ML20247F127
| ML20247F127 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 03/28/1985 |
| From: | Noonan V NRC - COMANCHE PEAK PROJECT (TECHNICAL REVIEW TEAM) |
| To: | Connelly S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTOR & AUDITOR (OIA) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247F051 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-87-535 NUDOCS 8907270093 | |
| Download: ML20247F127 (22) | |
Text
- _ - -
h.
x
/[
4,,,0 UNITE D S7ATES j
l'
,I.'n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,I wasmNGTON. D. C. 70555 y
/
March 28, 1985 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Sharon R. Connelly, Director 0ffice of Inspection & Auditor 0 TP'i(( ON.Y FROM:
Vincent S. Noonan, Director Comanche Peak Project I
SUBJECT:
ALLEGED MISCONDUCT BY NRC EMPLOYEES The staf f nas been conducting close out -interviews with Comanche Peak allegers
{
to assure ourselves that the concerns we are addressing are correct and also
^
to,nrovide feedback to the allegers oli our proposed methods of resolution.
Because we have confidentiality agreements with these allegers we address each alleger by number.
l On the staff conducted a transcribed meeting with the alleger stated to the staff that two NRC employees, a repre enta ive o Office of'In stigation an the other a Region IV inspector, pro sed a deal with another Supposedly, this deal would s e of continued employment for he next five or six years if would agree to,
drop allegations.
I am requesting that ur office i estigate this matter as appropriate.
Our transcript of the meeting will provide your office with sufficient detail and better under anding of the allegation.
Because of our confidentiality agreements with the allegers, I am not including the transcript l
with this letter.
If you will contact me, I will make arrangements to provide you with this transcript and other sufficient detail to assis.you in your investigation.
/
AE
-~
f y
onan, Director 40manche eakP(oject i
i i
g A
L 0907270093 890725 PDR FOIA 4l3 BAUMANB7-535 PDR l
~~{ ~
i__
I l
e a
l i
O S. NUCLEAR REGULA TORY COMMisslON Of fice of insector ano Aud. tot August 29, 1985 0,1,.. i,..u.....,,
l l
Report of Interview j
1
.)
Vincent S. N0ONAN, Director for the COMANCHE PEAK Project, U.S. Nuclear 1
Regulatory Commission (NRC), was interviewed by telephone concerning i
allegations of wrongdoina that had beeg raised by Comanche Peak Project f
against H. Brooks GRIFFIN, an j
investiga or or s r ce o nvesfigations and an unnamed NRC 4
investigator. He stated essentially the following:
During a NRC Technical Re iew Team allegation feedback j
meeting in
- exas, ndicated during a close out interview that an associat.e, had wrongfully been told by Investigator GRIFFIN that would be gua anteed a joy for five to six years if gwould not fur,, er pursue a ' legations thatgE had made concerning lealth and safety problems a' the COMANCHE JEAX site.
tated in a trat: scribed interview session or
...Well, I had a -- friend of mi e with me to meet with a couple of NCR(sic) inspectors to report --
was going to report this viola-tion and more, like seven or eig t different allegations.
And when
'(
met with them, they asked that I wouldn't be present. the NRC 1
.e ple. And we ownstairs and waited. When they got through interviewing came downst W s, r.nd I asked hem what -- you know, we wa ta about each one of them. And said they mada a de 1 it g if wguld not mention it to nobb y, not even tell t y were ure $would have a job for the next five or y
six years. What the told me...Who was the two inspectors? One of them was Brooks G FF;N...I don't know wh We met in Glen Rose over at the courthouse..$o the oth aid they told re, "That this job, the way they had it figured, was goirig to last five to six more years An if I promised not to carry the problems any turther," this is talking, "that we will assure you that you i
will be here anoth r t least five or possibly six years.
Don't
}
even tell you about this.
I r
On the basis of this testimony, N0ONAN sent a
.xnemorendum to the Office of Inspector and Auditor requesting an ion of this i
matter.
I 1
August 28,_J9,85
,, Bethesda, Marylmi
,a,=
185-35 n1 ward T. Canpoell, ' Investigator, OIA August 29, 1985 3,,,y,,,,,
Twes DOCUME NT iS P AOPE RT Y 05 Nmc is LOANE O TO ANOT**E n AGENCY *t AND iTS CONTENTS ARE NO Outs'OE THE RECElvsNG AGENC v witwCVT PE AMISSION OF THE OF **Cl O'/ 'NSPf CTOa aNo Avoiton l..
L_ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
7-(, $' N, ;.
s.
/
~
_ _ _, m._ _wv.unn aa rmagazett3EEEE53EEREIBMtN7e-~-"M
\\
i UP.0 TECH:i!C A'.,
".EVIInf TE A:t FEIDB ACT l
+
j i
)
I i
i
^
4 s
GODFREY & AMES COURT REPORTING CIATlfilD SHORTHAND RIPORTER s16 R'55EX A111NCTON. TX 10014 (817) 4 0 4346
, _ m m F N#g
m.
--- ar-M I
p 4
J 34 I
L 1
anchor tolts that, tie into the embed.
1 2
MR. POSI.USNY:
What's the number?
3 Mp.FERRARINI:
That's AS-7.
This came,from your 4
transcript.
I think it was transcript 84006.
Whatever 5
it is.
Your transcript.
I 6
We have reported this to the applicant.
And open 7
issue letter that was dated August -- no, it was dated 1
8 in November.
I don't remember exactly the -date.
And 1,
9 they couldn't produce any records to show the actual 10 lengths of the bolts.
At a matter of fact, they 11 couldn't.prodice records.for the installation oi the i
12 bolts.
13 So what that -- what we have asked them to do, is 14 to verify the length of those bolts.
We have got some 15 partial feedback from them, and oia Thursday they're 16 going to have a complete feedback.
There -- these --
17 some of those bolts are in fact definitely short.
So 18 your allegation was true.
They were cut.
19 Well, I had a -- friend of mine 20 went with me to meet with a couple of NCR inspectors to report-qlwasgoingtoreport this violation and 21 22 more, like seven or eight different allegations.
And lmetwiththem, they asked that I wouldn't be 23 when I
l 24 present, the NRC people.
And I went downstairs and a
J 25 waited.
~,-
-.--- - - - -- -- -- z In. x.
n-W. !
t 35 3,. _
1 When tht/ got through interviewing came 2-downstairs, and I asked them what -- you know, we was 3
talking about.each one of them.
And said they made 4
a deal with if would not mention it to nobody, 5
not even tell they were sure would have a 6
job for the next five or six years.
What the told 7
me.
8 And we went and made a statement together.
had 9
no reason -- nobody twisted arm to even go make a 10 statement.
And I brought up the allegations, and f
11 there's nothing ever commenting on it t all.
So 1
12 in Mississippi now, yeah.
j I
1 1
t ;
13 MR. PHILLIPS:
Specifically.
j
(
14 Who was the two inspectors?
One 15 or tLom was Brooks Griffin.
I don't know who the sther
)
16 one was.
We wet in Glen Rose over at the courthouse.
17 HR. FERRARINI:
Was that during the same statement l
18 gave --
g 19 That was when I was making 20 statements'.
1 21 HR. FERRARINI:
So was Brooks, and I forget who 22 else, but it's on 006.
23
/
But this came.
I went up
(
/
l]
24 first and spent three hours making statements.
And 25 then went next.
After -- I came down, and came
- L.'
- '.- -..'-. L, 2._:! : *:'.~ L :
2.-_ 'W2:2.r! 2h
~:
5 36 1
up, an.1 I told they was upstairs.
So they asked ue
' ~
2 not to be present.
So I waited downstairs.
3 So went up and talked to them-about 45 4
minutes.
AInd then came down, and that was 5
statement.
6 MS. GARDE:
Haven't you told them that before?
7 Haven't you told the NRC before?
8 I told last ti:ne we met, whoever 9
I met w!th.
10 4R. POSLUSNY:
Wesner? y
~ 11 Yeah.
