ML20033G244
| ML20033G244 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 03/27/1990 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Cohen W SENATE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19324H296 | List: |
| References | |
| CCS, NUDOCS 9004060365 | |
| Download: ML20033G244 (2) | |
Text
.. -
m N
n M*8 UNITED STATES U,-[*
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g -
WAsHmOTON. D. C. 20556 g
k*****-[y
[f v
March 27,1990 7
The Honorable William S. Cohen United States' Senator-Post Office' Box 347-Augusta, Maine 04332-0347
Dear Senator Cohen:
This letter is written in response to your letter of March 8,1990 concerning the employment of Ms. Sydney D. Faulkingham.
In responding to her, you may-find it helpful to review the previous correspondence between her and officials of the Nuclear Kegulatory Comission (NRC).- 1 have enclosed copies for your perusal.
The following summary of Ms. Faulkingham's employment should further assist you in your response. On October 29, 1986 Ms. Faulkingham was appointed to the USNRC as a part-time GG-4, Resident Clerical Aide (Typing), at the Maine Yankee Resident Office in Wiscasset, Maine. She was subsequently promoted to GG-5 on April 26, 1987.
In January 1988 the State of Maine discussed..an employment offer with Ms. Faulkingham as a part-time secretary for the State Inspector at Maine Yankee. Ms. Faulkingham sought the advice of her immediate supervisor who forwarded the request to his supervisor at the Region I Office in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
It is' unfortunate that the request was not forwarded to the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) at that time,.since by virtue of 10 CFR 0.735-40(f), the EDO is the only NRC official who can authorize such out -
side employment. As a result, Ms. Faulkingham was improperly advised that it:
was permissible to work for the State Inspector. She began her State duties in March 1989.
In June 1989 Ms. Faulkingham requested permission to attend a course at Maine Yankee which brought the matter of her dual employment to the attention of personnel and legal officials at the NRC. A-formal-review of her employment for the State Inspector resulted in nty decision that it is not appro-priate, as a matter of policy, to allow an NRC employee to also work for a State agency which is involved in areas which the NRC regulates, particularly when the same licensee is involved.
I allowed Ms. Faulkingham until April 1, 1990 to resolve the conflict. Ms. Faulkingham was notified by the Region I Administrator, William T. Russell, of nty decision in November 1989 and also that if she did not resolve the conflict by April 1st, then the NRC would pro-pose her removal from Federal employment.
She was further advised that if extenuating circumstances warrant, I would consider an extension of the dead-line.
FUi.L TEXT ASCll SCAN 9
9004o6o3CC *w
P.?
,p'f* *%s,#o UNITED STATES <
v.
A -
T
.g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
r; E
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20656
~k.*****
March 27, 1990 The Honorable William S. Cohen United States Senator Post Office Box 347 Augusta, Maine 04332-0347
Dear Senator Cohen:
This letter.is written in response to your letter of March 8,11990 concerning the emoloyment of Ms. Sydney D. Faulkingham.
In responding to-her, you:may find it helpful to review the previous correspondence between her and officials of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
I have enclosed copies for your perusal.
The following summary.of Ms. Faulkingham's employment should further assist you in your response. On October 29, 1986 Ms; Faulkingham was appointed to the USNRC as a part-time GG-4, Resident Clerical Aide (Typing), at the Maine Yankee Resident Office in Wiscas::et, Maine. She_was subsequently promoted to GG-5 on' April.26, 1987.
In January 1988 the State of. Maine discussed an employment'-
offer with Ms. Faulkingham as a part-time secretary for the State Inspector at Maine Yankee. Ms. Faulkingham sought the advice of her immediate supervisor who forwarded the request to his supervisor at the Region I Office in King ~of-Prussia, Pennsylvania.
It is unfortunate that the request was not forwarded to the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) at that time,.since by virtue of.10 CFR 0.735-40(f), the EDO is the only NRC official who can authorize such out-side employment. As a result, Ms. Faulkingham was improperly advised that it was permissible to work for the State Inspector. She began her State duties in March 1989.
In June 1989 Ms. Faulkingham requested permission to attend a course at Maine Yankee which brought the matter of her dual employment to the attention of personnel and legal officials at the NRC. A forma 1> review of her employment for the State Inspector resulted in my decision that it is not appro-priate, as a matter of policy, to allow an NRC employee to also work for a State agency which is involved in areas which the NRC regulates, particularly when the same licensee is involved.
I allowed Ms. Faulkingham until April 1, 1990 to resolve the conflict. Ms. Faulkingham was notified by the Region I Administrator, Willian T. Russell, of my decision in November 1989 and also that if she did not resolve the conflict by April 1st, then the NRC would pro-pose her removal from Federal employment. She was further advised that if extenuating circumstances warrant, I would consider an extension of the dead-line.
FULL TEXT ASCll SCAN 9
-m
'9oo9o603Qf w
j
The Honorable William S. Cohen 1.
In January 1990, Ms. Faulkingham submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for copies of the rules, regulations or case law which formed the basis for determining that employment with the State and the NRC represented, a conflict of interest.
On February 12, 1990 a copy of the applicable rules-and regulations was sent to Ms. Faulkingham.
In March 1990 Ms. Faulkingham wrote memoranda to Mr. Jon Johnson, Branch Chief, Division of Reactor Projects, Region I, and Mr. Russell stating that she would not leave the NRC willingly. She asked for a 60 day extension beyond the
. April 1, 1990 deadline. Mr. Russell denied her request for extension because she did not provide any specific information sufficient to justify an extension.
He reminded her that if she did not resolve the conflict by April 1, 1990 then her removal would be proposed.
I trust that this information will assist you in your response to Ns. Faulkingham.
Please_ feel free to contact me should you require additional information.
Sincerely, KA[
J es M. Tayfor xecutive Director for Operations-
Enclosures:
As stated I