Re: Allegor - or - Expert

[Bill Pitchford <Bill.Pitchford@asu.edu>]

PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL (To All Radsafers except potential employers)

I'm an ex-Submarine Navy Nuclear LELT / RCSS.  And I believed it.

I'm a real "stand-up" guy with a keen sense of literality.

I have personally been labelled as a whistleblower twice.

Once, in 1991, at a non-Arizona nuclear power plant where I found it 
necessary to make a report to a regional office of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission after extremely dilligent efforts to resolve thirteen items
that lacked strict compliance with regulations, license conditions, and 
technical specifications.  My dilligent efforts took me through every 
layer of management including a freshly retired Navy Nuclear Admiral.

An augmented inspection team responded in a very timely fashion and found 
substance to my allegations.

Review and revision of their findings resulted in ..."substance but no 
violations"...  Two of those allegations were clear and unavoidable 
violations of regulations.

My contract was "un-renewed" in the presence of the AIT. This prohibited 
action which was committed in the presence of NRC Inspectors went 
unchallenged.  I was so overwhelmed by this situation that I was unable 
to work for six months and required extensive counselling directly 
associated with the stress from this situation.

The second occasion was related to the sunset review of an NRC Agreement 
State Program.  I refused to "hold the company line" as requested by a 
Director of said Agreement State.  I cooperated with the Office of the 
Auditor General of said State and disclosed information of public concern 
to the Auditors.  This information had been previously discussed with 
said Director and after several instances of "perceived" retaliation had 
been shared in writing with the Governor of said State.  Governor of said 
State replied in writing 18 months after the original written correspondence
had been redelivered and updated on three occasions that this information 
had been forwarded to the Attorney General (by name) because it was 
outside of his (the Governors) jurisdiction.

The main issues were inspection backlog and lenient enforcement philosophy 
"problems" that were a result of being more "human factors" oriented than 
"goal directed."  

The short end to the story is that I was "constructively discharged" from 
my position with that Agreement State Program when my position was filled 
without due notice while I was on leave without pay for educational purposes.

I consulted with a lawyer. He had previously been employed by that State 
as an Assistant Attorney General for Employment and Civil Rights.  He 
said there was clear and convincing evidence that there had been several 
violations of the whistleblower protection legislation and that the State 
could be forced to correct the acts. My wife was ready to put a second 
mortgage on the house and proceed.  I was ready to look for a better 
environment.

Some of you know more about these instances, and some of you have even 
better stories of your own.  Get to know me better and I'll tell you "the 
rest of the story."

In a climate of "regulatory flexibility" law and reality clash mightily.

Consider this case law tid-bit:

"Public offiials may not violate the plain terms of a statute because in 
their opinion better results will be attained by doing so. They have but 
one duty, and that is to enforce the law as it is written, and, if the 
effect of their action is disastrous, the responsibility is upon the 
legislature, and not upon them.  But, if they knowingly, even though with 
the best intentions in the world, violate the law, they and their 
bondsmen must take the consequences."  Button vs. Nevin 44 Ariz. 247,257

How different from this is your perception of reality ?

I have never been inclined to "cover-up", but I'd have to have a lot of 
faith in THE REGULATORS to disclose "potential wrongs", In some 
regulatory circles, I'd need to "see bodies" before I would blow the 
whistle on anyone other than myself.

Does the quoted text below imply that one should report "potential 
wrongs" committed by "professionals" to those "professionals" certifying 
body?

What a fiasco that would unleash on public perception of the profession.

My choice, pathetic or punished ?

What fraction of all "professionals" do you think would meet this 
particular definition of "just taking up space"?


> 
> The converse between "whistle-blower" is "cover-up". When one sees 
> potential wrong, be it ethically or regulatory wise, a professional 
> has the obligation to speak out. This should include working through 
> the defined channels. If this results in failure, then one must do 
> what one must. To do otherwise is really pathetic. If one sits back 
> and does nothing, then that person is essentially not acting in a 
> responsible manner, and, as far as I am concerned, just taking up 
> space and being paid for it.

Remember this is PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL, and don't go find my resume 
to tie down any of the details.