ML20207D852

Summary of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Intimidation Panel 841221 Meeting Re Review Procedures,Matl to Be Reviewed & Definition of Intimidation

ML20207D852
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	01/02/1985
From:	Gagliardo J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:	NRC - COMANCHE PEAK PROJECT (TECHNICAL REVIEW TEAM)
Shared Package
ML20205D361	List: ML20205D355 ML20207D480 ML20207D546 ML20207D568 ML20207D602 ML20207D631 ML20207D697 ML20207D720 ML20207D750 ML20207D759 ML20207D777 ML20207D822 ML20207D852 ML20207D859 ML20207D877 ML20207D903 ML20207D918
References
FOIA-85-799 850102, NUDOCS 8607220204
Download: ML20207D852 (25)

Text

_

y (h

j

• UNITED STATES * ,

[, ,7

,  ; NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION IV

.. e 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 1000

,,,,, ARLINGTON. TEXAS 76011 I

JAN 2 1983 l

MEMORANDUM FOR: Comanche Peak Intimidation Panel FROM: J. E. Gagliardo, Chairperson

SUBJECT:

SUMMA'.Y OF PANEL MEETING ON DECEMBER 21 The CPSES Intimidation Panel met on the morning of December 21, 1984, at the Phillips Building. The following members were present:

Jane Axelrad James Lieberman Jim Gagliardo The following advisors / guests were present:

Vincent Noonan, Advisor (part time)

Stewart Treby Ecward Christenbury The following summarizes the actions and activities of the panel:

1. Panel members raised a question regarding the procedures to be used by the Panel to review all of the applicable material. Mr. Christenbury proposed three options. The Panel decided to use a combination of two options.

It was decided to have each member review part of the large volume of material related to intimidation and to have a consultant group review all of the material. The Panel member so assigned and the consultant group will brief the Panel on the material reviewed.

2. The consul _ tant group will prepare a matrix to be used tc analyze the material reviewed.

3. The consultant group will prepare or obtain applicant organization charts for the time periods during which the alleged intimidation occurred.

4 S. Treby expressed concern with the definition of intimidation used by the Panel. He agreed to provide the Panel with transcripts of the prehearing conference of June 1984 which includes the definitions of intimidation proposed by the applicant, the intervenor group, and by the staff.

8607220204 PDR FOIA 860715 CARDE85-799 PDR

r - - -. 3 l

.- e  :

l l

Comanche Peak Intimidation Panel -2 JAN 2 E65 I l l

5. Mr. Treby agreed to try and provide the Panel with the material (transcripts, depositions, etc.) applicable to the approximately 20 allegations of intimidation being reviewed by the hearing board.

6.

The Panel made assignment for the OI investigation reports and inquiry reports as shown in the Attachment.

7. The Panel will meet again at 8:45 a.m. , on January 4,1985.

The meeting adjourned at about 10:30 a.m.

!. 1 II

.': >/ , ,,b

[,i*--- -s J. E. gliardo Chairperson Attachmer.t: -

As statec cc:

D. G. Eisenhut, NRR Panel Advisors

( E. Christenbury, ELD 4

4

e ATTACHMENT

(

01 ASSIGNMENTS TO THE PANEL O! Document Panel Member Assigned Q4-83-021 Axelrad Q4-83-023 Lieberman Q4-83-025 Gagliardo Q4-83-026 Axelrad 04-84-011 Hunter Q4-84-037 Lieberman Q4-84-046 Lieberman 4-83-001 Gagliardo 4-83-013 Gagliardo 4-83-016 Hunter 4-84-006 Gagliardo 4-84-008 Lieberman k 4-84-012 Hunter 4-84-13 Axelrad 4-84-025 Lieberman{

4-84-050 , Hunter 1

r

o. . -

/pa aseg*'o,. UNITED STATES 8

• 7.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5 i wAssmatoN.o c.rosss o  !

\..v...,/

COMANCHE PEAK INTIMIDATION PANEL MEETING .

The meeting was held on January 7,1985, from 10:00 a.m. to 11;00 a.m.

