ML20245B464
Text
"
i . . . . . - , . - . - .
O
Title:
WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION : ;
ALLEGED DISCRIMINATION AGAINST A QC EMPLOYEE Licensee: Case Number: 4-85-013 s.
Kansas Gas and Electric Company Report Date: January 22, 1986 P. O. Box 208 Wichita, Kansas 67201 Control Office: 01:RIV '
Status: CLOSED Reported by: Reviewed by:
- i Mprson, Investigator R. K. Herr, Director 1- Office of Investigations Office of Investigations Region IV Region IV -
7
/
Approve ~d by:
1 , i.
- is Ben B. Hayes Direct ~r~
_0(l$f
- i Office of Investiga ons i
WARNING
..4
{
The attached document / report has not been reviewed pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 62.790(a) exempticns nor has any exempt material been deleted. Do not ;'
disseminate or discuss its contents outside NRC. Treat as "0FFICIAL USE ONLY."
t 8706160698 870605 PDR FOIA BROSIUS84-291 PDR 4 g-QQ -lO.
m n 4
4 SYNOPSIS
)
This investigation was initiated after the completion of case A4-85-005, ;
wherein the Kansas Gas and Electric (KG&E) Quality First (Q1) investigative 4 program at Wolf Creek was reviewed for adequacy. This case was initially j investigated by the Q1 office and was selected for further examination by 0I to determine the adequacy of tfie Q1 investigation due to the appearance of undeveloped leads and questionable findings. '
On July 18, 1984, a QC employee working within the Daniels International Corporation (DIC) Electrical Quality Control Department at Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Wolf Creek) advised the Kansas Gas and Electric (KG&E)
Quality First (Q1) organization that was being discriminated against by supervisor. A Q1 Report of Investigation subsequently closed this compla' int and reported that the alleger was unable to provide specific examples of discrimination. Q1 concluded that the allegation was unsubstantiated. On May 29,1985, a review of Q1 investigative files revealed the investigator's notes which documented several specific instances of discriminatory treatment..
The Q1 file also revealed that the alleger had identified witnesses who could j verify claim; however, Q1 did not contact these witnesses. The Q1 investi . '
gation documented that the alleger did not have an excessive amount of absences or tardiness. During Q1 interview, the alleger's supervisor stated the alleger was a slight absentee and tardy problem although the records did not verify this claim. The Q1 report was subsequently closed under the premise
- the alleger was unable to provide specific instances of discrimination.
The OI investigation verified the alleger's claims of- discrimination by supervisor. The interview of two witnesses and the verification of the alleger's lack of excessive tardiness and absenteeism through review of personnel records confirmed the allegation to be true. OI investigation also revealed that this identical QC supervisor was later transferred from Wolf Creek after similar type complaints were made by other employees under his supervision. The complaints were reported to DIC corporate headquarters in Greenville, South Carolina. The DIC corporate headquarters representative explained the transfer was not the result of the allegations against him but rather was a scheduled transfer to " calm the tension that existed." The corporate representative also stated that this supervisor was demoted from a supervisory position in 1982 for management inexperience and similar complaints received from fonner subordinates.
It is 01's conclusion that the'Q1 investigation was not conducted in a manner that would meet acceptable investigative standards of the NRC regarding completeness and adequacy.
l 1
Case No. 4-85-013 Page 1
.. l i
i4 I
, j x.
i THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY i-f i
)
.h\
Case No. 4-85-013 Page 2
r .
1 J
I i
i 1
\
l l
i ACCOUNTABILITY I l
The following portions of this ROI (Case No. 4-85-013) will not be included in I the material placed in the PDR. They consist of pages j through 16, l l
4 i
l I
I' J
Case No. 4-85-013 Page 3 l
, J
~ ,
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY I
e .
Case No. 4-85-013 Page 4 I ________ _ _. i
TABLE OF CONTENTS I 8
SYNOPSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 j
ACCOUNTABILITY PAGE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 I APPLICABLE REGULATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 !
I DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 !
Purpose of Investigation ...................... 9 .
' I Background ..............................? j Review of Q1 Files ......................... '
9 Interview with ,-
. . . . . . . . 10 Interview with '
. . ., , . . . . . 10 Interview with ., . . . . 11 .
, Review of DIC Personnel Files . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Interview with William Gary WESTHOFF, . .12 Interview with Charles C. HILL, Former 01 Investigator . . . . . . . 13 -
Interview with Merle Arthur DOAN, Jr., Former DIC QC Supervisor. . . 13
, Briefing of Ben HAYES, 01 Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Wili'ulness/ Intent Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Status of Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-t Supplemental Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., . . . 14
- LIST OF EXHIBITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4
i k
a
?
i Case No. 4-85-013 Page 5
1 4
1 l
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
.\ .
4 1
- P,
- t i
Case No. 4-85-013 Page 6
~
0 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS l
9 Allegation: Alleged Discrimination Against A QC Employee 10CFR 50.7: Employee Protection 10CFR 50, Appendix B: Criterion I, Quality Assurance Organization l l l
1 1
- t A
Case No. 4-85-013-Page 7
}
.~ ,
i
?
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY r
4 2 iI l
t I
l Case No. 4-85-013 Page 8 !
1
m A
DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION
- Purpose of Investigation \
This investigation was initiated by OI after the completion of case A4-85-005 wherein the Kansas Gas & Electric (KG&E) Quality First (Q1) investigative program at Wolf Creek was reviewed for completeness and adequacy. This case,
- initially investigated by the Q1 office, was selected for further review by OI
.with the concurrence of the Region IV Regional Administrator due to the appearance of undeveloped leads and questionable findings to determine the adequacy of the investigation concerning discrimination against a QC employee.
It is to be noted that OI's efforts were directed toward determining the .
adequacy of the Q1 investigation rather than conducting an independent investi-gation of the alleged discrimination.
. Background During May 19'85, OI reviewed all Q1 files involving suspected wrongdoing as reported in case A4-85-005. This review resulted in the discovery that a a Quality Control (QC) employee reported being harassed and intimidated -
by supervisor at ,the Wolf Creek facility. The KG&E Q1 investigation into this matter was subsequently closed after the alleger reportedly was unable to identify any specific examples of harassment and intimidation. An OI review of the Q1 documentation concerning this investigation revealed that the
- alleger had in fact identified specific areas of harassment. -
, Review of 01 Files On July 2 and 3,1985, the KG&E Q1 File, QCI84-79T(3), was examined by reporting investigator. This file documented the harassment complaints of
.. within the Daniels International Corporation (DIC) Electrical Quality Control office. The Q1 report showed that had reported concerns to Q1 Investigator, Charles C. ' HILL, and that
, the investigation had been subsequently assigned to Q1 Investigator, Linus "Ike" ISSINGH0FF. The Q1 file also contained a page of handwritten notes titled, " Exit Interview of .
This page was initialed CCH, 7/18/84 (Charles C. Hill) and detailed concerns over the supervision within the ~
at Wolf Creek. identified supervis'or, Art Merle D0AN, who allegedly threatened to fire for committing the following: (a). excessive absenteeism, (b) doodling while on the telephone (c) typing resumes, and (d) abusing telephone privileges.
reported to Q1 that was unable to relate any instances of " poor quality resulting from DOAN's incomp'etence."
allegations were subsequently referred to Q1 investigator, ISSINGHOFF.
ISSINGH0FF's investigative plan contained three steps: (1) interview DOAN and MAULDIN in reference to alleged threats and loss of phone privileges; ]l (2) check personnel file for excessive absenteeism and (3) evaluate plan after interviews.
4 Case No. 4-85-013 Page 9
___-___________________- _ ___-_-______ L __w
~
The Q1 investigative file contains a KG&E interoffice memo dated September 18, 1984, which was initialed by ISSINGH0FF. This memo states " review of personnel file reveals no and .
This memo also reported performance appraisals were overall commendable with no excessive '
absenteeism or tardiness listed on , attendance records. Further, no -
written reprimands or memos were located in file. According to this memo, a fomer supervisor identified as David MAULDIN, advised Q1 that he felt there was no harassment and refused to make any further statement, except that "any comments would be an administrative matter outside the Q1 charter." This memo also contains comments from another one of former supervisors, Art D0AN, wherein he advised that was a " slight problem on absenteeism and tardiness." DOAN reported that was very young and also immature. This memo concluded with the sentences, "~ could not relate any specific instance or provide any specific examples of . _ and was not substantiated, therefore, this concern is considered closed in the Q1 program."
INVESTIGATOR'S NOTE: Although 01 files had been made readily available for visual inspection by NRC personnel, the Q1 management refused to provide the
, reporting investigator copies of pertinent documents contained within their.
investigative files.
Interview With- ,
1 On July 10, 1985, .
.,a ~ within the Daniel Electrical Quali,ty Control Division at Wolf Creek was interviewed by reporting investigator in _
DOAN for a
]
between said to was supervised by Merle " Art" while working as a clerk typist for DIC Electrical QC. ~ said later found another job at hfter being subjected to various types of
~
and bft0AN. said that although was not excessively absent, had been threatened with termination by DOAN for excessive absenteeism.
added DOAN had threatened to fire for doodling while on the telephone and numerous other petty things. said had not been intimidated to comit wrongful acts by D0AN's harassment and added . did not believe plant safety had been affected by 00AN's management. statement is enclosed .
herein as Exhibit 1. )
i Recontact with , supra )
i On July 11, 1985, recontseted reporting investigator and )
advised claims of 00AN's harassment and discrimination could be verified through the interview of former co-workers including and . r marked that both of these individuals were living in or arcund the vicinity of
] i Interview with . ., . , DIC Ouality Electrical Inspector ,
i
.I On July ll, 198 .. was interviewed by reporting i investigator in . stated had never actually j witr.essed DOAN aten .]htermination.
wit advised had :
informed on one occasion that was being threatened with termination ,
for excessive absenteeism and tardiness. remarked that any claim Case No. 4-85-013 l Page 10 1
j U
.u.- ._ . - . ... - - - . -
s .
I by D0AN of excessive absenteeism and/or tardiness would be unjustified.
. described as a very industrious worker who willingly volunteered to work late.
~
also said that several other people .
within the / were absent or late more often than .
^ '
said that in opinion, did not abuse use of the office phone, said DOAN had trouble with several other employees not further identified (NFI) that he supervised and on occasion, made unreasonable demands of these e6ployees. . said on one occasion (subsequently identified as 2-1-85), personally complained to the DIC corporate headquarters in Greenville, South Carolina , about D0AN's attitude and incompetence.
said he was later questioned (subspouently identified as 2-12-85) by f
' ', about DOAN's actWities. said later alsoinformed the KG&E Q1 personnel that DOAN had instructed his QC inspectors not to find problems and not to I generate NCRs. said was not satisfied by Q1's lack of action j so reported this concern (subsequently identified as 3-1-85) to DIC "
corporate headquarters. ~ stated it understandina that DOAN was transferred to a "non-nuke" DIC job near{was statement is enclosed as Exhibit 2. ] ,
Interview With ., DIC - l On July 18, 1985, was interviewed by reporting investigator in
,a -
.)
at one point during the summer of 1983, verbally warned J' that
' said tardiness and absenteeism were becoming a potential problem. said that! immediately after warning, responded to advice and made a drastic work record and production improvement. . said 'immediate supervisor, Merle " Art" D0AN, started to closely observe and subsequently started to criticize for petty things such as trips to and from the restroom, the NCR trailer, and to the Administration building.
said DOAN attempted to un "the old ploy of excessive absenteeism and out of work area items to try to fire .
said DOAN was unable to document enough incidents to warrant _ termination. verified that D0AN had threatened to fire for " doodling" while on the telephone i and
- said DOAN subsequently took phone away making it almost impossible for . to perform job properly. ' stated only used the company telephone for personal calls about "5%" of the time.
said subsequently reported concerns of to the DIC Industrial Relations Office at Wolf Creek. said that within one hour D0AN was advised of complaints and that ( ) was heavily criticized by DOAN for recommending to that should report the concerns to Industrial Relations. said DOAN instructed ,
to convince that was not being harassed, however, claimed refused to comply with this instruction. said believed D0AN was i later investigated by DIC headquarters for harassment of inspection personnel ,
and incompetence regarding the inspection process, added D0AN was ]
4ater removed and placed 1n a non-supervisory job at DIC Regional Office in J statement is included as Exhibit 3. lL
?
Case No. 4-85-013 ,
Page 11 '
~
J
Re-contact With (Supra)
On July 19, 1985, was recontacted by reporting investigator, at which time executed a secor.d sworn statement, Exhibit (4), wherein ~ stated was aware that a Q1 investigator investigated allegations of harassment. stated . believed that D0AN's supervisor, David MAULDIN, told the Q1 investigator "no comment." said at this point the Q1 ;
investigation seemed to stop and was surprised that an investigator who l received this kind of response from a supervisor would stop his investigation. I said it was the opinion of several DIC personnel working in quality related jobs NFI that the Q1 organization was a cover up or pacification group which was probably organized to protect KG&E from NRC inquiries. said the Q1 organization did not address the concerns at Wolf Creek although it represented itself to be an organization to help resolve workers concerns, added that the Q1 organization in reality was a smoke screen to prevent NRC intervention, statement is included as Exhibit 4.
Interview With William Gary WESTHOFF, Director of Project Operations, DIC .
~
/
On July 26, 1985, William Gary WESTHOFF, Director of Project Operations Technical Services Qivision, DIG was interv ewed by reporting investigator at b!C headquarters 71nLGreenville, South CarolinQ WESTHOFF said he was unable '
To provide speelfic pertinent information in regard to the allegations made by against Art 00AN. WESTHOFF said he did receive several complaints against DOAN from other DIC employees working for D0AN at Wolf Creek. WESTHOFF ,
said he personally investigated the harassment and intimidation complaints against DOAN and related he interviewed (supra) and several other QC inspectors and found the complaints against D0AN dealt with old.or dated information. WESTHOFF admitted he did verify that DOAN had chiled one DIC QC inspector of Chinese origin a " chink" and added he (WESTHOFF) instructed DOAN to cease all ethnic references when addressing QC inspectors. WESTH0FF said only 50% of the QC inspectors he contacted believed DOAN was using harassment and intimidation techniques toward the QC inspectors, and as a result he claimed he was unable to use old or dated information against DOAN. WESTHOFF advised that recontacted him during March 1985 and reported that one NCR had been improperly dispositioned by DOAN, in that the NCR reportedly I involved the unraveling of insulation on an electrical conductor. WESTHOFF l stated he initiated an imediate reinspection of the area in question and determined that the NCR disposition was " indeterminate and needed further attention." .
WESTHOFF acknowledged he had previously demoted DOAN in 1982 from a QC super-visor to a QC inspector because of DOAN's nanagement inexperience. WESTHOFF advised he had also received. complaints from 00AN's subordinates prior to the 1982 demotion.
f WESTHOFF advised he contacted (supra) and informed him that the NCR concern had been resolved and that he (WESTHOFF) did not find sufficient i evidence to sunoort further management action in relation to the harassment .j allegations mu rgiast DOAN. WESTHOFF acknowledged, however, that he {
suggested to DOAh . iupervisor that D0AN's scheduled transfer to a non-nuclear i, posttien be executed to avoid further maragement/ labor tensions. WESTH0FF's Repc'.)t of Interview is included as Exhibit 5.
- Case No. 4-85-013 Page 12
On July 5, 1985, WESTHOFF contacted reporting investigator and advised that DIC had authorized him to release his report of investigation which dealt with the allegations made against 00AN. This DIC report of investigation is >
enclosed as Exhibit 6.
Review Of DIC Personnel Files On July 18, 1985, NickCARMICHAEL,hICpersonnelsupervisor/wascontactedby reporting investigator in regards%to the allegations made tiy . The personnel file of was jointly reviewed with CARMICHAEL, and after a review of this file, CARMICHAEL said that did not have an extensive record of absenteeism or tardiness and that any claim or attempt to discipline for excessive absenteeism or tardiness would be unfounded.
personnel file was void of any written reprimands or disciplinary memos. *
- Interview With Charles C. HILL, Former Investigator, 01 Program .
On July 23, 1985, Charles C. HILL, a former investigator at the Q1 Program at Wolf Creek, was interviewed in /S_pring City, Tennessee.) HILL stated he remembered interviewing
~
aTout and concerns ,
and recording concerns on a single sheet of paper. HILL stated that because of the time span, he was unable to recall any of the specific concerns developed by and stated the and investigation
, was referred to ISSINGHOFF for further action. HILL was unable to provide any further pertinent information.
Interview With Merle Arthur DOAN, Fonner QC Supervisor, Wolf Creek - !
On August 7,1985, Merle Arthur DOAN, Jr. was interviewed by reporting investi-gator in]6allas, Texas./ DOAN said he recalled having tardiness and absenteeism problemsYth several Tf his personnel between January 1984 and April 1985 at Wolf Creek. DOAN described one of these people as . DOAN was unable to recall the rate of tardiness or absenteeism, however, stated that it was excessive and that he wrote several memos to the personnel file regarding attendance problems.
INVESTIGATOR'S NOTT: As previously reported, a review of personnel file did not reveal any corrective or disciplinary memos.
DOAN said he also spoke to his ,~ ., about attendance problems and said became defensive about his criticisms of
. DOAN admitted that after spoke to about attendance an improvement in attendance record was noted. DOAN explained this improvement lasted approximately one or two months and said started to slip back into an unsatisfactory attendance record. DOAN admitted that did not exceed DIC's guidelines of unexcused absences, however, added he (DOAN) personally felt was excessively absent and late. DOAN admitted he was a blunt and candid person and that this fact was resented by some of his subordinates at Wolf Creek. D0AN denied harassing or discriminating against .
DOAN acknowledged that he had previously lost his supervisory job during July 1982 because of political reasons and because some o~f his inspectors had l
made harassment and intimidation complaints against him at that time. D0AN Case No. 4-85-013 Page 13
said he was returned to supervisor status once again during June 1983. DOAN stated a second investigation was initiated by corporate quality manager, Gary
~WESTHOFF (supra), after several inspectors had complained that he had harassed and treated them unfairly. D0AN said WESTH0FF's investigation against him was politically mctivated and that "WESTH0ff was out to get me." DOAN said, during WESTH0FF's investigation, he admitted referring to a Chinese QC inspector as " Chink" and that he had called a black QC inspector " Boy";
however, added these statemea.ts were made. ithout malice or anger. DOAN said he was later transferred to _ during April 1985, but said that he did not think the transfer w[as a result WESTH0FF's investigation. 00AN's .
statement is enclosed as Exhibit 7.
Briefing Of NRC OI Director On July 26, 1985 Ben B. HAYES, Director, 01, was advised of the results of tnis investigation, to date. HAYES advised that 01 had met tfe purpose of the investigation and instructed reporting investigator to discontinue further investigation.
Willfulness / Intent Section The investigation conducted by DIC corporate headquarters implicate D0AN as a '
supervisor who not only had a history of harsh treatment toward his personnel, but who was counseled concerning his management treatment of subordinates (Exhibits 6 and 7). D0AN's admitted he was a " blunt" person and that, although
, did not exceed DIC's guidelines of absences, attendance did not meet his (D0AN's) personal guidelines (Exhibit 7).
Conclusions It is 01's conclusion that the allegation of discrimination is substantiated.
DOAN exhibited a continual history of supervisory ineffectiveness resulting in harassment of his subordinates. This resulted in his demotion as a supervisor during July 1982 and his subsequent transfer to a non-supervisory position during April 1985.
A contradiction exists within the Q1 files.
The Q1 investigative finding that harassment is unsubstantiated is clearly without merit in that further investigation by the Q1 organization would have resulted in the discovery that D0AN, as a supervisor, exhibited tendencies to harass and intimidate those QC personnel assigned to him, thereby encouraging and atmosphere and pattern of discriminatory acts which inhibited QC indepen-dence.
Status Of Investigation This investigation is closed.
Supplemental Information ,
During the course of this investigation, interviews were conducted by OI with former investigators of the KG&E Q1 program. These.Q1 investigators expressed concern over the KG&E management of the Q1 program in that matters were perceived to be covered up and, therefore, pertinent information was not Case No. 4-85-013 ,'
Page 14
, , l reaching the NRC. By separate correspondence, Region IV was advised by this office of the concerns raised in the statements attached to this report.
Region IV was asked to determine if the concerns were of sufficient magnitude ,;
and impact to warrant the initiation of an 01 investigation into the Q1 '
program itself.
t l
1 l 1
'l t
i Case No. 4-85-013 Page 15
. 'l
.- :- i
-- s j l
.j LIST OF EXHIBITS 1
e I
Exhibit j No. . Description i 1 Statement, July -10,1985 h 2 Statement, July 11, 1985- .
3 Statement, July 18, 1985 4 Statement, July 19, 1985 - i l
5 ~ Report of Interview With WESTH0FF, July 26, 1985 -
6 WEST 0FF's Internal DIC Investigation of Allegations, Wolf Creek, .
Dated June 28, 1985
, 7 DOAN Statement. August 7, 1985 e
e
, J I
i
- .4 Case No. 4-85-013 i Page 16 l W
- ~ -
, . . . ~ . .. .. .... - 2
, .pg..
} <, .. - . . , 4-85-013 U 4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION vy ' 'i .,.,
o L "a j OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE, REGION IV o g ' '
ob-811 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 1000
,,,. . . ARLINGTON, TEXAS 78011 f ,
STATEMENT -
l ,
State, ' N Zip "
)
. Cijty-Location ~ (
T1!!Te ,h.dne~ No. : AC .
~
I, rd , hereby make %e following voltIntary statement '
to- /hsst h a , who has identified himself to me as an '
- Investigator with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. I make this statement freely.with no threats or prom ses of reward having been made to me.-
/>1L fenew ir f -Y ' <nh YK11 43rr>_J~~hn ee Acae s h ats 3 aaTeln~s'1~nd.iAl nr e.u- Gh ran d -
i L,. ' oa T7 '
~
. A r l 4 m C L ',c r .
.i u et P h -s} L. ~l'~ tess sowo.sab Gu Msef Ahe.T~OsAA1 bor as.J~
%,L s ou ~ . dwa-G h __ _
i Z ~' A D 2 r L m a. Pw e s alu saaLG nw u n 5 6 1,s u. w l 47~ oau= omb . Mbed. d)s'.F.s "
2 w n s.oA red's/) 13 % b
. ins .
rLM Tw,7/ fyEs. %s p- krimureA /v thw >> n <
A d < so-> RM udwe. ~n
. s. - r . i v. c.
al)afles oudk 0Less e<J *TinD 0 A- . JM
~
d /3 - febe 6 T b*d*,Se A> Aw0 bb4A AbOS k 40 A Y%d % Cskid dr W M 1~).e 6,5,~olos . $UH uasf$ cod 7lI. rl,L soJ~ A%~Ma s .' . L ThaD *T2 Ks,e b r,eo om U AE W $ a3 NfAM 'T~ alar ~ Aa0 %.L wGd 7
, esnr, w m;u a . .A u sa n 6 sa ru ow a I
o' b) Y s 9 Tife b , Sbold AsYSedatas t e
iso Aaco As i -
~[UtAld $3s* ,L Y$ /4 SbfV $fd ?h4 ado t A 4A> t'"A1Tr s uert kt AW k4c ow ' *
,m a ca nk TiU. dDw & A s e,arnTLy as,,.o no .
st /Nf~ A4 Nb 4 rso Ei. h S7 m aefd on uw d s z wv L..~r/L DG . .
, La, L. % n,. -
\' ,ans n . < - '
7 < ossraramep. r o
.AfL*0&R /Y .? _"_ _'Y ' ^ ^ a As)O hk .h (k t Af % A e b l Aa 'TTissy L g7 hsga 's W . W affo 7Df % T* Sn; Lit, r
k ec NM' bis f as cob lw&~ Ws llEeuss4W u-Q wns ' e a anna ? % : ,u , s a w w o,a e,va a m m. n < -
m ro '.1u w- $~% di~e.mr o sA ab a' Od > dom
(
/
l Initials of Person Making Statement EXHIBIT 1
( 4 <is 6 - O t b - Il.
._.m - . . - .._ ..:.. - ._ _
6 '. [ M.
/ '4 UNITED STATES
!" n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION er '~ o
. Is gj ' OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE, REGION IV
- % .o 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIV'E. SUITE 1000 ARLINGTON, TEXAS 78011 STATEMENT-(Continued) o$dD O U A,E $ W / R //w [ Q 4 3 Q j e,/ ,
< bh h ]
y w/ ^
/ .
1 ,/- -
a
,e
/ .
.i l .
,e .
/
y L
/
,/
/
a /
l I have read the foregoing statement consisting of $2- handwritten / typed pages. . I have made and initialed any necessary correcticns and have signed my.
initials at the bottom of each page. I fully understand and have discussed the statement with Investigator M. S a rdsee . This statement is the truth to thede%f my knowl e W elief.
Signature: -
, s Tame < ~ " ^
Su'o s ibedandsworntobeforemethis[6 day of 7 d - ,
t . _ . _ _ 7/'
F Investi or: .IN/Y2 ')
Authori'tNection 161c AEA 1954 as amended i 3
d Witness: . 4 Name/ Title Initials of Person Making Statement EXHIBIT ( )
Paca 3 of 3
_ _ _ ._._ )
p .. .., - v.. __... . . _
]
M2 . / - ^ ^
4-85-013 l
0, ,,,
UNITED STATES
)
f 4, -
l
- -} ) , j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION "a I '
o "[ OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE. REGION IV
- s# 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 1000
. . ARUNGTON, TEXAS 76011 l l
STATEMENT -
I Affiant Stf*et q i Ci$y
)
. State " Zip
~
3caTio'n *
/ -
7 ~ep5cne No.. d NC' "
1"~ -
.] .- - 7' C _
, hereby make the following voiuntarMtatement i
to #1. &meeso e , who has identified himself to me as an Investigator with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission. I make this statement j freely with no threats or promises of reward having been made to me.
ble Leu *sas is ?, w.e; Tiu 7L. 's ,snremeJ~ m.e n n a $scws M carean. f t,'~ u n L ,r< ~ 9 n s n L a te w o c s u r,s
'sk e / ' Toe + '
^ ~
a &..ar of '_ . .
'Ti, 5 t% sobu.M Adu')6M %
. r.0&essad +
000'T O . a N W F a i ) d u s ce a A h /) M A Z
li a w a F ka m M T 6/Y ListAs-ga
. AdJ ma w on uns &- &
J.A w
.. : rae a
- wks sea, 7Lu L J u ML 'n a ,L.n n n Asa s - - Se~~
- '?n' Ac. swa maro.ede Lo wnuns. Efetr
-n. :s u u - r ,:- ri m o . ~ ss merin49dn aJ was '
seso vu.al n ~su ura n se., k-rs a ne .et so woJJa. -
& . a, i~ ~ M ns'L'a m -o wo . .
me snreo rua . . xo n ~ro~a ~ ~ ca ,rie~ re l
rAL. s- 12e P% . 1~cua suen rzar w +s 14 m,rw wa J,rt,a not sw .
M'us s wn ui //,a rz ourl And . Ass ><7 rLo ins, A s, n~s 2 .it n 'aJ w usa a s,sm.
72 a s w % <~ru ,</h J r:
~7al,-
& / &vv0TbAna dv A/insixe 4,' (os.sh coffer no coothin E Oea A Eep' d h li 4 Tb & r U u o $3 & ne e6u,E u k
FHcS7s'Ah 72 ' _
_ _k '
.? W , A T l e_ b pA2L no [6 7te & s~o Mits "r.easm '
da,6 rze ceth. '
' Iwcs~+b &aK Doa w+8 iw<Z LiiirM us kut,nm 4 - % 5- 013' - 19 Initials of Person Making Statement EXHIBIT 2
ja p e- * ,
g' '4, UNITED STATES g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g". . p
,,,,)7pj OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE, HEGION IV Yg %/ 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE, SulTE 1000 ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76011
,,,,, l 1
STATEMENT (Continued) i ActrL <5 u & . h o n e bob f/s A uN2 setAMS ollaa %7~ tw Su O . Asna soaff MNe oaf OA66a60$ hfM4O S A40 "kt h ^
L ls k t. J '
rs c ~ o~'< J s onw+4. 1~findL od reOR TA Wh*dernsk fu t$rreadllp [C.. ud bmJ/aY c} /]An '
, be d e's wTTd a~a ileewrinsw. Ossa uen.rl'Taff lif Idsista s wo7'~12 RA0 lf a Altm2 nNo psT spws+Te AJC t 's .#8EiC $xAWly '
T -E ueJT~ To t%tu% F,id u bd tJesu hv was a L% sf.1+7dfM W<% ka buE69 +1lrb o 't ksAeLi l AY oacNm 13 GJwde Do A 7To//6t%ee.dlM d na E m D-
- l L , &A xiL m % s redsf a;6 6 6 4-Attr'use enx G ra'a s u tf n e4Aba.s' A n ,anirn.
7LJ~~bua ms Aod kwcrad f; A Ana-A)dh C/C
$58 mV 0A/les $ ,. #
N
~
l N N
l N
x I have read the foregoing statement consisting of 42 handwritten / typed pages. I have made and initialed any necessary corrections and have signed my initials at the bottom of each I fully understand and have discussed the statement with Investigator 4.paje. 3:WatsoJ . This statement is the truth to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Signature: '
Name Subpbedandsworntobefqe me this // day of" [ b ,
, $58+at [._- . L. .
InvestigatoI: [ N [
Aettibh Section 161c AEA 1954 as amended 3 i
Witness:
Name/ Title Initials of Person Making Statement _ EXHIBIT ( )
Pace 3 of 3
~
h ~* .
-. 4-85-013 4 '
UNITED STATES j
c -[ j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.3! :h} [) ,, OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE. REGION IV
".7#j[j 811 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 1000 ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76011 j
. ,g,,
STATEMENT ,
Affiant, Yet 4
7
, p State ~
- Zip Location bepho No.: AC F'
7
~
~
& , hereby make theTbilowing.voltnrcary statement -
to M. Gaesa , who has identified himself to me as an i Investigator with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. I make this statement
. freely with no threats or promises of reward having been made to me.
