ML20078B098
| ML20078B098 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 01/12/1995 |
| From: | Fitzpatrick E INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| AEP:NRC:1184D1, NUDOCS 9501250266 | |
| Download: ML20078B098 (3) | |
Text
-
Indians' Michigan f Power Company P.O. Box 16631 Columbus, OH 43216 i
E 1
INDIANA ANCH9G6N POWER AEP:NRC: 1184D1 Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 i
Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316 License Nos. DPR-58 and DPR-74 NOTICE OF DEFERRAL OF PAYMENT OF CIVIL PENALTY U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C.
20555 January 12, 1995
Dear Mr. Martin:
p This letter is in response to a
USNRC letter dated December 16, 1994, with regard to the notice of violation and proposed imposition of civil penalty - $25,000, and ~ demand for information issued to Indiana Michigan Power Company on August 5, 1993.
This was the result of the recommended decision and order from U. S. Department of Labor (DOL) Case No. 92-ERA-37.
The case arose from a complaint to DOL that a tool accountability technician was improperly terminated by American Nuclear Resources (ANR), a subcontractor at Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, after he t
requested a report concerning his radiation exposure.
i Our reply to the notice of violation and demand for information was provided in an attachment to our letter AEP:NRC:1184D, dated l
September 1, 1993.
A copy of that letter is attached to this letter for convenience.
With regard to the civil penalty, we do not believe that it is appropriate to remit payment until this issue has been fully and ultimately resolved. We have been informed by ANR that they are in the process of appealing the final decision and order issued by the Secretary of Labor on December 1, 1994. Therefore, no payment of the civil, penalty will be transmitted at this time.
Sincerely, eesJyc E. E. Fitz atrick Vice President eh I
9501250266 950112
/
g PDR ADOCK 05000315
/rMfb P
/v
l l
l'
(
Mr. J. B. Martin AEP:NRC:1184D1 Attachment cc:
A. A. Blind G. Charnoff NFEM Section Chief NRC Resident Inspector - Bridgman J. R. Padgett
]
W. T. Russell, NRC - Washington, D.C.
1 1
I l
l l
I j
j
ATTACHMENT TO AEP:NRC:1184D1 COPY OF AEP:NRC:1184D f
i i
l l
l l
l L
ammans asesigma x:
Pouercameesy P.O. Ses 1GE31 Cebunaus.CH 43216 l
s i
2006ANA M
l N
l l
AEPsERCt1184D Donald C. Cook 3katmae plant Unita 1 and 2 Docket mos. 50-315 and 50-316 License Nos. DPR-58 and DFat-74 l
NOTICE OF VIOLETION AND PRorOSED 23EPOSITICII 0F CIVIL PEEELIT l
ABID DE3t&EID FOR IIIFCEREETICII U. s. Ihiclear Y =*a q commission Document Control Desk i
Washington, D.C.
20555 Atta J. 3. Martin Septenbar 1, 1993 Dear Mr. Martin The purpose of this letter is to respond to your Notice of violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty and Demand For l
Information (U.S.
Department of Labor case No.
92-ER&-37).
Attached are our responses along with partinent exhibits to substantiate the facts set forth therein.
We remain convinced that fear of retallation or discrimination by anyone who any raise a safety concern, either real or perceived, at Cook aloclear Plant is not a problem now and has not bua a problem in the past.
TAis letter is submitted pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) and, as such, an oath stateneet is attached.
sincerely, I
E. E. Pit trick vice President i
de Attachment ces A. A. Eliad G. Charnoff T. E. leerley NFEK Section Chief NRC Resident Inspector J. R. Padge'.,t SMION O 2Nf0940002
\\
~ _.
J l
1 J. B. Martin AEF ERCS 1184D
}
1
.% )
- 3. J. Bueuer D. E. Malia/E. J. Toth
]
W. u. Badge
- u. L. mervath - arideana j
J. 3. Skimmock - w/o attachments j
W. G. andth, Jr.
i
- 5. A. Watsel, ERC - Waskington, D.C.
DC-N-4015.1 l
J l.
i i
1 1
1 1
1
}
j i
l -
Jl*
1 ij
{
4 1
1 p.
3 l
I 00200940003 3
J 4
4 I
i I
coinrTr at FnanEZ.Zm i
E. E. Fi*Pd *: being duly owers, deposes and asys that
~
be is the vise President of li-Zadiana Michigma Power company, that he has read the foregoing ansposee to EDTICE OF YZOL&TICE AND PRDWOSED imp 0SITZGE OF CZYZZ. PEER 12E AMD 1
DEIEMI FOR INrtMMR2ZtM and knows the oestante thereof; and that said aa=*==ts are true to the heet of his knowledge and h=1 W.
"/
subscribed and sworn to before me this Ac day of I-C /w
. 19 Gf
()
I I
L si s,
)
EtlrERRY PUBLIC RITA 0. HILL user neutnutwam E M DP'8'
^-L#"*Y-e e
0 e
I I
l 0.0 2 0 0 940004
7 i
i
,t i
l i
e i
i 1
- m AEriancensa 49
{
' NOTICE W VIAL & TIM AND F3000 SED IMPOSITI M N CIVIL PERALTY anD -= nom ImremmarIan 1,
a RESP MSES 1
(
f, i
i i
s 4
I 1
1 i
i 1
i h
1 i
I 4
i 5
i 4
+
s i
a 4
)
1
,1 i
- .o i
5
.f I
i 1
l
)
1.
i
+
1 1
9 4
j 4
i i,
00200940005
l 1
ATfRGBENT TO AEP NRC21184D Page 1 1
)
Statements Frosa pace 3 of the August 5,1993 USNBC to Indiana wi_dia== Power company motice of violation and 7.. --M Imposition of Civil j
Penalty and Demand for Information -
t 1
.....(D]escribing those actions and any additional actions you i
have taken or plan to take to =ialaise any potential di118aa l
l effect arising from this incident.
Included in that written response, you should descenes (1) the steps you have tahan to a
I
[
ensure that your employees and site contractors, inciuling but not i
N limited to Ameridasi haclear Resources, and the employees of your l
l contractors, understand their responsibilities with respect to the j
right of individuals to raise safety concerns without fear of retaliation or discrimination, (2) the actions you have taken to l
assess the extent to which workers at the D. C. Cook Nuclear plant l
l may fear retribution for raising safety cont.orns, and (3) the l
actions you have taken or plan to take to e13minate or minimiva any such fears."
t i
f
(
1 esmeral messanse i
i t
j Actions taken to minismise any potential chilling effect arising from this incident include informing employees of the incit.ent, sensitising them to the requirements of 10 CFE
.50.,,
and 1
emphasiaing existing management policy that encourages reporting of safety concerns.
f f
These actions were accomplished through a series of letters from i
i the Plant Manager. A letter was issued to all site personnel to i
l inform them of the existence of the concern, identify the l
Department of Labor process as the appropriate procoes for j
resolving the concern, emphasise existing
====&
policy, and i
review the reporting and ama=1m*4a= process.
(Exhibit 1)
A l
1etter was issued to all plant management,-.,--
-1 to inform them of the ococorn and to direct them to most with their employees to specifically ensure that they understand they can raise safety 2
iM related concerns without fear of reprisals or job related i
discrimination.
(Exhibit 2)
A letter was issued to all
)
contractor management to inform them of the existence of the l
concern and request that they meet with their employees to specifically ensure that they understand that they can raise safety related concerns without fear of reprisals or job related 1
discrimination. (Exhibit 3) In addition to the letters,===*4 aas I
were placed th.Wut the plant to make this infonmation readily available to all site personnel.
(Exhibit 4) f The Special Provisions for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, which are i
included in all contracts, have been revised to add section 16.0 j
which emphasises the requirements of 10 -CFR 50.7, specifically, j
Employee Protection.
(Exhibit 5)
J I
l 00200940006~
1 l
3
ATN TO AEP ERCS 1184D Page 2 i
[
I 1
d i
f Statement 1 messense 9
The policy of American Electric Power Company, Inc., has been and still is to ensure that all personnel engaged in activities affecting safety-related functions of structures, systems, and t
l components in Cook Nuclear Plant, have the right to, and are j
encouraged to, raise safety - ens without fear of r* =U =*4a=
j or discrimination.
j The statement of Policy for the Donald C.. Cook Nuclear Plant t
quality Assuramos Program, which is issued by the chairman of the Board, President, and Chief Executive Officer of American Electric Power Company, Inc.,Jstates that any site paracanal engaged in activities affecting. safety-related functions who believes the Quality Assurance Program is not being complied with, or that a deficiency in quality exists, should notify his/her supervisor, j
i the American Electric Power Service Corporation DirectosHjuality Assurance, and/or the Plant Manager. If the notification does not i
in the employee's opinion receive prompt or appropriate attention, the employee should contact successively higher levels of management.
An employee reporting such conditions shall not be discriminated ---8aat by raias of the American Electric Power system.
Discrimination includes discharge or other actions relative to w== tion, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.
(Exhibi*. 6)
Ample initial and recurring training e-aia-the processing of safety concerns are/were provided to all personnel. The process of our Quality Assurance condition Reporting program, which outlines the requirement to==amt ate known or suspected - safety concerns up through management and/or directly to the NBC, is explained on pages 6 and 7 of 8 of GE-C-2005 (Exhibit 7 - General Employee Training Lesson Plans).
The ERC Porm 3 is also thr Mly reviewed with all tra8==== as part of the oriamemeian program.
Page 11 of 11 of GE-C-5100-ED-1 also explains the workers' rights and responsibilities with regard to the Plant Managers Instruction (PuI) 7030 condition Report process.
(Exhibit S)
Each emplores, as part of initial training (and
~
during annual requalification) also receives the radiarian N
protection procedures as outlined in GEHl:-1004, 1013 and 1016.
(Exhibits 9,10, and 11) To assure that each employee understands the requirements of the specific PMIs, the employee is required to review the information with his/her supervisor prior to initialing the form signifying receipt and understanding of the training.
(Exhibit 12) 1
)
In addition, AMR =manga= mat posted portions of the M848-==
l Whistleblowers Protection Act to reassure their permanami that their safety concerns would be addressed without discrimination or j
retaliation.
(Exhibit 13) d I
l 00200940007 i
~.
1 l
4 l
ATTBCBIENT TO AEP:NBCs11840 Page 3 I
i i
I i
Statammat 2 Raauense f
t Actions taken to assess the extent to which workers at the l
Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant may fear retrDation for raising I
l safety concerns were based on a review and evaluation of the i
normal reporting process to determine if a notable chaege in the l
normal cyclic and workload reporting had occurred since the event.
The review ans evaluation were made of the Immber of condition l
reports pted before and after the two week employment period (in March, 1992) of the individual addressed in the Notice of i
l Violation.
The number of condition reports iniH=*=d por month j
between July, 1991, and April, 1993, were noted. The number of j~
condition reports were listed in three categories: AIR initiated j
reports, contractor initiated reports, and total reports initiated 4
by all individuals. The number of condition reports generated on a monthly basis for all three categories did not reveal any impact as a result of the cited event. The only noted difference was the expected impact of outage versus non-outage activities.
j (Exhibit 14) i statement 3 Resnonse i
ongoing programs that continuously encourage employees and j
contractors to identify safety concerns and other problems include j
the following.
4 3
As previously indicated, General Employee Training (GET) discusses g
j worker rights and responsibilities, and HRC Porm 3.
GET j
requalification training will be emphasizing this area hamant on recent events.
3
)
annum 1 state of the Plant meetings promote feedback between Plant j
Manager and personnel, including contractors.
The human j
performance evaluation system (EFES) provides a method for i
employee and contract personnel to aa-== i a=* = with site employee emit interviews provide management.
Indiana viaki-a=
open insights necessary to correct or stabilise any variances i
which may exist in our==ag-at or operations style.
)
{
These programs, along wit.h management's commitment to ensure the j
rights of all site personnel, will eliminate or =i=i=i== any fear i
of retribution for raising safety concerns.
1 j
additional Items i
4 Also from page 3 of the August 5,1993, UsamC to fnduna Michigan j.
Power Company Notice of Violation and L,:--M Imposition of Civil i
Penalty and Demand for Informations i
j
...(P]rovide the following information within 30 days of the date j
of this letter, in writing and under oath or affirmations i
i 00200940008 I
l-l l
4 i
(
i ATTACEMENT TO AEP:NRC 1154D Page 4 2
l l
s (1) a written description of the duties and activities j
currently perfa h by the tool accountability
{
supervisor and the site supervisor for American Nuclear Resources; and j
l (2) your basis for concluding that the tool accountability j
supervisor, the contractor's sito supervisor, and the i
managers of American Nuclear Resources fully,
i understand their responsibilities under your NRC i
14n====
and their obligation to fulfill.NRC regulations and license requirements."
i Item 1 Resoonse
}
The duties and activities performed by an AMR tool accountability supervisor, a temporary position activated - only during open a
f containment, are as follows.
" TOOL ACCOUNTABILITY SUPERVISOR Personnel in this category will have similar responsibilities as a QC Tool Accountant.
In addition, will be responsible for supervising a crew of accountants. This individual will be held accountable for the crews
- activities, including compt imaea with -
plant and company rules and y hw, resolving conflicts and the training of paraaaa=1.
EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE:
Mast have previous supervisory bac 4 M.
Previous tool accountant background is proferred."
The dirties and ace.ivities currently performed by the ANE site superintaadaat are as follows.
" SITE SUPERINTENDENT 1.
Meet with client supervision to determine what skills are needed to applicably fill an open job requisition.
j 2.
Interview potential e=adidates for open job requisitions, then determine if the amadidate is acceptable for that i
position.
3.
Process in now employees.
4.
Discipline and terminate scope /AInt employees as required.
The superintendent has the final decision on the degree of the disciplinary action.
5.
Liaison between scope /ANR employees and client supervisors.
00200940009 n--,
=
i
~
i 3
I J
'p ATTwsmsmmT TO AEP ISC 1184D Page 5 l
3.
4 i
j 6.
fiai=aa between scope /Aam corporate office and client i
supervisers.
2 7.
Completes or ensures an enaployee evaluation on each employee l
is conducted once a year.
The superia*=ad==t will also review all completed evaluations.
8.
Decide when employees merit a pay' increase, and fill out applicable paperwork.
9.
Work with employees and listaa to their problems and aaaa= ens, and try to work out oorJ1tets or problems j~
accordingly.
1 10.
Prepare weekly and monthly reports to the client and l
Scope /ANR Company President.
1 4
11.
Investigate all charges of harassment and discrimination.
12.
Mu-t weekly Aam supervisor meetings.
t 4
13.
Write company menos, ew edsres, etc., as required.
14.
Remain in constant contact with client supervisors to keep updated on employees' performance, problems, etc.
i 15.
Attend various mansgement training workshops and===iames to i
=h==a
management skills.
i 16.
Complete Michigan Employment Security Commission (MESC)
I requests for information reports and wage and severation forms. Also represent scope /ANR at MESC Hearings..
1 17.
Represents scope /AIER in various legal p E ::' W.
The site emperintendent is held accountable to the c1Laat and Scope /AmR for the employees' actions. This includes but is not
{
limited to safety, work quality, dependability, and procedural
- w complianoes.-
i t
j Item 2 Rossense The tool accountability supervisor involved is no longer employed by AHR. The tool accountability supervisor resigned from AMR on j
June 15, 1992, and was employed by faMmam Michigan Power company at the Donald C.
Cook Ihaclear Plant on June 16, 1993, in the 1.
Computer Security Standards Department as a esasuring and test f
equipment specialist (non supervisory).
The AIR site superintendent remains in the employment of ANR at the Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant in the same position, site j
superintendent.
^
i 0 0 2 0 0 9 4 0 0'i 0
t i
l AEP:NRC 1184D EIHIBIT 1 l
l l
l i
4 0020094oo;3
l l
i MMANA ARCHKRAN Pomm i
i l
f pene May 3, 1993 l
sunket Problem Reporting by Esployees 1
a J
From A.A. Blind l
Te All Managers 1
j Title 10 of the code of Federal Regulations Part 50, Section j
50.7 prohibits discrimination by licensees of nuclear power plants against employees (including contractor employees) for engaging in certain protected activities.
Section 50.7 3
goes on to list activities that are included under this protection, but states that protected activities are not j
limited to this list.
i j
The purpose of this letter is two fold.
First, I want to i
advise and make you aware of an ongoing administrative proceeding which concerns a potential violation of 10 CFR 50.7 and, secondly, I want to ensure that we, as Plant Management, are continuing to take appropriate actions i
necessary to promote a positive work environment in which j
all employees at cook Nuclear Plant feel comfortable with j
raising safety related concerns.
4 l
As you might know, a contractor employee has filed an i
administrative claim with the Department of Labor (DOL)
}
against his employer.
The claim alleges that the employee j
was discriminated against and not recalled for work as a i
result of engaging in an activity protected under 10 CFR 50.7.
A DOL Ad=4nistrative Law Judge has issued a decision in favor of the employee.
The contractor is presently I
appealing this decision.
Details of this proceeding will not be addressed in this memo because the administrative proceeding has not yet been concluded.
- However, j
notwithstanding the ongoing proceeding, we need to take this opportunity to ensure that our employees and contractors
.{
understand that they are encouraged to come forward whenever they have a safety related concern.
j l
t 00 1 000 1 000 1
i l
1 j
Paiblem Reporting by EsployCas j-Ma)' 3, 1993 j
Page 2 i
I I an directing all managers to meet with their employees and
]
communicate Cook Nuclear Plant's commitment to safety and our adherence to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.7.
More l
specifically you need to ensure that our employees understand that they can raise safety related concerns and/or contact the NRC without fear of reprisals or job related discrimination.
I will instruct all site 3
contractors to take similar actions with respect to their il employees who are engaged in activities at Cook Nuclear j
Plant.
1 In support of the above activity I will be sending a Plant j
Manager meno to each employee acknowledging the ongoing DOL j
proceeding, but emphasizing our commitment to cafety and our I
adherence to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.7.
If you have
]
any questions concerning this meno or its directions you are j
to contact me directly.
i bb i
A.A. Blind i
l j
i
?
I 4
I I
~
i i
00 1000 1 0002 E
l 4
1 4
l l
1 AEP:NRC1184D
- j 1
l EIHIBIT 3 i
i b
l 4
J 4
5 1
4 l
1 l
1 1
3 I
i 4
4 4
J e
N i
4 e
00 1000 1 0003
ii rveuronesest Cook w Plam 4
l One Cook Place i
anogman. na 49106 t
2 May 3, 1993
?.-
Ms. k,ydia Demski
,,. f,
)
President American Nuclear Resources / Scope Services l
2095 Niles Rd.
~
St. Joseph, MI-49085
(
l
Dear Sir:
Title 10 of the code of Federal Regulations Part 50, Section 50.7 i
I prohibits discrimination by licensees of nuclearf power plants
}
egainst employees (including Contractor employees) for. engsiging in j
cartain protected activities.
Section 50.7 goes on to iist j
cetivities that are included under this protection; but states that i
protected activities are not limited to this' Iist.
c: -
1 The purpose of this letter is two fold.
Firs,t, Z,vant to advise and make you aware of an ongoing ad=inistrative. proceeding.which i
i concerns a potential violation of 10 CFR 50.7 and',: secondly,, I want j
to ensure that you, as managers of employees working'ans. Cook at i
i Nuclear Plant, are continning to take appropriatei acti hocessary
]
to promote a positive work environment in which..these amployees ful comfortable with raising safety related concerns
'-f *.
j As you might know, a contractor employee has filedliin f
administrative claim with the Department of Labor *TDOL) against his l
cmployer.
The claim alleges that the employee.'.was;discrimfnated cgainst and not recalled for work as a result of -angag.ingiin: an i
cetivity protected under 10 gTR 50.7.
A DOL adm4nistrative Law Judge has issued a decision in favor of the employee. 4Th'.'-
s contractor is presently appealing this decisionii ' Details".of this proceeding will not be addressed in this mesio.becaisse-thes administrative proceeding has not yet been'. conclude @.-
- Bowever, notwithst=ndi=? the ongo:.ng proceeding, you: need:to take t.his opportunity to ensure that your employees underEtiand that.thisy are encouraged to come forward whenever they have,'.s. safety.related concern.
3 I am requesting all managers of companies that manage'empiby'ees who j
vsrk at the cook Nuclear Plant to meet with theit esplayees.and communicate Cook Nuclear Plant's commitment to safety had* our a
cdherence to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.7.
! tore specif,1cally 1
you need to ensure that your employees understarid 'thht they can raise safety related concerns and/or contact the :NRc;without fear j
of reprisals or job related discrimination.
~
i i
1 s
00 1000 1 0004 i
i 4
4 l
l
\\
I I
1 i
AEP:NRC 1184D EXHIBIT 4 i
I 1
001000 1 0006
7-l i
i l
4 j
August 11, 1993 l.
l The NRC has proposed a $25,000 fine for Indiana Michigan Power 1
j based on discrimination by a contractor against a former employee the Cook Plant.
The person charged that he i
of the contractor at for raising questions about hia radiation was discharged in 1992 exposure and for requesting a copy of his exposure records.
of based on a decision by a United States Department The fine, does not have to be paid until 30 Labor Administrative Law Judge, It is still being reviewed i
days after the decision becomes final.
by the Secretary of Labor.
i The individual was being released at the end of a work assignment and was proceeding with his termination whole body count when he became engaged in. a heated discussion c'oncerning. informatiion being i
i Based partially. on
.provided him regarding his radiation exp.osure.this behavior, the cont i
the Cook Pla'nt.
There was no i
next. time this skill was needed at j
retaliation or discrimination beccuse hel. questioned:his. exposure or j
contacted the NRC.
The Department of Labor Law Judge ruled.that this individual's i
i emotional reactions to the perceived delay. in receiving information regarding his radiation exposure was understandable. and should not i
I have been used in the decision not to. rehire, as. the' right to l
question and receive information regarding radiation exposure is a j
protected activity.
f' Indiana Michigan Power disagrees with this finding. Our policy and encourage. the' r.eportings of potential l
procedures remain that we Everyone is encouraged to report safety.. concerns safety concerns.
to management at any time.
If they feel.that it is necessary to E
j it to a government agency, they may do so,without fear of report retaliation or of placing their job in jeopardy.
I 1
i I
4 l
POSTED:
08-11-93 REMOVE:
08-18-93 00 100 0
1 0007 1
In support of the above activity I will be sending a Plant mean to eaM employee acknowledging the ongoi'ng m c-n emphasising our commitment to safety and our adEM s'
)
of 10 CFR 50.7.
If you have any questions ='-=~4 s meno you are to contact me directly.
~
1.
Raspectfully, A. % g9
'2
'I',
l A.A. Blind j
Plant Manager
' ' T .J '.
l 1
1 i
NOTE:
This letter was also sent to the following contractors' on Donald C. Cook i
l Nuclear Plant site.
i.,
i 1
Bartlett Nuclear Inc.
Brand Utility Services, Inc.
I j
Clean America
-DSI Industries s,
.. a.,-
j Holtec International
/
]
MQS Inspection, Inc.
'I :
i Master-Lee Energy Services Corp.
1 NRT Technical, Inc.
4 j
NUS l
National Installation Services Company Nuclear Energy Consultants t
PRC Engineq. ring Systems, Inc.
.a.
'e-
~
i Stanley Smith Security t
I Wondermakers, Inc.
S.
1 i
J
~
.E j
j l
O0 1000 1 0005
i 1
AEP:NRC:1184D EZHIBIT 5 l
I r
I 1
l l
l t
l 9
00 1000 1 0008 l-
4 1
e t e D 5. S g; tt.w u l
H 6.ti.it AAR R K Aff 4@
nacntsc i
rown August 20,1993 s.=
j s.3.a Special Provisions for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant l
E. E. Fitzpatrick [
ra.
8
]
- 0. I. Aguilar
=
P. A. Barrett B. H. Bennett
.I l
A. A. Blind s
l S. J. Brewer l
J. R. Corbett J. A. Howard j'
R. F. Kroeger L. G. Lewis B. A. Renz W. G. Smith 1
i
!j The Special Provisions (contractual) for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant have been revised. The revised special provisions, dated August 15,1993, should be i
included in all nuclear contracts for which the request for proposal is dated I
August 20,1993, or after.
i Please notify all personnel in your area of responsibility that this document has j
been revised. Copies may be obtained from the cosyviate supply room.
j rdh i
cc: B. R. Signet i
i J
t i
l 00 l000 l
0 0 0=<9r =
1
16.0 EMPJ/JYEE PROTECTION (10 CFR 50.7)
(
16.1 10 CFR 50.7 prohibits discrimination against nuclear power plant employees, including Contractor and subcontractor employees.
for engaging in certain protected activities. Discrhination includes discharge and other actions that relate to compensation, terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. The protected activites are those established in Section 210 of, the Energy Reorganization Act as amended.- Contractor shall
'be familiar with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.7 and ensure that its employees understand.their rights under this provision.
More specifically,. Contractor shall i
ensure that its employees understand that they can raise safety related concerns and/or directly contact the NRC without fear of employer reprispls or job related discr4=fnation.
- v.s
~
3,6.2 Contractor shall notify the Plant. Manager, or his designee, if any safety related concerns are reported by or raised by contractor's employees. - Contractor is prohibited from discriminating against any employee, or making any employment related decision, based on an employee raising a
safety related concern and/or contacting the NRC.
s,;.
3 16.3 Violation of this provision or of 10 CFR 50. 7 shall be 1
{
considered a material breach of contract.
(
i 1
nw. 0s1293 11*sa1\\aj2\\ mL 21 r,
i
)
l i
3 j
t i
4 j
.t i
m.-
i l
~
1 1
i 1
?
f Page 12 of 12
-(
l 1
l 00 1000 1 001 0
- - l
-~.... _.
i
)
l l
AEP:NRC 1184D
'EZEIBIT 6
~
1 l
l 1
l I
i i
i l-
\\
l 00 Io00 1 00I l
l
\\
i i
AmedeseWeseis Feuer j
Serviseoogeraties d
1 AlmereMePlata j
Celuneus.OH 43215 814 223 1000 E -,
i STATBENT OF POLICY i
l FOR TE DONALD C. COOK INCLEAR PUmT
[
QuAtm ASsumace Pamum a,
1 i
l POLICY I
i American Electric Power Company Inc., recognizes the fundamental j
importance of controlling the design, modification, and operation of Nuclear Plant)gan Power Company's Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plan Indiana Michi l
by implementing a planned and documented Quality Assurance Program, including Quality Control, that complies with applicable
,i regulations, codes, and standards.
The Quality Assurance Program has been established to control activities affecting safety-related functions of structures, systems, and components 4
i in the Cook Nuclear Plant.
The Quality Assurance Program supports the goal of maintaining the safety and reliability of Cook Nuclear Plant at 4
1 the highest level through a systematic program designed to assure that activities affecting safety-related functions are conducted in compliance i
with applicable regulations, codes, standards, and established corporate 1
l policies and practices.
i As Chairman of the Board, President, and Chief Executive Officer of j
American Electric Power Company, Inc.,
I maintain the ultimate j
responsibility for the Quality Assurance Program associated with Cook i
Nuclear Plant. I have delegated responsibilities for implementation of, l
and compliance with, the Quality Assurance Program, as outlined in this 3
statement.
2 IfFLEENTATION j
The AEPSC Director-Quality Assurance, under the direction of the AEPSC i
Senior Vice President-Nuclear Generation, has been assigned the overall responsibility for specifying the Quality Assurance Program requirements l
for Cook Nuclear Plant and verifying their implementation.
The AEPSC j.
Director-Quality Assurance has authority to stop work on any activity l
affecting safety-related items that does not meet applicable i
administrative, technical, and/or regulatory requirements.
The AEPSC Director-Quality Assurance does not have the authority to stop unit operations, but shall notify appropriate plant and/or corporate Revised: 8/11/93
'O O IOOO I OOI2 4
_ _ _ _ = _ -
l 1
i l
Statement of Policy for the i
Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant
}
Quality Assurance Program j
Page 2 l
l management of conditions not meeting the aforementioned criteria:and
{
recommend that unit operations be terminated.
t The AEPSC Senior Vice President-Nuclear. Generation, under my direction, j
has been delegated responsibility for effectively implementing the l
Quality Assurance Program. All other AEPSC divisions and departments l
having a supportirg role for Cook Nuclear Plant are functionally l
l
- + " responsible to the Senior Vice President-fluclear Generation.
w4 The Cook Nuclear Plant Manager, under the direction of the AEPSC Senior i
j Vice President-Nuclear Generation, is delegated the responsibility for j
establishing the plant Quality Control Program and implementing the j
Quality Assurance Program at Cook Nuclear Plant.
j The AEPSC Director-Quality Assurance is responsible for providing technical direction to the Plant Manager for matters relating to the d
Quality Assurance Program at Cook Nuclear Plant.
The AEPSC Director-i Quality Assurance is a'so responsible for maintaining a Quality Assurance i
Section at Cook Nuclear Plant to perform required reviews, audits, and surveillances, and to provide technical liaison services to the Plant i
Manager.
The implementation of the Quality Assurance Program is described in the i
i AEPSC General Frocedures (gps) and subtier department / division procedures. Plant Manager's Instructions (PMIs), and subtier department I
head instructions and procedures, which in total document the l
requirements for implementation of the Program.
t l
l Each AEPSC and Cook Nuclear Plant organization involved in activities affecting safety-related functions of structures, systems, and components in Cook Nuclear Plant has the responsibility to implement the applicable policies and requirements of the Quality Assurance Program.
This responsibility includes being familiar with, and complying with, the i
applicable Quality Assurance Program requirements.
i
~
i COMPLIANCE i
The AEPSC Director-Quality Assurance shall monitor compliance with the established Quality Assurance Program.
Audit programs shall be established to ensure that AEPSC and Cook Nuclear Plant activities comply d
i with established program requirements, identify deficiencie's or j
noncompliances, and obtain effective and timely corrective actions.
l Any employee engaged in activities affecting safety-related functions of j
structures, systems, and components in Cook Nuclear Plant who believes the Quality Assurance Program is not being complied with, or that a j
Revised:
8/11/93 100 l
3 001000 j
I
i _.__
-c.-_ _.. _ _ _ _.
- - ~ _
i
^ '
w h -/C h 3 S i
neum j
accumw M
., ~, +
l osse
,May 3, 1993 i
j sumpa Problem Reporting by Employees
]
P=m A.A. Blind To All Site Personnel Employees of nuclear power plant licensees and employees of contractors of nuclear power plant licensees are protected j
from discrimination for engaging in activities that are 3
protected by law.
Information concerning these activities l
(NRC Form 3) is posted on the plant official bulletin boards i
located at the west side of the Security Control Center, at I
the turbine entruce to the Auxiliary Building, and at the l
RPAC entrance to the Auxiliary Building.
Whenever questions come up concerning alleged discrimination against an j
employee, whether substantiated or not, there is a concern about whether or not these questions might inhibit other-i employees from raising safety related concerns.
l 1
4 The purpose of this letter is to inform you that an employee i
j has raised a concern about discrimination for engaging in I
protected activities.
This concern is presently being handled through administrative proceedings in the Department
(
of Labor, which is the appropriate process for addressing j
and evaluating such concerns.
Details of this concern are
]
not included in this letter because the p.e rh has not i
yet been concluded.
However, I would like to take this j
epr 4 ty to emphasize that the existance of this case
-l should not be a concern to any employee who wishes to bring safety related concerns to the attention of management or to i
the attention of the NRC.
It is corporate policy, and therefore a requirement, for all personnel to encourage the 3
reporting of safety related concerns and other problems.
At the Cook Nuclear Plant this is done thi. 4 the PMI-7030 j
Condition Report process, through direct reporting to 1
l
)
00200 9400l4 l-
~
Problem'Naporting by Employees May 3, 1993 Page 2 manag b t, or to the MMC.
Normally, the s.y,u1.ing of safety related concerns or problems should be accomplished through the PMI-7030 Condition 9"; process.
If the concern or problem is not am+ately addressed, then reporting directly to sur-e===ive levels of annagement and ultimately directly to the NRC sight be appropriate.
I would also like to point out that any employee may go directly to management or the NRC at any time.
In summary, I would like to emphasize the importance of continuing our excellent working relationships here at Cook Nuclear Plant, which includes the s % iing of safety i
related concerns and other problems without fear of l
discrimination.
e A. 06 6 i
A.A. Blind A
O 9
O 8
O e
4 9
m O
v 002009400l-5
..-4.-
s
-~.
c
1, 1
i 4
i AEP:NRC 1184D
]
EXIIBIT 2 i
e 4
i f
2 a
I 4
1 t
4 1
t I
4 1
e 4
1 4
i
)
l o
j i
k i
1
)
i I
E f
i i
a s
I d
OO20094001 6
Statement of Policy for the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Quality Assurance Program Page 3 deficiency in quality exists, should notify his/her supervisor, the AEPSC
~ - -
Director-Quality Assurance, and/or the Plant Manager.
If the notification does not in the employee's opinion receive prompt or appropriate attention', the employee should contact successively higher levels of management. An employee reporting such conditions ~ shall not be discriminated against by companies of the American Electric Power System. Discrimination includes discharge or other actions relative to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.
,=_
E. Linn Draper, Chairman of the Board, President, and Chief Executive Officer American Electric Power Company, Inc.
l I
i j..
i i
Revised: 8/11/93 00 1000 1 0014
i e
i t
l l
4 I
I AEP:NRC1184D i
i I
EIMIBIT 7 l
l i
e I-l I
t I
i I
l 9
e l
001000 1001 5
.ggf;-2005
'l TTruelOuaRty Assurance, Quauty Corwol REVISIO 8
~@ <ds F
2.
You can make the greatest contribution to quauty at the Cook Plant by doing the job right the first time.
111.
REPORT POTENTIAL ITEMS OF NONCOMPLIANCE 8.03.A A.
It's recGyned that things break and go wrong.
m B.
The Cook Plant has a system for i6psn g problems, i
defects, and procedural violations.
C.
It is ca5ed a Condhion Report.
D.
This system is required by federal regulations.
i i
E.
Specific items that must be reported are:
1.
Usted in the Plant Managers Instruction (PMI) on Condition Reports.
F.
BasicaRy, you should report anything you think may be, a problem to your supervisor.
G.
You may need to write a Condition Report.
1.
Your supervisor should help you with this.
2.
Instructions contained in Plant Manager Instruction on Condition Reports, PMI-7030.
' i 8.03.D H.
If you feel your report is not receiving the proper attentiom 1.
First, go to your immediate supervisor.
2.*
"Ihen, go through the other higher levels of your management.
l Page 6 of 8 00 1,000 1 001 6
i GE C-2005 1
i TITLE: Quagty Assurance, Quaity Corwol e
REVISION:
8 i
I i
4 1
J 3
I 3.
If you are unable to get problems rusovived,
/
then contact the NRC.
4 j
12.05.C 1.
NRC Form 3. " Notice to Employoos.'
i j
1.
i.4viih. ernployees of:
)
a.
N dghts.
b.
The employer's resporiamme l
4 2.
Divides the United States up into NRC f
i regions.
3 4
3.
Provides addresses and phone rurdx=5 for each NRC region.
i i
j 4.
C@ of the NRC Form 3 are posted at 3
a.
Secudty Coreal Cenior.
b.
South Secunty Control Center.
i j
c.
Auxiliary Building Access Control 4
J.
These reports wH1 not jeopardize your job.
1 i
j K.
You can be held criminaly Rable if you know of a nuclear safety related p-GT. and you do not report i
it.
4 h:
IV.
SUMMARY
4 J
SL-Title A.
The Cook Plant has:
\\
4 1.
QA Preysii to -
4 a.
Ensure safe op=.aii of the Plant.
t Page 7 of 8 l
OO IOOO IOOI7 s
I
\\
AEP:NRC1184D i
)
Exararr a l
l 1
9 l
l l
l l
l h
l 00 1000 100 I
a l
l
t
{
WbMKERS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES l
28.
How do you go about reporting problems at the W.G l
i j
Normally, the reporting of safety reisted concems or problems should be wi@.ed i
through the PMi-7030 Condition Report procoes. Ask'your supervisor for guidanos. If l
the concem or problem is not appropriately addressed, then reporting drectly to i
sucomesive levels of management and ultimately direcdy to the NRC might be appropriate.
l 29.
Can an employee go directly to management or the NRC with a problem or aafety i
related concern?
Y.na, at any time. Please see a Management representative or the NRC resident
~
ii= +:+.
1 l
30.
Can an employee lose his/her job or be discriminated against for reporting problems / safety related concems directly to the NRC7 l
En. Employees of nuclear plant licensees and employees of contractors of nuclear power plant licensees are gcL 4M from disc-ii..;c.siis7 for engaging in activities that i
are pici+M by law, such es repsi;.g pret,;eirs/concoms. Infomistion concer.hng j
these activities is contained in NRC Form 3.
i 2
{
31.
Where can you find postings of NRC Form 37 1
1 1
NRC Form 3s are posted in the Security Control Centers, the turbine entrance to the j
Auxiliary Building and at the RPAC entrance to the Auxiliary Buiding.
4 SEL.F CHECKING
\\
j 32.
Remember to use the S.T.A.R. method when pedeg.;r.g work at the Cook Plant.
i l
stop
. Thinic
. Act i
l Review t
l If you are not famiBar with the self-checking process, or have questions regarding how l
you shpuid be using it to pedeiii your work, ask your supennsor.
1
(
}
i 77tAINING INFORMA710N ONLY GE C-5100-HO-1 Page 11 of 11 Revision 13 i
00 1000 1 00 1
9 i
l 4
I l
1 1
1 l
l AIF:NRCa1184D
)
EXIIBIT 9
~ l I
l l
l l
l 1
l i
I i
00 10001 0020 i
i, i
GE-C-1004 1
E..
i i
e 1
3.
Chirper.
i
)
4.
Lo W S Wi$ry..
i i
5.
Audale Alarm also causes digdal dispiny to j
change or t**.
1 1
j 6.
Any time you encounter an alarm - contact
)
- RP.
i i
t.
Vill. DOSE RECORD l
(S.G.#7)
A.
You can obten your dose record from RP -
D o s;cr iry.
IX.
SUMMARY
A.
Proper cars and use of dosimetry is a part of your
~
job as a radiation worker.
1 i
B.
Review Objectives j
I C.
Allow trainees to handle the MT Ly devices to become sammer e them.
l D.
Answer Student Questions.
)
t i
I
}
i i
i I
i Page 8 of 8 1
i 00 10001 002 1
4 1
e i
i 1
?
1 l
f AEF NRC*1184D EXIIBIT 10 l
1 i
e l
l l
l i
l l
l i
I l
i 00 100010022
)
l c.
Contact to starting any work in 1
d.
Notify RP when changes or potential in working conditions d
~
occur that wwe not pronously evaluated.
e.
Umit the amount of material that has to be decontaminated or W of as
?
radioactive waste tw Em81ng material taken into the restrfeted area.
f.
Personal tools or shall not
~
be used in areas. Utgize hot tool crib tools and consumable issue I
items.
g.
Promptly obey "stop work" and evacuate instructions of (RP) personnel.
1 h.
Do not smoke, est, drink chew or apply cosmetics in Restri,cted Areas.
l 1.
Do not move or reposition rat $ological 1
postings.
P bloms - Responsbilties of
- Rgo, (SGd3) 4 l
a.
Inform Radiation Protection immediately i
of any unusualincident in the restncted i
area including alarms or Eghts from c6 iT=A46 equipment.
l b.
If you tear your Antics, 'stunediately i
leave the contaminated area and contact RP.
i c.
Report the 1:resence of treated or open j
wounds to APpersonnel prior to entry into a re.u'c.u area. Immediately inform RP personnelif a wound occurs while in a restncted area, i
l d.
For a known or possbie rMe sps, minimize its spread and notify RP i
personnet ps.w.
)
l Page 6 of 7 l
i i
1 00 100010023 4
l
}
1 i
s d
i AEP:NItC1184D l
XXXIBIT 11 9
0 4
s 1
(
d J
]
1 I
i 1
- l 1
1
\\
00 1 000 l 0024 l
Y.
l i
l SL-AS B.
Air samples are taken in areas where airbome radioactive material is suspected or where it might occur due to work activities.
ii 1.
They are only a sample d the air you have breathod; therefore, they are an estimate of 2
I the contaminants you have W l
interna 0y.
l SL-WBC C.
A whole body counter is normaDy used to check for j
intamal radioactive material.
i 1
1.
The whole body counte' is a very sensitive i
r l
machine that can detect radioactive material l
Inside the body.
{
2.
It gives an accurate value of radioactivity in i
your body.
1 3.
Everyone has a smal amount of radonctive
}
material inside their body from natural sources i
'In their food (e.g., K-40). '
4.
WBCs are required iratialy, per,adk.iQ, and 1
upon completion of work at cook. Also, r i
needed, for evaluation of a suspected uptake j
of airbome r% above the plant Emits.
i j
D.
Norrnagy, we (Cook) don't use other bionssay, but in J
the event of an accident or large ingestion, urine or feces samples may be obtained.
1.
This is an example of how the body works to eliminate the c.e,iisishi that gets inside.
2.
1.ike the WBC, this is to determine 'witemal exposure.
1
}
4 1
l Page 6 of 13 00 1000 1 0025 i
i
t j
1 l
l AEP 3GLC 1184D EZHIBIT 12
- Mee 9
0 4
00 1 000 10026
j (SECTION 1)
/II/MS/T 4 pxI-sono - com rxauw u.aAm Amu 1
/h A k j
CONTRACTOR COMPANY Tf?E: [ offsite
[ Support Services
[ Onsite I
WORK INDEPENDENTLY:
[ Yes
[ No SCOPE OF WORK:
[ Safety Related
[ Non-Safety Related Both APPROX.I.NATE START DATE:
4/<-[9J.
APPROXINATE END DATE:
j OR, ONGOING WORK (FOR SUPPORT SERVICES ONLY)
CONTRACT EMPLOYEE:
hx 2n h,m,
S.S. No.: Y?S~-97 0/ W il
~
l f g
)'
]
TOPIC /PROCEDORE NO, E
TTTLE (ABERV.1 DATE/ INITIAL Q d /9.3 N A,
PMI-2160 1
Control of Chemicals
[,
System Internal Cleanliness D/4/k h.
PMI-2220 PMI-2270 M
Fire Protection 3/h/D No2 b
9 Plant Operations Policy PMI-4010 PMI-4080
/
Control of Non-Core objects in M
h i
the Spent Fuel Pool and Transfer Canal j
I Plant Shutdown Safety and Risk 3[4[f52, d
PMI-4100 i
Nanagement PMI-5080 d
Administration of Contractors 3/9//2
~
k Radiation Protection Plan hfd.
PMI-6010 PMI-7030
/7 Condition Reports
[k93
/02 d
Logging of Tools - Refueling A7 d
SAso.007 l
Standing on Lines / Pipe Instruction: M<~/I71 Emnrgency Alarms:
3/<"/- M p
i Vorification I have received the above specified training:
3/k/h2 l
Signature: / /14#pi
/ N L/
Date:
v
/
Grainee signates n,,,,
DetarminationBy:[dde.
- aN7M672f7YSNMyrror$rygg Date: (/
.7
./
Deparmaant' Supervisor
//
7 -WO Approved By:
4h Ao sommr baseMmW Date:
DepayentSuperintendent FORWARD TO DEPAFdnr.ni TRAINING REPRESENTATIVE Page
[ of k i
{
00 1 000l 0027
i PMI-Soso - coqTRACTOR TRAINING (SECTION 1) l 6
DA"E/ INITIAL l
Wark hour limitations - policies and department specific J/e/v?2l[j]
i practices.
$[f,a.[$1
~
Plant PA system use and restrictions.
Parking-lot rules.
]kfi7,2.ft h,
Plant walkthrough for familiarization with Plant layout.
h//,/92[$ h Cock Plant hearing protection device policy.
W l
Hoct stress program.
92.
- u. Vital area door alarms.
.?A-/f_2 Sccurity door alarms.
fA n-:-MM nod a
l Paper recycling program.
d v.sgf/h*2.
A 2.1 l
fel M Safety Manual - ANR.
(
i
}
TOPTC - PLANT SPECIFIC Plant Specific Personnel Guideline Reference No. PM WWM Nl I
Procedure Adharanca Poliev Sta+==nt j
Plcnt Specific Personnel Guideline Referenca No. PM 2/s/71 dd Excactations of Radiation Workers Plant Specific Personnel Guideline Reference No. SAF 2/<~/90 / d l
Mazard communication Pi wm-ar Rieht to Itnow Law Prcper handling and wearing of security badge.
D$;~/fd
.d vital area door enclosure requirements.
f.1 Md 4
j TOPIQ ~ DEPARTMENT POLIgIES WMaN/M SASO.oo7 - Locaina of Tools - Refueline Snfety equipment.
C Housekeeping standards.
f *2 Plant PA system use and restrictions.
2/ d 2N
- hshaSM i
Parxing lot rules.
Department smoking policy.
/ 9,0 d
'Page d of 1,
l 00 1000 l 0028
l l
EMPLO!EE WIDf!ATIN SEET i.
E1PLCUZ KAME (EMe? ri A v [
- eMrII f ilIRE DATE d'-E-7d l
/
l
(-
- 1. DO IGT UMG2 STAND M RIaHT TO ENOW LAW 7 IF 110 EXPLAIN FULLY To 4)9 EN'LOIEE.
C'V'7
- 2. SHOW EWLo!EE LLIRART AND WiiERE TO FIND HSD5 SEI225....
- 3. SHOW EWLQIEE THE ETACUATION RCUTE & EIPLAIN GA3GE CARD Fmmt.
lAL
- u. ave EWtorEE rm mT = m Sam.
M
2A 2
- 6. mer itt IxJURIES rammr.
O
- 7. GIVE J2 DESCRIPTIW.
.6bd
- 8. HCURS, WAGES, PAIDAY, TD5E SHEEIS.
hd
- 9. ATTENDUICE PEICT, CALL TF, TARDINESS, d
b tMM
- 11. SECURITT RELES.
- 12. PAREDG Lor RULES.
Md 13. MESS CGE.
IfOd 11+. SAFETT WEAR..
- 15. FITNESS FCR IUTT, RANDW 2DG & ALCEE TESTDG.
- 16. AS A CattrRACTGL WE RECEIVE JOB DIRECTION Mm Ali AIR SUPEVISm WHO I3 TURN RECEIVE JCB DDGCTIN FRm A Im SUPDtVIS2.
/
.. Vf 98, n4TE mIENTATIm CoeLurE.
% Ahaemarztrr6m %,m S1anTURE
.Md 4, Mb EWLorEE Sto nTURE 0
'/
00 1 000 1 0029
i i
AEP:NRC11340 EXIIBIT 13 I
l l
i l
i l
0 0 1
0 0 0-1 0030
....&atv r.,( 7 fa gg
.z.
~ ATTENT.IO N.E M P LOYEES -
The Michigan Whistleblowers' Protection Act (469 P.A.1980. as amended by 146 P.A.1982) creates protections and obligations for empityees and employers under Michigan law.
i PROTECTIONS:
~
Michigan employers are prohibited from discriminating against an employee because he/she or a person acting on his/her behalf reports or is clearly about to report a violation or suspected violation of federal, state or locallaw to a i
public agency.
Discrimination because of an employee's. participation in a pubile investiga-l tion, hearing, inquiry or court action is also prohiblj,ed.
j OB LIG ATIO N S:
An employee is not protected from disciplinary action when making a. report or i
allegation which he/she knows to be false.
The Act does not diminish or impair the rights of individuals or the employer under any collective bargaining agreement, nor to permit disclosures which.
i would diminish or impair the rights of any person to the continued protection of confidentiality of communications where statute or common law provides such-protection.
The Act does not require employers to compensate employees for participationin public investigations, hearings, inquiries or court actions.
i Employees should be aware that Michigan's General Rules of Pleading.(Rule 1,11.6) permit courts to order complainants to pay the reasonable expenses, i
including reasonable attorney fees., incurred {n defending against unreasonable f
allegations which ought not to hav's been ma$e.
/
ENFORCEMENT:
An employee or employer alleging a violation of the Whistleblowers' Protection Act may bring a civil action in circuit court within 90 days of an alleged violation of the Act.
P EN ALTIES:
Persons found in violation of the Act can be assessed a civil fine up to
$500.00.
i
- Persons found to have been illegally discriminated against under the Act may be
., awarded injunctive relief, attorney fees, reinstatement, back compensation and/or actual damages.
