j gg L. K. Comstock Engineering, Inc. j i 920 For: Duquesne Blvd.

Pittsbulgh, Pennsylvania 15222 g g t

Attention: Mr. R. Marino 1]-K l

= l \-

{

{

General Manager Q.A./Q.C. Services i ki! u g$3 .

Subject:

Braidwood Station - Units 1 & 2 Electrical Erection Vork Ji 523543353

=S!c5= 5 I Sargent & Lundy Specification L-2790A

Reference:

May 17, 1985 letter, Richard Saklak (former L. K. Comstock Quality Control Supervisor) to Dan Shamblin (Commonwealth Edison Company Project Construction Superintendent)

Dear Mr. Marino,

I am forwarding to you a letter from Mr. Richard Saklak which I received by certified mail on May 22, 1985. This letter requests that some light be shed on Mr. Saklak's discharge from the L. K. Comstock Quality control Department. The basis of Mr. Saklak's request is apparently due to the lack of deteils he received from L. K. Comstock management upon his discharge.

A detailed explanation for the basis of Mr. Saklak's It was discharge isthis my understanding best was handled by L. K. Comstock Engineering, Inc. During our phone done during your meeting with Mr. Saklak of April 3, 1985.

conversation on April 2, 1985, I informed you of Connonwealth Edison Company's position relative to future employment of Mr. Richard Saklak at the Braidwood Nuclear Power Station and any other Connonwealth Edison Company Nuclear Sites. Specifically, I told you that it was Commonwealth Edison Company's f

position that Mr. Richard Saklak be removed from a L. K will not be employed in any other Q.A./Q.C. role or safety related role for any other Contractor at the Braidwood Nuclear Power Station Mr. Saklak or anyfrom is not barred otherany commonwealth Edison Company Nuclear Site. Ve recommended to the L. K. Comstock of our Nuclear Sites in any other roles.

and Company, Inc. that Mr. Richard Saklak not be employed at any other L. K.

Comstock Nuclear Site in any Q. A./Q.C. role.

HP93fbOh 8705260114 860611 ADOCK 0500 6 EXitlBITj@' g4 ///g ((}C00093n gDR dEWei=msjipm;ern?f l

I

. I 1

\

.= .. r>. -

f .

. BR/PCD 85-496 Page 2 of 2 i

l We intend to respond to Mr. Saklak stating we have forwarded his May 17, 1985 letter onto you for your action. We will enclose a copy of this letter in our response to Mr. Saklak. We trust you will resolve this matter.

Very truly yours,

\ r....0 (,N !b" D. L. Shamblin Proj. Construction Superintendent Braidwood Station DLS/kje/1926a I

I i

C0009372

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