ML20217D529

Notation Vote,Disapproving with Comment,On SECY-99-223 Re Millstone Independent Review Team 990312 Rept on Allegations of Discrimination in NRC OI Cases NDA,1-96-002,1-96-007 & 1-97-007 & Associated Lessons Learned,Recommendation 6

ML20217D529
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	09/28/1999
From:	Mcgaffigan E NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:	Vietticook A NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
Shared Package
ML20217D392	List: ML20217D387 ML20217D519 ML20217D525 ML20217D529 ML20217D536
References
SECY-99-223-C, NUDOCS 9910150193
Download: ML20217D529 (2)

Text

i NOTATION VOTE RESPONSE SHEET TO: Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary FROM: UOMMISSIONER MCGAFFIGAN

SUBJECT:

SECY-99-223 - MILLSTONE INDEPENDENT REVIEW TEAM MARCH 12,1999, REPORT ON ALLEGATIONS OF  :

DISCRIMINATION IN NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATION CASES NDA: 1-96-002,1-96-007, AND 1-97-007, AND ASSOCIATED LESSONS LEARNED- RECOMMENDATION NO. 6 Approved Disapproved V Abstain Not Participating COMMENTS:

1 See attached comments.

I l

n

(

(

SIGNATURE 2

/b

• U U V 18 j fMT DATE'

D 288Mi Taa81 CORRESPONDENCE PDR Entered on "AS" Yes [ No I

Commissioner McGaf6gan's Comments on SECY 99-223:

. I agree with Commissioner Merrifield that we need another approach, and I concur in

. the one he proposes. The recommendation that licensees retain all relevant

. documentary information regarding all employees affected in reorganization or downsizing has had an insufficient basis thus far, and this SECY paper does not make it sufficient. As Commissioner Merrifield points out, neither in 1-96-007- the case that prompted the Millstone Independent Review Team (MIRT) to make its recommendation - nor in any of the other cases the MIRT examined was it necessary to " analyze the circumstances based on disparate treatment". Thus the main strength of the MIRT's recommendation rests not on any case in which such information was in fact useful, but rather on hypothetical cases in which it might be useful. Perhaps such cases are possible, but neither the MIRT report nor this SECY paper says just how, and

-- how often, such information might be useful. The paper does say that history suggests on average one larger layoff or reorganization a yest that results in a complaint of discrimination, but that's not the same thing as saying that, in each of those cases, the records the MIRT wants retained would be either necessary or sufficient for finding whether there had been discrimination. If we're going to require licensees to retain possibly extensive records, we need to have a clearer idea of their usefulness.

- There may be a good case to be made for retention, and Commissioner Merrifield's approach leaves the.way clear for such a case to be made. In looking ahead, it is especially important, both for the issue raised by the MIRT recommendation, and for any issue of recordkeeping or reporting, that the staff and interested persons

- understand that backfit standards generally do not apply to recordkeeping or reporting requirements. Commissioner Merrifield points to Commission policy stated in the recent revision of Part 72. The same r:9 icy is reiterated even more recently in the statement of considerations for the propued rules on reporting of reactor events. See 64 Fed.

. Reg. 36291,36303 ( July 6,' 1M,9).

f