12 HS. GARDE:
Was that referred to 01A7
' 13 He said that well, he has just an 14 inspector, that he really -- I guess -- me -- in other 15 words, he didn't look into allegations.
He was just an 16 inspector.
Investigator, that's the word.
17 Investigator.
18 HR. FERRARINI:
Investigator.
Yeah.
i 19 HS. GARDC:
I t'aink what aying --
20 MR. FERRARINI:
I know wha saying.
21 MS GARDE:
Well, in terms of the technical l
l 22 aspect, I think saying nobody ever got the 23 technical allegation.
Obviously what saying O
24 should be referred to the OIA.
l 25 Well, you can see why I don't
33 Lyng, L
.pesansafgy:qqaqqksygM&gsyg93.yg.g: a es:aa:nr g m +.
37 1
trust 2
MR. FERRARINI:
Well, that was OI he was talking 3
to.
4 MS. GARDE:
No, I'm talking about referring that 5
allegation to OIA, not OI.
6 MR. FERRARINI:
All right.
7 He also, when I first met Mr.
8 Griffin in the lawyer's office, he lied to me, in front I
9 of my lawyer.
i 10 My lawyer told me not to make any statements, sign 11 any papers, ma'ee any tapes, unless he reviewed them 12 first.
And I met Mr. Griffin at another instance, NRC I
i La 13 personnel.
Well, they agreed to that.
And I uade a 14 date, and I met with them.
And they also agreed to 15 have a mechanical and civil engineer there, because I 16 told them -- asked them, "Do they know much about 17 construction?"
18 They said no.
I said it would be stupid to try 19 and sit here and try to explain to you guys, to you 20 people, how we did something, how it should have been 21 done, and how they did do it, and what would happen the 22 way we did do it, all this stuff.
23 And they said, "Well, we assure you that you will i
1 24 have a rechanical, civil en61neer present.
Plus if you 25 make any statements, that your lawyer will review and
. _ s _
-- _..: - - L - - ::a ~.
- ; 2:. ~- *1:: :.1.: :: c w uu :
~~
N 38 1
all this, before we use the information."
' ~ ~
2 So I sat and whether we made -- they had no 3
mechan}calcivilengineerwiththem.
4 Plus they -- I made a couple hours tapes with 5
them.
And'when they got through, I said, "I need the
-6 tapes to So let my lawyer listen to them.
And then 7
I'll let you guys have them."
8 And they go, "You'll get them when we get through 9
-with them."
10 And so they took off, so it wasn't that big a
~
11 deal.
You kno"w, and all this other stdff.
It just 12 seemed to me like the NRC was protecting the power i
I L.J 13
' plant at that time.
Or protecting theirself or 14 something or other.
15 Well, would you like to carry on with this?
16 HR. FERRARINI:
Yeah.
And that pretty much closes 17 that particular item out.
It was identified.
It's --
18 the applicant has responded to it.
And he's going to 19 go into detail on that, on Thursday, at a meeting on 20 Thursday.
i 21
'HR. MOLONSON:
Excuse me.
The one aspect of that 22 that ou missed was that there was no loss of heat 23~
number.
I 24 MR. FERRARRINI:
That wasn't part of his s -
25 allegation.
GonFP Y A AMES COURT REPORTING
m,wn M.niencerc M M@pS>. W 6 hwtA..w,/4.e,A w e bu.C.n.;
...!,w e e
-,_.. % g
~
90 1
it.
- -~'
'2 MR. MASTERS 0H:-
It's obviously not allowed by a
~
3 procedure,'and it's obvious something like that it 4
should have been picked up by QC, or a NCR should have-5 been written if that happened.
6 MS. GARDE:
If it was seen.
7 MR.'MASTERSON:
If it was seen, that's correct.
8 And we had no way to follow-up,on that.
9' MS. GARDE:
Right.
We'll give you more details on 10 it tomorrow.
11 MR. MASTERSON:
And that's all I have.
12 MS, GARDE:
Okay.
L_)I 13 MR. POSLUSNY:
Take another five --
i 14 (Whereupon there was a recess.)