Attendees were:

Members Advisors Invited Guests J. Axelrad B. Kaplan L. Chandler, ELD J. Gagliarde J. Scinto S. Treby, ELD D. Hunter J. Lieberman Topics Discussed:

1. S. Treby provided the panel with a detailed listing of intimidation incidents that had been addressed by the hearing board. The listing includes references to applicable hearing transcripts, depositions, OI

[

reports, prefiled testimony, and affidavits.

2. The parel reviewed the listing and made the following assignments to panel members:

Intimidation Incident Assigned Panel Member D. Carltoa Not to be reviewed R. Messerly Gagliardo S. Miles Hunter S. Neumeyer (Stanford Incident) Liebeman S W. Dunham (H. Williams) Gagliardo l W. Dunham (Temination) Gagliardo l T-Shirt Axelrad S. Neumeyer (liner plate) Lieberman e Liner Plate (QC breakdown) Liebeman D. Stiner (polar crane) Lieberman D. Stiner (weave welding) Lieberman g D. Stiner (DG skids) Liebeman D. Stiner (Weld sign tools on doors) Liebeman D. Stiner (Relocation of office) Liebeman D. Stiner (Telegram) Lieberman j

\ __

v. .

l l

i Intimidation Incident Assigned Panel Member D. Stiner (Incident to force Lieberman 8 her to leave)

C. Allen Gagliardo Lipinsky trip report Axel rad H. Stiner Axelrad L. Barnes (valve disk) Hunter M. Gregory (pressure on Hunter reviewers)

M. Gregory (QES review sheet) Hunter M. Gregory (ROF issue) Hunter Witness "F" Hunter 3.

The panel discussed the review format to be used and the documentation of the review.

4 Tha panel discussed the use of the consultants for independent review and "pection of a review matrix. ~

• tb: h ting The next neeting of the panel is scheduled for 8:30 a.m., Friday, January 25, 1985, in the Phillips Building.

( A conference call meeting will be held on Friday, January 18, to discuss the review progress of the panel.

NOTE The members of the panel plus the additional individuals listed below reviewed the case of the potential material false statement, regarding U-bolt torque valves, prior to convening the panel meeting. It was decided that Dave Tereo and Paul Chen will develop a list of cases for which incomplete information was submitted and Jane Axelrad will use this information to request a special investigation by_01.

Additional Attendees G. Bagchi, TRT W. Chen, ETEC C. Haughney, COMEX (TRT)

G. Holler, IE J. Scinto, ELD J. Sinclair, 01 D. Terao, NRR/TRT

EN s v. t. .

COMANCHE PEAK INTIMIDATION PANEL Meeting 1/4/85 9:00 am Attendees J. Zudans D. Hunter S. Treby J. Liebermarr

8. Kaplan C. Poslusny L. Chandler Highlights

1. EG&G role in review was defined - Kaplan to report on subcontractors schedule.

2. S. Treby provided list of seven allegations (hearing identified) referenced transcript records (attached) 1 which were assigned for review to group members.

3. OI report reading to be completed by 1/11/85.

(

4. Transcript of feedback interviews and list of allegers will be provided by J. Zudans to the panel.

5. Record Review Team (EG&G) documentation of intimidation incidents and transcript references will be provided to the panel when available.

6. Panel definition of intimidation will be provided to Record Review Group.

7. Next meeting - 9:00 am on 1/11/85 to discuss OI reports and develop assignments.

t/39

I. NRC Intimidation in an Interview of an Alleger Dennis Culton, a former electrical helper and draftperson at CPSES, alleged that NRC Region IV inspectors intimidated him in an interview.

The evidence consists only of:

Mr. Culton's July 25, 1984 deposition; (Tr. 58,500-591) tape recording of the alleged intimidating interview written transcript of that interview.

e l

l

III. Intimidation of QC Inspector in Auxiliary Building Mr. Robert Messerley alleged he observed Mike Robinson, a general foreman for cable tray supports, yelling and shouting obscenities at a OC inspector for " red-tagging" too many cable tray supports.

The evidence on this incident consists only of Mr. Messerley's testimony on this matter. Deposition of Robert Messerley (July 12, 1984). (Tr. 50,000-087) m l

IV. Intimidation of Welding OC Inspector in North Valve Room

'- Mr. Stanley Miles, a former iron worker at CPSES, alleged that he saw QC inspector identify improper welding in the North Valve Room. According to Mr. Miles, the QC inspector left, saying he was going to stop it, but later returned and did not stop the improper welding.

The evidence on this issue cotisists solely of Mr. Miles' testimony. Deposition of Stanley G. Miles (July 12,1984)

(Tr. 50,600-628)

(

V. Voiding of NCR on Polar Crane ,

(

Mrs. Darlene Stiner alleged that an NCR which she wrote regarding a hole in the polar crar.e rail was improperly voided and the hold tag improperly removed.

Nrs. Stiner's testimony on this concern is located in her eviden-tiary deposition (July 13, 1984); Tr. 52,005-010; 52,079-084; 52,182-190, and in CASE Exhibit 667, pp. 54-55.

Applicants' testimony on this concern was submitted by Mr. C. Thomas Brandt. Deposition of C. Thomas Brandt (July 11, 1984); Tr. 45,273-76.

I e

1

7 VI. Stanford Incident -

Alleged intimidaticn regarding voided NCR written by Sue Ann Neumeyer.

Neumeyer wrote NCR on CC inspectcr Stanford indicating he had ,

falsified dates, thus enabling craft to bypass QC hold points. NCR was voided. Applicants assert that dates were changed only to correct error.

The witnesses and their testirrony which deal witn the alleged '

incident are as follows:

Deposition of Sue Ann Neumeyer; August 1,1984 (Tr. 59,540-598) and August 2, 1984 (Tr. 59,754-825)

Deposition of Linda Barnes; July 28, 1984 (Tr. 59.006-117, 129-149)

~'

Deposition of Dwight M. Woodyard; July 24, 1984 '

(Tr. 56,505-572)

Deposition of Jack Ray Star.fcrd; July 25, 1984 (Tr. 57,500-587)

Deposition of John T. Blixt, Jr.; July 25, 1984 (Tr. 57,048-076)

( Deposition of Robert Siever; July 25, 1984 (Tr. 58,057-080) -

Deposition of Garden Raymond Purdy; July 10, 1984 (Tr. 41,156-188)

Testimony of Rcbert Marshall Duncan; Tr. 17,420-523 (9/19/84); '

Tr. 18,091-152 (9/20/E4)

O ,

Prefiled Testimony of Richard W. Simpson; August 15, 1984 (pp. 1-38)

Prefiled Testinony of Danny Ray Wright; Augusdt 16, 1984 (pp. 1-9)

Prefiled Testimony of Ronald D. McBee; August 16, 1984 (pp. 1-24) -

Prefiled Testimony of Alan Dale Justice; August 16, 1984 (pp. 1-20) '

Prefiled Testimony of James Edward Zwahr and Daniel Theras Wilterding; Augsut 15, 1984 (pp. 1-21)

Prefiled Testimony of James E. Srcwn, August 15, 1984 (pp 1-21)

7-i VII. Dunham's Termination -.

(

Allegation that QC inspector was terminated because of his complaints concerning OC.

Dunham's termination paper str.tes he was terminated for insubordination. Dunham filed a complaint with the Department of Labor claiming he was fired for criticizing the QC program, and one Harry Williams in particular.

The parties have stipuisted that Dunham's testimony is contained in the record of the D0L/ hearing, Dunham v. Brown & Root Inc.,

84-EPA-1 (February 13 and 14, 1954).

Curing the evidentiary depositions in this proceeding, Applicants presented further testimony on circumstance surrounding Mr.

Dunba:n's termination:

Ceposition of Gordon raymond Purdy; July 10, 1984 (Tr. 41,247-259)

~ '

Deposition of C. Thomas Brandt; July 11, 1984 (Tr. 45,196-198)

Deposition of Myron G. " Curly" Krisher (Tr. 37,011-C64; July 9, 1984 Testimor.y was also given by Applicants during the hearing sessions

( of September 11 and 18, 1984:

Testimony of B. R. Clements; Tr. 15,460-63 (9/11/34)

Testinony of Themes Brandt; Tr. 16,777-794 (9/18/84)

By Order dated November 30, 1984, the ALJ in the 00L proceeding dismissed Dunham's complaint (Dunham v. Brown & Root, Irc.,

84-EPA-1, " Recommended Decision and Order").