1 AW f':% is wErfik 17h sfs*NnT Ad M MS or escass ITs awreJTs Z~k.a aalla/ ins - Akd/ T2 Gad b9/C) fim.
~
< ~
s c I have uoneRaf af~ast/;t%ask t s &ab Iaas rto
% Lw Broev '
fmA ,f d -
, arts %RA takt J!;/s$L M smawasr a Awd u **G flwIL Aab blG4wT AA sa emt.$ 6 tr W . k dht l} / /]nd/M '
1~ vestas /(s ' ra nes aA NM AMA
.4LGa oss Ad w_4 AL A 7esDAf Ana/m . ka A2ll o Tff hith/ $ / $ CWMA al? E A' nan / ftlez? AU Eks/n NaK M 12%.) IIu'es i,J nr4kA IS di%urJ Nd L, n a # '
n i a i., a i a s 4 1 J r o u ,, A .. _ r
- l. 1260 'Ia.onhaM u r d 1A d ua d ts Asd Ea*M ,
/ 7 78 heueJi~ + Twz ausis>~. ,L uaa.iut !
Jos!%Ar0 72 /k V Aktt b Ax0 23 Afundi} 'W NW kwf
, A sa su b71/. i% /mb SOAA/ uoN Art V,7]AM rM i; AsO 7~s a+Td _
de la beiYedr) A ssJ f~M 'T~erite 'Th n ao Cow 141 W . ine.d 7ied,0 '
[ Ad & m ,'LA . $sna o ex h*0 s sbi t w%L AM b AeI'~L u $ 71 }r . k . 5 Sel1~ C0b AN 's CSm8 72 0A w
<ded hlda, ms.4$r.s $ k m.u +_m_ E ~ b M p 5ir O A 7b i K P h h ,
AfAv d Nocc ~Z" _ _ = s a gzZ~g ,4 m ,w 7; }
rrel 7$ /1iw . Osou w 777:/ W 92~ A Ja A '7~ &6M JA D ITA LVbJ4 h ,b* K, f$lue R Tb wu T&t> r15th .
t0ua rincit.s n i
nasen rz s- A ><s,.w asrv . ,wf(<er r
't gs- o r3 -13 Initials of Person Making Statement _
EXHIBIT .3
_.m _ _
je % ' UNirED STATES
'8?
f
'n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'. f ' OFFICE OF INVESTIGA flONS FIELD OFFICE. REGION IV
(%
,gg
/ 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE. SUITE 1000 ARLINGTON. TEXAS 76011
- STATEliENT 4
(Continued) o
' ~
)
Au,LsT . dw 7~ a er iLC. auk WAw w J La 6,a a6 tuLav At/L isr.escrus A. -m as. \
Lh"t?Ao ' ws,.}/*J/av D>/lTiks " L &7;% <e a si 's i soA udi A b S A v slar Arn N .
'f"~r:ebYlE. __ f a8 b** e car"Grf AnnaAs Ir,$ bJsa .eu% AM# sun A _ um/l foW/' x sul
] A -l b } Y uh w Ned/A,A in"21h' A.a [7hD 'khe d,%& "
WJ A F2 o ou/) or1k'a .54 TYP $l+ n _
Let /5medoWA T h lee 73 ALA ofasbs is // '
ltebwiY7lh. i
{ Al$rseeiW% /mI ~ L 2 bfd~v AA f~L x r 6 JaRe.5 arts -
k s w 5 s Es., Asa s e.u G /' a l t 4, ss n. cui .
- i. '7& 4X __ Cm Lao w r .ucofi./
3 Ds N 'S ANU h . wPAh A o Ardh .
a ns S 8 ca/s16.3"~JiS y
10~//$s y<
- ~e .s,rt/i$l, Mini $. ..
Afix .
t -
i y ,
hbo#A E N DetNl' '7f> ~ T A 2T /~~iN [1]#d AA [at t boeMr% w L6 + 14- fabsL ,, . Au xT& left fraL
%fr>& $U4v mM'.$ /TWus Y>NAs.cs '
Abd Ts ,
L . _ ets md);;/saw.J . s Law 11 7 a nc os 7~ i u 7Le JL' ou-( m, ~ n , nars is
'LL A . % 4,;ukv.u i M n'., 76 41
- Aw+_ A Am . J W-/S Sh / / a M Y W $ b .o (15 e$4d _
Ace w G ons Tb A.na -}A!seveNb 6ho.ss
. /Ve e su 6 as%.JrCv 14t'44 71 Als icis'ibs m /- r5 6Th. MW WN /$ '
5 0 b h w e L i N T'i A M d A na n w Irt, moi /7s ~
r2 t A s%-,
M A-C do eh Ad ad. hdat!nl Tk Lwoesof
- 1s~ 9 % s u / A / R sr n A d -> . 4),11,,h A k Das a !
u A MeurY / SuAdob2Rt h a e [ sa n s Lew L curG W dv Sclve. Ar r w C AA 11r '
Dw . u k h am - '
e<>J s tkms-J ra E' e. ' As rau 75 co wans Initials of Person Making Statement- EXHIB.IT ..(
) 4 4
j
,. *'a-
- j#c % UNITED STATES j'i - j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION er i/
Ta .. y j OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE, REGION IV
%,9[ ' %#
, , o 611 RYAN PLAZA drive. SUITE 1000 ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76011 STATEMENT .
(Continued)
L 7'~ un !7%' %ws nu dk. E te d r3d>flik.
T u .u L am O _
woJA>;L A> filed u -rG/1 ka ro AAo u1% dssN . J la T.s cd n/M ffen-E desrh 2~omiht&
O fx 12w ' isA , '
Aao 'E l. a A oat l M mJ Afr4 W 8 /i' N8 * /kw;Gu />./ <0A +l Ss.e. /Aw&~ ;
d7 iAs1&M Y 0 e.~d (4 con b & tu/% / ara NL M .
N02n usu ls-ru d's w a,.f #
ass J/' ecol 6 H. Au-s kmN f46 ar rle /)tE Ae d 2%.h i l l' .( S$ 246
$ 0. At a-te W , kM y lJeS N =f= d.51 TKe esot Awb iL n o a n 'a n ./ '
1
/
r
/
I have read the foregoing statement consisting of 7 handwritten / W pages. I have made and initialed any necessary corrections and have signed my initials at the bottom of each paje. I fully understand and have discussed the l statement with Investigator 4/,6, < terva . This statement is the truth to the best ofs my knowlledge an4 belWf.
Signature: _
_ Kam,e Subs day of % [ - ,
$gribedat and/Jw K4sworn4 / Uto before me this /R "
1 Investigator: h/IM- -
Author [ Section 161c AEA 1954 as amended Witness:
Name/ Title l
Initials of Person Making Statement _ EXHIBIT ( )
Page 3 of 3
~
l
._._]
4;85'013"'
- ( 4, . - -
M % UNITED STATES t, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
$' , OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE, REGION ii
. 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE. SUITE 1000
, , ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76011 STATEMENT .!
Affiant- Street - -
r
~
1 t,Ty. StatA Zip j Location J s TEfephon,,g,,,No .' : AC ._
hereby make the*following~ voluntary statement
~
I," ,
to. A.E eec ~ , who has identified himself to me as an Investigator with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. I make this statement .
freely with no threats or promises of reward having been made to me. !
hw Arsfrk Wir sa-Asd S&Gd /N h JNefid Ul 75L l TL w J f s.,_a__r am m n . LJk V snow
~
,1 I
Allers7EO A NMusbdT AJh U 0/ AS
~'
CL, w NL M f/vda'O/i&+& /A m ra . AfL L 675%
S& - 0Oam. 'Ti b / > m & o4-77>4 d 7b -bsk</ 'c o.AE Dodd afa tsL u un< sta '% n~. 7." 17 T/h 's,E 1Eo 8/ INwrZeARL S&'*-W172 S721). $ ants ,cuMiY1Lf~
l 0 S WsflY M S MAe 4A)~~1Yi!e SD 'bf- behA FEsm # 44~+xA t.alot.8/ Sb_f ,,le's /4ves[es~7E . 1 61 17is' s., si,xs x- u,2 ceAlue sau a.n 7c.o r ~ & _ d / ' u m ;z a k . a u a d d-ub e D& 6 w a.ooe1} 4 dd oar % h alt., Mw > zn 75 soaheef ' A'92 fr3m l l
%t.L wan;,e;or ' Aktf /0/ 6'O 45~ AMsA na a>-
A& u NL a9'~ud (U.' /0/ nodgew Ee0 )TseL P Nh 6J Mgn 7 E.t% '/3 belb &cuh wAl& CdAcNMS du f /A) 4/d1 & W t.2 & S #- Uh6 Sedm D Auve[
/V W NJTea vr,bDlhm . E Aw frhe 9 sL92 /A hu.0 i a r& AAib Droaoks L f, ;. A 1 7 ,1 fo Ae % C'Buans
/bfu d/ ods'A & oVo 4dekA , '
h kid !
[57
/ 1
/ -!
I ~
I ._
4-35-o 6 -14 Initials of Person Making Statement ,
EXHIBIT 4
- - - .. .._..~J
- r. ~.
. . .. - d.,,
(## " *% UNITED STATES
'^
. ,y 4 - , NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e l) o
%i ' :7 ,. . , j OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE REGION IV
'%d o[ 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE. SUITE 1000 ARLINGTON. TEXAS 76011
,,g, STATEMENT ;i (Continued) lf i
\ '
\
x N .
- N ,
N i N
\ '
N N
. N '
N ;
N
~
N N
N N
I have read the foregoing statement consisting of J2 handwritten /ty;:d pages. I have made and initialed any necessary corrections and have signed my initials at the bottom of each I fully understand and have discussed the statement with Investigator ag[ewsou
~
. This statement is !
the truth to the best o :y Aknopledge argi peNet.
Signature:
/ Name .
Sugibed and sworn to before me this & day of 6 #d' , !
Y t> %/'
InvestigNr: WM ~
Authori[Section 161c AEA 1954 as amended j d
Witness: i Name/ Title Initials of Person Making Statement EXHLBIT ( )
Pac Me of 3
-:-. . . . , . . . . . . . . . - .. - u _ -
_ ,_ 4-85-013 ;
REPORT OF INTERVIEW 0F WILLIAM GARY WESTH0FF '
Q4-85-013 On July 26, 1985, WilliamGaryWESTHOFF,b . _
N
,. ~]was interviewedJby NRC Investigator WESTH0FF Markregarding was questioned EMERSON at [ his knowledge of the alleged harassment and. intimidation of ' while working for Art DOAN at the Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Plant, Burlington, KS.
WESTHOFF stated he was unable to provide pertinent information in regard to
^
the specific allegations made by . against Art 00AN. WESTHOFF said he did receive several complaints against DOAN from other DIC
. employees working for DOAN at Wolf Creek. WESTH0FF related that he had received a letter from .4, in which . alleged DOAN was harassing, intimidating his personnel -
and showing favoritism to some of his employees. WESTH0FF said he personally went to Wolf Creek to investigate these allegations. WESTH0FF related he interviewed and the other.
and found the complaints against D0AN dealt with old or dated information.
WESTH0FF said most of the people who were supposedly harassed and intimidated by D0AN had already left the site and were employed elsewhere.
WESTH0FF admitted he did verify that DOAN had called one of Chinese origin, " Chink". WESTH0FF stated he instructed D0AN to cease all ethnic references when addressing the QC inspectors.
WESTH0FF advised that his questioning of the personnel working for D0AN revealed mixed results. WESTH0FF said fifty percent of the personnel
- contacted believed DOAN had used harassment and intimidation techniques within the department and' fifty percent of those contacted believed no harassment or intimidation had taken place. WESTHOFF said he informed the that he could not utilize dated information against DOAN.
WESTH0FF advised most of the complaints against D0AN involved QC personnel who had already transferred or quit their positions.
WESTHOFF advised recontacted him during March 1985 and reported !
that one NCR had been improperly dispositioned by D0AN. The NCR reportedly involved a RTD1 conductor with unraveling insulation. WESTHOFF stated he initiated an insnediate reinspection of this area which was evaluated as
" indeterminate and needed further attention".
WESTH0FF acknowledged he had previously demoted 00AN during 1982 from QC, i u supervisor to QC inspector because of DOAN's management inexperience. I WESTHOFF said complaints from D0AN's personnel were also received prior to D0AN's 1982 demotion. WESTH0FF stated, after concluding his investigation, he was unable to identify specific examples of D0AN's incompetence or i verify the allegations against him. WESTH0FF said'the allegations seemed "
to be dated and motivated by a personality conflict between D0AN and some of the QC inspectors. WESTH0FF acknowledged he suggested to 00AN's EXHIBIT 5 4 - g- o t'6 -l5
,, . ... e 0 .-
supervisor, positionin{LouEASTERW00,0,thatDOAN'sscheduledtransfertoanon-nucl jbeeffectedtoavoidfurthermanageme,t/ labor tensions.-
End of Report of-Interview of William Gary WESTH0FF.
Prepared on August 5, 1985 By Mark Emerson 4
e
)
4
,l 9
0 e8 G
s -. )
July 1, 1985 ME Conference with Regional Administrator i
On July'1,1985, Investigators HERR, DRISKILL and EMERSON met with NRC Regional Administrator Robert D. Martin to discuss supplemental OI invectigation of a sampling '
s of cases worked by the Wolf Creek Quality First (Ql) organization. Also present in
. the meeting were Paul S. CHECK, Deputy Administrator. and Division of Reactor Safety -
and Projects Director,. Richard P. DENISE. 4tgldt A sampling of eight Q1 cases were preselected by OI for consideration by the Regional Administrator. MARTIN reviewed iIlvestigative
~
this sampling and related that three/(3) categories should be further reviewed by OI. MARTIN itemized these categories as: Falsification of Records, Intimidation and ,
- Harassment, and Improper disposition a of Drug allegations. MARTIN said he vould leave.
the individual cases chosen to OI.
,- The following Q1 investigations were chosen for review by OIs QCI-85-202T (Falsification of Records), QCI-84-79T (Intimidation and Harassment), and QCI-84-103T(Improper Disposition i of Drug allegations).
l i
(
l;
- e i 4 - t>5 --013
- 19
. , _ w .. _ _ , . _ .u _
_ -. a ;_i l
..- o m. u - - . v- x.m. . . ~ . t ,- ,m~ , . - ..- . . . , _ . . __ _. j a...
^ ^
~ '
4-85-013 CONFIDENTIAL AlWEEL.
Inf7ERRIATBORIAL I N T E R O F F I C E C Qrfg,g I C A T I O N ,
{
Form 16 99 (Rev.12 78) l 1585 E 22 M 11: 15 r-.
. ] l
.s.. ._
TO: R. F. Green DATE:[: p;Q9.8p..p,
+
i.,
n FROM: W. G. Westhoff WGW-194 l
SUBJECT:
Investigation of Allegations - Wolf Creek In accordance with your request, I investigated allegations made by
Daniel employees (by phone 1/29/85)'and (in writing 2/1/85). Attached is a copy of letter.
I also received an unsolicited phone call (2/26/85) from another Daniel
,, e ployee . All three employees had been communicating j on the subject so I concentrated my investigation on the content of the ,
, letter and information gained through interviews. Since and were out on medical leave, I dealt primarily with
.. The allegation centered around the Electrical Quality ,
' Supervisor, Art Doan.
[ On Februaryy2.1985, ytraveled to Wolf Cree), and me off site with
~ g and . On February 13, 1985,IcontactedQualNyFirst (ChuckSnyderYtoseewhatactionthey were taking on their copy of - letter. They deferred their investigation to Daniel. I also contacted Daniel's Industrial' Relations Department (Bart Banks) to see if they had investigated any.
of the items in the letter and learned they had not. Since much of the information, to date, was aged (6 to 18 months), or based on opinions, I elected to interview the eleven electrical inspectors / supervisors in addition to site Quality Management (Eastervood, McCranuy and Damashek) to learn the current status of things. The results of the interviews, i with the eleven inspectors / supervisors, is attached.
4 I found that the inspectors were split about 50/50 between those who had a problem with Art Doan and those who did not have a problem. I found a few items of concern, which I passed along to the appropriate l persons. As a result of the investigation, I talked with Art Doan about ;
those things which he needed to -work on. I kept Quality First informed of the investigation and the conclusion.
When I talked to Quality Management, 't hey felt that Art Doan was doing a good job and was just following their directions. Quality Management i felt that many of the items were being brought up now versus 6 to 18 . j months ago as a result of the job coming to an end and the inspector's .I '
belief that if tSey were involved with an investigation it would extend j l their time at Woll Creek.
()
q) 2 EXHIBIT 6 e s-OG -14
=' : p' .
n I
Memo to R. F. Green- ' '
Page Two .
June 28, 1985- .
i ;4 i
I asked if there were any specific hardware related problems.
He called me on March 1, 1985 and stated that there was a nonconformance report-(NCR) that was closed in error and gave me the number. 'I asked Randy Byrd -(prior Project Quality Manager at Callaway) to investigate the problem. When Randy completed his investigation it was determined that the N3. was indeterminate and needed further attention. A " Wolf Creek Work Request" was generated and the Rtd-1 connector was evaluated by Engineering and found to be acceptable and the Work Request closed. Attached you will' , ,
find Randy Byrd's report of the investigation. .,<
Upon completion of the investigation I contacted and i j informed him that the hardware concern had been resolved and that I did
. not find grounds for further management action in relation to the Art Doan allegations.
As a closing note, on A,p,ril 15, 1985, Art Doan was transferred to a non-nuclear project in This transfer was the result of a need for hisservicesandnottDre]sultoftheaboveallegatio'ns. It did however
- calm the tension that existed within the Electrical Inspection group at
- Wolf Creek. .
- If you have any further questions on this, please call me at extension 4570.
W. G. Westhoff UY 5
/cd Atts. .
cc: J. G. Berra (DIC)
C. A. Snyder (KG&E)
M.1.cLT.Baersont (NRC)r W. G. Westhoff (DIC)
.k
. 4 1
a
- 1 1
y j .
1 1
-____m _-__.____m_ - - _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ ___ ._ _ . - . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _
4
, m _
>~
,i January-28, 1985 i .
Mr. Gary Westhoff l
.a
Dear Mr. Westhoff:
A wise man long ago stated "to know what is~right and not to do it is the worst cowardice." The time has come for me to step up and say what needs to be said.
-e When we talked 'in the summer of 1982 you advised me to contact you if .
a problem relating to quality and its integrity occured, which couldn't or wasn't being handled by anyone on site. Well, such a problem exists and in having a negative impact.on quality and has almost destroyed the morale of the department. Before I identify the problem, I must inform you that for the last eighteen months I have wanted to contact you concerning a wide' range of problems within electrical quality and !
quality in general. However, I have been restricted from doing so.
Sorry, but I can't expand on the reasons.
The recent resignation of an inspector, who is both a senior employee and highly competent, has prompted my having those restrictions of the past lifted.
Now the most immediate problem is the electrical quality _ supervisor, Art Doan. This man, to myself and other inspectors both past and present, is one of the most incompetent, inconsiderate,. rude, unknow-ledgeable, omnipotent egotistical individuals that I have ever had the misfortune of working for.
I knew you received a letter of, recommendation from Bud Schryer asking that Mr. Doan be reinstated to supervisor status. However, I feel that the reinstating of Mr. Doan as an electrical supervisor was (is) a grave error in the best interest of quality and Daniels. I will j state several of many reasons after I present my credentials. I have i been in Electrical Quality for over 5 1/2 years and besides having a background in electronics, electricity, I have learned a great deal -
here. Also, I've been in the Ipw enforcement business for over thir- '
teen years and am a trained observer and collector of evidence.
- NOTED v
FEB 011985 Wow
-.- ~ --.
, 7 i p ,-< l
~ ~
Page 2 This is why I feel you should reconsider the recommendation provided by Mr. Schryer.
- 1. There was an alterior motive and that was promoting Mr. Doan, so he could promote, first to lead, then to supervisor, an individual, whose name was Ron Poe.
Mr. Poe was unable to comprehend or handle the scope of the pro-motion as a supervisor. He was unable to perform a simple level-II inspection as an inspector, yet as a supervisor he (a) slept on a regular basis on the job in his office; (b) couldn't answer simple questions presented by inspectors; (c) was also a gambler, who ~ '
gambled on company time, by running large dollar amount, football pools, parley cards, and lottery tickets. The gambling was con-ducted under the knowledge of and with the condonation of Mr. Doan.
I depely regret, now, not having put a stop to this activity then,
- but it would have involved many people and would also have caused considerable embarrasement to the department, the project and to Daniels at Wolf Creek.
t I want to keep this short, but I could write a book about the irregular-ities noted here at the Wolf Creek project in the last few years.
Daniels has had the misfortune of having very good inspectors harrassed to the point of seeking employment elsewhere. This harrassment was totally infelicitous and unprofessional. If necessary, I could supply
. a list of thirty (30) inspectors, who would substantiate my findings.
Again, back to the immediate problem at hand. Mr. Doan is a power hungry individual that seeks power not to build people, but to destroy people. We, the dedicated electrical inspectors, at the Wolf Creek project provide our own pride and integrity to the site. Our super-visors' ignorance is only exceeded by his incompetence. Following are a few more of his incompetent traits:
- 2. Intimidating good inspectors into resigning
- 3. Advise inspectors not to look for violations
- 4. Recommending unqualified inspectors for certification and covering ;
for those unqualified inspectors when they error
- 5. Getting incompetent or "yes" inspectors to sign off NCR's that had problems and which one of the senior inspectors wouldn't sign
- 6. Open display of favoritism and preferential treatment to certain inspectors .
?
- 7. Mandated and obtained overtime for personal needs
- 8. Making irrational and incompetent decisions c
.."' ., y c,.Ug: m\ .
y ) i -
- Page'3-I'have sufficient facts or gounds for not trusting anyone.at this site, at least' with Daniels, to'do anything about this problem. I'll ,
c site two examples: '
- 1. We contacted the head man in personnel, Bill Burns, to oppose the
. promotion'of Ron Poe to lead. The perosnnel manager said he would make us.an appointment with Larry Bryant, then p.0.M. We all de-clinedfas we felt Larry Bryant's noted friendship with Art Doan would create a con,flict of interest. So the personnel manager said L. Easterwood would be coming so,on and we could talk with him.
., .Meantime the personnel manager. informed Bud Schryer that there were L problems brewing in Electrical Quality concerning Ron Poe's pro- . ,
. motion. It-was made aware through channels that if we' wanted to ,
stay at Wolf Creek and/or with Daniels to drop our request. We were never contacted by thoupersonnel manager or the new P.O.M.
4 - 2. . A highly qualified inspector was giv n a reprimand over some trivial matter. A group of us went to Bud'Schryer and prgsynte We also advised that if the inspectors reprimand jbamdh"p thewefacts.
. then all wantato file a complaint, about the su'ervisor p issuing reprimand, >
>; for sleeping on the job.
All the inspectors involved in both above examples were ostracized, harassed, and passed over for promotions because~of our endeavor to have
,' an equitable and creditable department.
.1 hope you can be trusted. All I ask is to please take appro"priate steps to removed Mr. Doan.
o I'm certain, considering the delicacy of this matter, that you will want to be discreet in your contact with me. But, please contact me upon receipt and after reading thin atfeither I
-p- .
it w
11 or one, whichJ n recorded,
.J In closing I have been very brief 'in this communique, which was in-
' tended to. arouse your attention. Action is crucial on this matter because the futuresof Daniels as a leader in the nuclear field can only be guaranteed by the. quality of'the personnel that is sent as their "
representatives to projects. To this end I will carry this problem to .
whatever' level necessary, including the NRC, for resolution. J As always my concern in quality. .
'*
- i
=-- .
q
. f
( ._
SUMMARY
OF INFORMATION FROM INTERVIEWS OF ELECTRICAL INSPECTORS - FEBRUARY 13 and 14,1985
- 1) There is a general opinion that the supervisor (Art) is inconsistent with his handling of inspectors - if two inspectors are both violating / abusing a rule / policy, the inspector in favor will be * '
ignored and the one not in favor will be corrected.
- 2) Statements that were ethnic in nature have been used by Art and witnessed by other inspectors. Some feel it was done in a joking manner. One of the people involved said it had happened to hini by Craft and he felt it just goes with the territory.
- 3) Some of the inspectors feel that " Art says he is not vindictive" but in fact if you cross him you will fall out of favor and experience
- a hard time.
- 4) It is generally (many comments on this) felt that Art makes impulsive i decisions without thinking the thing through. They also felt that when Bud was in Electrical, he would turn many of the decisions around which involved technical matters. They also felt that Terry will and has turned around many of the decisions which were managerial in nature.
- 5) No.one had any concerns about hardware, although there were many cases where the inspectors felt that decisions were made to support production (get high volume of inspections) versus quality.
- 6) ' Art did make a statement about those that had been involved in his demotion in 1982 - they had gotten what was coming to them or had been taken care of - however, the names that were considered to be involved were not accurate.
- 7) Art did tell the inspectors not to look for violations (do inspections) outside of their assigned areas. When challenged by the inspectors, he clarified management's position as follows. If a piece of work was signed off by a Daniel Certified Inspector, it was not necessary to go back and inspect that piece of work again unless there was a known/ suspected problem.
l . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
a .
DANIEL INTiRNATIONAL CORPORATION tant cournacroy '
P. O. Box 146 Telephone 316 364 6421 Strewn. Kansas 66839 March 25, 1985 , j p Mr. W. G. Westhoff -q 4
l r.
, l L
i === #
SUBJECT:
Closure of Nonconformance Report ISN 21654E ATTACHMENTS: Sketch of Rtd-1 NCR ISN 21654E KG&E CWR 04413-85 i
Dear Gary:
Per your request of March 4, 1985, the investigation into the closure of
- the subject NCR is complete. The results of this investigation are as fol-l lows
A review of the subject nonconformance revealed that the nonconforming condi- .
tion was identified as, "the outer layer of insulation of conductor 'A' on the vendor supplied cable for Rtd-1 was unraveling from inside the potting adapter to approximately 2" from the end of the potting adapter," (See at-tached sketch and NCR). The statement of completed action stated, "After training conductor to the termination point, the damaged portion of insulation was removed as excess, no nonconforming condition exists." ,
4 review of an identical Rtd connector substantiated that two layers of insu-lation did exist for each conductor. However, a review of the Westinghouse (supplier of the Rtd connector) specifications and drawings revealed that Westinghouse had not authorized the removal of the outer layer of insulation nor the installation of this type connector with the outer layer of insulation unraveling. In addition, DIC Engineering had not obtained, from Westinghouse, approval either through a Field Change Request (FCR) or Request for Clarifica-tion of Information (RCI) for either the unraveling condition or _ removal of the outer layer of insulation.
In conclusion, if the outer layer of insulation was not removed, the noncon-forming condition identified on the subject NCR was not corrected, and the nonconforming condition still existed. In addition, if the outer layer of insulation was removed, then a nonconforming condition also still existed, i.e. DIC had not obtained approval, from the designer, to remove the outer layer of insulation. Therefore, I concluded, the subject NCR was closed in error, and KG&E Corrective Work Request (KG&E Nonconformance document)
- 04413-85 (attached) was issued to address the nonconformance identified on the subject NCR. If additional information is desired, or I can be of further assistance, please give me a call. ,
Randy Byrd --"
Senior Quality Engineering Supervisor RB/bjb cc I.. C. Easterwood
- -- )
. 5
/ Attachm3nt 1 .
)
4
. , 4 l
d q
I 2
21" DAMAGE AREA FIELD CABLE VENDOR CABLES 1BBS33AN IDENTIFIED ON &
~Je 4.. !I ) 3..
.; A l
.) r . .
}
l i i N - .)
+
.V .
. POTTING ADAPTER l}"' -
))"
9 0
t e
9 e +
3 e
h 4 ;
1i O
(J
.i
- 4. - w m -
4*
',. g w: x,-ovv .1-1 a.v. 12-t-8 3 ,
.t gi en. I NONCONFORMANCE REPCRT (NCR) Alf D 8'/ (d8CO'MO PT NOT NN l 'CMON "EQ0 W coNTnot utto o = =ca w m Wolf Creek /7158 Hold Tagt X i 1SN 21654E
.ggL(nnestes er :.sta se Td 44019 54 tv c 3B Area-2047.' 6", Reactor, Area 1, BLA-251, 8804 A Item: RTD-1, Conductor A, Damaged insulation mates with IBBS33AN at IJJ079 C00E 0 # # aoa-C00t O .
coNTactLmo me4T5 g , ,' - inavtttms Na N/A ,
RA-CT-10420 DS WRt 81660-84 '
flNAf I g IDCP E-168-BB R/0 g.") e n oesc,,mo m ~c,c ,m ~c, ,
- 4 OuterlayerofinsulationofconductorAofRTD-1is/nravelingfrom i inside potting adapter to approximately 2" from end of adapter. ,
N Integrity of conductor A is o indeterminate. 7U d EM Mgd
/j -j .y ., -
C9 Method of Inspection: Visual y//,._Q a area-[j #q /2,em.1 f g,,f =rt
-"" RECOmdENCES .hiG4 S BASS FCR RECOMMENC4DcN! / ,
CAT A pCTION car , ,
C c-3 c
hf '
'O e P U,ri. , h l ., O,s s j
/ A g, $yf ff c, . - p
-< ~ ,
Q o , g* . , , w . aumcacervo.ua w m wr* e coermx. acne:vcNuu.cr : /
Alf . Ib . , /.
N0 Af/ M *9td T " M //t i J// // A/M , /// .
///,'/f Imant m cCe nc /(///7 jf//f l/ sitt appa. 11rLE ETE WLM C' *3MP.L'~D ' ~~CN JcW YK XA*'A'MO AM .bi5 Atoyga W tY N,An* * /, A'- - " M D M 4*n) d J.'* H }obas / nltMis. 1 Ah *TAA*4sd CNberefu 4 f' g6;g,on, x%n;&a m s&s
% secwt~ ~
i DM na tun copsttitu wh n/A cart NM Ac64cn VEliltita 14-
'I4ILE
'jn 1F ,
i i s nt DISTR!suTION
,l _ f,_ _ Y f fYC . b / *
,Y -
COIFUTER CgNG (D!c lute-*.AL USE ONLY) yI '
_. 20NC g CpatNCE M
,gutAT ACTTC00( __
~
l _ L. '
m E L
. _ . - ~
9,,; .,w - p .w., e, h o,, O *1os n- 1
- /1 h/W 1 _- , . . . . . . , t.
a a.ne o--.- . . _. _ _ _ _ . L.10 4 *' r. <,,
- p it - u f;
- j Jt /1) = 1 +KLCi D 6%u.I'I y _LLotwW / L t A !.J. ._ n,e t~f M o.. o #1/ te;. .e .
._. wzd I 88.s.3396L .A r i T 70 79 . N% DeMCED .A E iugamod. . h n Nd9 M AI a & s 4 5 Ha.o % # Mbi9 rE -
s.
-l I as ===n ..tes =. . . . . . . . ,
A u S.I N g.2 I
- m. . e e. . , ~ rw a w so 3
u camerarse neo, i - (, O Yes g No g Yes O No _ N Yes. See Fahne Dets Form I e tecn sess~nsosenes gm to asexv'sene ss s.can, ose j l O Yes W No __
O Yes S No ' Time Lime E No O Yes. Meteritz M M f.pt [ m l tt.asant eminen m . is. F e mesumen mense is a pesammen amne ,
, TYes O No O Yes O No _[] RewottlRyect NCR$FR No O MrA m men
.30 . .
f% -
, 'o g _ __
m Q .__ . . . . . _ . . . _ . _ _ . . . . _. __. ... _ .. _
o . .. . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . . . . . . . . . . . _ . .- _
' 44 Opus tanssu..Os's it Quesy Engewe. Os= 18 a CC tS e MDeo C
em C>gs* ances ,. _ _ . _ ...t7 -masessa - .vown ..pyme str'.,...... O. Yes .O No to yetur Sensus PF"'W 9eJ'tW
- b. _ _ _. ' ~~~
Ne _. No .
~ "'
i e M to se' 155) 5arsee ' Das 36Tuo7+ "M-6~wr~s QA4 C=I'~ 21 W se a tauswee
- t. . -
- .. . . - _ . _ . . . _ . . . . _ . . . _ . . . . _ . . . . . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ = ... _ _ .
T
'. 6..
e- . _ . _ _ . _ . . . _. .
f ._-.. . _ . . . . - - __ .
W femag Codeer * - . > Syear. %< e: 'SS Dans**"* '
5 c: -
[h phao- M %Pfc mewe t? T%=a
. 1
. N.-W. .9 s 36 a neweef tur= *.ae z e
}- NCRWR ne !
e
'a
~
g..,._ . . . . , . . _-. . _ . . .. _- -- . - _ = = = = = = = =
l
- I,r*.**
____ . . . - m= -e - - - -
-_ c m = 1 t
ph. ..
, ;,. ann. .pem.n hne.setsu,ese., via .oo y. !
Ma
. _ y =_~ - = ..-.w -_ . _ _ _ _ _ - ~ - - - - , .3
. . . n -
WRN 00Y00~$$
WO'LF CREEK WORK REQUEST
- 1. . N.,ne,~o
,,,,,O. ,_g.g3 2 R. pus.
e, f g
BBOYA .f 7'D-/ - LJ P r w e d .nfli,-J
3 Peornem' Work Description /
)? 7'D- / F20M BBo'/A . 80HDue76e A 1,1N/O/ MA 7M c lxlITH ' ) BBdi33RAl A 7' /7TO79 N8S DrnMCL7J ! ~
lh/k1L A1~) A hl. $2?.' W INI A %5 'r' t.- -
. //lXO ' 0!0 3a. Work Request Tj() No.
Pfl S'. l GC 8,2 I -
4 Pnonty 5 Plant BAode 6 HP Review 7. Salety Relatec$pecel Scope / g 3 / 6 0 Yes @ No SD Yes O No if//es, See Failure Data Form p. ,
6 -
s osarance Requwod 9. Tech. Spec. Requwoment to Reponatne SS gnature/Dat O Yes N No O Yes @ No ir e t S No O Yes, rence /fMh / p.p[ $
- 11. ASnAE,Section XI 12. Fwe Protection Revew 13 a. Dis r,stion Status O Yes 'MNo,M O Yes M No Rework / sect NCR'SFR No. O N/A
. 13. Wort instnit one I-' '
T /$ l 0$
- E0t'/E6 l$ $/N/$~h ~ A #C ~ /$1/ Ah/t/
vyoel Ai/ L1sbsdimts sbu 6 deIbene] uishe -)}r._
_A U$f 0ll A)lf OYS hhl) /0$ dYk/fl /) Y' E //}8 ,_. y 0
/ ~2/5 / ild a1 Ate >4- SS Al / b2h A/>E'th
'~
. h
. n)n.es De,ad/dkw' -
b L -
. / '
/ Yes GC No
- 16. Gearance Order Number 18. Ignation Source Permet Numoer 17/Rsr ion Wo& Perdet Numoer No. ,_ yo No.
t9 Permosen to start (SSI Segnature / Date Work Com o! Wort an s Segnature'Date 21 Wonunan s S
, I t t4 $/l 8 gM ]Y
, v $ ' A [ $ (i , - 0 DA W ' N6 M
- 23. Testing Comcuete/Osto nEW bt 0' # c' 24 System Restored (SS)10sto/Tme 4
%7
/v6e#'\
- 35. Section Review 26. NPRO Review 27.OE Provow j i
- 28. Cornrnents/Remarna / y 20 a. Removed item Contres ,
kc o f: n489 NCRiwR No.
f
/ .,
/ -
/ _
Wkke. Wnrtrmen Piner . Rhtft Mestwulaar vesenw.Se anu nim m. a
]
E"h90s &~16 666ddhICREEK WORK REQ Date/ Time ussied py .
)
- 'W ,, , - h2ub M DN J .
/2
- s r _.. _m osservosa '
I ~EU1*dans e to outer la er of insulation on conductor "A" of RTD-1. Reference en .
t:d'.. . :.
^
SN21654E. NCR states " Outer layer of insulation of conductor A of RTD-1 is
~ . . .
v 'tN6.'& . . . .
avalin'~from inside ottin ad h im
. 9 ~- - Y . $ W e .... .. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . .,
TInte rit of conductor A is indeterminate." NCR otentiall closed in error.
- 4. Work Request Tag No.
8 _ _ _ _
- 5. T.., u, i Resoure 6. Plant Mode 7. HP ^.. . . J 8. Safety Classihcation
.WM Ac 4,; i, f-(j - - O Yes 09 No _
glated O Special Scope ONNSR
- 12. SS Signa 2 i
- s. Camerance O Yes 9 No und to. os=rab*
p>Yes O No Time Umit T.S. Reference 24 11.ResonabW 49 hI-
- 17. Disposition Category
- 14. Troubleshooting 15. ASME. Sectnn XI 16. Fire Protecton Review 40 Y$s No O Yes. Class kNo O Yes XNo -
ta. Work e .-
00 T0 $ Off &)SO b 'O Cd T W l/? U _
r).2 TL sic- 4 . F~r6-l.- -//-PSb'c- '
~
y >W /,y yy ,,s.s.g,,Ist s ., e ic' iw
! / o A .94 H n _
. a L
Dere star 4E 5-*
M e/ Rrp-/ /3 yr& 21.
JO Gluainy EngineeriDate /
d OdRequired
'88edd /
AsstJ 2/**/1/*
- 22. ANII/Date
. h W+_ A M' AN %w s' n'/tr'
- 19. Grous
.> ///
24 Radiation Work Permit Number
" Wyes O No A//,4
~
- 25. Fire Protectio.n Permit Number p Clearance Orcer Number y s . --.
g
- 27. Work Composte/ Workman's Segnature/Date 3 /M 26. man's Supervisor
- 26. Permission to start (SS) nature I Date 4
- 33. Section Review 34. NPRO Revew 35. OE Review .,
- 36. Comments / Remarks 37. Removed item Controi or -3, 7 O Rebuild. WR No O Scrap D Downgrade
.:s.a ,
White . Workmer. Pink - Shlft Supervisor i llow - CE A m o w F 8n=.'I
.__d
. . .._ _ ~
,~., ~
'.,'i..<*. .
?l. . < . .n 4;
. h.
') i -
. 4,1Ej Section IV 4 tv.. *
- 1. ... . ,
n p.
. . . t, . a..:
,. . .. . ~:. s
- 38. Failure Descripdon ' *"
..u.. ,
' Vi g
y,. v. ... .: y. . ~%,; . .. : . e -3 ..y:g
- ,. ."v....>. .
3
',) , t c . rt. ?s
-ck. te_ :. .-[.Pc :.
4.f f
&f.'.
' .. .ci :. . < _ _ .
@ .a .
W-
'.s.: 'o
.. 'W.Q l.Q . . . .. 1=. ... . ,C.:..,W, , ,.i :h,. :.; - ' . -- - ~ -- . - - . '- L &
"M. m. Q'M .. ..v.-."
. ~
"?d. 39. Cause of Failure - J N
t-us
,h.
.=. : w ..,. w u ...,,,,f. w w . . ,ta. r.' . . . . = .. :. :. .
. . ... .. .. .::, . . u. ...... ..=. .....m. .,.u
.e.
. . ~ me m - .. >. ,.c.
.u..
.kd
.NM*MUy w ..! c .i.)$.~
2 ' '
o,..M . . M W . '. ..---~L.i-.-.-...---.--b '
.,r. . .
.h. a.
.CI's.A!Iff
. w
. = . . . . .a . .,
A. ,.o. . .g . .
. - me...e:
.4e a .s.. .
- 7. . . { \, aa:.y y.-.~ , :- <, , . , . . , -
... a ~ " 7 . , .u...m, . ,,-- p.. .:. :. ; %
m.c, . .... .... , , .
h.<o.nuO,hnw Y)u ? ? -/ 557Y--Ok k k) ms Kr ::47~ hn,. N;...w-E 4.. ...
.m ew . s .. m. 4 ' kr W.,]..3~ h0'%. ..
..d f a 7WwlbV& .
' ... , s ., . ,
- c. . . .+
. SOl%Ask ,g.:-ft. ; .e+ '. :. .
'12217.i
(-
AA . I
,h. ff .mpr. '
$ b& 4., I t' W [ ' E 'A
'%h ; y.)*. ..-
' ' Y? -m 7
L_ oAn.k JC,X }g .,U. .~.,.sL & ei P $ 1n. f n il e +-
- 1t r :.f.zo.:
' > tA%t
.. a : . .
06.Y,-80{f4,b52-
...=r. . (/ r, .
.$bn. ,Kr- .,. ,.
L b)/22t X %M-e7~.AL M P ~ -
', .: ~
- . z . w g ' db...
, - n:.. . wa o ,p ,g:. . . .e v.
f,4.,
_SEE. Wemm,Heus$, ,'" Osk'h . . . . . .
as is " bis mme.a . fn c. % 4c-w mea % ~
l
.+rre cM.c.o; m-' :r--zc-?r N; ~ ' ' f 'I3 Mc. f. 1
> 41. Parts . . .used . _. .. ..M A W A .' . . . . . . - . . . . . :2NN<.
.. . . . . . . .;. _ .L;. .;..* . *h "W-
- .;..!;8 .
.. . ..y A 'h
. .3 .
W
.. t . <.
I .
i
~ .. i . . . . y. * .
.1
. .o ,
. . x. . . - - ,... .. . . . . ' . . Ji ' . ,
- m. .. , , , . . .t /;E: .W .:.u . ...'.J. W. 4I ..
1 s.- 1
.i..
..o,..-
1
. .g.s. .'2
%.= ~ . : -- - : .- ::: . :
.}. .:.. ' * (. -- h".; .: . . . .- - -- . . .-- . n . . . :
.y .
=.:- - :p .: :-h r .* ' .}f.,fs. k
- , l y.: . _ ....
- ' 4
- A y.. ',: s,
.' x .
. . . : i,'. ;. .
II
. :q_y .
.h Equip No Ac5vity No WR No. Date
. . .V . ,
h T O
-, M&TE Used WC. E I N h o O
'I I
$ % cr B . +. 1 g ar 'g
- 3. Man Hrs. Used -
F Mechanic-ME, Electrician-EL,'Instrurnen k g b k 3 3 gg l
. Machinist-MC, Utility Helper-UH. Computer 1 k -
g g $ C\
h g 4 g3 ,[
f
(
.o X "
f,P Short Term Notes - % 3 s
p". s p "O N b ;)
to a h 4 s N Qi k 8*"'"*'Y '
c.c h d \ k V ug k N eu....
- ~
, c.e -.
A n ry%s
,%y
& % N ,
p - -.~ .~ ..
E m n Q 1i
.M ..
y s e 4 , w g 4 Q'
, r :..., r. ...r , . c, . .
A x. p h g i '
( . rgyR '*,$l3*
- e ':."'ta;N .t . 3 ,
s n -
' s .a
,, (
M
==============================================================.
MR O l WRITER =============== ,
- O :
==================:=============================
SYS : ===============
! MATERIAL REQUIRED YES INO : NON O I i
- =======================:==========a=======: =======;========l===
PRI ====;
!R.D.S WRITTEN !YES NO : SPEC. #
========================:==================:.
CG PAGE # =======:========:===============:
l R. O. S. #
- DATE : .
========================:
!ATERI AL INFORMATION ===================================: =
(ORDERED, HOLD,MMGM,ESD,ETC.)
b
= = = = =--- = _ _ = _ _ = = = = = = = = = = =-~=~~= ~= _ _ = _ _======
=_=== - -_-___====- ~~_
=============g O
4 8
m
- j , ' s:. Figura 1D O
' ,. , W' LF CREEK WORK RDQUEST SUPPIIMENTAL SHEET (W.R. BIOCK 18 COVf.) W.R. i EQUIPMENT NAMPAJO.
W.R. Block 18 Information Continued: Azdf, d om/ W a/,L,vad,
..::.~.
.a. . . . .
.;ilsWA)h u2ea 6 WAK .ddosAs ]M S$lolai . dor, A7 $,(/ PPo!M s d Ls w w/ /
.;.G:3. :, . . -
.< *' s_ Ahdar*':lt;.*Ql,'.
'e.- .i h
.i. -
%1QMQ&. +., 'b-~ a:MA49
- AGA ' d't'A;i,' W. . A/;_.
< , 4. '
hd ' h,W'RZ ' Y;T$Q.4* 5?
-)i.$&$.'/r
F@M - idkMP v. c.~p.:. Au .T.W?.p:fy'e.:a
. c.D ,s~ DXb.(/ s- .: l
' ' ... 'd!
.- f ./ .
Ah- " '
'.yyw->:.5'$Q}
Mq 'M%1R v . : ' ...;;p:9
' 1.Q;& ?...
e jjg **3
..E
= ,, . . i .' 1 .
,j. . . ' .
.n.*;p.;
. . y. .
4' },1. , g ,,. . p, a h.h,g '$hj .,%
. pl '.yj* .,.
- t ' g* 4;; "..
. . .- 4 a
- .I ' . ..,T.- h
..y
. u.< .. ;.a.;
,' 4+ ".g*, .yf;.cf,ARy',
- ciip s
~* .
.jp.,
' : s
.,.s...
..e.
\n
.. . ., +\;;
t
. . .'.y a...t.
I s
ADM 01-057 ..
- v. .:,
.: .3. .. .. gre.
,p:.". d, n.
,,I - - * . ;;. Rw . 3 c:: .. . . ....;-. ' .-YDE.'O'hOMN: ' '
-. 1 TB - 10 of" ovva->:
{RfO2l%
A geon %A a / R R 9 3 3 A 7_
_ }7nr Goa PI 3K s c--> 2L AlA -
nK M1 1x)M 22 A l C: l' . V2233^\ OL P 7. .R B ~~
19 A I R- _
l e 42.__G # 25 A/D- - [2u3A ,, u.
SH Lb 2T AIC, '
oe :
P3 .
'OR ' 3 I * A T A --- , or BL A2U 33 '
ids insa a. i - sc4
.s.
94 A)-BR 34 A2 R e t__.
. & R-Ex so A2 b n s.a N \ sV'
$ WLh 37_ 42G or 95 6 -BK 3C. A 3A - o hlr n- RK 3R A3C, i223,4Jt- 1 or Pin RL-R K 39 A_3 B - J -
ot
& BK- W 35 A3_.D i 223-3.n..t ar__ '
sHLD 37
~
/ 36 ox R-w _sha ~
's p o co ., 6 60 ? I g.w l l .p W Y,s s M \
_ RL-LO .
SK- R SH L3 V V.. cr->sao mhhr i F2uxe 2010 A detrM )
MumMercq l 9
, , , . ,me esam e. - m emme e**a= * * * * " ' * * * ' * * * * * " ' * * * * * * ' * ' * * * " --
egy- ma h 84M 9e q -4 6e eenge e m ge gase es. - g@g fBl.3eGES 5 **## ## 84I88*M 9* " * * * ' ** *"
e 8-' _ _ - enga g., geen ge asupeg, geem e og a 6- 9 e **** *'*DM*WD*"M' *'***988*** '-##
%^- hw,g gg4 m W . _ m ghG N @G eh eene9-e ee @m De N9 1
'* * *9**** $ eseen e ,,e messe
.j , 5; .
WJRK REQUEST ILc. VISION SHEET
- ?
- I' WR tb. pg/LJ - ff _ !
Bev. ^ gj Date _r/si/tr ,
Revised Disposition Category:l[l Rewrk/Feject l[l Repair /Use-as-is l% Change Engineering Design Authority Review Required: l[lYesl((hb bEr kA ll- Y}& WA05.SSAT AWo Ad8533AA/
f
. ;i, . ,
,W Ws o . /83.53.347
. h. e. /885 33 AN
- i
. :. s j i-l l
I.
7' Y C* Sfl8b ~
Group inader/Date k[/I -u- .// r L. ,
d Of Signature /Date # N - . d
' N'/Sc' l, Signature /Date F ' .
i
__ Signature /Date Signature /Date i
e l
\
\EM 01-057 ;' .
lev. 3 '
- , t
_ _ _ _. : . _ q ICRK REQUEST RC/ISION SHECT
~
WR tb._ gy/f.fg .
. Rev. r, Date 3;g/jy-Revised Disp 3sition Category:l[l Rework / Reject l_%Repairkse-as-hl~( No C .
a.
Engineering Design Authority Review Required: Q Yes l ,~l tb
' , h A&' Ef/ .<Al$ d A v Nd
- k.% As1 -e A & dau' .;
oL M * *'
and ads-eAW .ed aca @'&'?
. g yn/g M - -
ge nw. ~
r y\T.-* *;.*;;
,e..
- .'. a i
W4 2-m-as Grou to cr/Dat Vd[ mm/ S///u' NN fi ature/Date 7' M 'f.$
Signature /Date 1' J
_ Signature /Date )
Signature /Date ,
AD1 0 -057 Rev. .
5~., e* mI'.
2
,,, FOffM MEF-E-314-1 REV 2s 85 WOLF CREEK .
s
" ~ ~ * " * " * ~
STATION 'f W RW- g fy ENGINEERING DISPOSITION ?
(P., , J Rem No.
C-w - 432. - B B
- 1. DIsmSITIm Q APPROVED AS RKONENDED 0 DISPOSITION REVISED O RemrED 2.
(a) MODIFICATION Docuens .
(c) REERENCE Docuens NA Nk (b) AFFECTED DOCuGES (d) AFFECTED CD4NNEtCs UA Y$ i l
- 3. CIARIFICATION OF DISPOSITION:
~
S 0, /-lo/dep. L, M. Potseb n {lc .s01d 1Aaf tie unesselsy 5 re,coided were wt syy'ni Cka n f p rov ld< Ap ;>re,b n-e/ecfrie cup /< Ay is made o.s de k,m ' ed p en tA e n-%es ee 4 o lee k ( Parn 3,2, /, 5 r-( M ~769-o St9) i
& also .gsi d fAa (
a.- en due fw 7 0 7 cea ,, d resubce c k wu/d h spynprdk, ,
W% SIGNATURE os-je-er-mTE l
- 4. mis txruen REVISES AN EXISTING R4P C Es g go ;
TaIs cocuen REcuIREs A e rag !
O l'Es B No R4R #
R4R CATEGORY C 1A C 1B C ic
- s. AremvAts/ccuens ,
j; m
IEAD ENGINEER
<n 3-144r l mTE ,l l A n/ 3-/4-Kf /
- 3 - f tf- g f
,Resmusistr ENG1NEna mTE s erios m GEa mrE I
~
C *3 e ~ 6 X .dfC 1l .
RTVIEk' OF WOLF CREEK QI I!A'ESTIGATIONS radc o: il. 2. 6 - 3 5% '
- bs D: ssso-14 f e<' ~
SE NUMBER: Cc t '2.c*2.T (~s )
TLE- A% d 4tc ./;J,6 / rmr : .'*Pe st.h D u., h M Tmi E.q i,. ee a,
8 :
- oPSIS Or (.ASE/ CONCERN (S):
,, C'I 4 f c t s a.ow. cv4 m,.cr. . ,&t--.5 t - n c, ,.lf, ,
4 Q1 'ud s Ji- .WQ cle:t, . . v,p.cf c. r.6.
4 ? it #ed krca. (weos) .
t'<.~ o s.e - . 4 w r. . ..q. o,u ,, , .a. wr.l,.<as r-et es.~
"O t h ec. ua h L* ms(wfI%g c,re, p* f C r aaC l D *' I f 3 Y4meb sk 6 arJeck'5 ct 0 -. . n. . ..L : % s - a .a . c r ... . a- , a %,e s.4 <tae . A i bJ.oce.w s. ~ e %h .le s it 4 <a=.s.ncd>le 6 co n t fo de this e.aav a<er wat **i cs .s ..sk k \ v var.l y.m u a.ra w c_ w L a u a a ea , .l = a A p < o ~ d u f - sr h44 ft.,,g%g ).c},w -
' ue
'" c'#c =%.ccwes al by n-aeT:[;;LJ A c.{ F'is ,pa.n W-a oA r e4 - nted t w 'h c Mi%s ecvit. " . I LUATION OF QI TINDINGS/ DISPOSITION: AGREE DISAGREE AIN:
(
Oi 15 c w c$a 5 e % d c2- rreci:)e a d~E af$cuj o ~
Ed E+% IM NEcr Wcu 5
<t3-da 9 MCatra cE <,.c.%4 y v,c.c.f;,a P n rd ie e to 9 e a c.ca.ec%d . 1
. f~btO MesLc =Ticu
, b e%g %.s. g r<<c4ds d.c d CSCoct Ch,,nt. b b t _m_ .3 p.Ai r m e_d .
% pe.ck.:, n ,p & n k dc ,L od % k m d ;
tu.s' d. t-e r c> r e,cces e h i f,.
C*- prove , b+-yca.d et roctscJe cbbi; b'v' doca Os 4.u;Leteve JE C-sCeo% d prom vicMcc a.s i ray Q y te.(m @ pg Gyr tL% ihis
{
v % oi c 4 .4c% c.cn ch n.e.3 A ts~ &3 cu2 c & t ,
y Y \
b\L%
.q, REVIEW 07 VOLT CRED 01 INVESTIGATIONS C.L L6W U 5~ Yf h 't nsmEr.: c c.r- u 7 *t T (U l
, . g ,g t h d or 4 *D sc. GC ~sne r l
n .; ;
- >515 C'T (.ASE/ CONCERN ( 5) :
- A m,4., r w k l 't? Ol +% d s k wo 3 IUibdd. / cu l Lt.a ssl . J sds.,7 J ;re.J.. n ., c t. < % i i;.da.1a % o c
cf 4 u per.c.,,a .C& di h vg ksx,u o & u s >]~u d: *.fs eu ." du- pu Is ~ <[.e t - M u w ag~g yco) Q
" C$ u 6(is t. c d 5t- D tid m t L4 Leu a Ls e - w Nc s-Ms . M 4 ** c
$'ePre M r.
, G\ ~
'c t"Tc.d s Z v n G ., c.r W s 4 .v s,s e r s (-Q , s u E "L ~ Af*ad sG ~ w'4 d d5-cIkcuwfMM.%cb M k kkAperM
"'p ba seu d ca chi . cL. c3 y,,d stc tc.) % s mdd./ -
D *'
- M i '- ' M 5 k e . . . o c % - 7 GE,. .f' W a M O "***
8 ' C-'A -' I ! ff % Sd sid h
- AGRE. . REE
.;ATION OT Q1 FINDINOS/ DISPOSITION:
AIK:
QI dduck resk %eir r M,2 cakeh i T,M%j o .F o n t. e t M e d su wwd yea.
CI h oNA.A suF4r d ca t6 cle w y c 65-P u d v $b iW6. 9 WJ nk # cd we %,o.s sesp,ch . , ,
@ A ru,a e-r %.ciiud @ rncTa L 'EO'd'^" I!
tmh erz>c3e.- di.3 4csel @ prwidd 4 Ad-s vA.neln SW kl. d Sh. was b e ad, J d ed d W -
w ge. ac-k d4 mT.G t dt. 'i 4 PO ^d L D M * ,
q!
.:> iw imem-h ad wy rey,c.et+_d ia ik ia+-a u.s d oc .I Lj sr use. ~ % dcL1 A e..ovedc_ bush b db-4 c.t.
i weGcicJ'eu
" # ^~-A ebQ % %f den.c is uh ti Ed y
% cs cE m . __ _
.. 4--..
.. .- . %. $ -013 -/ 8 , 4
- ~ ' '
, ,g., i.,e 3 ,
5 -'
L
. .. .. . . . . w ra u.. <.n ~.c . , . . < . . . , . .
Qtjf[fl} fhT N
g 3.,ti- 5'/ REVIEWOFWOLFCRbEKQ1 INVESTIGATIONS a.o5 a o -S- 24 -
G __ .
j_ _ _.. -. _ _ - '.
SE NUMBER: G c I~' b4 "T 't "I' M' ,
, ILE :' h g.al Ik d or A "pl[ G C "T'c. p.ejibr- '
~
, ' (& -
s . ;
NOPSIS OF CASE / CONCERN (S):
%e. ,,%j To QI At 3L(. u.x u I M de. del u l L =sr.a/
.tlcd. TL, a t < < w ) i m .:1 e a reu ~ W sdq4 no k w u , M u i S % L b ." of 4 n " per...,nd fA d d d M
4-~-cl ee c-h sec, 7eol cd C-LC-c 6(,4c. M5ds5,yg g %dhs.t aM M MCesd .
5 c 640 repra '
r.
'D$ fe f*-It~C 2 s @ vg h .s c[ k G w W Vns o r,S * *
/""
- 5 *C A' '
- branel d veksel tac.w.=vf 4 b . W o b d ko.k cu pron
~
w'h b 4seu d a.b d u.ii . rL otreed d&l na + A ms k .. ,
A .c u w
% .,. ,,, ddc/
~
at -him : r i s. % r 3,a ,L_TW WJATION OF Q1 FINDINGS / DISPOSITION: AGREE '
? LAIN: '
h C(i ~dOk Md re.sk %eir eg.pc.Mc2 MA(e'.h ik %hmj eg og. pm w n> w-Q. veee.ud .
b Gi o&ux) -w.e Aid. sht.u.cd Le crc,esa.c/cA soerwicn tis desy ce.tk A weMia de s pictiw, ,
)
E hf gh tuh qu discGeseg
' .,en w use prosndal 4 g, y g gy ht"M e M ,%A & tad W % # w .
+m !
oe. aks. ch4 cmr&r A.'id F)~ed. L h of <e_ ecd
> % mu c-C 2_. md_ fcase ty re-ec.ete.] i& is , me.<r u 5m 14 .I '
~
- % se ~ctcs ddstT' s , erav 4 a % ds & alL % -f3
"**T'9M ek.idt% set deu tu tak tg Q
- Ws cEm . 4-ss-o 3 g
8E l .
Wy'* -
(.lf- ff .il}
. .:.r.
j
?
l l
l Report of Interview of William Gary Westhoff n i On July 26, 1985, WilliamGaryWesthoff,[ ' ~
i
,( .
-- 9 by NRC Investigator Mark Emersor.
L
. was interviewed /at DIC Headquarters in Westhoff was questioned regarding his knowledge of the alle *ged
- Harassment,pf and Intimidation of while working for ART Dean at the Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Plant,,Burlington, KS. ~.
wK c u dQ n [ A .op N di,+ 7 f s L < % q
' g(a ' fu Westhoff stated he id-
~
--*%rqAmipica in regard to the allegations i
made by 2RX against Art DOAN. Westhoff said he did receive several
., complaints against Doan from other DIC employees working for Doan at Wolf Creek.
q Westhoff related that he had received a letter from Mmennet in which alle'ged 44 DOAN was _ _ 0-t..- -===d Harms cing, Int id dating and hic personnel and showing favoritism to some of his employees. Westhoff said he personally vent to Wolf Creek to investigate these allegations. Westhoff related electrical .
he interviewed , and the other/QC inspectors and found that the complaints against Doan dealt with old or dated information. Westhoff said most of the people who were susposedly harassed and intimidated by Dean had already left the site and were employed elsewhere. Westhoff admitted that he did verify that Doan had called one QC inspector of Chinese-mmques origion, " CHINK".x 0 A 'J xi r--l:r i: --_- --s Westhoff stated he instructed to cease all ethnic references when ad!iressing the QC inspectors.
t Westhoff advised that his questioning of the personnel working for Doan revealed mixed results. Westhoff said fifty percent of the'contacte personnel believed U a -
Doan had used harassment and intimidation techniques within the' QC department and fifty percent of h those contacted believed no Harassment or intimidation had taken l
place. Westhoff 4 said he informed the Qc inspectors that he could not utilize dated j 415--013 -8
J 2
.,2 p ,
e, O
.. i
+
l information against Doan. Cesthoff advised most of the complaints Doan involved QC personnel who had already transfered or quit their positions. Westhoff advised
^ recontacted him during March 1985 and reported that one NCE had been improperly dispositioned by Doan. The NCR reportedly involved a RTD1 ccaductor vith unraveling insulation. Westhoff stated he initiated an immediate re-ir.spection tAMv*5GM deHs % OeTNwI4Mt 4"* ^suDeo FA% ATii3ha ',' i t of this area "M 9- 2: Airpaciti:n d a ;;;;;t 9 h A""'": *a dm etien. j Westhoff acknowledged he had previously demoted Doan during 1982 from Qd supervisor management- -
to QC inspector because of Do n'sg7 gip 2 Westhoff said M- 2_wrg ixx1 the r ' 8 aca hk hiIMA : .D ;.h' '
I complaints fromy pe rsonnel AdmQ;'pTicT44e 1982 demotion. ;
I i Westhoff stated after concluding his invest % 4 tion he was sqis unable to identify specific .
i examples of Doan's incompetence or verify the allegations against him. Westhoff ,
i said the allegations seemed to be dated and motivated by a personality conflic c between Doan and Men some of the QC inspectors. Westhoff acknowledged he suggested.r
% Doan's supervisor, Lou Eastervood,that Doan's scheduled tr.ansfer to a non N position in. -
I be effected to avoid Jerseyez further managerent/ labor tensions.
t End of Report of Interview of William Gary Westhoff Prepared on August 5, 1955 by Mark Emerson i
I"
.i o
l t J
. . .: i u.s. suCu,Ari CeCULATCRY COMMISt,4CN y ",, ,
~* LLECATION
. DATA FOiiM inet uct.ons c,n re...>.. sio.
