ML20059K439
| ML20059K439 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Prairie Island  |
| Issue date: | 01/26/1994 |
| From: | Martin J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Antony D NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059K449 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-93-192, NUDOCS 9402020104 | |
| Download: ML20059K439 (7) | |
Text
p.
3
\\
. f* "' %y UNITED STATES fi h
fg NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION O
REGloN m a
801 WARREtMLLE ROAD
...../
uste. wnois cos32aasi January 26, 1994 Docket Nos.
50-282 and 50-306 License Nos.
DPR-42 and DPR-60 EA 93-192 Northern States Power Company ATTN:
Mr. Douglas Antony Vice President Nuclear Generation 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 f
Dear Mr. Antony:
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY - $50,000 AND DEMAND FOR INFORMATION (U.
S.
Department of Labor Case No. 93-ERA-12)
This refers to the results of a hearing conducted by a U.
S.
Department of Labor (DOL) Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) into a complaint filed on November 5, 1992, by an' individual formerly employed by Burns International Security Service (Burns) ~, a subcontractor at Northern States Power Company's (NSP) Prairie' Island Nuclear Generating Plant (Prairic Island) (DOL Case No.
+
93-ERA-12).
The former security guard alleged that Burns improperly terminated her employment on September 3, 1992 because she raised' questions about certain security practices at Prairie Island.
In a December 4, 1992 letter, the DOL Area Director concluded that Burns would have taken the same unfavorable personnel action regardless of the individual's questions about the security practices.
That decision was appealed by the individual and, following a hearing, the DOL ALJ concluded that unlawful employment discrimination had occurred.
Specifically, the ALJ found that Burns, partly due to pressure applied by Northern States Power Company managers, wrongfully discharged the individual in retaliation for her having engaged in protected activities on several occasions.
The ALJ ordered Burns to reinstate the guard with back pay and other compensation.
.An enforcement conference was held on September 1, 1993 in the Region III office to discuss the corrective actions taken by NSP as a result of the' findings by.the DOL ALJ in this case.
The corrective actions were also described in your letter of August 131, 1993, which was placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
The NRC has determined that Burns' termination of the guard was a violation of 10 CFR 50.7, " Employee Protection."
This violation is described in the enclosed Notice of Violation 9402020104 940126 4
PDR ADOCK 05000282
/
O[ 8 G
PDS I
010020
1 L
Northern States Power Co.
-2 8
1 and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice).
Specifically, J
under 10 CFR 50.7, discrimination by a Commission licensee, or its contractor or subcontractor, against an employee for engaging in protected activities is prohibited.
The guard's activities, which included raising questions about security practices at an NRC licensed facility, are considered protected activities under l
To emphasize the importance of maintaining an environment in which employees are free to engage in protected activities without fear of retaliation, the violation has been categorized at Severity Level III in accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions,"
j (Enforcement Policy) 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C.
After consultation with the Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Regional Operations and Research and the Director of the Office of Enforcement, I have been authorized to issue the enc]osed Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice) in the amount of $50,000 for the Severity Level III violation.
I The base value of a civil penalty for a Severity Level III violation is $50,000.
The civil penalty adjustment factors in the Enforcement Policy were considered.
The NRC considered mitigating the base penalty for your corrective actions; however, mitigation was not warranted because you did not become involved in this case or otherwise take steps to limit the potential chilling effect of the alleged discrimination until the DOL process was'far along and allegations and complaints of discrimination had been pending for an extended period.
With respect to prior performance, the NRC recognizes that your recent performance in this area generally has been good.
Under the.
normal application of the mitigation factors in the Enforcement Policy, full mitigation of the civil penalty might be warranted.
)
However, because we have substantial concerns about the discrimination and the apparent involvement of NSP personnel in the discrimination in this case, we have decided to exercise discretion pursuant to section VII.A.1 of the Enforcement Policy and not mitigate the civil penalty in order to emphasize the need for NSP to eliminate discrimination and foster an environment in which all employees at Prairie Island and NSP's contractors feel free to raise safety concerns without fear of retaliation.
You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the enclosei Notice when preparing your response.
Since the NRC enforcemeni. action in this case is based on the Recommended Decision and Order of the DOL ALJ, which is' 3
still being reviewed by the Secretary of Labor, you may delay j
payment of the civil penalty and submission of certain portions of the response as described in the enclosed Notice until 30 days i
after the final decision of the Secretary of Labor.
Notwith-1
i i
Northern States Power Co. l standing your presentation and the corrective actions you described at the enforcement conference and in your letter of August 31, 1993, in that portion of your response which describes corrective steps you have taken, you are required to describe any additional actions that you plan to take to minimize any i
potential chilling effect arising from this incident.
The DOL ALJ found that Burns International Security Service i
discriminated against the former security guard.
However, the ALJ also concluded that NSP was aware of the individual's protected activities and put pressure on Burns to remove her.
To support this conclusion, the ALJ cited numerous occasions in which: (1) the USP Security Shift Supervisor told other security officers that the security guard in question should back off and not ask any questions and stated that there would be problems if that security guard "did not back off",
(2) two NSP supervisors allegedly recommended that Burns reprimand the security guard, l
and (3) the NSP Superintendent of Security labeled the security guard a " troublemaker".
(See ALJ Recommended Decision and Order, June 24, 1993, at 21)
The ALJ concluded that Burns was in frequent communication with NSP concerning the security guard and that the " record was replete with enmity directed toward [her) by Burns because of her protected activities, and the pressure placed on Burns by its client NSP, who was also aware of her protected activities."
While harassment, intimidation, or discrimination against any person for engaging in protected activities is cause for concern, discrimination by management is of special concern to the NRC.
Therefore, in order to determine whether additional enforcement action is appropriate, including action directed to individuals responsible for discrimination, you are hereby required, pursuant to sections 161c, 1610, 182 and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.204 and 10 CFR 50.54 (f) to provide the following information to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory-Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555 within 30 days of the date of this letter, in writing and under oath or affirmation:
your basis for concluding that Burns International Security Service and NSP managers and supervisors involved in this event fully understand their responsibilities under your NRC license and their obligation to fulfill NRC regulations and license requirements; the steps you have taken to ensure that the NSP and Burns International Security Service personnel whom the DOL ALJ l
indicated were involved in the discriminatory action that is addressed herein will perform their duties in compliance with the Commission's requirements; and i
l
-l p
y w
-i-w,-y--
r
-m-y m-,y-ei--yy--
r-
,.---i
rvq I'
'l LNorthern States Power Co.'
-4 the steps you have taken to ensure that managers-supervisors, and-employees of both NSP and'NSP's contractors, including Burns International' Security Service, understand their responsibilities regarding;the right'of-individuals to raise. safety concerns without fear of-retaliation or discrimination.
The answers to these questions are required to be included.in that portion of the response which is due within 30 days'of.the date of the enclosed Notice of Violation.
.A copy'of your response to these questions should also.be sent to thelNRC Assistant General Counsel for Nearings and Enforcement, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
You should also address what action-you plan to take to ensure that you are aware of allegations of discrimination made by your contractor employees and what actions you plan to take to ensure investigation and resolution of such complaints.
A Notice of Violation is being issued to Burns International Security Service for the violation and a Demand for Information is being issued to Burns requiring it to provide information to determine whether additional enforcement action would be appropriate.
Copies are enclosed.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice,"
a copy of this letter,;its enclosure, and your responses will be-placed in the NRC Public Document' Room'.
Please provide copies of this letter and the enclosed Notice of Violation to the individuals who-were involved in the incident and inform them that they may respond and that, if.they do choose to respond, this response must be provided within 30 days of the date of this letter.
The responses directed by this letter and the enclosed Notice are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Manage-1 1
-}
Li J
my
.i
. Northern States Power Co. -
ment'and Budget.as requi~ red by the Paperwork Reduction Act of f
1980, Public Law No.96-511.
Sincerely, I
i Jo'n B.
Martin Regional Administrator
Enclosures:
1.
Notice of Violation and Proposed l
Imposition of Civil Penalty.
2.
Letter to Burns Internatioral Security Service enclosing Notice of Violation and Demand for Information l
cc: Burns International Security Services i
- i
. j 3
I a
- l
. l 1
, )
1 l
_.4 i,
r m
~ '
r ~. _.
= ;y 6
{
Northern States Power Co.
- 6 cc'with enclosures:
.DCD/DCB"(RIDS)
E..L.fWatzl, Site Manager
[
M. Wadley, Plant Manager
' Resident Inspectors, Monticello and Prairie Island
-John W.'Ferman, Ph.D.
Nuclear Engineer, MPCA State Liaison Officer 5
State of Minnesota Prairie Island LPM, NRR t
I i
+
h e
1 i
.i I
i
'i 1
w
,.,~s
'i T
iNorthern States Power Co. 1 DISTRIBUTION I
SECY-CA JTaylor, EDO-JSniezek, DEDR JLieberman, OE LChandler, OGC
-JGoldberg, OGC TMurley, NRR i
JPartlow, NRR EGreenman, RIII Enforcement Coordinators RI, RII, RIV, RV
.j Resident Inspector i
.FIngram, GPA/PA DWilliams, OIG.
BHayes, OI EPawlik, OI:RIII DFunk, RIII l
EJordan, AEOD I
DRosano, OE
. E%Mlgp9(2)
.Yh,'DCQagni iMO:RIII SLO:RIII PAO:RIII IMS:RIII I
i I
'l 1
(
I P
~
-,