ML20042D688

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Staff Requirements Memo Re 900322 Affirmation/Discussion & Vote in Rockville,Md on SECY-90-069 Concerning Fitness for Duty Stay Request Filed by Several Plant Employees
ML20042D688
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon  
Issue date: 03/29/1990
From: Chilk S
NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
To: Parler W
NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
References
REF-10CFR9.7 M900322, NUDOCS 9004050011
Download: ML20042D688 (1)


Text

.....

p reow 9

S o,

UNITED $TATES IN RESPONSE, PLEASE

((

g NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION REFER To:

M900322 E

W ASHIN GT ON, D.C. 20b56 o

%,,,,,4 March 29, 1990 OF FICE OF THE SECR ET ARY MEMORANDUM FOR:

William C.

Parler, General Counsel FROM:

fa 1 J.

Chilk, Secretary

SUBJECT:

STAFF REQUIREMENTS - AFFIRMATION / DISCUSSION AND VOTE, 3:30 P.M.,

THURSDAY, MARCH 22, 1990, COMMISSIONERS' CONFERENCE ROOM, ONE WHITE FLINT NORTH, ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND (OPEN TO PUBLIC ATTENDANCE) 1.

SECY-90-069 - Fitness for Duty Rule Stav Recuest Filed by Several Diablo Canyon Emolovees The Commission, by a 5-0 vote,* approved an order responding to a February 2, 1990 motion requesting a partial stay of the Commission's Final Rule and Statement of Policy Concerning Fitness-for-Duty Programs as applied to certain employees at the Pacific Gas and Electric Company's Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant.

The Order denies the mot'on as essentially moot since the Court of topeals for the Ninto Circuit has already denied a stay pending appeal.

(Subsequently, on March i'. 1990, the Secretary signed the Order.)

cc:

Chairman Carr Commissioner Roberts Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Curtiss Commissioner Remick EDO GPA ACRS Pp - Advance WCS - P1-24 9004050011 900329 PDR 10CFR PT9.7 PDC

  • Section 201 of the Energy Reorganization Act, 42 U.S.C.

Section 5841, provides that action of the Commission shall be determined by a " majority vote of the members present."

Commissioner Remick was not present when this item was affirmed.

Accordingly, the formal vote of the Commission was 4-0 in favor n

i of the decision.

Commissioner Remick, however, had previously indicated that he would approve this paper and had he been p

present he would have affirmed his prior vote.

I i 0 i

t