ML20211N370
| ML20211N370 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 02/19/1987 |
| From: | Martin J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Julie Ward SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| References | |
| EA-87-020, EA-87-20, NUDOCS 8703020058 | |
| Download: ML20211N370 (3) | |
Text
.-
[prea e
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'4 REGION V t,
g 1450 MARIA LANE,SulTE 210
,d WALNUT CREEK,CALIFORNI A 94596 FEB 191987 l
Docket No.
50-312 License No. DPR-54 EA 87-20 Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station Mr. John E. Ward Deputy General Manager, Nuclear 14440 Twin Cities Road...
Herald, California 95738-9799 Gentlemen:
On October 10, 1986, the U. S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Wage and Hour Division in Sacramento, California, received a complaint from a former quality control (QC) inspector who had been employed by a Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (SMUD) contractor. The fomer QC inspector alleged that his employment at Rancho Seco was terminated because he raised safety concerns while perfoming his duties.
In response to that complaint, the Wage and Hour Division arranged a mutually agreeable settlement between the QC inspector and US Testing, the contractor. We understand that SMUD was represented during the settlement negotiationc between the contractor and the inspector.
Notwithstanding this settlement, the NRC is concerned that a violation of the employee protection provisions set forth in 10 CFR 50.7 may have occurred.
Regardless of whether or not a violation of 10 CFR 50.7 occurred, the NRC needs assurance that the actions taken against the former inspector have not
(
had any " chilling" effect on other licensee or contractor personnel.
Therefore, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f), you are requested to provide this office, within 30 days of the date of this letter, a written statement, signed under oath or affimation, which:
1.
Provides the: basis for teminating the employment of the former inspector and includes a copy of any investigation report you have regarding the circumstances of the temination; and l
2.
Describes the actions taken or planned to assure that this termination does not have a " chilling" effect in discouraging other licensee or contractor employees from raising perceived safety i
concerns.
l After reviewing your response, the NRC will determine whether enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements.
4 In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2,
. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter will be placed in the NRC Public Document room.
070302005s 070219 PDH ADOCK 05000312
\\
P PDR
Mr. John E. Ward Fra Ir ;gg7 The response requested by this letter is not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, Pub. L. No.96-511.
~
ly, John B. Martin Regional Administrator cc:
S. Knight, SMUD State of CA
/
.f t
J
I Mr. John E. Ward The response requested by this letter is not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Acto of 1980, Pub. L. No.96-511.
Sincerely, John B. Martin Regional Administrator cc:
S. Knight, SMUD State of CA i
bec: SECY CA J. Taylor, IE A. Beach, IE J. Martin, RV A. Johnson, RV J. Lieberman, OGC J. Sniezek, DED/ROGR Enforcement Directors RII-III Enforcement Officers RIV F. Ingram, PA J. Crooks, AE00 B. Hayes, 01 S. Connelly. 01A D. Nussbaumer, OSP IE/ES File IE/EA File EDO Rdg File DCS (ALL PARTIE'S LISTED BELOW HAVE CONCURRED IN THIS LETTER PER BETTY SUMMERS 2/19/8 IE:ES RA:RV OGC ES:D IE:D EHoller JMartin JLieberman ABeach JTaylor 02/ /87 02/ /87 02/ /87 02/ /87 02/ /87