ML20235M085
| ML20235M085 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 02/13/1989 |
| From: | Ernst M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Hairston W GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8902280113 | |
| Download: ML20235M085 (6) | |
Text
&h I
a UNITED STATES j'-
[n Ho NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
/
REGION 11 j.
101MARlETTA STREET, N.W.
g ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323 FEBfs a Docket Nos. 50-424, 50-425 License Nos. NPF-68, NPF-79 Georgia Power Company ATTN: Mr. W. G. Hairston, III Senior Vice President -
Nuclear Operations P. 0. Box 1295 Birmingham, AL 35201 Gentlemen:
On November 2, 1988, the U.S. Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division in Washington, DC, received a _ complaint from two employees of Georgia Power Company.
~The employees alleged that they were discriminated against for voicing nuclear safety concerns related to the Vogtle Nuclear Plant, while they were performing duties 'at the Georgia Power Company corporate office.
In response to that complaint, the Wage and Hour Division conducted an investigation, and in the enclosed letter dated December 2,1988, the Area Director of the Wage and Hour Division found that the evidence obtained during the Division's investigation indicated that the employees were engaged in a protected activity within the ambit of the Energy Reorganization Act and that discrimination as defined and prohibited by the statute was a factor in the actions which comprised their i
complaint.
Based on a review of the complaint filed with 00L, a violation of 10 CFR 50.7
)
may have occurred which could have a chilling effect on other licensee or contractor personnel.
Therefore, you are requested to provide this office, within 30 days of the date l
of this letter, a response which:
1.
.Provides the basis for the employment action regarding the two employees and include a copy of any investigation reports you have regarding the circumstances of the action; and 2.
Describes the action, if any, taken or planned to assure that this employment action does not have a chilling effect in discouraging other licensee or contractor employees from raising perceived safety concerns.
After revier your mponse, the NRC will determine whether enforcement action is nectissary at this time to ensure compliance with regulatory require-ments.
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 and its enclosure will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
4 8902280113 890213 PDR ADOCK 05000424 l
1 P
PDC t
hol i.
i Georgia Power Company 2
FEB 181989 The responses directed by this letter and its enclosure are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reductic Act of 1980, Pub. L. No.96-511.
Sincerely, Malc L. Ernst Acting Regional Administrator
Enclosure:
DOL letter dated 12/2/88 cc w/ encl:
l R. P. Mcdonald, Executive Vice President, Nuclear Operations P. D. Rice, Vice President, Project i
Director
(
C. W. Hayes, Vogtle Quality Assurance Manager l
G. Bockhold, Jr., General Manager, Nuclear Operations J. P. Kane, Manager Licensing and Engineering J. A. Bailey,-Project Licensing Manager-B. W. Churchill, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge D. Kirkland, III, Counsel, Office of the Consumer's Utility Council D. Feig, Georgians Against Nuclear Energy State of Georgia
t.
9 L.
' Georgia Power Company 3
pgg3g9ggg-bec w/ encl:
H. Thompson, DED0 J. Lieberman, OE
.L.. Chandler, 0GC S. Varga, NRR R. Cunningham, NMSS E. Reis, OGC-
'J.'Hopkins, NRR-
.M.
Sinkule, RII.
DRS Technical Assistant NRC Resident Inspector Document Control Desk i
i t
/
,,, qoM
'RI RI RI R
ODeMiranda RJe ins.
LAReyer JPS r
2/ 3 /89 2/l) /89
/89 2//0/89 f
h:
R$
suya a/ib/M
- __ :_ = ____ _ _ __ __
q-(-
~ U.S. D:partm:nt of L1bt Emoloyment Standards Ad a.v*
i
'?'
Wage and Hour Division g4
}s 202 Citizeno Trust Building j'
/
75 Piedmont Avenue, NE Atlanta, Georgia 30303
-Tel: (404) 331-4307 QXR7IFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
^
I December 2, 1988 Jesse P. Schaudies, Jr.
Attorney at Law Troutman, Sanders, Lockerman & Ashmore 1400 Candler Building Atlanta, Georgia 30043-7101 Re: John M. Fuchko & Gary A. Yunker vs. Georgia Power company
Dear Mr. Schaudier:
This letter.is to notify you of the results of our compliance actions in the above case.
As you know, John M. Fuchko and Gary 1
A.
Yunker filed a complaint with the Secretary of Labor under the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 on November 2, 1988.
A copy of-the complaint, a copy of Regulations, 29 CFR 24, and a copy of
~
'the pertinent section of the statute were furnished to your client.in a previous letter from this office.
- ]
Our initial efforts to conciliate the matter did not result in a mutua?ly agreeable settlement.
A fact-finding investigation was s
then oonducted.
Based upon our investigation, the weight of the.
evidence to date indicates that John M. Fuchko and Gary A.Yunker i
were protected employees engaging-in a protected activity within Lhe sc0pc Of the Energ} reorganization Act of 19 74 and Lina t discrimination as defined and prohibited by the statute was a factor in the actions which comprise their complaint. -The following information supported this determination:
Georgia Power Company management was akare of John M. Fuchko and Gary A. Yunker's use of the Employee Quality Concern Program to pursue regulatory concerns, a protected activity under the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974.
The complainants were denied positions in the nuclear field and placed in new jobs in non-nuclear divisions of the company.
These new positions require lesser knowledge and expertise.
As indicated by salary administration, these positions are worth less to the company and have lower pay ranges than the complainants' previous jobs.
j These new positions also have limited promotion potential and may be. temporary.
Therefore, the evidence indicates these were
<z,, b
Mr. Jesse P. Schaudies 2
December 2, 1988 adverse actions taken by the company.
The complainants' pursuit of regulatory concerns were more active than others and as a result they received disparate treatment. Of the eighty-five people in the corporate nuclear division, seventy-nine were offered positions in the Southern Company project. The company did not follow any established method to fill the positions including those outlined in the Corporate Human Resource Planning Guidelines. The complainants' personnel records indicate that their performance and technical knowledge were as good ar if not better than others offered positions.
Some of those offered positions are at present being retrained so that they can do their new jobs.
In short, the company's explanation for their actions is inadequate.
Corporate reorganization alone cannot explain what has occurred.
This letter is notification to you that the following actions are required to remedy th'e violations:
- 1) Restore John M.
Fuchko and Ghry A.
Yunker to positions in the nuclear division with comparable compensation, terms, conditions, and privileges of their employment;
- 2) Cease all discrimination against them in any manner with respect to their compensation, terms, conditions, and privileges of employment because of any action protected by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974;
- 3) Pay them a sum equal to the total amount of all cost and expenses (including attorney's fees) reasonably incurred by the complainants for, or in connection with, the bringing of the complaints upon which this order is based.
This letter is also notification to you that, if you wish to appeal the above findings and remedy, you have a right to formal hearing on the record.
To exercise this right you must, within five (5) calendar days of receipt of this letter, file your request for a hearing by telegram to:
The Chief Administrative Law Judge U.S. Department of Labor Suite 700, Vanguard Building 111 - 20th Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 Unless a telegram is received by the Chief Administrative Law Judge within the five-day period, this notification of findings I
and remedial action will become the Final Order of the Secretary l
of Labor which must be implemented within 30 days.
By copy of this letter, John M.
Fuchko and Gary A.
Yunker are being advised of the determination and the right to a hearing.
A copy of this l
l l
4/
.J'v
(
Jesse P.
Schaudies, Jr.
3 December 2, 1988 letter and complaint have also been sent to the Chief Administrative Law Judge.
If you decide to request a hearing, it will be necessary for you to send. copies of the teleg* ram-to John M.
Fuchko and Gary A.
Yunker end to me at 75 Piedmont Avenue, NE, Suite 202, Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Tel: (404) 331-6401.
After I receive the copy of your request, appropriate preparations for a hearing can be made.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to call me.
It should be made clear to all parties that the U.S.
Department of Labor does not represent any of the parties in a hearing.
The hearing is a new action in which the parties will be allowed an opportunity to present their evidence for the record.
The Administrative Law Judge who conducts the hearing will issue a recommended decision to the Secretary based on the evidence, testimony, and arguments presented by the parties at the hearing.
The Final Order of the Secretary will then be issued after consideration of the. Administrative Law Judge's recommended decision and the record developed at the hearing and will either provide for appropriate relief or di;smiss the complaint.
Sincerely, Joseph H.
Allen l
Acting Area Director cc: Robert Scherer i
Sandra Michaels John Fuchko Gary Yunker 0
_ _ _ _ _ _