15 MR. POSLUSNY:
Okay.
I'd like to revisit a topic 16 that was discussed in one of the previous allegations 17 this afternoon.
If you could briefly go over the 18 details of the instance where you and another employee 19 were talking to NRC employees about allegations.
Could 20 we revisit that real quickly?
21 MS.. GARDE:
Can I ask why?
Off the record.
22 (Whereupon there was a discussion held 23 off the record.)
- l 24 Okay.
I met with Mr. Brooks 25 Griffin in the Glen Rose courthouse up in the a-e-_-_--_ - - - - - - _ _ _
Sn t fl{o +
s.
y
.,/ '
he ughly 5
pape what rwo I
MS. G rks do pe 4'
6 he n't riod ARD :
r.
kn of e
E H.P o.
t 7
w R
I 's I
im ?
t e
inte O
SLUS tr ha ve r
8 vie N:
ansc Y
ri got ws.
Oh, o bed.
he.
it 9
ne I
of 10 had tho a
se frie tr allegat ansc nd And 1 1 io of ribed.
I min m
ns r"~~
e ade abo Ll 12 M.P ut what some R
a some was al OSLU lega t N:
pr wa S
13 Y
oble ing to nt io yo It n,a m.
s s
u it m
14 wa ake nd nt wo to rt h
hwh some tel O, ye h 15 ile M.P l
R i
a.
de OSLUS na nti m?
Go 16 N:
fying e
Y od O
Y pr b.le kay.
o e h.
a 17 m.
I s
wa thin O,
18 nted h
the N to bring had ei 19 RC, up.
ght a
or nd 20 I
So I ten wol tol al u
was be in G legat d
got d
wok 21 off I
io r ing ns w
le was that o k, at wa r
the n Ro
?
nted me s.
et to wol im.
ing wi e
t u
tal d
e k
th the. stop by So So I to w
we et m
the aid n
s nt do ahe cou w
whe n tair.
s ad a
at.d rtho n
nd tol u
s s,a m
e d
othe And ade nd all in they whe r
n my was dr state ec tol upstair e by, I nts.
or ov me d
s.
I me that So Mr.
stop GODF t
ped
_ ___,__._Hetr REY hey Griff didn ' t in
_ _o 469 AMES wa and
_ _ ____ _6100 OURT m
C nt the (8
EP e in
.___1 ) R 7
ORTING 4
_ _60-2048 i
\\
p-
',/
J' s
/
/'
\\
- _2 2 ~L'.
.=P2 t2tri' u
.;;32: =.'2*.tih OfE5%=25'*-L. : 23
- ~ '.
92 1
there when they was talking to 2
HR. POSLUSNY:
Do we knw "Lo the other inspector 3
was?
4 No.
I have got it also on paper.
5 MS, GARDE:
Was it on Driscol?
6 I don't think so.
I don't know.
1 7
went up there, and stayed about 45 minutes, i
1 e
8 came back down, and arried me home.
And was 9
walking on the way home, and I said, "What did they say 10 about your allegations?"
11 said they told me, "That thisjob, the way they
~
12 had it figured, was going to last five to six more 13 years.
And if I promised not to carry the problem any 14 further," this is talking, "that we will 15 assure you that you will be here another at least five 16 or possibly six years.
Don't even tell your bout 17 this."
18 HR. POSLUSHY:
And did imply that this was a 19 joint statement of the interviewers or did identify 20 the specific person?
21 Well, it must have been a joint 22 statement, because said "they said".
23 MR. POSLUSNY:
Okay.
24 Okay.
25 MR. POSLUSHY:
All right.
We'll follow-up on it.
. t:L
...-.%..4.
... t Ow c w... :.u.;i
- W,w w
. - u a+...
a,..--
...-r.
~
93 1
Okay.
Is there any --
2 MR. PHILLIPS:
Also I understand you to say that
~
3 you had told someone in NRC about this subsequent to 4
this occurrence; is that right?
5 Right.
6 HR. PHILLIPS:
Who was that?
7 One of you guys named him a while 8
ago.
-9 HR. POSLUSUY:
Westman?
Yeah.
10 11 HR. POSLUSNY:
Was thit in August?
12 The last meeting I had with him.
s 13 HR. MASTERSON:
I don't recall that coming up.
14 But Dick was taking more notes than I was.
I was more 15 involved with the technical.
16 HR. POSLUSNY:
We'll have to check with him.
He 17 may have sent it over.
18 I don't guess there's no reason 19 to bring his allegation up?
We'll wait and I'll bring 20 them up when we meet.
21 MR. POSLUSHY:
I think that's enough with the I
22 subject.
Let's go on with the allegation.
)Doyouwantmetoidentitymyself?
23 l~
24 HR. POSLUSNY:
Yes.
( __ -. - _ _ _ -
l.
A A
j' U.S. N'UcLEAR nEGULATORY c0MMisslON Of fice of inspector and Auditor October 5, 1985 o,..,,,aui....
Report of Interview Comanche Peak Project was interviewed by tele one had reportedly heard COMANCHE PEAK Project ma e against Investigator H. Brooks Griffin and an unnamed NRC investigator, stated essentially the following:
s Glen, Rose, Texas.
ote to PRESIDENT REAGAN about health anc. s fety irregularities t1
.had seen at COMANCHE PEAK. Soon after letter to the PRESIDENT, was contacted by an individual named H. Bratsks GRIFFIN, who iden ed himself as an investigator for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissio,n (NRC).
Their initial meeting was at lawyer's office in Fort Worth, Texas. Thei sec s at the Somervell Count Courthouse in Glen Rose.
was' accompanied by M of the SOUND ENERGY 0WER. This or nization is located "n Dallas, Texas.
was also there; can not rememb r% name.
GRIFFIf was accompani d by a man from NRC whose riam a sd can not renember.
GRIFFINaskeddifhe(GRIFFIN)colduseatapekecorder, reed.
They spoke fob ttyree hours.
During interview.
said th d an associate who also was awa e of irregul' rities at 60KANCHE PEAK.
identified this person as s
At the conclusion of their session, sked by GRIFFI i could be located for an interv'ew, greed to find GRIFFIN and he unnamed NRC official remained at e courthouse un returned with
'spokeinprivatetoGRIFFINanfhiscolleague.
The interview asted approximately 45 minutes. V(tg it was congluded, Griffin and the u na d NRC offici about the co(Alleger A-4/1 hen departed.
proceeded to tel nversatio g just had i
Oct. 2 and 3, 1985,
,, Bethesda, Ruyland
,,, 185-35 m......,
Edward T. Canpbell',, ' Investigator, OIA 3,,,,,u,,,,, October 5, 1985 l
ouvs oe Ce'NeI"i[c IceYc'[w"ir$v'r e'e'a'OissioUi>Ev'"a ^oS'Uc'e"[s ^UsSfe$ o!'d'o'a'*vo"v'o'n
.I
w
^
m A-4.
with the two NRC offic als jaid that Griffin ifguould not pursue COMANCHE PEAK allegations further the wo&td' be ranteed a job for fiv t six years. GRIFFIN cautioned Jnottoeventell abou g offer.
l 4
felt
.d to report this wron offer that had made t
,did so onI i Glen Rose, Texas w en infonte sev
' NRC officials about wh t had told.
1 l
l i
1 l
l i
1
~
U.s. NUCLEAR REGULATORY Commission Of fice of inweetor and Auditor October 10, 1985 o.................
Report af Interview COMANCHE PEAK PR JECT was interviewed by telephone concerning an ega 1ons ad reportefly ma 'against U.S.
l l4uclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Inve ator F. Brooks'GRIFFI a d an unnamed NRC investigator to COMANCHE PEAK PROJECT, stated essentially the following:
)COMANCHEPEAKSTEAM never told' had been told by H.
1 r eks GRIFFIN, an invest'ga or ;or t e u ear Regulatory s
Commission (NRC), that i uld not further pursue allegations had made at COMANCHE PEAK, th would be guaranteed five to six ye rs employ t.
hor any other NRC employee, ever made t is i
offer is claiming that tol
/
- this, s ying.
is concerned about questions that was ask n front of supervisors by an NRC esentative.
