ML20062J787
| ML20062J787 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Saint Vrain  |
| Issue date: | 11/10/1993 |
| From: | Crawford A PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF COLORADO |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT (OE) |
| References | |
| EA-92-152, P-93105, NUDOCS 9311170283 | |
| Download: ML20062J787 (4) | |
Text
.
./
O. Public Service *
%'"L,.
P O BOX &W DENVER CO 80201 0840 16805 Weld County Road 19-1/2 A. Clegg Crawford l
Platteville, Colorado 80651
{'c',,[,Q,"[,,,
l c
t November 10, 1993 Fort St. Vrain i
P-93105 Director, Office of Enforcement U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commiccion ATTN:
Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.
20555 DOCKET NO. 50-267
SUBJECT:
Reply to a Notice of Violation, (NRC Investigation OI 4-91-019; DOL 91-ERA-037)
REFERENCE:
1)
NRC Letter, J.
L.
Milhoan to A.
C.
- Crawford, dated October 13, 1993 (G-93162)
{
Dear Director:
Enclosed is Public Service Company of Colorado's (PSC) response to EA 92-152, NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY, contained in Reference 1.
This response is prepared pursuant to the provisions-of 10 CFR 2.201.
The Notice states that:
"During an investigation conducted by the NRC's Office.of
[
Investigation on November 26, 1991, and February 11-14, 1992, and an investigation by the Department of Labor which was reported on April 29, 1991, a violation of NRC requirements was identified.
In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1988), the violation is set forth below:
"10 CFR 50.7 prohibits discrimination by a Commission licensee against an employee for engaging in certain protected.
activities.
Discrimination includes discharge and other actions relating to the compensation, terms, conditions, and i
privileges of employment.
The protected activities are described in Section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act of j
1974, as amended (now Section 211), and in general are related to the administration or enforcement of a requirement imposed I
under the Atomic Energy Act or Energy Reorganization Act.
i
(
9311170283 931110 Il
[
^
PDR-ADOCK 05000267 9
G PDR gs
/ g)
I 1
/
P-93105 j
November 10, 1993 Page 2 t
f
" Contrary to the above, on March 21, 1991, the licensee's
{
radiation protection manager terminated a contract radiation protection technician in retaliation for the technician's having engaged in a protected activity, i.e., reporting to PSC management potential safety concerns relative to the j
activities and the job performance of a PSC Health Physics Technician.
(01012) l l
"This is a Severity Level II violation (Supplement VII).
Civil Penalty - $80,000" l
In response, the position of PSC remains as follows:
l
'I (1)
Admission or denial of the alleced violation:
f PSC denies the alleged violation.
- l (2)
The reasons for the violation if admitted and, if denied, the i
reasons why:
j The complainant was released as part of a
downsizing necessitated by the inability of PSC to ship spent reactor l
fuel to the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory in 1991.
l The complainant was chosen to be released based on the assessment of the Radiation Protection Manager that the complainant was demonstrating an inability and unwillingness to deal effectively and appropriately with his coworkers.
?
After several meetings with complainant in response to a j
complaint by a coworker in which complainant stated his refusal to change his interpersonal behavior _
towards coworkers, and after objectively canvassing complainant's l
peers, the decision was made to release complainant based on his unacceptable behavior. PSC acknowledges that the concerns l
previously raised by the complainant were
- valid, and-appropriate management action has been taken_to mitigate _the safety issues that were raised.
No safety concerns - were involved with the release, and the release was in no respect i
based on complainant's reporting of safety concerns or I
concerns relative to the activities or job-performance of a j
PSC Health Physics Technician.
i Facts, explanations, and arguments related to this matter-were i
presented at an Enforcement Conference held on May 10, 1993, in Arlington, Texas.
l o
e v=
+-*w- - +
,m
l 0
P-93105 November 10, 1993
)
Page 3 i
I (3)
The corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved.
Since the alleged violation is denied,.so corrective steps l
were required to be taken.
However, as a result of this situation, PSC felt that it would be prudent to take certain l
management actions as follows:
The complaint mechanisms available to company and i
contractor personnel were reviewed for appropriateness i
and effectiveness.
To avoid any perception among the work force -that complainant's allegations of retaliation for raising i
safety issues had basis, the Vice President of Nuclear l
Operations issued a " Chilling Effect" memorandum to all
)
employees to remind them of their responsibility to raise safety concerns.
This message was also personally i
delivered by the Vice President and discussed between j
management and the employees in a
group meeting i
subsequent to complainant's complaint to the Department of Labor and is regularly emphasized in meetings and l
j notices.
l 2
PSC took steps to strengthen existing mechanisms for j
dealing with contractor personnel problems.
Prior to complainant's complaint to the Department of Labor in April,1991, PSC had never received any 10 CFR 50.7 complaints l
in its entire history.
Since the permanent shutdown of Fort l
St.
Vrain in - August of 1989, Public Service Company of l
Colorado has dramatically reduced staff from 771 (including l
contractor personnel) to 113 (including contractor personnel) with no further alleged violations of 10 CFR 50.7.
[l 5
(4)
The corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further
}
violations:
l Since the alleged violation is denied, no corrective steps are necessary to avoid further violations.
PSC continues to i
monitor personnel management procedures at Fort St. Vrain to ensure appropriate measures are in place to handle any future
-t personnel problems involving contractor or PSC employees.
i l
i I
l 4
l
T j-P-93105 November 10, 1993 Page 4 (5)
The date when full compliance will be achieved:
Since the alleged violation is denied, Public Service Company of Colorado believes that it has been, is now, and will continue to be in full compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.7.
PSC formally requests a hearing on this matter in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR Part 2, Section 2.205 (d).
Please contact the Fort St. Vrain Decommissioning Program Director, Mr. Don W.
Warembourg, at (303) 620-1009 to discuss the time and location of the hearing or any other questions you might have regarding this matter.
31ncerely, M
A A.
Clegg Crawford Vice President Electric Production t
ACC/bj cc:
Regional-Administrator, Region IV j
i h
i e
I l
i
.