RECE!VING OFFICE Docket Number (if applicable) recility(ler.) Involved: (Namel as mere e.sn 3, or ut fjf/g j p ,=fgpg 8 5 0 0 6 4 8 2.
..w6c, wrae GENERIC) ,
huML)MZ-m W.,,~C -
l '
~enetiens! Ares (s) Involved:
Ch..ek sp; c,priate bosteel l operations onsite health and safety d construction offsite health and safety emergency preparedness safeguards ,
other tsp.cityl cri.mion: 191 elWol, Iri r i vl at l II I i1 I I I I l I I II I Umit to 100 characters) gg g g g lIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIII I IGl vi- l 9151 -lol /131 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I etcc of A!!egation: '
' :4 everiete box)
- contractor employee security guard .
_ licensee employee news media d NRC employee private citizen organization (specifyl l ,,,,,,,,,,
oth er (Speelfyl MM 00 YY
- 4 ," .p-tion Received:
0 7 6 i B f
- mes of ir riividual (nrit two initisk and t.s <>.mel MI
> c,civh.9 A!!t ' action:
Mice:
$? $ W ACTION OFFICE tion Offke Centact: triest two initials end t it n. met i S T* lep' one Number: ,
tus:
l Open,if followup a,ctions are peinding or in progress
)
., :t c,,,, , ,
Closed, if followup actions are completed MM CD YY a :e C!c%d:
- "I
.. m a es .a .,..
IIIII II[ll III l
l
- ~' ""~*' )
",ran uumber:
l l ~
l 'A* l
< 4 0 t3 - 5 j
..,_.__~ _ _ _ _ _
- J r-CFFICIAL USE ONLY '.,,
- : CASE iCHRONOLOGY FILE, musseE R SATE OPE 8 SED OPENED sy 4- W- 613 7 -0/-E' S~ EMM$dA/
ECTE 'ACTivlTY l-D/- 2T T A12 AfAROO- s w /5 1AW k st Y Y K GsJ - a 2 W G d6 JG,A -nn~
b3Nd w St/ -2'S~-cos W / ~
7-/Mr5 Ao2 //udd $w' d K m2ta/A ned X
'7 l Y- 1 5
._ ]O-si1All A s df Z~
'p O A, 4 jQ j jj( g are// ( ,)
O f &'. 4 sf~ht. . "
7 'f~!V I~' T U 6 ~'/ N 7~T i bl/~ b 'A $20 TiG~E 72 aav 3 Essie,e da 4/WA ds'7~ns,-
~
~
2- m c qLrJ '
7.x4 LTeak 5h ws71/F ok /W .cw / a 17-a d s vid 61AE7 /]){ Av/L APnTDd11 '
/ "
7-5 /-W ' >/ /vi d A b d f ,
9-1 ks- //s/d A ji>>>> & w & ] A y / d N M m r-3/-ii w / 4 ,J.xaC/ M .4.* ,JJ J Ae h-n& XL 6K A. )mQ_
_A lldul i2 L + A! '/d & ..ji?# km . ,-
%G
'Gbiriu aD \ Puad Smes' Gsa hs,o r a ()op
_ A/&v 2 0 - J. I (4 + '
d s7% GF = 90N- 98 I - 4870 t W . ~rmu,;c / hw (sr+iverYak) .
J h y/l /> UIk . Wdb6ed 2 9V ,
T- 3-85' b>EA WsdhifSano 6 -J'77s Au_- &
AwjA ldM/A b 9-30-tr~ /Nns./ lf?
' M J A w n k ZAsc./r c_Lh Ao W&,_ > &
i04MY' Ehi$UdWm ' hw " /MmA&or/W
/%d L W & .
Il- A/~ 95~
M A 0 r X o s t / o A ls U / &. f0/__-&
95-ss- cm_ &mj2-zz-shn.H"Wm.,;-ps-e.r:.M QS -
~I 2 7-9t; h, b '
rar sexAn W A' O/MO : Fo/ & _/f "Qew n f@A$
w %
y \
ECTIVITY 00 DES L/W e LETTER De WEWO TC a TELEPHONE CALL INSP a IRSPECTION esT9 e wgETING INV s INVESTIGATION PE P- a REPORT !$$UED OFFICIAL USE ONLY DO NOT DISCLOSE d 'N ~- Ul 'd d 3
P Eh *105ICkII11 E7j,Jg' CASE mm: Q, -d[ DATE:
(( ((
"' d Dr(ICwl : Sast VM $ Q PIANT/ VENDOR:
INVESTIGATOR: [g*Md Q
- t SUM'ARY:
- 1. : - . =- , h y; y /
- 2. PflNbt' th. &w , b Y2 R '
- sy'y2 4 >
/"W was n-roaiy/nur
~
- c. ,wozm (7-io-sc .
- 3. g ega., D ssii non '
6.
0kilyvhv.c. , _4(Q
'- WSuspfh RW*Vf ("f?)~~ L .
-p f
9gWa-e- aiu,1a ,-f@pe +
,,. p w,a ne~a 4 &w~ w e
/Nssun.%AEMou.
g, gy fg C0421CS:
f 013 - + ,
t
. _ __ _ , _ ._u . {
& R h @5-&
II/r/ts-OIFO REGION IV CHECK LIST FOR ROI BEFORE TRANSMITTAL TO 01:HQ
!I
- I 1
J
( Check the following before transmitting ROI *to 01:HQ:
^/ ,
, _'7 Do the Table of Contents page numbers correspond with -
page number in the report?
k [ Do the Exhibit numbers in body of ROI correspond with ,the .
exhibits as named and listed on Exhibit page? .
g/
o the titles appear (after name) for each individual named in the Table of Contents?s / N M ### /41 O # #08 p/~ Does the.first page of all exhibits carry the case num3er? l t
/ _ Are all exhibits numbered on lower right side? "
4 I
L Do conclusions match in each of the following areas? '
! a. LOT '
- b. Synopsis N#g
) y '[ c, d.
Purpose--
Willfulness 6 LW -
f_7 Has potential DOJ referral been considered? gj a
~
/ Is there a requirement for " Notification" of the Region on any potential safety question?
Has copy of ROI with original attachments been made for AO storage at OIFO Region IV?
/_ h as original ROI with copy of attachments been made for 01:HQ?
as the diskette been duplicated to retain in OIF0?
f_ b s original diskette enclosed with ROI?
f_YHasROIpac'kagebeenmarkedfortransmittalviaDHL?
1 ii
.f '
Y f 4 - % 5- 013 g e .
2
U(U 64- M T '
'1
\. , s nir I4deu.r . ;
etttwe4 couem ett EI<< . %df Ap,n we a ce M 61Jg .l pdkb>~ . d t1 had bo<u d\<gD i g n O J L. f aa& g :
to w l
m2 c . D.y hedJ % & - . % am,h dxda , asatp
\
- j. W3. . % uA j d) q WJr. Wre , j
/
- b. o w ~. 4hn J J fo b . 14
. em doodied, bya nwa,, u- 1 M eks @%. & m %- 9 l[0.w.J3JgedUsS(.wt+cAA
& % <~4<9-J4 J pnda., q -
A Dou. K4, u kJ
- =JL- e.d. J<.Js A pw y 4 A 4 W p e p p .u c~ h cb.5 a 6,6auid guhJ. ^
- i.,<. Sudi<4 u r blit. .
Jai J tthd<- w h4- 4 pow 'p.xt@<cwi- (~.-. _
% be,s entJ<.s) E E 3
. k'.. MEll[d y O K 9 w, 4 pg uk9m 4 ff, ,
ic , e u eK. a ly mi / ,,, / i' ,,
.._._T_h<. carJNAblag. b.Aw wo.s .p.ao h 9:L<. CEd ytt &c.4
... s~S .
mawbg.(.bh . .hg i
._..gid h ."The.x..fMs,w. s. M_.b<cw yedmsl14o.6uhd d%
n.tewg mMeck., .
M pAbd.
..W.":: bwwths NSO .&Nk%3..re dO
' ~ vtd M The n d.
. . ._ E w<.M '
O ftil>N W W er.% igkm
%d'.1&M..%
.h.MMeg M $S1w p Gg &4h.Lt w .suk.ppmA
...._ O.
L 3L utj' '
.Ih .OS:5, )
hd ML61.Mek*^- _ y IN hA*d bli _b..k [s .
<tdA NA .Y S& (Y' fW W hs .
.h I a
2
.. _. ....M 7 18 8 M i
- = . . -
J.. J.. .
_ ... n ._ . _ _ . . . ._.
'A
/f1Jyyj _
4- ts- ors -c J
h-13-85
? m Alleger: DIC Electrical QC ' Doan threatened to fire fo ,
excessive absentism,, doodling, Q1 exit interview 7 - 1 8 - 814 QCI 84-79I typing resumes, abusing . phone 3 poss2ble witnesses provided (none interviewed) Phone taken away.
Q1 investig ative plan 1. Interview DOAN and MAULDIN(supervisors) 2 Check Personnel files 3 Evaluate Q1 result: . hould not relate any specific instance or provide any specific example of harassment. I and H vas not substantiated therefore this concern is considered closed in the Q1 program". . I Q1 memo in file: ..."no excessive absenteeism or tardness shown on attendence records no written reprimands". J
" ~.Q . - .: ~ ~~- g i Jul Interview of Alleger 'N )
i
% y 10, 1983 - '
l '
- l. Personality conflict with Doan
- 2. Never intimidated
- 3 No Plant safety issues
'; reportedly i DOAN/ threatened to fire alleger for excessive absent and tardy problems, doodling while on telephone and other harassment / personality conflicts. ..
a REVIEW OF PERSONNEL FILES no excesses verified by DIC personnel mgr.
. (attendance added to allegers " principal areas of responsibility for this job")
ifffERVIEW OF TWO WITNESSES (provided by alleger) and VERIFIED Harassment / Favoritism further identified Q1 as " cover-up, pacification group..... protect KGE from NRC"
"./.'as smoke screen to prevent NRC intervention" INTERVIEW OF DOAN ---Denial of Harassment i
"I am a blunt and candid person. . ."
1 is a lazy person etc. l
'h' 4 -Ts5 -ol3 - 59 31 1
- .J er . # r Y
2:RC FORM 305 <
UJ. NUCLEAR RE1ULATOOY COMMISSION 6421 INVESTIGATION STATUS RECORD INSTRUCTIONS: This form is to be mmoleted whenever significent actmty has occurred reintive to e case or et least every 30 days. If no change hos occurred during the 30 day reporting pened, indecete No Change" in the status block, Keep the orgnal with the case file end send one copy to Headquarters, g
Office of Investigations.
CA&E NUMBER CAftGORY OFFICE O . OPERATING REACTOR I INOlvtDUAL LICENSEE '
01 Field Office 4-85-013 c . REACTOR UNo R CONSTRUCTION _
M
- MATERIAL 3/ FUEL V .VINDOR X .OTHfR Amoano To sus;eC' WOLF CREEK: ALLEGED HARASSMENT AND INTIMIDATION EMERSON OF A QC EMPLOYEE STATUS (Soncity dere, and provme a bent onecreten)
DATE: Jan. 30, 1986 - Case closed On Jan. 22e 1986. ROI received in OI:RIV on 1/30/86.
I 9
4 A
I i
- ' 1
\
.i l
t I
4 Bs - 013 -a
$W&
~1
- UA. NUCLEA:t Cf TULATDAY CQ8A848SION t'RC POAM 308 INVEST 1GATON STATUS RECORD lesSTRUCTIONS: This form a to be aprno'eted whenesse s ywficent actierty has oemarved ro6stise to a esse or et toast every E deys if no shenes has senarred skring the 30 day reporting period, indeste *'ho Otange" in the stetus t>4ecdt. Kaso the orienel ureth the mes fi6e and send one empy to Headquarters.
Office of investiestions. ,
CaTroomy OF 4CE Casa seveneen g o . oesnarmo acacron moeviount teC =ses l c g,y"crga u
[ . . .areainwrue' n IV
,4-85-013
' v waooa (xn = orma assmuo to *vw'c' Wolf Creek : Alleged harassment and intimidation Mark Emerson of a QC employee.
ST ATUS (Speci4 stree, om/ provate a brw/ esecresthwt) 07/01/85 - This inquiry was opened after completion of Case A4-85-005, wherein the Q-1 1 program of KG&E at Wolf Creek was reviewed for adequacy. This case, initially '
l investigated by the Q-1 office, was selected to be examined in detail due to the c appearance of undeveloped leads and questionable findiogs. An alleger complained of l harassment and intimidation by two supervisors and provided identification of witnesses who could.confinn the harassment and intimidation. The Q-1 investigators interviewed the supervisors who denied the allegation and failed to interview the witnesses. The Q-1 investigator closed the investigation explaining that "the allegation was unsubstaniated and had no direct impact on a safety system. ECD 9/85.
f I
DATE: July 31, 1985 - This inquiry is currently in progress. Anticipate , completion of "Q" in August 1985. ECD: 9/85 DATE: Aug. 2, 1985 - This inquiry has been upgraded to an investigation. Please makt. necessary correction to case number. This investigation is currently "
in progress. Anticipate completion of case in Sept. 1985. F,CD : 10/85 DATE: August 30, 1985 - Investigation complete. ROI in preparation. ECD: 10/85 DATE: Sept. 30. 1985 - Rough draft completed but not reviewed. Anticipate final to be completed and forwarded to 01:HQ in Oct. 1985. ECD: 11/85 DATE: Oct. 31, 1985 - Due to typing backlog, smooth report will not be completed until November 1985. ECD: 11/85
- 5 ,
j1 DATE: g 985 - Final draft mailed to 01:HQ for final review this da.te.
DATE: Nov. 29, 1985 - Final draft mailed to 01:HQ for final review on Nov. 20, 1985.
ECD: Unknown DATE: Dec. 31, 1985 - Final review currently being performed at 01:HQ. ECD: Unknown
- y. , , .
- 2. ' %
! N.
~
"/h psf ,/ w
,o i ,b , /
~ se j
, . se .mn u . az i 94wpg
,f3 yJ v
s 4/6 Jyrw (k- .
0".
d & C- f~e/ b t
~,'y c c%/ M9n gegaene. e vy ms a .
sem
. .d / .c 'AMM _
i T em sn me aa
, GQ ga d{ J .E L s~o 3 M W . .
sJ$ n 9v y odp{
y x s p 4:e O w . .-
.zwyl a pg p;c p eg.o (ha9 e +~
hja &y' CWuCe mu N f A' ef- k Y )
e.
~
su Kscond A /A f Ai4 nr ra, ascassa ms4 u Dw+#e-]s4
( 9 _
A
- sa,1 au p1A n~ se d t
~
y r k s.-. ).
L t AB & 4 % d M )f$ /f % VrYf -r e-,um, 7 m o a t p A sy ay/ nWar crH
- K /p'-A naff9! zi s'W Bf -Ytesy w (lll-4-%5-o th - 2%.
- R
" $f $ sag op p o~ s -w,ea, gg,y , a g wsgo ~gse gaz2) 4~ mm a,;4
( s % a vaasy.rQ'th o-i,.si,y p e
'A&& & n ni kap g aa d-4 A-M w apro h h h wf 5 s,L;usfp:}
- +m , ~ ~ g c-, ~
b W Q( mTeu n plc p ,
m onp-4 4i4 E k n A A ra sger _
t
/
w6m m w.o gulo &,W ~ ~~l gIlO ce .9 ~y.c/p e4
($\
~
9 xs r.D u caasey _..
1 C
g-[fJej 7 ?
k NMe 8 y Y- -
- 1. ~
c
~.
)..:
C calf %e
4 fw g6;L pkg _
/ad l
n a R
mae fca.:r o a 24 DaJ s~rQs#d
%& h,@.Sl & hiiw . W l
~ t & E A f 7 msf. ~ du.Cf Odu = meS% 9 '
wuLesLa .
8/m + c 6 sk- ,
{ had 0 ,
b { h tfa Z Tid A m }76 pe l o r '
, ur un TA} mp ar 2 se<~spr is ;4 %
58Rf S HC VC m AE
~ v sc , A f / cg / x m u a n d
, usaaf was fOa~ j }w pove) w a topaef- - sw a % x2,,ona'; %au -
% s_ -
. I IM f" oa $h'y *" &&. k" .,
3 7% d M y 44 n u?r so ay /p~ O zg&. ai:=..ua,os r f/%n ga* merr=y~ ~
. Q) u sydpr ?4 er.cabay%/k g
s Y '75MMf Aw StWI L.rDAuQ <,O/M [ a r
M$ f*>nd hM 4 -9;5SQff
- 013 pgh -9
.m.-.-._.,&<
g a
,s f h0AN) MEtb6 A e[W gasd caths Tkedh DOS: w.& nytt mf ,
W2-(f paum s+suffd h SY5$$'fR ,
j w'f T&p.p paj/af lSDxW6e23th-padf./
9
. ax 6sW l 9745E
/
2nav u*y.c %
P f Job 'r w p 4 /'%
w a-sasc 2 ww; yam vs.ex pe a g,4 1R** naga uh ritN
[d fY & b "'
^Y h f/g en un sqq(L scrp n-r agS"! u L
0A 'T^ & /k .
h hh h b)$ d $f/w f h 1 h%'[k perss in &arscR , ?
f ftpn qs. f W M NS)'
[ ---
4 -q s-ot'5 - 26
[l
~
j' g !
oiD T& v fk 1gsd $7// r>f l 7a W.r-y ob mg ,g _
- W -
w %+P /#
fSRh' m7& w: s%%k A ac
? .
s p h A0 S G -
ra As
' ref Wft s ( am
~ '
l lduOjf s arp1, .
l po Csr
[w ~% ETd~f %r dr x un e
)
......-.....-.-i D,, 2, 2rrr
$D W8 3 "h0l -
pss. V Gam./a[
~
s blC@m~ r; Oc.-
Af1Asf) 5SM W]
~
. QC ATes p n$osa
^-
- ~ - - Aq w aq'aTarJ OL ~
WfM*A liS T f bea 'T~~ ..
_. will 3 M Gir" /P sle.ce A k 17~
~l
\g 4.yp'y
~
7y/b * ~'$ nr4~d 7~' *
~}
c , ~ i a a , .., ~ ~ n _
((i% ~'T n M w.ecr4 End.i i _ . T.L_=
p p
^; %TW
~ ^ ~
{ ~ vata ~ aed op.
gu., h ..-. ._
._ _ . _ _ ;!J . _
~ ~
.l,[ ~ _ hs t$
.a 'wm z o .c
-s
.4
-n h-SM Nk . _ _._ $ .$.
. pes 445-ois b5-
'T - = w e *4*e e 44.==-= =.- < w e @pele gafsWy ,
A tllll=predaH eT%9sroe .
IM &ulb = s e. A g&+ y 016 mjur 2 -
i'
(
- d. $((b fd u-
-- 14 -6 G6 0 .~
r~ s awassmug
~
y ".3LI 3 - 33G g 12r_Q .
"' y
~
x_%
. ,J ..
2 w h ($d- %
I l .. ..
l
.. .._ a _ __
j$fvc 4 M y- N A l o ditu4 ~
.)
(LedO -_ . . - .
.--. ...;. .. lata T dl. m T 7s (e a f .- .-. . .
Q; . . par 7QfA n wM K. u/ aM GW . . .
L .. _ _ . ;
/
UN"ji fk6,rt Id Ack ' /'36/( [k 4W 4-Y . . _
4 PW PGsa 0f - Mi+cabstQD C/,vhx $Q c& ft *T!*--- .-..
}p") - }.. W Dkpces .22bn --+ J+<nio/<d4A ar 7a '
Q) 2 ... .i
~
3)
& sq@hrms F rp rs c / 23z A - ~
w
- -..a
- ~ . _ _ . . . _
= 4-15-o r3 ;d ^
- . . ~ . ~ . . .. . ...-..-..,.ne..
.C ,
, ,sy (m) G2 n
- \
- % l
/&n~- / 0G 84'-7 7 /
(7 gi
~
7/e/e4 #//pou pNg#j Gp4
~ ^
L%flp4' tr - et n '7: f cf as i
. Blec. 5~y. 4 Efee Qu,g, ry .l
~
Nil'(
lSi1Td Erit ==
..; n ee * + d = E Xe-
' ' /.
pbw(jsopuvisse nie a 0 a y 7tA nf9'~
.. . y -
u,r~o.mouas Ar- Ay ,s a f e tris J.r s? : .-.
ll 61.//e CeisRf 8,I'( Iferve.r . . _ . ,
fig stugen(an r~si.m.
3u hS A W fbhO.'..g fpI? cow .
NFG hs @ M lrinQllte.y
. . .-... . (. .lii .. fok- 10 5 71 R4+ hss .
.. . $ - . @ clua feess~dprc/ , m & &/ha inss~ ,9g,y ra d.
.- . - . ....y ..
di9 E d 4 i
//~s p rn .T.~n.cu.ea g _. - .
l . ._ : . _ .
l p"6!tV' Q t'c 5 sr- ' n na oa c
9 .
1 m @EA '"
up -
m> L
=m nz G
~'
%g afp % ,a a~.,w n n
% era ~
ran w e insa-k su n ,m~.*~4
mswra 4(
.!'h .Y6 sseillt g i os A tu N4 - . . _
'l.
y '
, . -+
e no c pia ald!" , J h />on50 (72~La g y% m _
i.ks & n k W s~s #f.J r2 n-ge s.~y FM sKde'4 ^<
s JmniC ane >-y a 4 mr La- A A e w:snniT4a.mk n.
+-ss:66' '.c 'inii.nv
f , CoJ ! l~~ W 3
- e %
/f(06 eN, s & , ,4 0 *'! N f W mR
- f, Sct;l-r m 196 se E W + M T dt M . ,A"
.47pa 4-0 ntsb ip;- u r n m v$ y .
Oon Oo No h M SS M Y
. co & A $ n-y sfctKc t rsKn ~co et sq S& ss Ase<~ss@ f4 U uus sor .
,,w-nar4," r+ ru {- < ~.w u .a
)
GI f y -
/ ~ 7; a M of LCL} ;;
ps zra N
- j . . .. _
-e.- -
.*....ese t .
633-27-G54
~
3 f.
Ak.4 ~ ~rn6s 1
^
\ . . . ..
- .. L _
J rn~ 7//r/2'l .-
. - - . , . - . + -
pA --
- i
/ ogo.
}
d_
--.y p -
e6
- c. .
-..(
1
~
. p ,ig-gf
~
m p(E$ 0fY'[ hl SuffG-s4 4 4 s-x-e '
p 68(
x -
rG nn/m a 8= , avn u ..
1/ v & 0 n/ @ l & S (93 81 taduY Aa evy 4 @ onR #fuylf th c -Q . ie a s a s,e~l 1l W 4wn
~ ^
'gpa 4tk gS2 4 acern p .
pnjnrx & w is n -
sgzxc a. s-,a =
/FC3 p
/d 4 4
^*
icve6 I hi- "
i:
1 Ig M Q Mn -- -- ..
I '
h sow isa a ~ >
Lru ap tw bde y 24 ou fa g - }, --
9,
$ Y P - - - - - ~ ,
ogx.cws;ea au-g ;
g op ,e sa p f.-85 -013 -99
44+94 mhea # M
.ae644' +V"-4 A g.m #4 e ere shp9 mV a gir e L Y esm nc c b
.)Ee 6d[ _
J .
- r
~l c- ,
a%-E J Y h ],l r =
/"
- en ase*~,W
.h~
~
i ..
] -
I
- 'lh"~'** .3(se" .... _
- a .
i t (dP d*
7 1
[g.ymeig) =
% ~
r p W6' 0ol( N1+c Nhe f_b}'i (t/) l X /4%D
\\
V\
Pecs0'd. /;isv7) :
DY Q
i p r. c w M Lo s m j .
yk J _-
~., 3
s - -
.z.
+
[ %
0, UNITED STATES 3 vy ,, j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/-[ OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE. REGION IV f
% k.:
%',,# 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 1000
,',,,, ARLINGTON. TEXAS 76011 l l
STATEMENT 1
l (Continued)
B/7id Em 4 amsiurik / va oceout a/Ds,;fA LbTe im . Tisa mk w o d eu ad um M A __
.C Ls- dv/n W 1uoe1 /!s ~ d CM c~ AnJ & i D. '
ILan A /floo T er J > A so n uLesw isLY1 flaA .
7th . ,a lossdf A, iw a.fust R.Br I nu a s a , n a / L L J: z' '
&& e w ' L" // ard/' ' u-af w c4 L.
a~/
.r4,r n L A G a
% L A . C a m 27
'" ,_ss LLs 6 d:' n # 2 m r0 dA1J~at0 m2B J ' Air
~ ~
. LF
'sL~f Ks s A 2'. G /~ :tv i da h 16' & L w f on ir A A m f a A ,' 6/n uds so nsw oa~ %
G6x n w./ A# Tla u+s a7'n d 'o M d n o h r F M '/k I@.
&# ( f n e t, a Ala '7s A ha u l - a.u
(&_ O.o s T 62 Mp?ta?$Y. __ x8 ,aef~e a 71 Ar.h Areared. Nu "call7sd ' Ml Mmw'in sa N/Sy/%. '
ur R i @ @ % :.a 'se fan c(7 At r b do,. '
'A '
6 & insbcTs'As _
u E
.sn sal f W& C, Tv . '
T d;9 1 /M . va .i Di/%ee2L 7% rG srw 6%V '
cum '
_twaA 'L
- ! iss e sw snT- ~
nas 64, keus7sd sw at s i% ik a oLw as _ wsd70 f~i < f.Z~ T S c / Pkts . b s lA m ,,e n w w ea T in b '2~~ ess C 1 A b h u k eQ k
l ra W av %/h 5 . n11 kssca m x a ao .
am//wiW6v G+lva Mc14Ml u AJA, inmed!4Telo labeul/ d '
i
/ (
4- Ts5- oi 3 - f7 Initials cf Person Making Statement EXHIBIT ( )
. . - , ~
- cq ,
g % UNITED STATES
'j ^ y, 'y NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ra [ pj OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE. REGION IV 611 RYAN PLAZA ORIVE, SUITE 1000
.N j ARLINGTON, TEXAS 78011 gg
! STATEMENT (Coitinued) .
L2nin h AdOCM9L. L145 $dag bTed W 0 Ndf
- i.
W$W fb Owid(1 m dD 72 M .nacw s.' T AAL.o ~
l
% + .J o .. nn W fpj 7 w- w fm y g ,a cdnWeiA7~ d7 'Hamma7~~~5 Ad 7[e Nl tav*0%4 dc) - .
mv F ' Yr A u Lo see d b w o . T A $ $L D 1~
l~ ku$ n us M k fA '% u m 09so 0<Jttw ~ SA/Arwoe l976~ (s~ aJaw tA.+/> % Af a ldPAflaff IniIIWWN /buodsuCx YrN3Iisc nfn'b$/R<. mN'% $d a .i/s14 st"~r la h4AcW s s wrek & 12% . C 61 I .
uesrLa Lu sn su. rs:1 aZir s u., szs rLJ .
Collal A cithe.se tNU "ck ;a L sa ilf f La cw//a/ a "V AlwX mD Ae>b " la m 1hu x S n ~ r x Ts m m a Ill a l ~
i Mlthe Ns oem . L ,Ab AAs1 M/m4 ' TLf* E/) a f W zA.
]/L r r~ Ju*7~'
~
! hu 79Gss cd k f tfi'f 'rs! ~ '
$il/ 1~a+s 'YElvsh -
- C & W17~~ Wlls es boIF 's twes!!d&
9 I'have read the foregoing statement consisting of 7 handwritten /4yped pages. I have made and initialed any necessary corrections and have signed my initials at the bottom of each page. I fully understand and have discussed the statement with Investigator M *4dd . This statement is i the truth to the best of my knowledge an belief -
Signature: '
J4.I /
Name /
Sgibedyd sworn togb fore me this 7 day of A sv ,
5984-at ( // * .
Investigb: X/I .h j 1
Author V Section 161c AEA 1954 as amended i
. Witness: .
Name/ Title Initials of Person Making Statement EXHIBIT ( )
a... , . , -
- . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - - - _ - _ _ . _ . _ . . - ,m
- 7 UNITED STATES
" P C 3 ~7 4-'d5'* "'%,e,
- NUdLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
, , , , , g .
s REGION IV
- s '
", (11 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE. SUITE 1000 ARUNGTON, TEXAS 76011 "o , , ,, *'
i
- FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL .
DATE/ TIME: 2/ 8ec #ET C fo O PRIORITY:
Imediately 1 Hour ~
2-4 Hours MESSAGE TO: h/t t Mv 7 c// f go #
MESSAGE FROM: M MeM tIUMBER OF PAGES: l $. PLUS TRANSMITTAL SHEET TELECOPY NUMBER: VERIFICATION NUMBER:
4 CONTACT:
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS / ATTACHMENT (S):
~
f /d of / 2 I
i 1
f I Transmitted & Verified by: DISPOSITION: -
Return to Originator Place in Mail ,
}
NAME . DATE Other E4
$-%6- 013 7 L