ML17202G628
| ML17202G628 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 10/05/1989 |
| From: | Shafer W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Reed C COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17202G629 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8910180074 | |
| Download: ML17202G628 (4) | |
Text
Docket No. 50-237 Docket No. 50-249 Commonwealth Edison Company ATTN:
Mr. Cordell Reed Senior Vice President Post Office Box 767 Chicago, IL
- 60690 Gentlemen:
or.r 5 1989 We have reviewed your response (enclosed) dated September 13, 1989, to our request, dated August 1, 1989, to investigate the possibility of employment discrimination in the actions taken by Transco Inc. in the termination of a former employee.
He are satisfied that your investigation was.adequate to determine that no
- discrimination was involved in this action.
I
~*-\\- *o v'---
Your re$ponse and our previous investigations described in our A~gust 1, 1989, letter.tlose thi~ allegation (RilI-87-A-0074).
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/enclosure:
T. Kovach, Nuclear Licensing Manager E. -D. Eenigenburg, Station Manager DCD/DCB (RIDS)
Licensing Fee Management Branch Resident Inspector~ RIII Richard Hubbard J. W. McCaff_rey, Chief, Public Utilities Division RIII
- 1J.-viL
-:;i':,Jones/ j p.
I 10/ f /89 RI I I 121Vv1...
Lerch Sincerely,
- Original eigned by W.D. Sbc.fer" W. D. Shafer, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 1
. r \\
'1
'-' \\
~I
\\
,. e CommonAlth Edison 72 West Ada~treet, Chicago, Illinois Address Reply to: Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690 - 0767 Mr. A. B. Davis Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Il
- 60137 10 c WITHH,OLD "'
September 13, 1989 SUbjett:
Dresrlen Station Units l & 2 Response to Allegation Concerning Employment Discrimination
~o. RIJI-87~A-0074 NRC Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-248
Reference:
Ca> Edward G. Greenman L~tter to Cordell Reed dated August l, 1989
Dear Mr;. Davis:
.1' ORMATION UBLIC.DISCLOSURE
~
Reference Ca) informed Commonwealth Edison of an allegation concerning the possibility of employement discrimination at the Dresden Nuclear Station CNRC Allegation 87-0074).
The following attachments provide Commonwealth Edi.son's investigation into this allegation.
Attachments to this letter contain information which is' exempt from public disclosure ftCcording to_ 10 CFR 57.90(~)(7).
Edison requested, and was granted, an extension for submittal of this' report by Mr. Robert Lerch of your staff on September l, 1989.
If you have any further questicins regarding this matter, please contact this office.
Very truly yours, Nuc ear Licensing Manager WEM/scl :0279T:6
.Reference <a> requested Commonwealth Edison Company <Edison) to investigate whether the termination of a former Transco Products Inc.
<Transco) employee,
, was justified. If this investigation determined that in whole or in part discrimination was involved in termination, Edison was to address additibnal questions related to the possible thilling affect of such termination.
.. 1111111111111111 was dismissed from llllposition as Transco's Site Quality Control Manager at Dresden ori April 5, 1987.
Commonwealth Edison'~
investi~ation has determined that the ter~ination of was fully justified and involved no discrimfoation.
- allegations raising safety concerns a-t the Dresden Nuclear Power Station were investigated by the NRC as described in I~spection Report Nos. 50-237/88030 and 50-249/88031
~hi ch concluded that
no discrepancies or violations of regulatory requirements were identified.
- I filed these allegations.weeks after -was terminated from Transco..
Commonwealth Edison's investigation indicates that termination from Transco was the outcome of absenteeism and failure to notify-supervisor of
- absences in a timely manner.* There is no indication that Transco terminated
- for raising any safety concerns.
This cone l us ion is supported by the documents provided as exhibits to this letter.
Commonwealth Edison ls both aware of and respectful of lts obligations not to retaliate against employees or contractors who engage in protected activity as defined in the Energy Reorganization Act.
The validity of the termination and the filing of the allegation after the termination leads Commonwealth Ediso~ to c6nclude that there is ho reasonable basis for believing that the employm~nt action by this contractor could give rise to a "chilling affect" on other persons.
Thus, other than to ensure that, as always, employees and-contractors work in an environment that does not discourage the voJcing of safety concerns, Cbmmonwealth Edison does not believe that further action is neces~ary as a result of this complaint.
~*lEM/ s cl : 027 9T: l p rd vacy of C:;:;~
a cleari*:.'.
t VO 1 '1;..J,
..Fi:'._~jl!O INFORMATION ATTACHMENL~ WITHHOLD JKOM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE