ML20198Q315

Discusses 971212 Petition Filed by NRDC Filed W/Usnrc Pursuant to 10CFR2.206 Requesting NRC Take EA Against Envirocare of Utah,Inc.Requests Provision of Any Info Re Issues Identified in Petition

ML20198Q315
Person / Time
Issue date:	01/14/1998
From:	Bangart R NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP)
To:	Sinclair W UTAH, STATE OF
References
NUDOCS 9801220398
Download: ML20198Q315 (17)

Text

- - - . -- . . ._. - . ..

Mr. William J. Sinclair, Director VAN 14 g3 i Division of Rad:ation Control i Department of Environmental Quality

,, 168 North 1950 West ,

P.O. Box 144850 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4850-

Dear Mr. Sinclair:

)

As you are aware, c,, December 12,1997, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) a petition pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 l requesting the NRC to take enforcement cetion against Envirocare of Utah, Inc. (Envirocare).

In its pet'. tion, NRDC alleges that Envirocare has violated Section 211 of the Energy Reorganization Act and 10 CFR 19.16,19.20 and 40.7 and claims that Envirocare "..,has and stdl is threataning to destroy the financial well being of any employee who provides any information about operations under its NRC or state license, including radiological safety information, to the NRC or other proper authorities." NRDC also requests that NRC order the immediate suspension of the Envirocare State license under Section 274j(2) of the Atomic Energy Act. Furthermore, NRDC indicates that, at a minimum, NRC must investigate the adequacy of the Utah Agreement State program to protect whistleblowers.

You have been provided a copy of a December 31,1997 letter to Mr. Charles A. Judd, President of Envirocare, from the Director of NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards which requested that Envirocare respond to each of the allegations raised in NRDC's petition, in an effort to assist the NRC Ir responding to the NRDC petition, we request that you provide us with any information which you may have related to the issues identified in the subject NRDC petition as they relate to the requests for action against the NRC license. If you have any questions about this request, please contact me at (301) 415-3340. Your cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely, Othbd @ned By RICHARD L DANG APT

@2gg gg4 Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs l

PDR cc: T. Cnchren, NRDC

' Distribution:

DlR RF (7S33T.

!l fl' l'll'll'll'lll*l DCD (8P 03)

SDroggitis - POR (YESM NO._, )

l LBolling ' G Deegan, NMSS l JHomor, RIV JGreeves, NMSS Utah File ygpgg

, DOCUMENT NAME: G:\SCD\SINCLAIR.WPD E VIOUS CONCURRENCE, o v. w. . w on e,= e auame i. ia w c . em m .me -

,. v ce .umm.nv eu. r soem L OFFICE OSP l OSP;DD l- 'OGC OSP:D (,1 - '

NAME SDroggitis:nb PHLohaus FXCaraeron -- RLBangart 4th IDATE> 01/07/98

• 01/07/;3

• Oillp/98 01//'/198 _ _

E 04'"""" g' ME b"haTu 3 Y>

(- _ = - . . - - - -

2 .. '

, pu.es p k UNITED STATES s* 1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 30004-0001

• .... January 14,1998 i

Mr. William J. Sinclair, Director Division of Radiation Control Department of Environmental Quality 168 North 1950 West P.O. Box 144850 Saft I ake City, UT 84114 4850

Dear Mr. Sinclair:

1 As you are aware, on December 12,1997, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) a petition pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 requesting the NRC to take enforcement action against Envirocare of Utah, Inc. (Envirocare),

in its petition, NRDC alleges that Envirocare has violated Section 211 of the Energy Reorganization Act and 10 CFR 19.16,19.20 and 40.7 and claims that Envirocare "...has and atillis threatenlag to destroy the financial well being of any employee who provides any information about operations under its NRC or state license, including ladiological safety information, to the NRC or other proper authorities.* NRDC also requests that NRC order the immediate suspension of the Envirocare State license under Section 274R2) of the Atomic Energy Act. Furthermore, N3DC indicates that, at a minimum, NRC must investigate the adequacy of the Utah Agreement State program to protect whistleblowers.

You have been provided a copy of a December 31,1997 letter to Mr. Charles A. Judd, President of Envirocare, from the Director of NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguardc which requested that Envirocare respond to each of the allegations raised in NRDC's petition. In an effort to assist the NRC ;a responding to the NRDC petition, we reluest that you provide us with any information which you may have related to the issues identified in the subject NRDC petition as they relate to the requests for action against the NRC license, if you have any questions about this request, please contact me at (301) 415 3340. Your cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely, fil( u - flo il Richard L. Bangart, Director /

Office of State Programs D cc: T. Cochran, NRDC i

i

Mr. Niiam J. Sinclair, Director Division of Radiation Control Department of Environmental Quality

, 168 North 1950 West P.O. Box 144850 '

Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4850

Dear Mr. Sincicir:

As you are aware, on December 12,1997, the Natural Resources Defense ouncil(NRDC) ,

filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) a petition purs nt to 10 CFR 2.200 requesting the NRC to take enforcement action against Envirocare of ah, Inc. (Envirocare).

In its petition, NRDC a! eges that Envirocare has violated Section 21 of the Energy Reorganization Act and 10 CFR 19.16,19.20 and 40.7 and claims at Envirocare "...has and stillis threatening to destroy the financial well-being of any emr' ee who provides any information about operations under its NRC or state license, i luding rad alogical safety information, to the NRC or other proper authorities." NRDC iso requests that NRC order the immediate suspension of the Envirocare State license un r Section 274)(2) of the Atomic Energy Act. Furtnermore, NRDC indicates that, at a mi mum, NRC must investigate the adequacy of the Utah Agreement State program to pr ect whistleblowers.

. You have been provided a copy of a December 3),1997 letter to Mr. Charles A. Judd, President cf Envirocare, from the Director of NF)C's Office of Nucinr Material Safety and Safegdards which requested that Envirocare spond to each of the allegations raised in NRDC's petition. in an effort 's assist the C in responding to the NRDC petition, we request that you provide us with any aformation ch you may have related to the matters identified on.

page 2 of the subject NRDC petition. If u have any questions about this request, please contac' me at (301) 415a340. Your operation in this matter is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely, Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs cc: T. Cochran, NROC p

• ,  ; Distd 4 'on:

DIRN (7S333) DCD (SP 03)

SDroggitis - PDR (YES_./ _ NO )

~ LBolling .

'JHomer, RIV

- Utah File .

N

)

DOCUMENT NAME: GASCD\SINCLAIR.WPD \

• SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE.

v. ,- . , o,- . -,.ce . c. .~ .m w. v . e--.e.o %

OFFICE OSP l OSP:DD l OGC- OSP:Dl%d l NAME SDroggitis:nb PHLohaus FXCameron RLBangart DATE 01/07/98

• 01/07/98

• 01/ p)98 01//A/98 OSP FILE CODE: SP-AG-28

Mr. William J. Sinclair, Director Division of Radiation Control D6%artment of Environmental Quality

, M8 North 1950 West P.O. Box 144850 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4850

Dear Mr. S% clair:

As you are aware, on December 12,1997, the Natural Resources fense Council (NRDC) filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) a petiti i pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 requesting the NRC to take enforcerrent action against Enviro e of Utah, Inc. (Envirocare).

In 'is petition, NRDC alleges that Emirocare has violated Sect' n 211 of the Energy Reorganization Act and 10 CFR 19.11,19.20 and 40.7 and ims that Envirocare " has and ...

stillis threatening to destroy the financial well being of any mployee who V 'vides any information about operations under its NRC or state lice e, including radiological safety information, to the NRC or other proper authorities."

You have been provided a copy of a December 31, 997 letter to Mr. Charles A. Judd, President of Envirocare, from the Director of NR ' Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards which requested that Envirocare re ond to each of the allegations raised in NRDC's petition. in an effort to assist the NR in responding to the NRDC petition, we request that you provide us with any information whi you may have related to the matters identified on .

page 2 of the subject NRDC petition. If yo have any questions about this request, please contact me at (301) 415-3340. Your co ration in this matter is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely, Richard L, Bangart, Director Office of State Programs cc: T. Cochran, NRDC Distribution:

DIR RF (7 33) DCD (SP 03) ,

SDroggiti PDR (YES,f.__ NO )

LBollin JHo r,RIV Uta ile DOCUMEN NAME: G:\SCD\SINCLAIR v p . .e mi. e.e w nee in m. w c- < . w ; m. = w . r con + m .u a = ne.m*.m. v . Noe m OFFICE $9 OSP l 031$l OGC . OSP:D l l NAME SQroggitis:nb PHLo ia .is - FXCameron RLBangart DATE 01/'7/98 01/ //98 01/ /98 01/ /98 OSP FILE CODE: SP-AG-29 uw.- g. ~ ) _ -.

f$-$$$ SI J' PAL-ll5 - 3s +

SH l l l

EXECUTIVE TASK MANAGEMENT SYSTEM l

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

<<< PRINT SCREEN UPDATE FORM >>>

l TASK

1. - 7S333 -- -

DATE- 12/30/97 T- - x MAIL CTRL. - 1997 TASK STARTED - 12/30/97 TASK DUE - 01/08/98

.....-~~

TASK COMPLETED -

~~~~~~~.......

/ /

TASK DESCRIPTION - 10 CFR 2.206 PETITION REVIEW BD MTG

SUMMARY

- ISSUE LTR TO UTAH FORWARDING SECOND LTR TO ENVIROCARE (#3)

REQUESTING OFF. - OSP REQUESTER

- RLB2 WITS

~~~.

- 0 FYP

- N PROG.- SCO PERSON - SCD STAFF LEAD - PROG.

AREA -

PROJEC1 STATUS

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OSP DUE DATE: 1/9/98 REF: EDO (G970863)

PLANNED ACC. -

N LEVEL CODE - 1

, e s ., -

h ML -

% p% P14&

a y Gc0 PREDECISIONAL- LIMITED DISTRIBUTION 10 CFR 2.206 PETITIQ_N REVIEW BOARD MEETING _ f,UMMARY EDO Control Number: G970863 NMSS Control Number: Not yet assigned Petitioner: Thomas B. Cochran, Natural Resources Defense Council Licensee: Envirocare of Utah

1. Convention, NMSS Petition Review Board met on December 23,1997, at 9:30 a.m. in T6A1.

2. Attendance:

Present at the meeting .vare:

W. Kane, NMSS, Chair J. Hickey, NMSS/DWM D. Gillen NMSS/DWM J. Holonich, Petition Mgr. (PM), NMSS/DWM J. Park, NMSS/DWM G. Deegan, NMSS/IMNS M. Weber, NMSS/DWM R.~ Bangart, OSP S. Droggitis, OSP J. Goldberg, OGC $

B. Reamer, OGC J. McGurran, OGC r9 J. Lieberman, OE S. Rothstein, OE "

Q R. Fortuna, Of J 6e . N A 5S /0*ud E$

n m Present by telephone: [

R. Scarano, RIV L. Howell, RIV ",

L. Williamson, Ol/RIV w

3. Scope of Petition in his December 12,1997 letter to Mr. Callan and others, (received by NRC on December 15,1997), Thomas B. Cochran, of Natural Resources Defense Ccuncil(NRDC), made a number of assertions, and among other things, petitioned that NRC take enforcement actions against the Envirocare's NRC licanse under the conditions of 10 CFR 2.206. The letter asserted, or petitioned for, the following.

(1) Asserted that some current and former employees of Envirocare feared for their lives or the lives of tneir families.

(2) Asserted that the licensee threaten < d to destroy the financial well-being of any employee who provided information to NRC.

(3) Requested that NRC immediately investigate and suspend the Envirocare license.

(4) Requested that NRC investigate the criminal violations under section 223 of the Atomic Energy Act.

(5) Requested that NRC order the immediate suspension of the Utah PREDECISIONAL- LIMITED DISTRIBUTION

{' a FREDECISIONAL- LIMITED DISTRIBUTION license.

(6) Requested that NRC investigate the adequacy of the Utah program to protect whist leblowers.

(7) Requested that NRC contact each current and former Envirocare employee personally.

(8) Requested that NRC order a special independent review of Envirocare's relationships with its employees.

4. Discussion. The PM, J. Holonich, led discussion of the NRDC submittal.

Attendees agreed that certain elements of the submittal satisfied the conditions of a 10 CFR 2.206 petitien, since there were petitions for enforcement actions to be taken against the licensee, but the petitioner should not be offered a public hearing under NRC Management Directive 8.11. Attendees also agree.d that the lead for handling the action should be transferred from the Office of State Programs (OSP) to the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguaras (NMSS), Division of Waste Management. OSP agreed to notify the Executive Director for Operations of this transfer in ticket assignment.

Mr. Holonich indicated that NMSS had already sent a letter to the licensee dated December 8,1997, touching on some of the " chilling effect" concerns raiseo by the petitioner. Our letter requested a licensee response by January 8,1998. Mr. Lieberman and others agreed that a second NRC letter should be sent to the licensee, supplementing our first letter, which would forward the petitioner's package, and request the licensee's response to the various charges, particularly those related to provisions in Envirocere's contract with its employees and potentially-threatening practices. Our second letter would also ask Envirocare if it intends to enforce this contract. Based on Envirocare's response, attendees agreed that a muting with Envirocare may be necessary.

Attendees also agreed that add,tional rounds of correspondence may be necessary, including a possible Demand for Information.

With respect to the elements of NRDC's petition requesting immed! ate investigation and suspension of the Envirocare NRC license, attendees agreed that there were no grounds to take such actions at this time. Therefore, the acknowledgement response to the petition would not grant the request for immediate action, but would leave open future options pending the Envirocare response, and/or revelation of additionalinformation substantiating the petition charges. This response would include a copy of NRC's second letter to Envirocare, and would also indicate that issues related to criminal violations were being forwarded to other authorities, such as the FBI.

The Office of State Programs indicated that whistleblower protection was not a PREDECISIONAL- LIMITED DISTRIBUTION

, il a'

l l ..

PREDECISIONAL- LIMITED DISTRIBUTION )

[ - matter of compatibility, and therefore, it was not included in NRC's reviews of Agreement State adequacy and compatibility.- OSP agreed to send a letter to Utah requesting information relevant to the petition and the charges against Envirocare.

5. Schedule. Attendees agreed upon the following schedule for actions:

(1) The PM (Mr. Holonich) will immediately forward copies of the complete NRDC package to Region IV for information. Region IV will forward the petition to the FBI for appropriate criminalinvestigation and action.

(2) NMSS/DWM will send a letter to the licensee forwarding the December 12, i 1997 NRDC package, and requesting additionalinformation from Envirocare (in addition to what was requested in NRC's December 8,1997 letter). The licensee would be provided additional time to respond if required (beyond January 8,1998). DWM committed to completion of this letter by December 31,1997.

(3) OSP will issue a letter to the State of Utah in early January forwarding th second letter to Envirocare and requesting relevant information. (qs.33 (4) OGC will provide the Pe'ition Manager with copies of similar acknowledgement letters which had deferred or denied immediate action, while leaving open the NRC decision on the merits of the petition.

(5) NMSS/DWM will prepare tne letter to NRDC deferring any immediate actions requested in the petition and attaching copies of our letters to the license, and our letter to Utah. The petition would remain open until NRC reviewed the licensee responses. Subsequent to the meeting, Mr. Kane discussed the petition response with the NMSS Director, who suggested that this letter to NRDC should also ask them to provide NRC with information concerning the names of individuals who had expressed the personal safety or financial concerns. The NRC letter is due by January 16,1998 and would close out the EDO ticket, G970863.

(6) OSP will respond to Mr. Cochran's request to suspend Envirocare's Utah license arid to investigate the adequacy of the Utah program to protect whistleblowers se arate from the issues addressed pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206. .(t)5 33 (7) - Addition *! actions. TBD Bimonthly status updates are required with petitione by the PM until petition is closed.

PREDECISIONAL- LIMITED DISTRIBUTION

.; s ,i i

~

PREDECISIONAL- LIMITED DISTRIBUTION i

2

6. Prepared by:

~

WW G. Deadfan, NMSEVPe'.ition Coordinator lzl2Ml17 Date:

7. Approved by:

c Y~/Ak (A.P4; /W?

J. Holonien, Petition Manager Date:

^

$t? uwr --- / ?lD//99 i

/W. Kane, PRB Chair Date: i l

8. Distribution to: j All attendeos and Cathy Poland for NMSS ticketing. l C:2206.eny i

i PREDECISIONAL-~ LIMITED DlSTRIBUTION .i i

s s

o , ,, m- ., yna + ,s s- ,. - x. , , , . - , . ., ,, , e- .-. - , ,. ,,,-

- - , , . . ,,,,vn.,,,. ,. .- n..a-.-- .n u. --

I

/pa het p UNITED STATES 4

!.3 t # ] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WAsHlWGToN, D.c. SeteHe01 l i

• g

• • • • • December 31, 1997 i i

Mr. Charies A. Judd, President -

Envirocare of Utah, Inc.

46 West Broadway, Suite 240 Seit Lake City, UT 84101

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE TO DECEMBER 12,1997 NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL PETITION FILED UNDER 10 CFR 2.206

Dear Mr. Judd:

By letter dated December 8,1997, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission notified Envirocare of Utah, Inc. (Envirocare) that it considered Envirocare's employment protection policies and its Employrant Agreement to be inconsistent with NRC regulatory requirements, including Section 211 of the Energy Reorganization Act (Section 211) and 10 CFR d").7. In that letter, the NRC requested that Envirocare modify these corporate policies and submit them to the NRC for its review within thirty days of the letter.

On December 12,1997, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed with the NRC the I enclosed petition pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206. In this petition, the HRDC alleges that Envirocare has violated Section 211 and 10 CFR 19.16,19.20, and 40.7. The petitioner clso alleges that Envirocare "...has and still is threatening to destroy the financial well being of any employee who provides any information about operations under its NRC or state license, including radiological safety information, to the NRC or other proper authorities." Petition at p.2.

la order to respond to this petition, the NRC requires informatiun from Envirocare in addition to the requests made in its letter dated December 8,1997. Specifically, the NRC requires that Envirocare respond to each of the allegations raised in NRDC's petition. Further, the NRC lequests that Envirocare advise whether it intends to enforce its Employment Agreement against current and former employees who have engaged, or do engage in protected activities cognizable under Section 211 and other employee protection statutes, if Envirocare does not intend to enforce the provisions of its Employment Agreement with respect to protected activities, the NRC requests that Envirocare advise what actions, if any, it has taken or plans to take to notify current and former employees that the provisions in the Employment Agreement, including Paragraph 11, dealing with remedies for breach of the covenant not to disclose confidential informatiori, will not be applied to protected activities of cunent and former employees, in accordance with Section 182 of the Atomic Energy Act and 10 CFR 2.204, Envirocare must respond to the questions and requests in the immediately preceding paragraph in writing, and under oath or affirmetion.

- In your letter dated Decemt* 23,1997, you indicated thst Envirocare has modified its employment protection policy and employment agreement as requested in our letter to you of December 8,1997. You also requested that the NRC provkis Envirocare with other

- whistleblower protection policios for use as a guide in making changes to Envirocare's policies.

Please be advised that the NRC cannot provide legal guidance of this nature to its licensees.

We suggest that you seek assistance from private sources, such as trade associations or law firms, which may have the relevant expertise that you require.

Y$ .WW W -

+-

t V.$ .

l 1 C, Judd 2 I.*

Because Envirocaro's complete response to the NRC's December 8,1997, letter is still pending, the Commission has decided to extend the time within which Enviroca. , iust respond to that letter, so that it may provide a single package of responses to the information requested

- in this and the December 8,1997, letters. Accordingly, the NRC requests tnat all responses be outmhed within 30 days of the date of this letter.

- in socordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's ' Rules of Practice,' a copy of this letter, its enclosure and your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR). To the 1

extent possible, your response should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that M con be placed in the PDR without redaction. If personal privacy or proprietary information is necessary to provide en We response, then pisase provide a breaksted copy of your response that identinos the information that should be protected and a redacted copy of your response that deletes such information. If you request i withholding of such maiorial, you amat specl6cally identify the portions of your response that  !

. you seek to have withhold and provide in detail the bases for your claim of withholding (e.g., l explain why the disclosure of information will create an unwarranted invasion of personal i

., privacy, or provide the information required by 10 CFR 2.790(b) to support a request, or j e withholding confidential commercial or Snancial information).  ;

i if you have any questions concoming this letter or the concems raised in your December 23, J 1997, letter, please contact Mr. Joseph Holonich, Chief, Uranium Recovery Branch.

Mr. Holonich can be reached at (301) 415 7238.

Sincere b1 art J. Paperiello, Director ,

I Of6ce of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards t

Docket No. 40-8989 License No. SUA 1559

Enclosure:

As stated r oc: = K. Alkoma, Envirocare of Utah, Inc.

W. Sinclair, Utah Division of Radiation Control

T. Cochran, NRDC (w/o enclosure)  ;

t e

i t* w e-- e si e--.w,.e m. ,- 4*n=A.-w

- my *me< ew ,e - ev e * -- mr w n y-.e-- r- ,--ev-ev rn-g**w-- -----r- -- -s --

sa+.-r 1- *-ere+**----wwo-w+++. -w-+wre- ve r v ur y aww#

.', . ' .Mr. Charles A. Judd, President O'C' U O' E f

! .', Enviruvre of Utah,Inc.  !

48 W:st Broadway, Sude 240 j

Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 4

s 1

. SUSJECT: REQUEST FOR ENVIROCARE'S DFMONSTRATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH

- EMPLOYEE PROTECTION PROVISIONS OF ENERGY REORGANIZATION ACT -;

OF 1974 AND 10 CF4 PART 40.7 I

Dear Mr. Judd:

J I- The U.S. Nuclear Ror u , ommission has carefully reviewed Envirocers of Utah, hc.'s  :

(Envirocare) Whistlebuwer Pr% 0 tion Policy; its Environmental CGT;"m Program that is - l referenced in the Policy; and Envirocare's Employment Agreement that it requires its employees  ;

to execute. As explained in thn enclosure to this letter, based on that review, NRC believes that  ;

i these company policies are inconsistent with Section 211 of the Energy Reorganization Act,42 '

U.S.C. 5651, and 10 CFR 40.7.

1 in order to ensure compliance of its employee protection policies with these statutory and '

regulatory requirements, Envirocate is request 6J to amend these policies in the manner

- described in the enclosure to this letter and is requested to submit the amended polecies to NRC for its review within 30 days of the date of this letter.

If you have any questions concoming this subject, please contact the NRC Project Manager,

- Harold E. Lefevre, at (301) 415 8678. For your information, I have enclosed a copy of the NRC ,

' policy statement on

• Freedom of Empkyers in the Nucker Industry to Reise Sekty Concems '

M9thout fear of Meta #s#on," 61 FR 24336 (May 14,1996).

ne.r.

o y0rigtg'alsignedby)

Carl J. Paperiello, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards j

. Docket No. 40 8969 l

Licensa No SUA 1559

Enclosures:

As stated cc: K. Alkema Envirocare of Utah,Inc.

W. Sinclair, Utah Division of Radiation Control DISTRIBUTION w/ Encl / File Center NMSS r/f URS r/f ACNW PUBLIC CCain, RIV AGarcia CNWRA

DGillen 8Rothstein BChidskel RFonner w/o Encl.: MFerlertine BReemer CAbrams DOCUMENT NAME:- 8:\DWM\URS\HEL\ENVIROC.ARE\ PROTECT.EMP ROConnell MLayton g/h OFCE URS URB' OE OGC 08L b  !

NAME' HLefevre * 'JHolonichs JLieberman* JGoldber9' h DATE: 11/20/97, 11/20/97 11/21/97- 111 25/97 12 0,/97 mmmmmme numana y name summmmmmmmmesammmammmammmme===mamm-summme men name NW /

OFC -l NAME' CPhollo ,

DATE'- 12/d197' L 'Please see previous concurrence. OFFICIAL RECORD COPY L____... . . ._ . . . ._ _ _ ' li. - _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ __ _....._ ._ _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . .

-2 . .- ..aA - m -. - _ ma a_, .

h

• e e

9 ENCLOSURE 1 l

i l

I

. i

/ . . j

.' [

o- U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION'S j EVALUATION OF ENVIROCARE OF UTAH, INC.'S EMPLOYEE PROTECTION POLICIES  ;

i The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has carefully reviewed Envirocare of Utah, Inc.'s (Envirocare) Whistleblower Protection Policy (Policy); its Environmental Compliance Program '

(Program) that is referenced in the Policy; ar.d Envirocare's Employment Agreement (Agreement) '

that it requires its emplopes to execute. Based on that review, the NRC polieves that these company policies are inconsistent with Section 211 of the Energy Reorganization Act (ERA), 42 ,

i U.S.C. 5851, and 10 CFR 40.7. . .

1. Whistleblower Protection Poliew/ Environmental Comoliance Pronram 1

Envirocaro's Policy encourages employees to report suspected legal violations of stato or federal environmental laws and violations of the ERA and the Atomic Energy Act. However, the policy t

does not incorporate all of the protections afforded in Section 211 of the ERA and 10 CFR 40.7.

• Among other things, those provisions specificLlly protect employees from retaliation for providing his or her employer or the NRC with information about alleged violations of the ERA or the Atomic Energy Act or requirements imposed under those statute' " 3 Section 211(a)(1)(A) of the ERA and 10 CFR 40.7(a)(1)(i). The Secretary of Labor has .;n rfically held that en employee who

• bypasses his tr,anagemer.t and reports nuclear safety concems directly to the NRC is protected under Section 211 of the Er4A. San Saponto v. Florida Pcr & ilaht Co . 89 ERA-07, (Secretary's Decision and Romand Order, Junt 3,1994). Further, the statutory and regulatory provisions also pmtect employees from refusing to engage in any practice made unlawful under Section 211 of the ERA and related regulatory requiremen's if the employee has identified the alleged illegality to his or her employer. Ett Section 211(a)(1)(B) of the ERA and 10 CFR 40.7(a)(1)(ii).

These protections afforded employees under the ERA and NRC regulations are not set forth i

i specifically in Envirocare's Policy. First, while the first two " bullet" items in the Policy deal with these concepts, they are limited in their scope to protecting employees raising alleged violations of state or federal envircomental laws. It is necessary to modify Envirocare's policy to afford employees rais5g nJclear safety concems the same protections.

In addition, the third " bullet" item in the policy is also inconsistent with federal legal requirements. ,

Frst, that item protects Envirocare employees from discrimination for notifying regulatory officials of "substantiar' safety hazairds or other violations of state or federal environmental laws, but only when the employee "has not received an appropriate response after following the procedurs for reposting environmental vic4ations outlined in Section 4 of Envirocare's Environmental Compliance Program." Section 4 of Envirocare's Program provides procedures employees should follow to report suspected violations of environmental laws and regulatiors which specify that employees should generally report vkilations of environmentallaws and regulations to supervisors, but may report suspected violations confidentially to the Environmental Compliance Officer when other reporting channels have been eahousted or it is " unrealistic" to report the problem to a supervisor.

Sechon 211 of the ERA and other similar laws do not require that the alleged safety hazard or violation be " substantial.* Secondly, it is not necessary that employees abstain from notifying appropriate govemmental officials unters the employee "has not received an appropriate response" from the company. As noted above; NRC regulations, as well as Section 211 of the '

ERA, as khizM by the Secretary of Labor, permit employees to bypass management and refer their concems directly to govemment offici9ls.

The third " bullet" item therefore needs to be modified to be consistent with Section 211 of the ERA and 10 CFR 40.7. Specifically, Envirocare's Policy should clearly state that its employees

. - - - ._.a =.= -...-..-.-- ----.-, . - - a- -- .

. 2

" are free to bring their concems, whether ' substantial" or not, to federal regulatory officials !n the first instance, includire the NRC, with respect to safety concems that fall under the ERA j and'.he Atomic Energy Act.

Final 6y, we note that these changes need to be incorporated in the company's program.

Envirocne's Program as it is now written relates to the company's compliance with envirunmentallows. Envirocate should expand that Program to include procedures applicable

- to NRC ccvered activities.

p 2. Envitacara Employment Agreement As noted above, the NRC has also reviewed the Agreement between Envwocare and its  !

omployees to determine whether it may restrict employees from reporting safety concoms.

Paragraph 10 of that Agmement provides in part Employee shall not at any time, while employed by the Company or thereafter . . j 4 . disclose to an/ person or entity or use in any manner whatsoever any  :

i confidential or proprietary information of the Company. , , .

i The paragraph defines " confidential or propnetsT information " as including:

i without limitation, all of the Company's . . . research data, test results, environmental monitoring information, radiologies, ar,alytical results of i customers' weste materials , , . and all other information involving or reasonably l related to the bus ness or prospective business of the Company . . . .

\

The NRC believes that the above language could be interpreted to preclude the disclosure to the NRC or another gove nment agency of data in support of a nuclear safety concem.

Accordingly, this provision does not comply with 10 CFR 40.7(f), which, in part, prohibits an agreement that contains any provision which would prohibit, restnct, or otherwise discourage an employee from engaging in certain pectected activities, including providmg the NRC with information about alleged violations of Section 211 of the ERA or the Atomic Energy Act.

We note that Envirocare has recently added a sentence to Paragraph 10 that states: "This -

provision does not remove any protection of rights afforded employee under 'whistleblower I protection acts' or similar laws." We believe that the added sentence does not bring the Agreement into cornpliance with NRC requirements. In our view, the Agreement must 1 specifically explain what rights employees have under the laws, including the right to raise nuclear safety concoms or provide nuclear safety information to the NRC or other federal or state govemmert agencies. Therefore, the NRC believes that the Agreement needs further

+

/

modification in order to comply with NRC requirements. ,

N. 9 r

i

+

b q.

e

• 4

1. a e

e em 4

0 ENCLOSURE 2

t

• S4SSs Federal Raghter / Vol. st No. to / Tusedsy. May 14,190s / Notines  !

I pseedom of in the Numiser This wealistles is -- - P: and -

.V bessary To nesse conmeme malewsw.h addless to de heedawn  :

' wuneutpeer et noenseen;posey asund to the individual employee. ihe  :

Sassement peresysses by hileur warhaus that i 1- mining mesmas kno meshedla j pTL M *'Y .

seenhsele een gamoreen a chilhas eSect that asy disasump enha:werture boss mes sentansat of policy, emmemas. A seineennes es the l

- masennes N Nurjont t employu to aim smannsis h ameter enday l Commissien (NRC)is ~

g'*", d""' ",",g "*9'"*"**thispolicy Ne sunketies l "

l ,,,=

• am-ar 8L 4~'n22,"cJ e e seeie. ala t "b".'e"' .

,,e.m,,,,m ,m,g ,,,

t wi setaus The respansAdaly ist malataistas such an

'I N8 D enviremment uses week each HRC

.seensee. e,s ,ed m em u as .t . o.s.a a.

.i.

2"W=aw' M**'Y I' Mi==

! his snessment d 3"'88*

! ancisar."ladustryM g, a 2 esevidas

"""""amm'80*"8 pelley ses ent to addswa ased to summes Mmme anim l etaffNRC useneses thstr

'=*====d*=====-

l

. usy u. i .

22l*sm,J.se

,m,is,es, ,,e to mise m.,,,25.M

• M" *8'8'mannen eauraon ammamas withest har of seinsuska ,

y" IJebermas.Diessamr.OSeeof r - --- I.A-1. E.A a, and

- . U.S. Nuclear msguisesry 6). On puhruary a. stes.the

! th* Washlages.DC 30886- Cosmalmien ator seasidatag thsee l 0001.(301)416-3741. ans and the basesiur

syssaansaerauf spessaanut thus pubitabad am samment a proposed sestament."ptendess of I in the Numiserladesary to i NRClianuses have the prismary Comanas Wetteurpaar of l sospensibility to answo the misty of n=a haas== "in the poemas Regisamr too

! . auclear opentions. Mar'inestian and pR feet. 8.1988).

essassualesales of satsey The pseposed sesamment ,

eenemens i and the of semanned esamma pn w soployees to raias such encomras la en cetimens and aspseesnessivesof the i tatseml of onsytag outthis ladusty esamaningboth the policy

, sentessant and NRCandDesarmaamt of the past, have seised Iaher(DOL)pergumenen,b mese -

la lasues as a sesult, the septammet osmanents suiste:Ito the

heakh and enh hasbesetted. eastumes of the pahey =a=*==aamt

Akhough the "g secognians lashaded:

that met every ename sensed by 1.th polier ansamment would 1 mployeesis enemy ier se dinosame emplerees has betagias that matter.la valid, rhw their esasses to the PSChasame it emmelades thatitisimportsetthat peeldedthat employees sapoeld smanaes'amassement esmhush en mammany pm,,ide smasses 2 the aviseemset is which sessey lesens ese lissesse yster to er - , r4 i poem IdumalSed sad eAssalvely week emudag to the NRC.

. nedla widah suspieyees sm! 3.N use of a handins peled simuld hoe to seine esmesans. be et the diesseeks of the_a__sspleyer and

hundsuds of eenouns are met be seasidand by the NRCla seised svelved dauyla the nedser esehasting the smaamashisases of the industry, them as seensles, linnasso's saamives sepens ofladiv6 duals being 3.The staisementis set needed i seenlisted against hr seidag sanearna, to en envisemment to seine

. emmemme tf tecuses as mushastty te,

%=en== en p===r e e. w m enemme adssens seashe===as by enemy m ammes and umns sivu and artalmal saastaams h "eraseamentesonstus ,. eu* 6 disohnnem

) p*"y".se'"s

.e n d"* NMM*P*"'" @4.The ? _ _7 af employee r- and see mesmo seimuss as Inc. emnesens pnyuma and the sesseight 4

' sus =hmeashems emmisemase was les psenetytive;tae

. Federal Repeter / Vd. St. No. 94 / Tuesday. May 14, 1996 / Notices 34337

' " la hesited fact.epedAc Operedens (54 FR 3424. january 24.

empeedoms concordsg eversi t of 1989), t saast provide the osam were paresived as t situs eas" would met abeelve l',. leadesship metres and malatains i

inn use of new requiremsats without employees of the duty to inform the

'. eenployer e(metture that could beer en the salmy sadsomment.

tothe Administratin la this ut.

Proedure Act and the NRC's Beckfit pubuc, inca worker.heakh and = neo Howwer, the the

!+ Rule, to Olt S0.10s. safety has been t = =';;;*r- one, p weg:=:;.*, "ttluma es and esenhhah wed amWeemeau, wie t,s.meio ding whether the s festored the esi , when cesning to the NRC, i

Idse h (e on vo veinen the as i or o 7"' I'*I I'" -I' "I"=4 *****'

y caming to the l .esalo.r management la reseMas o a.u. .mnaa. was eastem<n_

NRC.

=**-

NRC,wiesut Isar of whhadmu e

1 prescriptive and that dedalens on osalor saanagement involvessent should seetemme of Poury (2)Impulag,oestmmers

, ewsmasas i of their . , in g ,

he decided by Ucensees m of this Statement of

• I3} g

la add &uos, two pu forth the Nuclear g, i

had ** re,,emat..blic ve. of """eT.were ses, R.ye%,y Comma-. -

a d _ d,, ;,, m 6 tha,t liestasse and other Einergy lasutute (NEI)la discuss the policy statement. Summaries subinet to NRC mtherity establish g 3,, ,,,g,,g m

,w,,,,,,,, g,, ,p,,,;,,, ,

I l i of meettags along with a revised and maintain a i,Wous work . la nerepishd l statsener.t peepeand by NEI were envireament in which samployees inal ded with the esaments to the spee to raias maceras both to their own hduary

- _ __ _ m wu n,res,,pise eer ,,,,,,,, g,

,g,, ,,g,,y policy statement Blod la the Pubhc management and the NRC without iner gg,,,,,,,[their ridit to seim

Deeument Raon (PDR). of retalistia. A saletposeedeus work u es NRC.

l 1Ms poucy statement is bolag lereed envireanant is entios! to a liosasse's Tpucy seismaatis dirosand to su j aher oenaderlag th blic commaste chility to safely carry eut Danesed eenployers, inchiding usansees ea4 thstr and comedinou e wi the r ; a t

andvidea. enmuenas,mobW m NRCesserity.

oflabor. The more siplScant changes This pokey statement and the end their employees. A is tatsaded to

! laciudad principles sat fare la it we tatsaded to m isrese W pb w an umasses i t m pdier statement == mvised 2 applyis usansed actMeim of au NRC w NRC j sterify that assier managementis Moonsees and their amatreeterp,* and seer emnployese enh>'istion er suthmity that en est of reen i "'uty er p although itis recepised that same of disco'= w n w eedam en empleyw for empeasd to take .'of alleged '

j assuring

. a mia. e. th.at a,ecases e the pt e ,h ta, ens, propeas, .e ,uan,y or steps a in, thaten p to in sing a,s.o,

,, , ,a ,, n,tea,dal me, e, e,esanimy e,,ssaar,n is

, ,m,a, j investigated and reeIEssfas o p,ened to environment (e. .

the work r The %==t==ta= eenphaelses that a personauy involved la e to smise , ,gg,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

', ,em -- a use m.ners. estabhaksee.st

.ac. ras e s o.f a.e ammo in ,mu in ,o,es,o

,, 2. Relemocr i to maletaaamos of a management structure such u na hhh mans and en ten carryeut e~eni ,ui - e.uy. c:'so, pere is. .m ,ie,em . d a very nle'l'asues , ,,a ,.,op.t.s,, _uo

3.The pebey matament has been k t struaurs.

revloed to emphastas that while gabT Cears believes that the a

temic As d 1954, ahessauve peepean for raising sneet ogInctive improvensets to the to NRC bu sueerity annearns swy be helpful for a saimp anyt,e. ament for mislag concaras u meedd's ausgations that Ley g, g,,,,gg,,g will l on-d -. - .*e .eme e <*a e m.maass . ,, ,ma,,,, ,, es,, ,,m,,s e i establishment of alternadve preparas is orgnaintion (er the orgnalastion of the been dmortralased agniam ler re8dag o t a restuisement. licensee's osaneder) as asamunicated and w mke saleressment eedon

4. statesment een and demensereced bylienness and minonen h subsensumesd. The i 3.maireJ"ll"u'" s vs. a me.

r lra;",s.",u,*s1: 4."s**is:n @-a mi-he--ug,,,,

C etennes revi to prov that 7%

enforcement dedalens egnaet Hamas" egen produced by the percepden that 0 and 80.7). Un er 4

M_III,Y** ['Ytaber dao

$ N wo"u' d $r# sug **$ ley %'F",7 "* **ggd amended, the t a

es the relaueoship between the Ikanese that multiple SM exist ter salaing M* ""

j and centracter, the ressenablesses of concerns. As her%==n= ion amad la *""PI *I"" d TY$Y"**d **

no henue's wenight of es its tegg policy Statement a the esserecaer's sictions and its attempts to Camduct of Nuclear Fewer Plant 2 e ^""f" de htis = b se ab be h==a en niene lavestiente and resolve the master. ;mesieamweTE"nsyneme, mEsu.

w orLakurir j 5.To evoid the peenibluty . , n, ,esume, me uma *nmmmm.' ame neyse mens a passmal susseg ser me

, by amane esammentase that me yo inst.4.s and appiaman to homess a as a mtmasse a s e meressea&ees emp statessent might

- r u e. - .o -C i eine es seem e, ,e es em,=,;,,

is h,eisse . er amenmes

=.=.7,m, or ammoismene "d

cai e ,i

,,,= -e-:m we y,,or demensuuse , .=,:::::

. e.s -o me enc

• pa mopieres a .en-ened

• us peau.s -t_ ,e,,,,m ma s.,,se ,i., e,

, by the semployer, the stateenent that mates mtan) er as samy assymsmuss as euseness me to timed am Nec rum a w

• 6.sumese ese sequess a pain reportlag Cancerna to the Casamissiern er iet4. as amendes.

]

l u

i

.- -- .-..-.--,-.__ . . - - - - - - - . - - . - - _ - - - - _ - . - - . - . . - - - . - - - . ~ . - - - , - - - - , -

s .

l : . 34338 Federal Register / Vol. u. W. De / Tuseday, nday 14, 1993 / htless i . '. -

i ,

psevide a pemenalremedy b tts Asustly ese NRCs Tminias of addrenales cameras ase esmanible,

'4 maployee when dw-a-a as hund superdeurs may also maalate the medible, and e5sds to have esmeed, pensatial pusepties that e6erte to

• ggggFatsee usey pewide sanne he Nhc assy laidste as investignalen seduas opasoning and malatanance cases . helpful lasights en various ahanative

, even though the matteris alsoiming may mese supervisers to be less he Ossnamissies pesagaises I withis the DOL process. seamptin to emphyee esmaerns if what warbs hr amalissesse may

, the NRC's delasmiassies lif idemnaesties and reeclutise of act he approprises brasether.

whether to de seis a bassies of the seneens level.sipalaenat aests er IJssesses have la the pas used a variety schedule deleys. t- such as:

poteri Wdamerent - - )

$.,getthe man which is., hosed as its (t) As " that allows i.ve, ,stie.s..

ek highly W hr -

,,ma,,es , ,e e,,,

= ba.g[- = a EAuJive presmunes Airprehlen sewarding idnes not based solelyNen,, g gas - .

their east sedass het mise en their (8) A pelley that pasmits mapletees to M-aan n.= and a- a.m seine senseras to the lissesse a spaality 1 mattheties to saisty. Qud61e self IJammasas hear the primary assamments of the envireement sur am munes peup; ,

I r=T==May kr the sah use of secJant seistas yemens esa sameDute le (3) As senhedsman pseyenn:er j matalais la their varinas liensed eassivesses by evaluating the g,yg , ,,g ,,, g ,,, ,,3,,,, ,

aanvillan,To aney out that ad tisselim af preMan n.as .. as een also be memM Papua-s=T===khty,liasmenes -

y of need to sensive used to determine whether employees he emesses of a liseness absmative )

4 problem identisemales and believe their senemme have beau der esammes easy be inSummond sesolutise preamsmas ase essential to addressed and whether eassanihls the preyum la to et wtag satsey.Das, the Cassanisme en feel has to sense - amployees, priorislatism pasmses, agemas that and lineesse will establish When problems meIdestiasd through the i

a many4mmadams everemmet when self emessment, prompi muusin idsmisry wemp the l spaployees are enamuraged to raise esties shou'Id be takaa. ability to allow issuse with  ;

annenes and whose such muaneras == IJamasens and their sammumme seesynky, and sessums .the ,

soviewed, the pseper should elserly identify the psomasse prisms botasein the summse of a gina r pr6erer en poesstialsahey that employees may use to seise peopus appear m be W )

'= '

and how

. sad - - ' resolved emmeans and emphyees should h, 1

with timely Men'emple'yees. sessmeged to use them. he NRC e the p ay s .

8p tse the value of employees , Amhed erthe A mhtNmmacians everemmentis follow up ad sealude of enouns sotalmeed by'a ===g===* eendo namal preamuses le 3..minias that premmates semployee annaesmas la imeues to the em supervisore er mised by uploym may be a amenary seidag and resolvtag ammamma.Other managere er Eling suports) *I""t *I *" P'F"8- '

estribusse of a teesk plass with this ty ist poblem id=an-a= and his pelley Sesamment should met he of as envireement may include welf.pe sesolutica. However, it is innportant to laterposed ea that every i

developed eysesmas er far that the het that asume tiemmens esemblish we pseyams prierttimias publems direenas su de met desin to ass tbs , fur raising and ammmmma.

resswanssensedhusly;edhmive 18** mensassmet pommeses duse r shemid the need tar ammumlestless among various not mens that these employuas de met pseviding shesmaalve methods kr t ^- - _ er elesmes.es of the have legitisnets osaamms mat ahemld he mistag sumsmens that een serve as lissesse's ergnatasties for y espeseed by the licensee's resolutism istmemal"m.as abaring laferanaties and the processes. Nor doesit sneen that the asts."' C _pe vehen" er "saisty rest causes of Admetised :and manmal pressanes am met samalvo. Even the number the of _- "- .

saightinc employees and managers with an open is a y good sovireament, same omeplaulty potetial and iguesticalag entituais, a incus on am may set always he .

hasards, and hisemy or allsentions sah som issaisla anlt aag , and. al".a'ti,e r uas,mmorientatiesni towed se ammi *==h.g rii=aan===

. muy through .as.ev.sands to the NRC erlinemana.

ahm.e. hr While J

mare. pampantin, ne method of mising ' Mr.c., and ammasas mey haltial and ammist IIennsume in meinentalag a sahey-p~ tial sa,bry seneses should be time.d as e.partedit; , hehen hun.8m the intenst of . emous evisemment, he

.d .,,,, ,e m., ah, 3, 6-me - mind, *e -w- c-i a, by ankms as age ie.

I as pertent heterla achieving a wock ' **ck liemasse to han e shaal der - ~'- al.==.vve pepessa,is

abrirumment la which eenployees hel ****""s'On incus:(1) achieving and smalatsinlag met requirtug IIcensmus to have a h boe a mia,emaa n s.na ad m u m ** ='8'**=**t wh== mpiereas seal popues. In the absenos of a i

.mmoimma boo m miss a nt . - m a m ely =

earpesandene, g._ ena ciudy In their supervisess and to licenses - Cassanismien, th,emouirem.om ^"

ased medby'es hath su ess ""* P==r and (8) en easwingthat besnoweak of shamnsthe peuyams are Imr H=an-a=plopes Thisepocas would aluman means of seistag and b " --- - y, umofni sseei u.i

'T**.* -

pmemos as wellas poviding essasras - .e. '.as.'.t== . le tha a.8=a m of i.hhe '.Is.-es i..pass.ih iK". ' a b h. p=aani e.it.

a. =:-a ac

.< =e. 6

. '".""s:

'.:ll:::'*'9:r?

"'."':"t m 2.,-

a ,ei.

='t:

w . ".;l=,s"',.

,.' s,P.

,m--- a--.=e .e son .n e.esa - . -a - a ,, e

, aasast bes.s th. *'.h.i. .f r.. is . s _

me? t m. .h

.ne u L is ti t. .m s,-

Federal Register / Vcl. St. Nc. 94 / Tuesday, May 14, 1996 / Notices 34339 l . *,

tap,,Waj Censroenwe' Awargesse of environments, licensees should work and in le the hast latemets 1>* nog,s p m ,

seasider action se that; of the hennes sad the employee.

" "' (t)Each erlevolved in For these passens, the Ceausiasion's

1. 8 C8"alasian's _ _ _ _ m.. -- is uconsed ec.rit6er is awm elthe has hem ud endams u se to safercasmest pehey provides for i,

' gislicensees is considmedan elthe salons taken by (ucable minaties;seguledens that Pahibit honesses la addemales sad reselnag enspliesco with satshements, (3)Each contracter is aware ofits j was if Scassess use autectors der inaues of disensiaatie when the seepenalbludesin leetering en Comadesias develops alorcement

Producss or service 4 selsh limaasd envireament la which employees feel i sealdties. M us,U m.asec em eeneusas for violationsinvolving 3,ee to team essesres related to licassed disceimination. (se FR teeth November ble for heWas their saamactare ,,,g ,gg,,,

• as,1964).

tein en envitesuneet la which gg)g Deenses has the ability to sant'sener employees are hoe to anise le sesse seems, t may and oversee the sentracter's offerts te it desirable to une e period, that

] esmeans without fear of meaus'Jem- encetrage employees te estas comovas, is, to meistola er sustero Nevertheless, eartala KitC y and pavsat discrinelaeuen, and teenin benetts of the employes 8mluiremente e ly daartly to ahegeuees of diserimiasuen by j eenpessem of (eo,88' retalisties, pendias en er j enemple, the slee em deEherste oblatalag reports of ausged centracter seenluties of the metter er pending the ademanducs, such as to CFR 30.10 and diese*mtestaan and associated outoonsofenla enhvthe 30.4 and the rules em separting of levesdesdeas asamd by er sa behalf of1eber his ofits omstacaers; osedveting its own ins period may enha tuolings on.

dobras ud uemeesspliameosla10 GR loveatisations of such discrialaeues: site and esuld be mand to demonstrete Part 21). In particulary ths Chena:alon's end,if worrented, by directing that management emesuregament of as poeWhidea es ,

-4 esanast esmedial assion be underemkam' and savtressment sendumso to mielag map leyees for seielag e.Any esseeres (4) Centreeter essployees sad I

appues to b eestrecesse ofits comeses. By this menessenut are informed of(a)the achnewledgieg  !

Messees, as wou as to liseasese (see, ler im j of selslag enfaty comunes that although a depute asses as to esemple,10 0 A 30.y and to.y).

Aseerdingly,if a heemsee sentrosam (b) how to reise onasoras threegh whether disminimeden enounod,in the i aanmal preessnes, eherastiw istmaal laterest of set discousaglag other discriminates one ofits presensas, and directly to the NRC. een hem pelsteg seneeres, the empi la en elapplissWe Adepties of aestract previsens

, 6es rules, the Censha6en ess bivolvedlalas dispute will I severing the emettere discussed abow met pay and benetts while the 1

intends le esmeider enferoement methan may peevide additionaleaswana that ogniast hath the Moonses, who tuneins neues is bolag sessanidsed or the anstreeter employees willbe able to is hates semelved. However, peepenelble for the oevireament taler gnagares without fear el malatataed by its sentractme, and 'he estem of the heading period peg ."Aiea, approach la this policy eletament is not who actuaUy disertmine ad

- ha intended to aher the seisting rights of 38'*I"""*' *f %u _t l

the employee.

enferiassent acus,sInshe

" 3 he Casas of Ausged - ~

,_2 either the uceasse er the employee, or be taken as e disessies b taksei eeninst lianasses Ier weeruter The Commission reminds licensees of supesaseen et, the r===y, or en I

actions, and the astuse of sub essises, ta=laa for 1 their obligouse hath to enewe that licensees to the holding per6od i the Nmc intends to sendder, among elactions employees, )

other things, the relatieaship of the eencept.For the emp and b l actions by sensleyer, pattenin a 1 i

sentresser to the particular lisenese and centracters, who have raised concerns parledun l 80s hcassed activides; the the esaditions of a specinc l have a well. founded, men-reemeneWeases of the llenesse's ceas is anualy voluntary. i l discrimlastery heels and to make clear A heemans may senciada,aber a fel  !

eversight of the sentreeter enviremensat to all employeu th,t say advoese sedes review, that sa advwes action ogniast as for raneing esmoeras by smothods such as taken egela.si en sunplayee was for essp is wanested 'ne licensee's sev6,we of osasseter peuo'es la ter raising mas! resolving anseeves and  !!gttimate, ase<lisertatastery ressoas. Im sessynises the need for j employees ellege rotellation for hasasses to tehe assion when justi$ed.

eudits of the enactivesses of sentressor eagestag la pre c red activities, sealer l Ceansdesien segulations de set tender r. I enests in arrylaa out:hese piaMan. lisemase maast meet should he ;,dvised person who l locluding peacou, ares and tenialog of la of the matter one nasure that the assi immuna or l eenplopes ei mapervleers;the appropriate level of eneaegement is Useasse'J involvement in er died ang heen ass-novelved, soviewtag the calar tacts tod esaaldesedens (see, for ty to penent the and evaluating er the eenspie,10 CFR BC.fid)).he uom;and the hasasse's eEnsts esassa.

la responding to the partiodar Canimisslan espects licassess to enake mlatent of this policy statementis permannel d==&s=== that en eensLetent ellegetsen of disors=Imaana= laeluding to emphasise the imperianos of licenses witt regulatory.'2 and that whether the licanoes reviewed the t teklag en active role to commoctor's investignues, conducted its pres y resolve situations involvirg ,was ohn moi.p.m base the she indMdeal own lam--- ~. er teek susseeable el disminismuss. Beesues of the who was the manpse of as ed.um esses mer assion to esideve e ter any eneples entwo ofleher management h** " sand 6 diserimi estion toredues seletiana, any emneraall imposed m ua ,eewon is not a deAWe a one @((Pue=8'd me i Mnl.m., esmouma

",,[,*,n",,",",,4.g,,3 mma ,s s.u a mar Csatracters have been ockleved laternally, m consnissien essen ens em.-w d sei es ==== ==

lavolved la e number of disertainatire emphaslems that internal resolutton is ' we m talihmemnessesemen maksumetu essepleists that are made by essplayees. the Ifeensee's reopeneihility, and that la the laterest of ensurtag that their early reestuden without genrnment ,",,,,,y%,,

F"""'d F N "","'""^

,, iham in sense immedWe mer adas estametere estabheb esfory comedeus lavelvesment is less likely to disrupt the asy poumoelma the seenhaams asund

1... -

).'

34840 Federal Regieter / Vol. 61. No. M / Tuesday, heay 14, 1996 / Nouces i .l. '

1* erg l h the ggagjpgees and The f*mmatasta='s 4 " ^- that _ pygampdgend en*leggj,el 6ddrees the 1

enhty of the hemsse's spandees, employees wulaermally raise sahey saamar.noNRC ====11y be

!' ammeerns to their employwe does not Wewed as e enhey valve and not as e e ,,g '

• • • " "8 disemi th 'the

• esmewas.

aheve,the sneeweges sep to came to the This sestmisest has been issued j .7 As phay le maianalalag a sakey- NIIC et any thne helleve that the to expedeus sedreament seats with Casamissias should aware of their

"-9 to malatais en en I

( Wounsee - - " Newever, esacurse A nut, whue met required, the isw h en esehoetoseine 4 employees la ihe nuclear industry also Casamassles does espect that employees semesses petsbetism. The

! how :- - "ha-- is this anos. As a normeUy wulhow valsed the issue with =y=*=*t==a and sugestions anstalmed

genealprienpla,the Comsdanica the liceeses either prier to er la this pelley senemment (o ast establish j sp suployees la the amatassu -- , with samlag to the new T w However,if a nuclear to smise sehey and NRC.TGe Commismien asusinar huesse has est established a saAsty-esempuanas emnsures dhessly to lissasses that semplaints that adveres . ennadeus envbunassai, as evidseemd by llenesses, er ladiessaly to Mesmanes , enties was taken agalast an employee setnuatism agniast asladividual br threegh sammasses, bensuse hamnsess, der est heleglag a emmeurs to his er har and act the Comenission, hear the w is a protested the estivity, dding laveivsepro 4

employer, when the empph* lahreaties to the er the NRC, primary enay hr sak opesation the eencern to the NitC.

siancisar hdlities and sais use of surutiaised by the NRC to determine appecyMs enlarasmaat aseien may be assiser matarlais.s The Ikmasse, and emieressmaat acties is warramend lar takes egninst the niemese, hs discriadasties. essensessa, and the bevolved ladividual 1 met the NHC,is asunt la the best passelas and has the knowledge Remueden against e aguged supervisers, hr vielseless of NRC

! la prmed aanvium, they

' of we spenSe and me sesmens to p porand hea maad smasma a their mapieyere ' b Osamissien reasyden that the er to the NRC, wGl met he talerated. If emusively with amassas raised by andens disamedla els W essployees. This is amether remens why adwm assion is 8sund to how eenmal statammt wiu met =======dly lasulate the r "===iad== aspects homasses a because the gleyse raised a enmeers er the Home,cidl an u np 5 Spe n wenMad a ,aar w ul m either the they w au paremmelcast should the

establish an entireannot in which and arisminal safaramenest er.*.ien may be i eueployese Aset hos to suise sensures in ,,g , p,,,,,3 ,,,gy ,

the Ikmasses thannelves.

taken ognisut the Hemsse end the ,,,9,heset Newever, measures,if adopend by puun hr he

.',mm iC'r ave h

r- a *'- ver6 .hnt sty of means M g,- amma, shamand he

=*'em==t 8= mi5s*"e==the ===-

employees sense senesma to thema, each ' Sammar7 thand as Rushvtils, tearyland this eth day as empisyment centmcas, sumplayers' The '%==Wa= that NRC of ndsy.ts8a.

t h - wulesteh esisty creacious per the Nuclear Repaisasey Cummismen.

gense and c d - .andcurasia septements.In Amt,asesy envireaments la which smoployees el Jehm C muyte, l

mploym la the sinciser insinstry hs" liosasses and Monasse crimescaere em 3. ,,se,yafahs e hd-bem speed 8cauy hind to fu1811 NRC - gree, and isnl has, to raise esesares te (yst ties. oktaan Fusd him a4s aml l

that liesasses identify tasir ===aga ===8 and to the NRC

= Weleti== =d miwy wineut her of emnases.

l I,lemasses must smews that issues, hamples of these include many employees who conduct surveulence. employsment assions egniast employees gushty assurnmen, mdiaties protection, who have reised cancerns have a wou-and security assivities. In addition to laus ded, ase disartalastery basis.

individuals who eyedSenDy perterm When ausgedens of suscrhninenen adse funesisms to asse --da-d=3 in licensee, tantracter, er eubeantrecaer togstrumman, the 'W=d== _ ' "n the Counsalasien especes enesweges au employees w seios that sealer 16mmast ====g====e wul i sommeros to liesesses if they idendfy answo that the appropstaan levelof sainy issues ase that kamasses een amanessmentislavalvedis weiew the address them holen en event with particular ins,as, evoluete er sensadder sabty sensequaman samme. the assim, es4.where wuomated, the matter.

one e i .,4 ,um ym.eds eher Emp also have a solola and en -usesnummenisami M :to a amandeus

• **=us of remh8e **umesetas by envhemaset, employees are

• t et eey tums, the n, es sec' se enhe.ms.m ms mi.

er sh== in sec epsemew = sec yeyams s.s - m.$a*s"e s. me. 7. -i==

ces- 6 miscome *.i-,isyees will mannauy sa,lse ennenes with the to the h'8"*se eman,em egenus e en g ,elved lianasse beesuas the liesasse emb tems ahmsla he abuely a es has the wuty der sainy W Omm et she ameune OsammL The sepasar amusers enem haises is ess. ass eese. and is samman la the best peelden to

• manya en es mpmans es emans ends is ces Pos en ensi no en se etme assiel aushme ans commessen imands is pesa es insamer ammman.ct, the Communmaan has est salessa mis of taeveduals who esmas e es pec as the yesuma asemanassa. tasumme se susatsud by se (Ft le 13 esent puuminem San 'anammans of Polesy en t3 unes emnata leihmir e Pseemung the lismetry of Altge and f=ne=*t=1 man emans a sensuse . asusum-

._ _ m , . , _ _ . _ . _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _