ML17311A517
| ML17311A517 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 12/20/1994 |
| From: | Russell W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17311A514 | List: |
| References | |
| 2.206, NUDOCS 9412280389 | |
| Download: ML17311A517 (8) | |
Text
7590-01 UNITED ST T S UC AR GU ATOR C
ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY T
ALO VERDE NUCLEAR GEN RAT NG S AT ON UNI S OCKET NO S
N 50-5 STN 50-9 ECE PT OF PETI ON OR RECTOR'S C
0 0-0 Notice is hereby given that by petition dated November 14, 1994, Florida Energy Consultants, Inc.
(FEC) and Linda E. Hitchell (petitioners),
in a petition signed by Hr. Thomas J. Saporito, Jr., request that they be granted (I) an administrative public hearing before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board) and (2) leave to intervene in such a hearing.
The petitioners also request that the NRC (3) issue a
confirmatory order requiring the Arizona Public Service
- Company, et al.
(licensee) to immediately bring all three units at the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station to 0 percent power until such time as the licensee can demonstrate corrective actions obviating any inference of a hostile work environment and (4) issue a demand for information (DFI) to the licensee seeking an explanation as to why the NRC can have confidence that the licensee will ensure that an environment exists free of harassment, intimidation, and discrimination, both in general throughout its organization and in particular with respect to certain named individuals.
In addition, with respect to these individuals, the NRC interprets the petition as also requesting that the NRC require the licensee to provide (5) a description of these individuals'urrent employment duties and responsibilities, (6) an explanation as to why the NRC can have confidence that these individuals will comply with NRC requirements, (7) information as to why the Commission should not take action
'P4i228038'V 941220 PDR ADOCK 05000528 P
PDR I,
C r
to prohibit these individuals from being involved in NRC-licensed activities, (8) information as to why the NRC should have reasonable assurance that these individuals will abide by NRC regulations that protect individuals who engage in protected activities, and (9) any other information the licensee believes to be relevant to the Commission's decision in this matter.
The petitioners assert as a basis for their requests that the licensee has been the subject of numerous complaints filed under the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 and adjudicated by the Oepartment of Labor under the employee protection provisions found in 29 CFR Part 24.
In addition, the petitioners assert that a hostile work environment is pervasive and encompasses all three units at Palo Verde, as well as being condoned and fostered by licensee management to dissuade employees at Palo Verde from identifying safety concerns internally or directly to NRC representatives.
The petitioners also assert that they are subject to physical harm and the loss of personal property should Palo Verde experience a nuclear accident as a
direct or indirect result of the hostile work environment at this facility.
The petitioners'urrent requests are similar to those in a petition dated May 12,
- 1993, as supplemented on May 28, 1993, in which Mr. Saporito requested that the NRC institute a proceeding pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202 to modify, suspend, or revoke the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station operating licenses; initiate actions to immediately shut down the three nuclear reactors at Palo Verde; take escalated enforcement action against the licensee and/or licensee management personnel; and take immediate actions to cause an exhaustive survey of licensee employees at Palo Verde to ascertain the scope and breadth of any chilling effect that may exist at the nuclear station and to discover if licensee management actions, if any, were effective in limiting
any chilling effect at the nuclear station.
In addition, the bases for the petitioners'urrent requests are similar to those in Mr. Saporito's request of May 12, 1993.
Mr. Saporito asserted as bases for hfs prior requests, in part, that the licensee had violated 10 CFR 50.7,,"Employee Protection";
alleged that the licensee had a reputation for leading the nation in whistleblower complaints; pointed to the Department of Labor discrimination cases involving licensee employees, Linda Mitchell and Sarah
- Thomas, and the resulting issuance by the NRC of a notice of violation and proposed imposition of civil penalties on September 20, 1992; and asserted continuing discrimination by the licensee against the petitioner in denying him employment at the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station.
Since the requests of May 12,
- 1993, and November 14,
- 1994, are similar, the staff is addressing the current petition together with the petition of May 12,
- 1993, as supplemented, for purposes of preparing a director's decision.
The petition has been referred to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206.
As provided by Section 2.206, appropriate action will be taken with regard to the specific issues raised by the petition in a reasonable time.
L
'u
Copies of the petition are available for inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room at 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555 and local public document room at the Phoenix Public Library, 12 East McDowell Road, Phoenix, Arizona 85004.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 20th day of December 1994.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~~o
/,
William T. Russell, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
y il II