ML13311A366
| ML13311A366 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 11/06/2013 |
| From: | Bill Dean Region 1 Administrator |
| To: | Joyce T Public Service Enterprise Group |
| References | |
| EA-13-160 | |
| Download: ML13311A366 (4) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I 2100 RENAISSANCE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100 KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406-2713 November 6, 2013 EA-13-160 Mr. Thomas P. Joyce President and Chief Nuclear Officer PSEG Nuclear LLC - N09 P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038
SUBJECT:
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ASSESSMENT OF PSEGS RESPONSE ON THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF A U.S. DISTRICT COURT FINDING ON THE WORK ENVIRONMENT AT SALEM AND HOPE CREEK
Dear Mr. Joyce:
In a letter dated July 26, 2013, the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) informed you that it had become aware of a jury verdict in U.S. District Court in Camden, New Jersey in favor of a former security supervisor of Wackenhut Corporation (now G4S Security Solutions), the security contractor at the Salem and Hope Creek Nuclear Generating Stations. The jury found that the former security supervisor was terminated by Wackenhut in October 2009, in retaliation for engaging in a protected activity.
The NRC also noted that this jury verdict raised questions as to whether the work environment at Salem and Hope Creek is such that employees are encouraged and willing to raise safety and regulatory concerns to PSEG, its contractors, or to the NRC. Although Wackenhut, and not PSEG, was the only party named in this complaint, PSEG, as the NRC license holder for Salem and Hope Creek, is responsible and accountable for the actions of its contractors when engaged in NRC regulated activities. Therefore, our letter dated July 26, 2013, requested information regarding what measures PSEG is undertaking to ensure that Wackenhuts actions do not have a chilling effect on the willingness of your employees or contractors to raise concerns.
PSEG provided its response to the NRC request in a letter dated August 22, 2013. The NRC reviewed the PSEG response, and held conference calls with PSEG representatives on September 13 and 26, 2013, to gain further details and discuss outstanding questions regarding the PSEG response. Based on our review, the NRC staff has concluded that PSEG was responsive to our July 26 request for information; and that PSEG has taken appropriate action to ensure: (1) employees and contractors are willing to raise concerns; and (2) management will promptly address employee and contractor concerns when identified.
In reaching this conclusion, the NRC recognized that PSEG undertook a number of specific actions, as detailed in your August 22 letter, in response to the recent jury finding as well as the NRCs July 26 letter, including communicating the jury finding and NRC letter to your entire staff as well as to all contract employees. The most significant of these actions involved communications and case study training sessions for supervisors and above on their
T. Joyce 2
responsibility for maintaining an environment where individuals are comfortable speaking up. In addition, the NRC recognized that PSEG previously established a Safety Conscious Work Environment (SCWE) policy; had communicated that policy to its staff, management and contractors; and had conducted various assessments of its nuclear safety culture and its SCWE in the preceding 15 months.
The NRC previously reviewed the SCWE at the facility in late August 2012 during the NRC 95002 supplemental inspection and found, based on a sampling of 65 workers and first line supervisors from across the station (including security personnel), that personnel were willing to raise safety issues, and also appeared comfortable challenging management decisions when warranted. (We note that since this inspection report contained security-related information, it was not publicly released). Further, PSEGs Employee Concerns Program (ECP) conducted a survey as part of a security records Apparent Cause Evaluation (ACE) this past summer to review the safety culture in the security department, and concluded that security officers were comfortable raising safety or security concerns. The use of your corrective action program (CAP) by the security force has steadily increased since 2009, providing further indications that Wackenhuts actions have not impacted the willingness of security force members to raise concerns.
Finally, PSEG noted a number of ongoing methods for monitoring the health of the safety culture and associated SCWE at Salem and Hope Creek. These methods were previously established to detect any adverse trends and assist management in determining the need to take corrective actions. (Reference PSEGs response in ADAMS at ML13235A098). We understand that you will continue to keep our staff informed of any challenges that may emerge in this area going forward, as well as developments relating to the District Court case or any other litigation that may adversely affect the willingness of employees to raise concerns at Salem and Hope Creek. Based on the above, the NRC has no further questions at this time regarding your actions in response to our letter of July 26, 2013. The NRC will continue to monitor the SCWE as part of our baseline inspection program.
With respect to the jury finding of discrimination referenced in the NRCs July 26, 2013, letter, the NRC notes that on October 30, 2013, the judge in this U.S. District Court case ordered that the jury verdict be vacated, and that a new trial be conducted. The NRC will continue to monitor this court case until it is finalized. At that point, the NRC will determine whether any further action is warranted.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
T. Joyce 3
Please contact Glenn Dentel at (610) 337-5233 if you have any additional questions. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
/RA/
William M. Dean Regional Administrator Docket Nos: 50-272, 50-311, 50-354 cc:
Distribution via ListServ G4S Security Solutions
ML13311A366 SUNSI Review Non-Sensitive Sensitive
Publicly Available
Non-Publicly Available Office RI/DRP RI/DRP HQ/OE RI/ORA RI/DRP RI/RC RI/RA Name RBarkley/RB GDentel/GTD LJarriel/LJ via email DHolody/DJH DRoberts/DJR LClark/LC WDean/WMD Date 10/24/13 10/25/13 10/24/13 11/06/13 11/5/13 10/29/13 11/6/13