ML20212H381

Discusses Licensee Request for Release of OI Repts Re 980423 Predecisional Enforcement Conference

ML20212H381
Person / Time
Site:	Maine Yankee
Issue date:	04/21/1998
From:	Lieberman J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Meisner M Maine Yankee
References
EA-96-397, EA-97-375, EA-97-559, NUDOCS 9804230038
Download: ML20212H381 (3)

Text

.

DCS p""*% yyz g 1 UNITED STATES j

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20066 0001

%,*****/

April 21, 1998 EAs96-397; 97-375;97-559 Mr. Michael J. Meisner, President Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company l

l P. O. Box 408 i Wiscasset, Maine 04578

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR RELEASE OF OFFICE OF INVESTIGATION REPORTS PERTAINING TO APRIL 23,1998 PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE

Dear Mr. Meisner:

In your April 03,1998, response to our December 19,1997 correspondence which I communicated the apparent violations stemming from NRC Office ofInvestigations (OI) reports I l-96-050,1-96-025, and 1-96-043, you again requested that, in the interests of achieving the maximum level of mutual understanding and open discussion, you be provided with copies of the l referenced 01 reports in advance of the conference. You also request that because company and l individual reputations are at stake, the NRC come to the predecisional enfo;;ement conference I l prepared to identify and discuss with specificity the basis for any belief that MYAPCo and /or its employees or agents deliberately violated or carelessly disregarded regulatory requirements.

l In a telephone conversation on January 12,1998, I explained that the NRC would not release the l reports while enforcement action was pending and that MYAPCo did not need the reports to l present its case on the apparent violations presented in the December 19,1997, correspondence.

l Our letter and our Demand for Information of December 19,1997, combined with the l information MYAPCo has gathered through its own efforts, should provide MYAPCo with the 1 opportunity to meaningfully prepare for the predecisional enforcement conference. I further explained that if and when enforcement action is proposed, then the underlying reports would be subject to release. The NRC's position pertaining to the release of the OI reports remains the same.

Normally, OI reports are not made available to the subject of an enforcement conference until l and unless the NRC staffinitiates formal enforcement action after the conference. O!

investigations, by their very nature, involve potential wrongdoing by individuals. It is for this reason that the enforcement conference, in which contemplated enforcement action based upon the findings of an OI report will be discussed, will be closed to public observation. 01 reports are released before the conference only when the pertinent evidence is already in the public record, such as when there has been or is a public adjudication before the United States Department of Labor in which the same or similar evidence was or will be placed in the public 9804230038 980421 PDR ADOCK 05000309 4 (. i G PDR }

2 Department of Labor in which the same or similar evidence was or will be placed in the public record. That is not the situation in this case.

l a It is important to understand that the predecisional enforcement conference is not a formal hearing. The conference is in essence the last stage of the fact gathering process. In this case, as

)

in all others, you, as the licensee are given notice of the apparent violations before the

]

l conference. Our letter and our Demand for Information of December 19,1997, explained the basis for our concerns. During the conference, the staffis seeking your understanding of what happened. The conference is an opportunity for you to provide your perspective as to what happened. If attendees are not prepared to answer a question because it relates to matters for which notice was not given, or for any other reason, then a written response may be provided subsequent to the conference in order to supplement the record. The predecisional enforcement conference is an effective way for the staff to gain the insights necessary to decide whether to initiate formal enforcement action. The staff considers all available information, including the licensee's presentation at the conference, before deciding whether to initiate formal enforcement action. If the staff proceeds to take formal enforcement action, the subject is asked to formally respond to the action and the OI report will be provided upon request. Funhermore, if the NRC staff were to determine that enforcement action against individual (s) may be warranted, the staff would then invite the individual (s) to a separate predecisional enforcement conference to discuss

, any apparent violation (s) by the individual (s) prior to deciding whether to take enforcement i action against the individuals.

l I trust that this furthers your understanding as to why the NRC does not, as a matter of policy, release OI reports prior to an agency enforcement decision.

l

! Sincerely,

&u k ~W ames Lieberman, Director l

t

(" Office of Enforcement I

l i

a. .?

3

~,.

' Distribution:

L. J.* Callan, EDO

,.f,.'

, A. Thadani, DEDE

> ?

• H'. Thompson, DEDR

,- .' P. Norry, DEDM -

c -4 ,

c i Blaha, AO/EDO

i , , .- ;S/ Burns, OGC

l } l ' ': >

- H. Miller, RI <-

' '~ "S. Collins,NRR -

^

, , , , G. Caputo','OI -

'* ~ A. Galante, CIO

)! t,

, K. .Cyr, OGC

'D. Rathbun, CA f

, , + J Lieberman, OE EDO 970851

. OE Day File

- o-isc ,

y * , 3

's TRe J L' berman

@//98 4A98

• 4M98 p c.ca ,

WrmerA., '

g:\malynch.tr i I

I i

! l l,  ;

.j  !

,, i. <

t 7

- . _