ML20245B176
| ML20245B176 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07001113 |
| Issue date: | 04/06/1987 |
| From: | Ratner M RATNER, M.G. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20237K674 | List: |
| References | |
| 2.206, NUDOCS 8705270575 | |
| Download: ML20245B176 (6) | |
Text
- _ - _ _ _
A---
{s 77 I
O MOZART G. RATN ER, e c.
uoo scNirca sincer. N.w 4 c.
suite sso WAS HINGTO N, O. C. 2 0 015
.A A Cooc 2 NOZARY 0. R ATN cR sea-o s
y April 6, 1987 f
Mr. James M. Taylor 9
Director of Inspection and Enforcement g
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission I
Washington, D.C.
20555 Re:
In the Matter of Vera M. English v.
General Electric, Docket No. 70-1113
Dear Mr. Taylor:
When you rendered your Partial Director's Decision Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 5 2.206 on August 29, 1986 (Partial Decision), you specifically deferred any NRC action on Mrs.
l English's request that enforcement action be taken against General Electric Company (GE) as a result of its deliberate discharge of her from'its Wilmington, North Carolina Nuclear Fuel Manufacturing Division (NFMD) for reporting safety i
violations to the NRC.
The stated basis for this deferral of action was the agreement between the Department of Labor (DOL) and NRC to coordinate and cooperate on matters related to the employee protection provision of Section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974.
Department of Labor; Employee Protection, 47 F.R.
54 58 5 (December 3,19 84).
The Director determined that the agreement "means deferral of NRC consideration until the metter has bee termined by the h
EDO - 002761 l
a l
James M. Taylor April'6, 1987 Page 2 Secretary of Labor."
Partial Decision, p. 11.
Reference was also made to the NRC likely waiting until the Secretary of Labor had resolved the complaints filed by Ms. Malpass and Mr.
Lewis.
Id.
On January 13, 1987, the Secretary of Labor dismissed Mrs. English's administrative complaint, because, in his view, it was filed after the 30-day statutory limit.
The Secretary did riot disturb the Administrative Law Judge's substantive i
findings of illegal discrimination against Mrs. English by GE.
An appeal to the Fourth Circuit has been filed by Mrs. English from the Secretary's dismissal, but resolution of that appeal is not expec'ted for some time.
i l
The purpose of this letter is to request that'NRC now move promptly and vigor'ously to take appropriate enforcement action against GE for its misconduct against Mrs. English.
l 1
l Briefly, the bases for this request ares j
i 1) the excuse which was given to justify deferral, 1.e., awaiting action by the' Secretary of Labor,.is i
no longer valid; 2) regardless of the technical tineliness of Mrs.
j English's complaint, a DOL Administrative Law Judge held, af ter an extensive hearing, that GE
" discriminated against" Mrs. English because of her i
" violation of and participation in NRC proceedings l
investigating" GE's f acility (In: the Matter of j
English v. GE, DOL Case No. 85-ERA-00002 Decision and Order August 2, 1985, p. 13) and GE has not j
paid any fine for its conduct nor has Mrs. English i
been compensated for the wrong done her; l
q
.j
l James M. Taylor April 6, 1987 l
Page 3
.i
\\
3) the effectiveness of the NRC's program to protect and encourage workers to report safety violations l
to it -- a program which exists as the direct result of a Congressional mandate -- is severely hampered, if not destroyed, by any further delay in taking action to demonstrate to all workers in the nuclear industry that they will not suf fer, but in fact will be fully protected, if they carry out their duty to report such violations to the NRC.
l 1
It has been almost three years since Mrs. English was fired from her job at NFMD.
Over a year and a half ago the Administrative Law Judge concluded, after extensive hearings, that GE deliberately discharged Mrs. English because she would l
I not stop insisting that GE comply with NRC safety requirements and reporting their failures to comply to the NRC.
Both GE's internal inspection and the NRC's inspection confirmed the validity of a number of Mrs. English's charges.
By reporting her concerns to the NRC, Mrs. English was fulfilling the mandate of 10 CFR Part 21, and the Congressional goals and purposes of 42 U.S.C.
S 5851.
Nonetheless, to date the NRC has not taken a single step to show its support for Mrs.
English and her conduct, nor has it taken a single action to show its disapproval of GE for its retaliatory discharge of Mrs. English.
Surely, the NRC must realize that so long as this situation persists, the other employees at NFMD and employees throughout the nuclear industry will be substantially deterred from coming forward and reporting safety violations to the NRC.
pawnwaw.
1 i
l James M. Taylor i
April 6, 1987 Page 4 l
The messages that Mrs. English's treatment has sent and is sending to the nuclear industry is loud and clear -- employees who report safety violations to the NRC and suffer retaliation from their employers cannot rely on the NRC to take action to redress the wrongs done them and their employers-will not be punished for their misconduct.
In consequence of this message, significant safety problems at nuclear f acilities, will be known only to employees and ignored by management, less likely to be discovered and corrected.
The ultimate result is that there is an increased risk to workers and to f
I l
the public health and safety.
If NRC is to fulfill its statutory duty to prot'ect the it j
safety of nuclear workers.and the public health and safety, l
must take forceful affirmative action immediately.
We propose j
the following steps:
1)
Impose'on GE the maximum fine permitted by the statute for its willful retaliation against Mrs.
English, which constitutes several on-going violations beginning from the date of Mrs.
English's transfer out of the Chemet Lab and continuing until Mrs. English is fully compensated; Impose, as a condition of an NRC license for GE's 2)
NFMD f acility, a requirement that GE fully compensate Mrs. English for her losses incurred as a result of GE's misconduct, including front and back pay, emotional-distress and other pain and suf fering, medical bills and all costs and. fees Incurred by her in pursaing tuar claims against GE.
These enforcement actions would both punish GE for its-misconduct and thus hopefully deter it and other NRC licensees
_______...______________.____.____._______m_
_.m__
p
. j
(,
I James M. Taylor April 6, 1987 Page 5 from similar conduct in th'e future and demonstrate to other l
workers in the nu, clear industry that should they uncover and t
f report violations of the NRC's safety and/or quality assurance
. rules, the NRC will assure them that any loss they suffer at i
the hands of their employers as a result of their reporting,.
will be fully compensated.- By these, actions the NRC Will l
substantially advance its statutorily mandated goal of protecting the public health and safety.
As you know, Mrs. English has already filed a 5 2.206-petition.
This filing is neither a renewal of that petition l
nor an attempt to relitigate the issues.already resolved there.
With particular reference to the request made there~for enforcement action based upon GE's retaliatory discharge of Mrs. English, it remains our view that the Director erred as a matter of law in deferring NRC enforcement action, at least-insof ar as imposing a fine on GE, until final action by the DOL.
The present petition focuses on the actions to be taken by the NRC now that the reason given for deferring action no langer exists and DOL has decided for purely technical reasons, which are relevant to its authority, but not to NRC's, to deny relief to Mrs. English.
This is a new petition which incorporates by reference the material filed-in support of the first petition and seeks the specific relief outlined l
m.
i James M. Taylor April 6, 1987 Page 6 i
- above.
Your prompt and favorable response to this S 2.206 petition is essential to re-establish the effectiveness of the l
NRC's program to' encourage and protect nuclear industry workers to report safety violations to it.
Sincerely yours,
.=89 ft
~
U J Mozart G. Ratner j
DL1A
~
')Kthony Z.'Roisman M ounsel for Vera M. English i
i h
4
_____.________m_
_.. _. _ _ _ _