COMPANY POLICY:
Company policy prohibits employees or management.from engagingin discrimina-tion or retaliation against another employee because of his/her cooperation with public officials involved in the enforcement or adjudication of federal, state or local law.
A violation of this policy could result in discipline, up to and including discharge. 001000 1 003i PLEASE REPORT ANY VIOLATIONS OF THIS POLICY TO THE PERSONNEL
/V GlO i LCOL.V FY cnq' r n v,1 c (.,jj vjy gu j_
~
AN ACT to provid3 protedon t3 employees who report a violation or suspected vweiam of state.
Icc:1. or federal law: te provid2 protecdon O employees who parac:pate in hearings, investigadons.*
legislative inquiries. or cour~ actionst and to prescibe remedies and penaltfes.
t tac feople of the State of Nichigan enact:
Sec.1. As used in this ac:
(a) " Employee
- mesas a person who performs a service for wages or other remuneration under a cuatract of hire, written or orsl. e= press or implied. Employes includes a person employed by the state or a politic =1 subdivision of the state except state c!assified cMI service.
(b) Employer
- means a person who has 1 or more employees. Employer includes an agent of an
=nployer :nd the state or a polideal subdivision of the state.
(c) ~ Person' means an individual. sole psoptietorship, parmership, corporation, associadon, or any othef le-sl entity.
(d) ~Pubile body" me:ns a!! of the following:
(i) A st:te officer, employee, agency, depsr: ment, division bureau, board, ecm=a'an council, tuthority, or other body in the executive brane!ici state government.
(ii) An agency, board, commission, council, member, or employee of the lepislative brzsch of state government.
(iii) A county, city, township. village, intercounty, intercity, or regional governing body, a counc!I.
school district spes::1 district. or municipal c:rporstion, or a board, department com="bn. council, agency, or :ny member or employee thereof.
(fo) Any other body which is ercated by state or local uthority or which is prim:rily funded by or through st:te or loc:1 authority, or :ny member or employee of that body.
(c) Alaw enforcement agency or any member or employee of alaw enforcement agency.
(oi) The judiciary and any member or employee of the fudiciarv.,
Sec. *. An employer shall not discharge, thresten, or otherwise disciminste ag: inst an employee regsrding the employee's compensadon, terms, conditions, loc = tion, or privileges of e=pseyment because the employe, or a person sc:ing on behsIf of the e:npioyee. reports or is about to report, verbally or in writing, a vioistion or 2 suspected violation of a law or regulation or rule promulgated pursuant to law of this state. a politic:1 subciivision of this state, or the United Statei to a public body, unless the employee knows that the report is !:Ise, or bec:use an employee is requested by a public body to participate in an investig: tion. hearing, or inquiry he!d by that public body, or s court se:icn.
sea. 3 (1) A persen vno ailstes.a violatios er tats act may brist a civil acties ter a,P..,. :.ste La*usctive reiaaf, or actual da=agss, or beta vis11a oo days art.cr the oct=trence er the alleged vtaiation cf this act.
(:l) An actica cosasaced ;=rscast to subsection (1) ear be br=ught is the cir==it coers ter the cous:7
,, aere the alleret vista,nes ec=srred, the seus:7 *ters the ---=' *
. resides er the asusty where the w
Perses against vnee the civil campiaiss is filad resides er has his er her princi,41 plass of basiness.
(2) As used La subsentoa (1).
- damages" oesas dammees ter injury er, lass causes by each vietation of this set. Laciuting resseeatis asterter rees.'.3 (k) Aa capieres shall show by tisar and esertaclag evidenes us,t he er ate er a perses actiar en his or her be.% elf wme amont to repart, verta11r er la eritt.ac. a violaties or a suspected etahties of a, law of tais state, a petitical subdivisies of this state, or the Unites States to a pahita bedr.
~
Sec. k.
A seurs, La traderise a, judgment la sa acties besoght persuant to this act, shall order, as the esurs cessiders appropriate. reinstatement of the espierte, the 3mraest of best waces, raL1 reinstatenest cf trings benefits and senterity rights, actual damages,.or aar coesination of these reedies. A court nar aise ava.rs ne=== '-h--t all er a peruos of t*e asets of 11tigstion,1
'M 5 reasseakis attaracy fees
. and vitaess rees, if the court deternimes that the avsrt is syyropriata.
Set. f.
(1) A persea vhe violates this act shnii be 11atia for a civil fine of set more thaa $500.00.
(1) A civil fine vtish is ordered pursuaat to tais act aball be submitted ta the state treasurse ser 6: posit is the graeral fund.
Sea. 4. ':his act shall act be construed te disiaish er impair the rights of a perses ender aar enlaircive bargs.1=i=g accessant. ser to pe.=1t disclosures whi,ch would diminish er impair the rights of any persos to he c=ntiaued protection er confidentiality of ccennanications where. statute er coassa 2aw ;rer'. des such y
pr=t ec ton.
Se:.
7.
".his act shall set be constriand to require. an. - ' rtr
- .s c zge:sats as emptores for l
ps.rticipatica la an investigation, hearing or Laguirr hcid by a pueLie bocr in 'ac oriance $th section 2 'af ~,
i this act.
t
~
ses. 8.
An emolover shali,ms eac ters and use other aeproertate mas ta kees or her emaioyees it.for..et of their protec: Loos and st11gstion,s, imder this act. _
m
-. 0..J.4 -
ars. 7. "his act shs11 be '4.evs and ame be cit a "i va 8
.w 2
I l
o AEPtletC 1184D EZIIIBIT 14
\\
l l
l l
l l
l l
l l
1 l
1 I
h
{
l l
e 9
9 l
00 10001 0033
-._m___.._
l i
CONDITION & PROBLEM REPORTS INITI JUNE 1991 THROUGH MARCH 1993 E ANR initiated CR/PR O contreetor inilleted CRIPR 300 E Total CRIPR f
aso - -
200 -
o O
d
,=
,=
?
a e
,=
?
o,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, >
A=
i
.i 1
I
\\
I AEF:NRCs1184D l'
\\
EXIIBIT 15 l
4 i
i s
a i
t b
i i
i 4
l 1
A e
i
)
1 I
l 4
001000 1 0035 i
I
. !e e,5b E5 C
5
.~.
.9 n
H/
==
y O1 R0 a
F/
u 1
a-n 0
~
E 5,
q.
EG 3,
y.
TN AA j.
+-
. 3_
S < e-DR
- .w e'
E E
9 E
=A u
v-s.
i-K T
T i
g U
E E
T L
L L
A P
P P
m
~
T M
M R
H m
- g/ g J
O O
G o
v*
C C
f = C.
e.
i
.=*
,p-
- ).
s-
- '(
3*
p
. o
]
g-1 n.*
s
.t4
^
r s* v r-
+
c
-. s-sL-
, =.
- .+
ff g
i.
.s*
2,.
+
2 2
a s2 t
9 9
y 1= *y.
.'./ -
u E
/
/
r <
g t,
T 9
0 1
,+
i t
- s.
S A
2 2
2 i
3
[
H 0
D
/
/
/
t.'..'
t 2
n 4
2 2
3 n
0 0
.,vf
{e.
.}=
R 1
. 4r 0
}'.
t
. 'g '. 4 I
o r*.:~.
- s a s
=
st L
8
. f'
., ' s,9
".*.3
+
s-6 i
4 i
y N
f.
- t..vt
- .,w 7
l.t, e N
5 p
r
..i u
7
. [=
S 3
R 0
9 y
.s p
. 't
- 3 R
E 9
0 p.
.* g I
.. =
G f
E B
9 t'~.'
1
.- e.
a
,A M
1 2
3 s P
t N
U a.
S N
T T
T
< a t~
S 7
4
.f
(.+ -
s
.h.'
y,..
P E E
E r
t G,#-
G L
,G G
y
.f. y
,,.L*
v g.
i a.
.=
m7 o
[
.a
.v
- T-
.e
?
i
,r
'r p..
,e L
? '.
C 3
.=
T
+r
.b. y i
C 3
7 EE 1
A'6 t.
.*i
' e '.
w
_ i
',0 SS R
K g
U C
g
.y D
A v
's t
n g p'
. g..
,y v.
' k, C
F e
+i C
T a
s
.. 4+
A D
u
^ 'i e3 v
d.
T D
R R
c
- - p P
R P
P E
,.s
.. /.
S-I*
P
- s.
- r.
R C
P
.m, CR D
E S
e
.s SO A
P E
E R
S R
Y NT
.E
~
4 AC U
E.o RA G
E E
E e
4-
,e TR A
L E
T E
P
,f T
R T
Y I
Y n
g-s t.
LN P
I O
S O
e L., t-
_3 EO S
T L
P NC P
P
. s.,
N E
M H
H a
a i
S E
E E.
R 1/.
O:
=.w g..
}M+e.
ST E
R E
RP M
U N
H N
n t-r
.a EE A
O E
E E
e 3
PD N
C G
G G
c.
4:g,-
O c>
O* g L 3.-
p 4
^
C.
uo
,Oc*
- n zY h wOOU I
!8<
j
?.
,
- e. 41
- oc -
[
COURSE TITLE 1.P NuHDtR DATE STATU3l
~~
~~
GEN EMPLO_ LEE RESP PROT k
GE-T-3000_
10/16/92 COHPLETE 2
4 GEN EMPLOYEE INPO CilALLENGE GE-T-4000 12/05/00 COMPLETE CEN EMPLOYEE INPD CilALLENGE
~GE-T-4000 11727789 COMPEETt-GEtLEllELOYEE INPD CllALLENGE
_GE-T-4000 04/27/90 COMPLETE GEN EllPLOYEE INPO CHALLENGE GE-T-4000 04/22/91 COMPLETE GEN EfiPLOYEE INPO ~ CHALLENGE
~GE-T-4000-iv/uYIYi COMPEETt 3
GENERAL EMPLOYEE SECURITY _
f GE-T-5000 12/05/0B COMPLETE GEi1URALEMPLOYbEShCbhtITY GE-T-5000 11/27/09 COMPLETE O
JENERALEMPLOYEESECURYTT g
GE-T-5000 04/27/90 UDMVLt.it EENERA,L,_ EMPLOYEE SECURTTY y GE-T-5000 04/22/9i COMPLETE _
5 CEENERAL EMPLOYEE SECURITY
,7 GE-T-5000 10/09/91 COMPLETE
' p., V,,. h Er-T--3 0 0 0
..i0716/yz COMPCETE
'-GENERAL'~EIiPLOYEE SECURYTY
+.
4 s _,
p...
g..,
t EDUAL ?SilPV. FFD jiR'AINING ['.".
-, '....Q'GE4T-550b*~;
. _ '.10/09/.91 COMPLEfE 2
i PHSO.131/lHD. EVENTF M. CRANE GP-C-9116 02/27/92 COMPLETE C3
~~'
' gIl1 DUST.IRAL SAFETY 2SENI.NAI+
.7 s. ~ ~.' ', ' '. 4 G P'Li-0 0 02 /
5~10/30/91
-~
GUHPEt;IL
.._cfD[s)O.IFT OPERATIONS HP -C-F510
_. 08/15/90 COHPLETE___
~
spPERATE FORK LIFT d-O-C012 08/16/90 COMPLETE
~~
'UOMPEETE 3
HECil HAINT TEgTS 1990,
t,8 23
'HH-T-00901s
. s 007T5790 t
REFUELING INTEGRTTY i. f ', '
~..s t.
- 03/20/92 * '. ' _ -
COMPLETE
~ DC4C-Hl CO -
g PHI 5000 - PROCEDURE REVIEWS T DC-C-9000 11/05/90 COMPLETE j
.:.,.,:.:, [
e a-g m
. N.*,lODL huh /kYT7?M1/ A_ s OffRX. W. n'<i
~'- ~ ~ ~ ~
STATUS g
l,P NUMBER DATE o
6 COURSE TITLE COMPLETE DO-C-R004
- 2/12/91
__BfADI A.TI_0N,3LAREHESS SEHINAR GE-C-2010 09/15/09 COMPLETE FITNESS FOR DUTY PROGRAH COMPEETE-~~ ~ ~
GE-T-2060 92770785 GEN EMPi.0 EE SITE SPEC GE-T-2000-40/23/05 COMPLETE GEN EMPLOYEE SITE SPEC GE-T-2000 32/21/86
. COMPLETE GEN EMPLOYEE SITE SPEC
- - ' - ~
GEN _Q Q 0.Y,F,6 SITE SPEC GE-T--2000 32/11/87 t;DNPEETt 8
=_.. 5LETE COHf CE-T-2000 02/24/00 GEN N PLOYE5 SITE SPEG __
CE-T-2000 02/27/09 COMPLETE o CEN. EMPLOYEE SITE SPEC
~-*
. CE-T~R100
..08723783 UDNPCET ;,r G. GEN iEMP SI.TE..wr.,0.RBAC:FAQ.1
.,g.y.
. py,..a g....,
. ~.........
4 CE-T-R100' 02/21/06
., f i.COMPL.ETE..
.o
~~ GEN EHP_ SITE SPEC.PRAC PACS GE-T-2100 02/11/07 COMPLETE o GEN EMP SITE SPEC PRAC FACS
'IU('Y.
- o f" ~.
i,#? ?.?
5j * ',f.
,f'
- ,'g*f y.
, a_ y
.GE-T-2100 02/27/09'e. '-
- *' COMPLETE s
_ GEN EMP _ SITE SPEC PRAC-FACS
~ ~
GE-T-3000 02/20/05 COMPLETE o GEN EMPLOYEE RESP PROT
- i 02/27/89 UuRPCu t
~ GE-T40.00
.E
..mO. GER.,EMPL,0XE,E.,JyRg 'g@f a tg,77P**[*;*.*-h e v*7-?" ye&- c - M.-~
.;.6,
..y.,.CDHPLETE j
i
,7
-02/27/09 crNER A1_ EMPLOY #Et IECURITY *
- __ __CE-T-5000 COMPLETE M GE-T-5000 02/23/90 GENERAL EHPLOYEE SECURITY
~
~ ~ ~ - - '
02/21/91 COMPCETE g,.GE-T-5000 GEN,ERAL EMPL,0YEE SECURITY,,,;
c.
COMPLETE GENERAL EMPLOYEE SECURITY.
4C GE-T-5600 09/25/91 kGE-T-5000 09/11/92 COMPLETE t
GENERAL EMPLOYEE-SECURI.TY
^--..
HMK Mi &~ &#f;RJ #n2vpaWT M
A a
b h
t I
AIF:NItC1184D EIRIBIT 16 l
l l
i l
l l
l i-l i
h 1
l 00100 0
1 0039 4
I
)
uy a
-=
\\
J xn n
- // f '4
^
)
Amen.can Nuclear SERVCES NC.
g c;;;y Resources,inc.
semamsarreousw h
mmm mmm suo n.woons si..m wi.m aoss Ten.onone:(916) 983 4535 1M. phone:(6161953-1554 August 11,1993 1
i To:
All American Nuclear Resources Supervisors From:
Lydia Demski, President You will have observed bulletin board postings relative to a proposed $25,000 fine by NRC against Indiana Michigan Power ConWny for alleged discriminadon by American Nuclear Resources against an employee who questioned safety regulations by D. C.
4 Cook. Discrimination did not take place; American Nuclear Resources does not i
discriminare against any employee, nor do we seek rernliation or intimidate an employee who raises an issue relative to safety concerns. On the contrary, we have a safety i
program that encourages questioning safety practices without risk ofloss of job, etc.
1 1
In this particular incident the person charged that he was diwharged in March of 1992 for raising questions about his radiation exposure and for requesting a copy of his exposure records. The fact of the matter is that the employee was laid off and while going through the exiting procedure there was an incident causing delay of the body count, the laid off employee became extremely agitated and demanding, a scene occurred.
It was management's decision not to recaI1 this individual, not b-mnm of his raised safety questions, but, bamm of his poor work performanca (documented 03/20/92) on Iay off notice.
l The fine, based on the decision by a U.S. Dept. of Labor Adminiendon Law Judge, does not have to be paid until 30 days after the decision is final It is sill being l
reviewed by the Secretary of Labor.
i i
Indiana and Michigan Power disagrees with the ennent finding that 'American Nuclear Resources discriminnred against the employee
- as does American NuclearResources.
l Everyone is and will be continuously encouraged to report any safety concem to management at any time. If our employees wish to report to a govemment agency i
rather than management, they may do so without fear of zerniinrion or of job loss.
00 1000 1 0040
..