ML20057C504

Insp Rept 70-1257/93-10 on 930812.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Announced Insp to Obtain Info on Licensee Employee Concerns Program

ML20057C504
Person / Time
Site:	Framatome ANP Richland
Issue date:	08/26/1993
From:	Nader Mamish, Reese J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20057C495	List: ML20057C494 ML20057C504
References
70-1257-93-10, NUDOCS 9309290044
Download: ML20057C504 (7)

Text

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION V Report No. 70-1257/93-01 License No. SNM-1227 Licensee: Siemens Power Corporation 2101 Horn Rapids Road Richland, Washington 99352-0130 Facility Name: Siemens Pawer Corporati'on Inspection Location:

Richland, Washington Inspection Duration: August 12, 1993 Inspected By:

M M ~#

F/zuS3 h

L.

Mamish, tion Specialist Dste Signed h-8hha Approved by:

/

Jamtfj. H. Reese, phief Da'te Signed Facilities Radiological Protection Branch Summary:

Areas Inspected:

This was an announced inspection to obtain information on the licensee's employee concerns program. Temporary Instruction 2500/028 was addressed.

Results:

In the areas inspected, the licensee's programs appeared capable of accomplishing of their safety objectives.

No violations or deviations were identified.

k b

9309290044 930826 PDR ADDCK 0700 7

C

t i

DETAILS l

1 Persons Contacted J. Davis, Spectrometry Laboratory Supervisor G. Mathison, Employee Relations Director P. McBride, Health & Safety Technician Specialist l

Y. Muns, Health & Safety Technician i

J. Tufford, Health & Safety Technician Student

• R. Vaughan, Manager, Safety, Security and Licensing

• Denotes the individual. attending the exit interview on August 12, 1993.

In addition to the individuals noted above, the inspector met and held discussions with other members of the licensee's staff.

2.

Inspection Findinos The inspector interviewed licensee managers concerning the substance of their employee concerns program (ECP). Additionally, the inspector reviewed licensee documents, and interviewed workers to determine their awareness of licensee's ECP.

The questionnaire, provided in Temporary Instruction 2500/028, was completed during the interview and is included as an attachment to this inspection report.

No violations or deviations were identified.

3.

Exit Interview (TI 2500/028)

The inspector met with the licensee representatives, denoted in Section 1, at the conclusion of the inspection on August 12, 1993. The scope and findings of the inspection were summarized. The licensee was informed that no violations or deviations were identified.

t l

L'

Attachment J

EMPLOYEE CONCERNS PROGRAMS PLANT NAME: Siemens Power Corporation LICENSEE: Siemens Nuclear Corporation DOCKET No:

50-133 NOTE:

Please circle yes or no if applicable and add comments in the space I

provided.

A.

PROGRAM:

1.

D the licensee have an employee concerns program?

Yes p.t No/ Comments)

Employees normally express their concerns to management.

If management does not resolve employees' concerns, workers are encouraged to elevate their concerns to higher management levels, and ultimately, to the director of employee relations. Employees, however, may directly discuss their concerns with the employee relations department.

Similar to permanent employees, licensee contractors have the same benefit of using the ECP. For permanent, and contract employees, i

the process of raising concerns may be performed on an informal and a formal basis.

2.

Has NRC inspected this program? h Report # LG B.

SCOPE:

(Circle all that apply) 1.

Is it for:

h No/ Comments) a.

Technical?

(hNo/ Comments) b.

Administrative?

h No/ Comments) c.

Personnel issues?

2.

D,oeg it cover safety as well as non-safety issues?

(Yes),No/ Comments) 3.

Is it designed for:

h,No/ Comments) a.

Nuclear Safety?

h No/ Comments) b.

Personal Safety?

c.

Pp nnel issues - including union grievances?

l (Yes No/ Comments)

2 4.

Does the program apply to all licensee employees?

(Yes,No/ Comments) 5.

Contractors?

(Yes,No/ Comments) 6.

Does the licensee require its contractors and their subs to have a similar program?

(Yes E No/ Comments) 7.

Does the licensee conduct an exit interview upon terminating employees asking if they have any safety concerns?

(Yes E No/ Comments)

Upon termination, contractors are asked if they have any concerns and are offered a form to document their concerns.

C.

INDEPENDENCE:

1.

What is the title of the person in charge?

Director of Employee Relations (for non-safety related matters).

Manager of Safety, Security, and Licensing (for safety related matters.

2.

Who do they report to?

Both individuals report to the Senior Vice President & General Manager.

3.

Are they independent of line management?

Yes.

4.

Does the ECP use third party consultants?

The EAP may use third party consultants on an as needed basis.

Currently, licensee's ECPs do not provide this kind of service.

5.

How is a concern about a manager or vice president followed up?

It is handled by the same process.

Employees, however, may directly raise their concerns to top executives.

D.

RESOURCES:

1.

What is the size of the staff devoted to this program?

I Five individuals are dedicated to resolve matters of employee However, the licensee would involve additional staff concerns.

3 members to carefully evaluate safety related matters.

2.

What are ECP staff qualifications (technical training, interviewing training, investigator training, other)?

Staff Staff qualification depends on the complexity of the concern.

members are generally trained in investigative techniques.

E.

REFERRAL 5.

1.

Who has followup on concerns (ECP staff, line management, other)?

Line supervision, management, and ECP staff.

F.

CONFIDENTIALITY:

1.

Are the reports confidential?

(Yes gr No/ Comments)

Who is the identity of the alleger made known to (senior management, 2.

ECP staff, line management, other)?

A11egers identity may only be revealed on a need-to-know basis.

3.

Can employees be:

a.

Anonymous?

(Yes,No/ Comments) l b.

Report by phone?

(Yes,No/ Comments)

G.

FEEDBACK:

1.

Is feedback given to the alleger r;on completion of the followup?

(Yes gr No - If so, how?)

Informally or formally; such as, by verbal discussion or written response.

2.

Does the program reward good ideas?

While no formal program currently exists, special one-time dinner certificates are offered for bright suggestions.

3.

Who, or at what level, makes the final decision of resolution?

Senior Vice President & General Manager, and the President if all f

program avenues were exhausted.

i

=

l

4 4.

Are the resolutions of anonymous concerns disseminated?

Yes, especially if they are safety related. On the other hand, concerns would not be disseminated if they are related to personnel matters.

5.

Are resolutions of valid concerns publicized (newsletter, bulletin board, all hands meeting, other)?

That is dependent upon the type and the severity of the concern.

H.

EFFECTIVENESS:

1.

How does the licensee measure the effectiveness of the program?

The licensee has not officially measured the effectiveness of the programs. However, the licensee indicated that workers have not complained about the ECP and are satisfied with the program's performance.

2.

Are concerns:

(YesothComments) a.

Trended?

Concerns are not trended. However, if the an increase in the number of concerns was noted, problems would be trended.

4 b.

Used?

or No/ Comments)

Yes, on an as needed basis.

l 3.

In the last three years how many concerns were raised?

\\

30 i

Of the concerns raised, how many were closed?

30 What percentage were substantiated?

20%

4.

How sre followup techniques used to measure effectiveness (random survey, interviews, other)?

Through direct interviews with supervisors.

S.

How frequently are internal audits of the ECP conducted and by whom?

About every 3 years by ECP staff.

i e

i 5

j I.

ADMINISTRATION / TRAINING:

1.

Is ECP prescribed by a procedure? (Yes p_t No/ Comments) 2.

How are employees, as well as contractors, made aware of this f

program (training, newsletter, bulletin board, other)?

During orientation and general meetings, and by discussion with supervisors.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

(Including characteristics which make the program especially effective, if any.)

Workers were interviewed during the inspection for the purpose of determining their awareness of the ECPs. Generally, workers were cognizant of the fact that concerns are directed to supervisors, and managers /ECP staff if they were inadequately addressed. However, workers were unfamiliar with and, unaware that a formal program of addressing employee concerns existed.

This observation was brought to the licensee's attention.

NAME:

TITLE:

PHONE #:

Nader Mamish/ Radiation Specialist

/(510) 975-0322 Date Completed: 8/26/93 2500/028 Attachment Issue Date 07/29/93

..