.Ithough is not definitely sure who this official wa thinks that it 'as H.
rooks GRIFFIN.
This incident occurred i Specifically, it involved being asked by C person w nks was GRIFFIN, about complaints that raised.
A site superintendent and general foremar. a COMANCHE P AK were present.
This questionin oved tc be extremely embarrassi nd costly to Two weeks aft r had been asked these questions, s laid off.'
)
feels that issal was a reprisal action for pp tly br1'ng-ing ' safety concerns to the attention of the NRC.
thoug was even-l tually rehired, i s in a job that paid $3.00 an hour le s than wha l
had been making.
feels that it very inappropriate for this questioning to pr i
front of bosses. Despit tha d was noncomm 1 wit answer eca marke would like to add tha assoc at n with could a so ha been factors i reduced status at COMANCHE PEAK.
j 1
Investigator's !bte: It is my opinion that was not alleging
)
specific wrongdoing an NRC enploy cernin stioning at the l
work site. Rather, was express' isplea e over the manner in which the interview done.
,,,,,,,..,,,,, 9/6 and 10/2/85 13ethesda, Marylard I85-35 j
Fdward T. Caipbell, Investigator, OIA October 10, 1985 o,,,,,,,,
f Ev'Isfoe'Cl%$I", O*"c*l0c7E'r$v't eEa'Ods.o*~YtOe'oEc'el ^~'sE*v 'S'a'~'o'2u'Itof' ' " '"""'
._____._______._________m
g,-.
............n--m.,_.u---.___.....
o
""'*\\
~
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISslON Off ce of inspector and Auditor October 5, 1985 o....,,..a,......
)
Report of Interview H. Brooks GRIFFIN, Investigator, Office of Investigations (01), Region IV, i
l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), was interviewed by telephone concerning allegations that had been made ainst he and his supervisor Rich d K. HERR, by COMANCHE PEAK Project l
l He stateo essentially the following':
He has been working for the NRC since September 1982 and has been in his present job all this time.
Onh he and his supervisor, Richard K.
i rect r,
Refr on IV Field DTfic, 01, had occasion to intervi and COMANCHE PEAK Project at the Somervell County Courthouse in Glen Rose,
. He h d met rior to this intervie ; he d never met be fore. After j
s
[ associated th an organization ca led THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABIL TY PROJECT TGAP),
appeared unwilling to talk to him either r off the record about he and safety concerns that was aware at' the COMA HE PEAK ST ELECTRit STAT 10N~.
The meeting with however, did address some of these matters.
was accompanied by and
'They said that they represented an organization k own as CIT 2 ENS /\\
ASSOCIATION FOR SOUND ENERGY. A court sten pher was used to transcribe the meeting. At the conclusion, mentioned that had a colleague who would als like to disc s some he lth and safety concerns with 01.
left the courthouse and returned a short
, time later with He and HERR then proceeded to. interview Their int r iew was tra scribed by the sa r that h d ee used for e
session. Neither no were present uring the interview o At no time either before, during, o nterview of did he or HERR mention anything t out guaranteeing five or six years employment if would not pursua allegations thatg'had made con erning irregu arities at the COMANCHE PEAK site.
If s cla g that he (GRIFFIN) reportedly made this offer to then is not telling the truth. He never made any such o er t 8/28 and 10/3/85 Bathesda, W1.
I85-35
%#tt*94t'On On 41
- de 2 Edward T. Campbell, Investigator, OIA' Cetober 5, 1985 EIs 07Nel$I.Ec'4oticN.$v's e's'd8 s's $UoEv'Is'oS'UcY$ IUsSiSoS'a'dEEuofto?' ' "
'5'*"D
- 4 L
e
i t
Griffin Interview.
It vould be ridiculous for him to have done so. Even if he had wante to, the as no conceivable way that he could guarantee work if ytthdrew any allegations that ad made. Th'e contention that he mace such an offer is pure fabri on.
