ML20133A429

Discusses Conclusions from 960911 Predecisional Conference in Region I Ofc That Discussed Findings of Two Subject OI Investigations.No Formal Enforcement Action to Be Taken Against B Hall for These Violations

ML20133A429
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	12/11/1996
From:	Miller H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:	Hall B AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
IA-96-99, NUDOCS 9612310091
Download: ML20133A429 (4)

Text

.,

e O

$ 3MGuq\

y UNITED STATES g g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

% j REGloN I o 475 ALLENDALE ROAD

\ ***

,d*4 KING oF PRUSslA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406-1415 December 11, 1996 IA 96-99 .

l Mr. Bruce Hall HOME ADDRESS DELETED UNDER 2.790

SUBJECT:

ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE (NRC Office of Investigation (01) Reports 1-94-006R & 1-94-053)

Dear Mr. Hall:

On September 11,1996, the NRC conducted a predecisional enforcement conference with you in the Region I office in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, to discuss the findings of the two subject Ol investigations. As noted in the two subject reports, forwarded to you with our letter, dated July 1,1996, Ol found that while you were the PSE&G Manager, Nuclear Safety i Review (NSR) you (1) discriminated against the Onsite Safety Review Engineer (OSRE) by '

virtue of negative comments in his performance appraisals (in November 1993 and May i 1994), due to the OSRE's involvement in events associated with a December 3,1992, l incident involving two of his subordinates (both of whom were Safety Review Engineers l (SRE)); and (2) discriminated against an SRE, one of the two OSRE subordinates involved in  !

the December 3,1992, event, by virtue of the SRE's transfer to the Hope Creek Safety i Review Group (SRG) from the Salem SRG.  !

On December 3,1992, two SREs, both of whom reported to the then OSRE, and one of whom was the individual subsequently transferred to the Hope Creek SRG by you in 1994, attempted to process a safety issue in accordance with station procedures, by submitting an incident report at the Salem Station. At that time, and afterwards, a number of discriminatory acts were directed towards those two SREs, as identified in an internal PSE&G review in early 1993, and an 01 investigation (OI 1 021 R). Those prior findings resulted in the NRC issuance of a $80,000 civil penalty to PSE&G on April 11,1995, (

Reference:

EA 94-239) as well as NRC enforcement action against the responsible individuals, including the former General Manager at Salem.

You did not become the Manager of NSR until May 1993. Nonetheless, you provided negative comments to the OSRE in an interim performance assessment in November 1993, and a final assessment in May 1994 criticizing an April 7,1993, memoranda that the OSRE had written to the two SRE subordinates which had been supportive of their efforts to raise the safety concern in December 1992. You also included a negative comment criticizing an October 12,1993, memorandum that the OSRE sent to the licensee's senior management, at your request, after he discussed a safety concern with you on October 4,1993. That concem involved SORC members anticipating criticism for acting in support of safety, by voting "No" on a temporary modification submitted to the SORC by a systems engineer. The OSRE had entitled the memorandum, " Atmosphere of intimidation". You used both of these examples in the assessments as examples of poor judgement by the OSRE. Later, you transferred one of the two SREs to the Hope Creek SRG from the Salem SRG, against the SRE's wishes,in retaliation for the SRE's involvement in the December 3,1992, event.

9512310091 961211 PDR ADOCK 05000272 O PDR

Mr. Bruce Hall 2 At the enforcement conference, and in a September 5,1996, letter submitted to the NRC prior j to the conference, you acknowledged that you may have made mistakes and may not have l been the best manager. However, you maintained that you did not do anything to these two l individuals in retaliation for raising a safety issue, did not violate 10 CFR 50.5, and did not  ;

deliberately engage in any misconduct in evaluating the OSRE or in transferring the SRG l engineer to Hope Creek. You noted that you were not involved with the December 3,1992, incident; did not know either individual until May 1993; and learned the details of the December 3,1992, incident at a presentation prior to meeting the OSRE and SRE, and that presentation had both fully exonerated the two involved employees and disciplined certain managers for acting improperly during the December 3,1992, incident. In addition, you stated that you had no reason to expect that PSE&G management would somehow be pleased if you retaliated to support those managers who were involved.

With respect to the OSRE, you indicated that you rated three other supervisors who reported to you with lower evaluations than they had received previously. You indicated that your supervisors reviewed your performance appraisals of the OSRE, and also reviewed the transfer of the SRG to Hope Creek, and found the actions to be fair, honest, and proper. Regarding ,

the OSRE's April 7th memoranda to the two SREs, you indicated that you found the l memoranda ill-advised at the time they were written because the task force assembled to investigate the December 3rd incident had not yet issued its report, and you maintain that the OSRE should not have pre-judged its outccme. You also indicated that it was not appropriate

. for the OSRE to use PSE&G stationary and official correspondence to express his personal speculation that the cause of the December 3rd activities was retribution for previous SRG activities. Regarding the October 12,1993, memorandum, you acknowledged that you asked the OSRE to put his concern in writing so that you could raise the concern to management.

