ML16341E283
| ML16341E283 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 06/15/1987 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Panetta L HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16341E284 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8706230177 | |
| Download: ML16341E283 (4) | |
Text
/ Q
~P,R iitgIi 1 4>
~
~u rC A
. ~
O (i <
Cy n +a*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 JUN ~5 SN The Honorable Leon E. Panetta Member, United States House of Representatives 380 Alvarado Street Monterey, California 93940 Dear Congressman Panetta:
This is in response to your letter dated April 24, 1987, forwarding information regarding your constituent, Ronald
- Cowan, who encountered problems with his former employer, Bechtel, a contractor of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PGEE), concerning his rehiring at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant.
By letter dated May 27, 1987 (Enclosure 1), the NRC notified PGSE that Mr. Cowan may have been discriminated against by Bechtel.
The NRC requested PGSE to provide, in writing, the reasons why Mr. Cowan was denied employment and to describe any actions PGSE has taken or planned to take to ensure that this situation does not have a "chilling" effect, discouraging other employees of PGKE or its contractors from raising perceived safety concerns.
After we review PG8E's
- response, we will determine whether enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements.
Mr. Cowan had filed a complaint with the Department of Labor (DOL) in 1985 after he was terminated by Bechtel.
The DOL Area Director found that Mr. Cowan had been discriminated against in violation of Section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as
- amended, 42 U.S.C.
5851 (ERA).
The Area Director ordered that Mr. Cowan be reinstated in his job or, if the position no longer existed, that he be compensated for lost wages.
Although Bechtel apparently signed a settlement agreement with Mr. Cowan, he initially experienced difficulty in being I.ehired.
He was eventually rehired, but he was again terminated, after he expressed safety concerns to the,NRC.
He has riot been rehired by Bechtel.
In your letter, you questioned whether the NRC has any jurisdiction over the rehiring policies in this situation.
The NRC has not determined the extent of its jurisdiction to impose remedies, such as rehiring, that traditionally are imposed by the Department of Labor.
However, the Commission's regulations, in 10 CFR 50.7, prohibit a licensee, or a contractor or subcontractor of a
- licensee, from discriminating against an employee for engaging in certain protected activities.
The protected activities include those established in Section 210 of the ERA.
As defined in 10 CFR 50.7(a), discrimination includes discharge and other actions that relate to compensation, terms, conditions, and privileges of employment.
8706230i77 8706i5 PDR ADOCK 05000275 H
L.
J
")
'fP ~~ hVt.
The Honorable Leon E. Panetta Under the Commission's regulations, an employee who believes that he or she has been discriminated against should seek a remedy for such discrimination through filing a complaint with the Department of Labor, as Nr.
Cowan has done (10 CFR 50.7(b)). If the NRC believes that a licensee or its contractor or subcontractor has discriminated against an employee for engaging in protected activities, then the NRC would consider taking appropriate enforcement action against the licensee.
Such enforcement action may include denial, revocation or suspension of a license, imposition of a civil penalty, or other appropriate action (10 CFR 50.7(c)).
In carrying out our respective responsibilities in the area of alleged licensee discrimination against employees for raising safety concerns, the NRC and DOL entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (NOU) effective October 25, 1982 (Enclosure 2).
The MOU provides that the NRC and DOL have complementary responsibilities in the area of employee protection.
DOL has the responsibility to investigate complaints of discrimination and, after an investigation and
- hearing, may (1) order a violator to abate the violation, and (2) order such remedies as reinstatement of the complainant to his or her former position with back pay and payment of compensatory damages.
The NRC, although without direct authority to provide a remedy to an employee, has independent authority to take appropriate action against a licensee that has discriminated against an employee.
Please contact me if I can be of further assistance to you.
Sincerely, 0rigi~l signed bg piete'tella~
Victor Stello, Jr.
Executive Director for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
Letter dated May 27, 1987; NRC to PGSE 2.
Memorandum of Understanding
- See previous concurrence
- DRSP/PDV CTrammell:c 6/1/87
- DRSP/D:PDV
- DRSP/AD
~ADP GWKnighton GNHolahan DMCrutchfield 6/2/87 6/2/87 6/4/87
- DDONRR
- DONRR JSniezek TMurley 6/7/87 6/7/87 "ADP E
- ARM:PPNB FNiraglia VS llo AThomas 6/1/87 6/
/87 6/1/87 JGoldberg JLieberman 6/2/87 6/2/87 6/
/Q
/87
- OGC
- 0E GPA/CA
l<<
1 l'<<)I I
f
,)lf<<
4
~
W
'f I
> 4
'I'll >
>W WW..I) fI fh<<vv
~ '
) 4 4,
I I it'h Wk
<< T l.K
'<< l ')
)
I
)I lw
<<I ',
Wh<<WW
"> 4 4
h
~
~
4, Jv v
> >I II
'~>lv lw
'w 4
4 4
1 4
<<l)Q l,l P kill
t wlw' I
I.
)KJ<<W Kft
)
k Jf W ~
I l hll
.. ~ )
ll>
-I ll 4
),)'4 Iv,
)
Wfii,, la
'I,, nfl II ft tt, i 4
4
- 'I =l W
IK>
f>
'.f'
<<T 4
~
IK W
l.'"
= >f W >lf il W
"W'),W W,J
'Iff-, <<".',lif fl W
f<<W WI f 4k'
)vf 4<<
ft I I II.,'h'l
... c'~J>
I
)Ill>ft I I
4 "WW,>I...l 1
-,I<