4 1

I I

,e 4 u. -- ,,..e .,

4 .x - ..-,- .e-. - w-,_,,

_q VIII. T-Shirt Incident .

Intervenor alleged that electrical QC inspectors wearing T-Shirts were intimidated by management.

Certain electrical QC inspectors were wearing T-shirts referring to

" nitpickers." They were subsequently sequestered by management and their desks searched. (There is a question of their prior involve-ment with " destructive testing" prior to the incident.) Some of those involved were later transferred or terminated. App 11catns assert management might have overreacted, but the actions taken were not intimidation.

Evidentiary depositions:

Deposition of Mark Welch; July 16, 1984; (Tr. 53,000-264)

Deposition of Kenneth Whitehead; July 17, 1984; (Tr.55,000-164) ..

Deposition of Jack Pitts; July 31, 1984; (Tr. 73,500-553)

Deposition of Ronald Tolson; July 10, 1984 (Tr. 40-546-562)

Deposition of B. R. Clements; July 10, 1984; (Tr. 40,096-105)

Deposition of Thomas Brandt; July 11, 1984; (Tr. 45,128-149)

Deposition of Boyce Grier; July 11, 1984; (Tr. 45,591-599)

Deposition of Gordon Purdy; July 10, 1984 (Tr. 41,198-199)

Deposition of James Curzins; July 17, 1984 (Tr. 54,008-055)

Hearing Testimony:

Testimony of Michael Spence, Tr. 14,924-930 (9/10/84)

Testimony of Antonio Vega. Tr. 15.055-060; 15,191-193; 15,197-251; 15,278-416 (9/10/84)

Testimony of B. R. Clements, Tr. 15,418-428; 15,470-503; 15,514-521 (9/11/84)

Testimony of Thomas Brandt, Tr. 16,107-133; 16,175-201 (9/13/84)

Testimony of Gordon Purdy; Tr. 16,358-373 (9/13/84)

Testimony of Ronald Tolson, Tr. 16.399-575 (9/14/84);

Tr. 16,6'52-658 (9/18/84) I

)

.g-Testimony of Gregory Bennetzen, Tr. 17,745-934; 17,954-968 -

i (9/2,0/84)

'~

Testimony of David Chapman, Tr. 17,969-18,031 (9/20/84)

Testimony of Doyle Hunnicutt. Tr. 18,515-669(9/20/84) l

• 4 1

(

4 e

1

-y 4-

-p lib] @' bb q -

T i rne_. - L (n t A ha.c!<tcd i,5 a $'#^4 - \ tv4 CS C9sES a h ged ind a'en. s o4 ndwwtda.Ov1 sum- . .

ruit w'. A r% Tedy k c w o A o v & ti e . S o h d braekcb ( [. ) iRds'cade a.w e.m d cccu'rmo cuer em en %ded qdw d o f %n . ~Oo 4N

~

broches C [.'. ) indcck o.n. 2ppccxtimb .

Hw - knw in Wc4 a. siw31 e Victdad '

c ccuer eq .

l 9

P A/40 ,

_ _ . _ . . --_ _ _ , . _ . m___

o . .

TA I '

Mm's D.5 % cr : kie ,.c v d !,t., ,,., 7,,7 c 3 '

bxy C. SMnce :(f.d6o T. Gemc6 $ b/3 ,

. erJ > .LM s

Tm I ,, ,1 TMy L4.$Macy: Teculn:<!ack y 8.s h g

_[ Dec.

T%

Erly 'n y,t ks T w & )I 6 h e, y o. (if_{ f .j Q. C..

i In spccwe (w .k.Valvc Reem tam

\*'$^' e Tul -y Sep13 D. Sher Tcitym rc %yroyr ep7in

~ Tul -y Sept 9.54.a<.t: L.lcab. e? u ch Scy4 .ts-t4 0.5bncr: Bus meidod i

I

", Syd - Te.c. . O.shncr

Ikuressmed h> lcte O ct D.5%:ner: Lw_id 5,,,_y)$ m y , ,

t l

l n -

\

i

E'"- Tc.n b'ien Isy.. g ,. p. w.G . be .<,p 2 ,;.4<3

~ N - Det_ t.ery AIlcr, crn.uu.g) .

(  :

5pd.r3 - Er'.7 1 to.,wg N u- 4 7 <,- : t: war bk hv+/w 44,',d

-[

ta ay - D <.e. u'rs<ss F %.W 4 (s s-vejac-;.y ( t co*flM)u/ FW %y3 ps'gl j Tu n e_

I I 0's D -

F,i.I-$omvau- D, Sidww t 9eu.r Cng,o cIdev.c ew y

• C I J '

s)

s'\. y Ls y mi!

.t 0.t. h m T<;p ,,+<e s (

l I J Anus + p;wb.w3 Armw.ch,  ;

S cfI- L.b.rne; . Va.tvc h scid.ed  ;

i 1

.. (.

_ .I mu-w weoisey-a- : whd w,cuan -e Tm 11 'u,n%< S F;'3gl50{pilLscid!

% {

Mi F: L ukm s, hrre-r <se ect iro.sE. n'es f" l '" F: Lub3 guev.E , .prAlm Cdie t

T Ski,-b 1Acidcv.Tr ' + ""

'"7H tvu.c4.q ,

j Lak Tu"., blyJt17 m. Cm3ery i G E 5 Reiki. Ikch mac'02-nt y a c $up ew re.w<.A a

e' o c. c. .

2 s '

IL f

I c. 7 9 tmsed y: za,u.;Ab y a.c. ns,ue,r. p. , x ,6,1 su,tdm3 c secena ,n ',, )

'/,

e

( _

W 4

f 1950 i

e

- . =

e h

g 3-Oft?

'( ATTACHMENT OI ASSIGNMENTS TO THE PANEL 01 Document Panel Member Assigned

Q4-83-021 Axelrad .

/

, Q4-83-023 Lieberman v'

l. ~

Q4-83-025 Gagliardo i

Q4-83-026 Axelrad Q4-84-011- Hunter 04-84 037 Lieberman'L '

Q4-84-046 Liebennan V' (4T83 '001 Gagliardo M ' ..

i

-013~ Gagliardo

~

i N 0'16~ Hunter 4-84-006 Gagliardo -

N 008 Lieberman-

' 4-84-012 Hunter 4-84-13 Axelrad 4-84-025 Lieberman h "

4-84-050 Hunter ,

S/4l

S

( m M+. . =

COMANCHE PEAK INTIMIDATION PANEL MEETING

SUMMARY

~

.Y.

Meeting was held on December 14, 1984 fron 8:00 am to 12:00 pm.

Attendees were: D. Hunter, RIV B. Kaplan, EE&G C. Poslusny. TRT J. Axelrad, IE J. Lieberman, OELD J. Gagliardo,'IE.

S'. Treby, OELD B. Griffin, OI Topics Discussed:

1. Definitions of intimidation, harassment, discrimination were as agreed upon at previous meetings and analysis format were distributed (attached).

I

2. A decision to change the role of B. Kaplan from full member to advisor was made.

I

3. A question was raised about the groups judgements of intimidation standing up in a hearing, considering the experience and background of panel members. Discussions of panel objectives and direction of activitieY'to; determine existence of intimidation followed.

~

. ' :. 7 _-', ;;? ' . ~, ya

4. Brooks Griffin provided selected OLreportsio each panel' member-for res . .e the... provided a description of 01 investigative effort and the details on each provided package. Based on panel review, attachments 9 te reports may bc rcqucsted.

a

-2 ,7

( W%;.-.v; .. .

Commitments: .

. r:d--

. s

1. Provide a list of 01 documents provided to Panel and number of copies (for the record) with specifics on enclosures of lack thereof -

B.. Griffin.

2. Determine i.f INEL contract which procures B. Kaplan's services addresses the receipt and control of confidential information - C. Poslusny.

3. Provide, if possible, a matrix of allegers and supervisors - J. Gagliardo

4. Provide detailed organization chart of TUGC0 with details on

(

responsibilities of allegers - D. Hunter.

5. Provide results of TRT follow up effort en allegations (intimidation related) addressed in OI reports - V. Noonan.

6. Provide details on regional follow up on allegations addressed in 01 reports - D. Hunter.

7. Provide ,heer,4gg records, past and current (as obtained) related to intimidation issues to be r.ieintained.-In TpT offy - S. Treby, C. Poslusny.

., e - --

8. Develop and maint' a in index of materials provided to panel and/or

-i. maintained in TRT office - C. Poslusny.

4

. , . . , , ,- . . - . -_ ,,a

-3.

( ' M.i?Lj, -.

~

9. Obtain data on turnover rate (transfer or removal) of QA/QC staf'f at2EC v

Comanche Peak O J. Gagliardo, D. Hunter.

10. Follow-up with 01, Region IV on release of an OI report to ASLB -

J. Axelrad. .

11. Expedite copy of OI Report 48-4-025 and expedite completion of outstanding investigations concerning intimidation for panel consideration - B. Griffin.

12. Provide TUGC0 report relative to intimidation of QA inspectors -

B. Griffin, ftext Meeting The next scheduled meeting will be held on December 21 at 8:30 am, Room P412, Phillips Building.

l Activities will include:

l l

1. Discwes,4on,s of ft:rther review of 01 reports.

~

• ~ --

/~:_

p:

Discussions of panel follow-up ections.3 .-C

! 2.  %

l l

d.

w

-4. .

-=d:-g.z_ .

DEFINITION OF INTIMIDATION, HARASSMENT AND DISCRIMINATION

. -C --

n.

. v Intimidation or Harassment: Incidents, statements or other actions that are

• reasonable likely to influence employees to refrain from performing

• safety-related work in accordance with requirements or identifying or reporting quality discrepancies or safety problems. In detennining whether the incident, statement or actions was reasonably likely to influence enoloyees, a number of factors will be considered including: 1) the nature of the statement or action; 2) the intent of the person making the statement or taking the action; 3) the perception of the recipient of the statement or action; and 4) the positions of and relationship between the person making the statement or taking the action and the recipient.

Discriminati,on,: The showing of prejudice in the treatment of employees for performing safety-related work or reporting quality discrepancies or safety problems to their management or to the NRC. The showing of prejudice may include adverse actions such as discharge or other actions that relate to the tenns, conditions, and privileges of employment.

T%

.....~ . p .

.g

. .- .3 n

4 ee

- 5,-

NUfs-T- .

~

FORMAT FOR ANALYSIS OF INTIMIDA ION AND DISCRIMINATION AT COMANCHE PEAK-

1. Description of the intimidation / discrimination incident ir.cluding:

a) Name, position and duties of person subject to intimidation; b) Name, position and duties of person alleged to have intimidated; c) Names ando p'sitions of other persons either subject to or involved in the incident; d) Area of work involved - welding, coatings, etc.;

e) Date and place of incident; f) the nature of tne statement or action; g) the intent of the person making the statement of taking the action; h) the perception of the recipient of the statement or action; and

1) the positions of and relationship between the person making the statement or taking the action and the recipient.

3. The effect of the statement on the recipient including any specific failures to report safety problems and the basis for the conclusion that l the effect occurred.

4. Reference W documents where incident is described such as Investigation i

Reports, deposition; hearing'trascriots..etcsjptitle, da,ted, pages).

ci._. .

i S

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

i t

t Document Name:

CP PANEL MTG Requestor's 40V*". --- '

I DEDIR02 V "7-Z.L

- . .~ .

Author's Name: .

_;, T_ ,

Chet 12/17 p ( .

^4

, Document Comments:

CP intimidation panel meeting sumary -

k 6

8 i

(

I i

WA., .

. . = s* a ,e Ap.* . * ...

I he -

- . r".", g

• • a

, E_

a

! y m, ,

1 I

!  ?,

l T

-- -,,,---,w,.c ,.e. - . ,, , ,,-w-,,r.---,- ---- - em, ,,,.,_.w---+-,,--n- . . . . , . n,.ee ,r---,.-. ,,,,rr--

-w-,.,w---