Also, he had never interviewed either alone or wi an ne else et the COMANCHE PE S
ifical
, he never asked M in the.presenc supervisors about any 4
irregularities t
had reportedly identified. He th that if is c aim ng that he interviewed him in front of upervistrs, then is confusing hiin with some other NRC emp oyee.
l I
l 1
l l
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of trupector and Auditor o,...i,...o......
Septenter 6, 1985 Report of Interview
+
Richard K. HERR, Director, Region IV Field Office, Office of Investigations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), was interviewed by telephone concerning allegations that had.been made against possibly himself and a member of his staff,
. Brooks Griffin.
These alleq tions were made by Comanche Peak Project He (Herr) stated essentially the following:
He has bcen working for the NRC since September 1979 and has been in his present job since July 1982.
Neither he nor H. Brooks GRIFFIN, an investigator on his staff, make any offers whatsoeser t nche eak Project M so that ould not pursue allegatioris tha ad made about /conditio the COMANC3E PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STAT Specifically, he did not tell @ nither before, during, or after thei
/ nterv ew at the Somervell Coanty Courthouse in Glen Rose, i
exas, that would be guar' anteed five to years employm'ent if id not ' #
further pursue any allegations that ad a made.
Arthermore, GRIFFIN did not make this offer to er to either during the time that they (he and Griffin) were together wit It is very likely that Griffin would ever make such an offer t I
is very questionable in
's mind whyM ould ma thi accusation.
o)tpresentwhen was interviewe.
If is eating was poss told after the interview sdss on, then is only what gis making up this story, he ( ER ) cannot conveying what heard.
explaingmot tion.
Investigators Note: On October 3,1985, Richard K. Herr indicated that either John T. Collins or Thomas F. Westerman, bo NRgemployees,mayhavebeenthe unidentified person who allegedly spoke to
'at the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station. John T. Collins is a spe'cial assistant to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement; Thomas F. Westerman is the Chief of the Region IV Comanche Peak Group.
i 8/28 and 9/4/85 a,, Bethesda, Marylard
,,,,, 185-35 s
Mward T. Canpbell, ' Investigator, OIA o.,,..n.... _Septaber 6, 1985 i
- '
- cmai=':u 1; :1*,;=lM==: omen =;? a*"* " c~""*
1
'o tt
i n
q U.S, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of inspector and Auditor October 6. 1985 0,.., 4,, u......
tieport of Interview i
Special Assistant to the Director, Office of Inspection and j
John T. COLLINS
{
Enforcement, U, S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC), was interviewed by ANCHE PEA '
telephone concerning any informati by 3
interview of COMANCHE PEAK PROJECT an unidentified NRC employee. He state essen owing:
He has been working for the NRC, formerly the U.S. Atomic Energy He has been in his present joo as Special 1
Comission, since 1963.
Assistant to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement since hovember 1984.
(
at the r
g He has never had any occasion to interview C0fANCHE PEAK S EAM ELECTRIC ST
- ION, In 'artic ar ha never,spokeng to in front of any pervisors.
185-35 b
Bethesda, Maryland
_..,. =
.......,,,, 0::to er 3, 1985 OctoMr 6.1985 Edward T. Cam 3 bell. IInvesticator. OIA o,,, o,n,i.e iT AND iTS CON RENTS Amt NOT TO BE DiSTmisuTE D t*is COCUMENT as PaOPE RT v 0+ NRC #F LOANED TO ANOTaf A AGENCY OUTS *DE T HE RECEIVING AGENCV WiTHOUT PE RMISS'ON OF THE OF FiCE 08 INSPECTOR AND AVOLTOR
Q r)
U.S. NUCLE AR REGULATURY COMMISsloN Office of inspector and Auditor October 6, 1985 i
I DJif St t' AntCtI Dtion Report of Interview i
Ro'ert G. TAYLOR, Regioit IV Reactor Inspector, U. 5. Nuclear Regulatory o
Commission (NRCi, was interviewed by telephone concerning any information that he COMANCHE PEAK inter iew of COMAh0HE PEAK PROJECT Sy an unidentified NRC employee. He i
stated essent' ally the following:
He has been in his present position as a Region IV Reactor Inspector since January 1984, and has been at the NRC since November 1974 He has never had any meetings with
.at the COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION.