However, you expressed concern about its " sloppy" language, and the OSRE's inability to separate fact from opinion, and you were critical of the language, " Atmosphere of intimidation", stating that it undermined credibility in that the OSRE was using opinion rather than fact. Regarding the transfer of the SRE, you indicated that eleven of the nineteen employees who worked for you at the time were either discharged or reassigned. You indicated that you viewed the reassignments as opportunities for growth and strengthening of the organization and broadening the employees experience.

The NRC has evaluated your contentions but does not find them persuasive. For example, the April 1993 memorandum for which the OSRE was criticized in the appraisal, was sent by the OSRE to his two SRE subordinates at a time when you were not yet the OSRE's supervisor, and at a time which was outside the appraisal period. Further, you had not discussed with the OSRE your concerns regarding the April and October memoranda at any time prior to the November 1993 interim performance assessment. In addition, you criticized the OSRE for terminology used in the October 12,1993, memorandum which was written by the OSRE after you specifically asked the OSRE to put his views in writing for the benefit of your senior management, following a discussion that you had with the OSRE regarding the SORC issue.

You did not directly communicate your criticism of the terminology of the October memorandum until the November,1993 interim performance assessment. Lastly, with respect to the SRE, you included this individual in a termination list prepared at the request of the then Vice President, Nuclear, a few days after you approved the SRE's involuntary transfer to the Hope Creek SRG. The then Vice President, Nuclear, promptly removed the individual's name

-.. ~. - - . . - . - - . - - . .- - -

. ~

h Mr. Bruce Hall 3  :

4 from the termination list on the basis that it would send the wrong message to the organization. The SRE was subsequently transferred back to the Salem SRG by the new

] Director-QA/NSR after the new Director assumed his position.

As the then Manager, NSR, at Salem, you were in a position that conferred upon you trust and

, confidence in your ability to ef fectively manage and promote the safe operation of that facility, r

in that position, you were responsible not only for ensuring appropriate resolution of potential safety concerns, but also responsible for professional treatment of allindividuals who bring

forward those concerns. Your actions in this matter did not adhere to these standards, and did not provide an appropriate example for those individuals under your supervision, or individuals of PSE&G's organization with which you interfaced.

I have decided, after consultation with the Director, Office of Enforcement, and the Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Regional Operetns, and Research, not to 3 initiate formal enforcement action against you for these violations. In reviewing this case,I have considered the circumstances surrounding the two violations of discrimination, and the fact that in August 1995, the licensee replaced you as Manager, NSR, and placed you in a i nonsupervisory position; that you later left the company in March 1996; and that you appeared candid and remorseful at the enforcement conference during which you j acknowledged that you exercised poor management skills related to this matter. However, l conduct in the future which demonstrates discriminatory treatment of employees for raising safety concerns may result in escalated enforcement action against you. {

You are not required to respond to this letter. However, if you choose to provide a response, please provide it to me within 30 days at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region 1,475

Allendale Road, King of Prussia, PA 19406-1415.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter with 4 your home address deleted, and any response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR).

l If you have any questions or comments, please Contact Mr. Larry Nicholson, Region i Branch Chief, DRP, at (610) 337 5128.

o Sincerely, 1

~

j

Hub J. Miller

Regional Administrator 4

j cc:

L. Eliason, CEO and President PUBLIC State of New Jersey

_ ._ ~ . . . .- - . _ . -

Mr. Bruca Hall DISTRIBUTION:

PUBLIC '

SECY CA JTaylor, EDO JMilhoan, DEDR JLieberman, OE l HMiller, RI q FDavis, OGC FMiraglia, NRR RZimmerman, NRR Enforcement Coordinators

RI, Ril, Rlli, RIV

' i BBeecher, GPA/PA GCaputo, 01 DBangart, OSP

, HBell, OlG EJordan, AEOD OE:Chron OE:EA DCS DScrenci, PAO-Ri (2)

NUDOCS Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC) 4 J

lst .

i v. . . e.,, os ini. socu, ni. indic.i. in in. 6..: c . copyithout .it.cnm.ntiencio.u,. e - cop ,,tn .it.ctyn.nti.ncio.u,.

Y "9t" = No co fJh 0FFICE RI:E0 DHolody/mjc

• Myl RI:DRP//gTl RI:RC _, r' RY/ W F l OE l NAME RCoop W *

• KSmith /(VJ A HMLMer JLieberman  ;

DATE 10/ tl/96 10// 8 /96 10/RN96 /) 10/ F /96 09/ /09 /1NHL

{ OFFICE DEDRa f l l l l NAME JMiPhtfan ,

DATE 10/ /9 C s y

i OFFICIAL RECORD COPY a: PROP-SAL.REV M geiv 310027