In partic s never oken t
% in the, presence of supervisors l
)
f October 3, 1985 Bethesda, Muyland I85-35 41 p,sg =
evettiget On On Edward T. Campbell', Investigator, OIA October 6, l')85 o.i. o.c ui.e o,
- *.15 DOCUME N T es PaoPE AT
- C F N RC if LO ANEQ TO ANOTHE R AGES #v iT ANO iTS' CONT E NTS ARE NOT TO BE OiST misvig o outsiO4. THE RECEIVING AGENC v WiTHout PE FiMiSSION OF T**E OF File OF iNSPE CTOR AND AUDITOR
f o
7, n
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisstON Office'of Inspector and Auditor O.........u...,..,
October 8, 1985 Report of Interview Thomas F. WESTERMAN, Chief,. C0f1ANCHE PEAK Group, Region IV, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), was interviewed by telephone concerning any information that he mi ht have on the COMANCHE PEAK interview of MMANCHE PEAK Project by an unidentified NRC employee.
He stated essentially the following:
He has been in his present position as Chief, COMANCHE PEAX Group, Region IV, since June 1985. He has been with the NRC, formerly the U.S.
Atomic Ener Commission, since 1969.
He has never had any meetings with at the COM NCH P AK STEAM ELECTRIC STATI cifically, q e,poken to inthepresencedf
) supervisors.
7 1
Investigator's Note: Subsequent to my conversation with Thomas F. WESTERMAN, he (WESTCIMAN) contacted Region IV Reactor Inspector Robert C. STEWART and asked him to call the Office of Inspector and Auditor. This call is reported on the following Report of Interview.
i l
1 l
l l
-i
.o-o o
% nhne 7_
1onn
.i nothoraa. Maryland
.,=
185-35 Edward T. Canpbell, Investigator, OIA October 8, 1985 Om w...a
'es DocvME NT iS P AOPE RT Y 05 Nmc ir LO ANE O TO ANOTHE A AGEf tCY iT ANO *TS CON 1 E NTS ARE NOT TO BE OiSTniBUT j
%,TS'OE
- E HECElvsNG AGE NC Y waTMovt PE nusssiON OF TM! OF $ eCE OF #NSPECTOn AND Avo tog
- :,2
- P 6 4"ym t ] O l
f q
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORV COMMIS$10N Office of Inspector and Auditor October 8, 1985 o............
Repoyt of Interview
~
]
Robert C. STEWART, Region IV Reactor Inspector, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory j
Comission (NRC), was interviewed by telephone concerning any information that he mi the COMANCHE PEAK interview of COMANCHE PEAK Project by an unidentified NRC employee.
He state essen e
owing:
He has been employed at the NRC since 1970 and has been in his present job all this time.
On he and four other emp eyees a MA4CHE PEAK STEAM ELECTR 10N.
He questi d
them about a There were no per ' sors present during ese interviews; however, he had a supervisor find the interviewees and take them to an o ice for the interview session. He can not remember the names of the supervisor that assisted him, nor of the other four e s he interviewe The interviews were very short.
All the others, ndic d that they had no-kn of any He.did not realize that beg t
ave e on the job af ter this brief interview.
October 7,,1985
,, Bethesda, Maryland 185-35
,, Fghtard T. Canprell, Investigator, OIA October 8, 1985 3,,,,,,,,,,,
tha*S DOCUM5 NT.s PROPE RT V OF N PC 7 F t.OANE D TO ANOTHE R AGE NCY 'T AND 'TS CONTENTS ARE NOT TO DE DtST RigvTE D OU TS'DE THE RECEIV+NG AGENCY wif v0VT PE RMISSION OF THE CF 5'rE OF 'NSPECTOR AND AvosTOA
- O M
- 4 4 - =1 mw 4 ii
_________________________________m___
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _