ML20205C246

Requests That Listed Info Be Included on Service List for Case Number 93-ERA-44,Harrison Vs Stone & Webster

ML20205C246
Person / Time
Issue date:	11/26/1993
From:	Uryc B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Hinton D NRC
Shared Package
ML20205B966	List: ML20205B960 ML20205C246 ML20205C251 ML20205C257 ML20205C267 ML20205C284 ML20205C290 ML20205C299 ML20205C338 ML20205C474 ML20205C491 ML20205C503 ML20205C537 ML20205C546 ML20205C563 ML20205C576 ML20205C599 ML20205C605 ML20205C613 ML20205C627 ML20205C642 ML20205C649 ML20205C658 ML20205C664 ML20205C704 ML20205C710 ML20205C719 ML20205C730 ML20205C740 ML20205D959 ML20205D965 ML20205D976 ML20205D987 ML20205E279 ML20205E291 ML20205E321 ML20205E326 ML20205E336 ML20205E359 ML20205K789
References
FOIA-99-76 NUDOCS 9904010122
Download: ML20205C246 (43)

Text

.

~n d

• O

' N' UNITED STATES '

/

p #** ato%*,S

" NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION 11 w o- 101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W., SUITE 2900 L ATLANTA, GEORGIA 303214199

%.....+

November 26,1993 NOTE FOR: Ms. DIANA L. HINTON FROM: BRUNO URYC SENIOR ENFORCEMENT SPECIALIST ENFORCEMENT AND INVESTIGATION l COORDINATION STAFF j

SUBJECT:

HARRISON v. STONE & WEBSTER  !

93-ERA-44 PLEASE INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING ON THE SERVICE LIST FOR THE ABOVE l REFERENCED CASE.

Director Enforcement and investigation Coordination Staff '

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region 11, Suite 2900 l 101 Marietta Street, N.W.

Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Director Office of Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Office of General Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Enforcement 1 l 11555 Rockville Pike l

Rockville, Maryland 20852 l

DELETE: REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

101 MARIETTA ST., NW SUITE 3100 ATLANTA, GA 30303 I.

AG c v

\

fb

!l 9904010122 990324 PDR FOIA i

L

/v. GU.,NTER99-76 PDR N m

I

. ,~ ,

- vl ,

~f .

!+

D

+ G q

q 4 , 1=

l,

,~lt

- a.

=~x F.

bw w$~aw+=v

~

} , (s rT

_ [

d P F T _ o n ko e

_ O l W s HEY. _

1 4

E

[

t --

s E 8 w L ,b m i

O 9 l

E' i

P ff 1

n t i

t p

p A'k s 5 a -

P T

0  :

a r

1 r t 7 l

. J i

1 t

u  ;

~Ge m p

1 z

5 3Rv!o e1 1

s-u 9 e

_ 0 0 wc c t

us 7 7

m 2

&waAs7T~ &e 1 1 s

0 t ,

' .~

8 0

4 .

c"a d 1i f

2 7

2

>e oz sA~

o e e 3

4 8

4 ~?

- t t

_ 1 0

?,~e' c'k~ ~ 3

• 2 .

E

)r a

C 1

nau./

- a suf 5

,m r-W 3

+ SWo twAMC h

v a

?

c

&e$.9y_~"+~

E o&~

1 3

'u "

l I

.c m )d k]e m-6

~.

- 5

~

g -

il i , '.

1. NAME:b4dMLLhO DATE:  !( / /hb

2. ALGNO:- RII- -A- g

3. LIC:  ! **********

• • • • • • • • • SEQ NO: A I~ !

4. FAC: *

5. CONTPACTOR:

• 6.

7.

TYPECMPLT:

ERANO:

DISCR0 b -ERA N BLIST 0

• i

8. EICSNO: *

9. OINO: * /

10. DATECMPLT: / / * ,

11. DTRCVDOL: / / *

12. DTRCVRII: / / ,*

13. DOLOFF:

• j

14. DOLCO: *

15. DD-DEC: FOR COMP 0 FOR RESP 0 *  !

16. DT-DD-DEC: / / *

17.

• FNDAPLD: YES% NO0

18.

• APLDBY: COMP $ RESPQ .

19. ALJ: 'l2_. M A L A M D 64 Y *

20. ALJRDO:

21. DTRDO: / / *

22. SOLDEC: /

23. DTSOLDEC: / / /

24.

• ENFACTION: YES0 0

25. EANO: *

26.

• ENFCONFDT: I /___ /

27. NOV-DT: *

/ /

28. CEL-DT: / // *

29.

• DTLICRESP: I/ / /

30. STATUS: 00 Pf E0 C 0*

31. REMARKS: f! [ ] DELETE REMARKS AND ADD A/I i/ [Y) [N] OE/EICS ON SERVICE LIST

.i

/

,/t L

(

i L

l IA 97 __

. - . -- -- -- - . . ~

Mr. Steven J. Kelley _

m

[HOME ADDRESS DELETED , m

' UNDER 10 CFR 2,2904 - -

l .

SUBJECT:

NRC tovestigation Report 1-96-033

Dear Mr. Kelley:

This refers to the NRC investigation conducted at the Limerick Generating Station, f Limerick, Pensylvania, documenting that you falsified fire protection surveillances while in your former position as a fire protection technical assistant at Lin= rick. Based

' on the investigation, the NRC Office of Investigations (OI) reviewed the PECO Energy

, Company (PECO) internal investigation that found that you deliberately failed to do certain tests, yet falsified the related documentation; and you failed to enter a specific area necessary to complete a fire suppression water system spray and sprinkler visual inspection for which you had signed documentation indicating that the visual inspection had been successfully completed. You admitted your role in the falsification to PECO security. As a result, in part, of yeut actions, the NRC has issued a civil penalty to PECO on this date (enclosed).

The NRC has decided not to take enforcement a etion against you becace of your position within the company, your cooperation with the investigation, and your apparent forthright testimony. -While formal enforcement action is not being taken against you, you should be aware that the NRC regulations allow the issuance of civil sanctions to be taken directly against unlicensed persons who, through their deliberate misconduct, cause a licensee to be in violation of NRC requirements. Deliberate misconduct includes an intentional act or omission that the person knows constitutes a violation of a requirement, procedure or training instruction. An order may also be issued to an individual to prevent his or her engaging in licensed activities at all NRC licensed facilities. A violation of this regulation as set forth in 10 CFR 50.5,

" Deliberate Misconduct", may also lead to cruninal prosecution. Similar failures in the I future could lead to formal NRC enforcement action against you.

You are not required to respond to this letter. However, if you choose to provide a response, please provide it to me within 30 days at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region I, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406. , , , , , _ , , , _ _ ,, . 2 ,,u This letter, and your response to this letter, if you choose to submit one, are not being i placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) at this time. However, they are official agency records and are subject to public release under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) if an appropriate request is submitted. If they are released in response to a FOIA request, any information that would constitute a clearly 7

\"

\

b i

)

L "_ l

e3 .

l l...

f.

L.

unwarrarded invasion of personal privacy (e.g., your home address), is custcmarily redacted.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact Mr. James Lieberman, at (301) 415 27.41. ..

- Sincerely. -

l Hubert J. Miller Regional Administrator l 6

Enclosures:

Synopsis of OIInvestigation Notice of Violation and Proposed Ir;; position of Civil Penalty )

to PECO Energy Company i

i i

l

p..

3 -

j ro DISTRIBUTION:

PUL*J C SECY .

CA LCallan, EDO r

--BerhDEDQ -

- -- + c -

. . _ . JLieberman, OE: - - - - - - . , - . .. .

' ~

, HMiller, RI - ~ -- r ,{ 2 FDavis, OGC _

SCollins, NRR ^

R7ammerman, NRR l Enforcement Coordinators

t. RI, nn, Rin, RIv BBeecher, GPA/PA GCaputo, OI I DBangart, OSP

. HBell, OIG Dross, AEOD OE:Chroc OE:EA DCS NUDOCS

, DScrenci, PAO-RI NSheehan, PAO-RI Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)

NRC Resident Inspector - Limerick -

To receive a copy of this docutaent, indicate la the bar: *C" = Copy without a attachment / enclosure "E" = Copy with attachment / enclosure "N" - No copy OFFICE RI: ORA - RI:DRP RI:RC RI:RA-l NAME ,DHolody/mjc - WHehl BFewell HMill:r DATE- [//97 / /97 / /97 / /97 OFFICE OE ~

DEDO NAME JLieberman EJordan DATE / /97 / /97

.r - -

,, ... ____._______m.__.._ _

s INDEX OF CONCERNS Rll-1996-A-00G3 CONCERN: 1 e DESCRIPTION: TWO INDMDUALS FAILED TO PERFORM REQUIRED FIRE WATCH PATROLS AND FALSIFIED RECORDS TO INDICATE THE PATROLS WERE PERFORMED. (LICENSEE SUBMITTED LER)

RESOLUTION: 01 initiated this investigation on March 22,1996, to determine if two firewatch personnel who were formerly employed at the TVA Sequoyah Plant, failed to patrol their assigned areas and documented the firewatch joumals as though they had completed their patrol.

The evidence developed during this investigation substantiated that both firewatch personnel failed to patrol their essigned firewatch areas and falsified their firewatch journals by claiming these areas were inspected.

I a The evidence did not substantiate that their actions were intentional or willful.

R Y

)

F l i i

- ~

l ALLEGATION REPORT CASE FILE NO: RII-96-A-0063 FACILITY:SEQUOYAH ALLEGER:_NA (RI'* SELF-INITIATED)

CONCERN NO:

ADDRESS: DOCKET NO: i DATE RCVD  !

EMPLOYER: J HOME PHONE:( ) TITLE:

WORK PHONE:( ) CONFIDENTIALITY REQUESTED: Y N MANDATORY ADVISEMENT: Y N WHAT IS THE ALLEGATION? LICENSEE SUBMITTED LER 96-001 REPORTING THAT TWO INDIVIDUALS FAILED TO PERFORM A FIRE WATCH PATROL AS REOUIRED AND FALSIFIED RECORDS TO INDICATE THE ROUNDS WERE PERFORMED WHEN. IN FACT.

THEY WERE NOT.

]

WHAT IS THE REQUIREMENT / VIOLATION?

~

WHERE IS IT LOCATED 7

]

WHEN DID IT OCCUR?

i WHO IS INVOLVED / WITNESSED?

i HOW/WHY DID IT OCCUR?

WHAT EVIDENCE CAN BE EXAMINED?

DID THE INDIVIDUAL EXPRESS A CONCERN TO THE LICENSEE?

WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THE LICENSEE'S ACTIONS?

WHAT IS THIS AN ISSUF OF? FALSIFICATION l

Ask all above questions, do not leave any blanks. Complete one sheet for each issue. Forward this form to: RII/RAC, P.O. BOX 845 Atlanta, GA 30301. Do not retain any file copies subsequent to receipt by RAC.

RAC phone numbers are (404) 331-4193 & 331-4194.

• • ADVISE ALLEGERS OF THE 180 DAY DOL REPORTING REQUIREMENT FOR g  ;

DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINTS - (INITIAL) YES , NO (\

i PREPARED BY: JERRY ENNIS DATE PREPARED: k

3 C

\

b i 1

i I

gr%99CE'5Ww u.w '"~~3&w M Qr }%%

. .j . SENDER:,,te, u . complete neme rend t for ww.vnysm~.

- os.

r d, m-va.g . . ,re-w ~ r ld iso : esi.ktoe recewe e rv M* Complete, hems 3. ) b.* g ., , - pl/p M'followin n theg*e

+ePWnt your name end . orm ao thet we -

Eices'(for ' *' "r='#

• dx' tri . M I f {;m~ ttwo card to you.*W,.as on the reverse o'**'/mfMP"'W W"k$@%can f

'y,'* [* OA"DM. k"M' Add ress

• '4N4 { I t.e#

does notiipermet** Attach ttwo form to the front of the maalpiece, or on the back er oper,. ' . '.'

4,%%%FW.cPyihj.)fgiiqph

.I sN write ,%etum Receipt Requested" on the meilpiece below the artscle number, y; 1,g,ddressee s*gp g ,,, =Hgf *g,3gy$ e ';

• • • ., 2.h O.,Restricted Delivery 8;E

,4 ._ .

e j g feesThe ,ed.Retum Receipt

• • ***><**J ' -- - we~ show MH=ste.r to whom P 6%the wmarticle otowe'+ was d.=elivered and the date e . Consult postmester for.'fN. 5 Ae k , A_ddres_ sed _7 to:g. 3 m 4' 34 5 Article Numbera

• 7 .vs...re,y[ ,

GZa>23Sx556e,34D/wankj s5{]@hgprt.W. *3 Mr. George Huddleston ' i Attomey at Law s 'gjf8*q'ONMIIIiE I

&l% "

5133 Selkirk Drive (, 1 We'.itT41llT?%D co69U**Ef[#5l

. ' * " Birmingham, AL 35242 F O bMerchandise r

6 . ef , .O. .K~nie. ,'s, e.@. , Return R4ceipt" f,ork; $

IC  % fQM ,7.sDate of e ve -w. -

m rew i

l

<O MN._ _[__ _ 4/ 4 h. dTl/2 / My. pv. dD Mar =M.E S,

! J5.'Si ur wwyn.y ...y.,4,; r; 8. Addrfstde's Address (On'y if requested a g fri n ,g. . .p 4tr and f'e e is p ed) @. p.'a. *-

y ,g. Mc . ., ,* , .

'g4 C W~ ~,w N

""6.glknet y 8 .t W k[.lkll;llI !*II{l N MlN. N!!Igl{ll!'T [

enn .",- m- - - - --

i 2, fly ..

I f,3 PS For.r,r n <33'11, D. ece,mbe.r,199,1

..,+ ^.. s. :.e.u.s.opo:ssee-.

aam.e.g. DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT '

t: .. a. :_m.u J '.,, . w - i s. L :A.m . m ~ .14.L .m-= u J l l

9

\\

f. D

f

\ .

1 ~

1

)

ON

.I - .. }. {[ W g p [

p

.,J. UNITED STATES AL SERVIC f

~~ ~

..a. & 4 p ,

. y,*. sy a n ,

w. 7<

\ s

'- s' * .-

, m g ' _,_ ' oniew m

su.inesNN .:.

u m *1 % E r-m i 3 m,g jijhNdy#$idarE*

USE N r '

a, - g OF POSTAGE,s pF V'# M %1167k M Ih %

i ks.@:M27 W F # 4"fu&# g $ v;dN r # "J0tWW.YA%g@?hRg@

@ @0W p 55 N=' y gp W N

fl* 'WR. w. w M rw g ; 4%

h[@N87diOffssk. ?'%;t*:I'dd, Print _you

>> , - %a 1,d. . :6 -. N;% . ; RlURAC (GW$i.#fg;:m 4w# gpg? :j P.O. Box 845 p*st#

a f: %";

' ' b = 4.y 4 y*;

avj&;f[*~Q .k,'4,'.

Al .' f :7.?;;d;Ji-l, Atlanta, GA 30301 I

.., l. . a 3. l!!I!!Iitr

. .. , .f .c f hk!! . .

h Mt h l1Jk!LiMaii161'1HJiJJ /

. . :- u . 46~*~*~~~'

I n ,..:n%s2%.% ras.E :.'s .2 h

-.e.4 A 5s** .x^'A b Jd ' ' ' '

9 1 I

o e

, ci =

{ ), , , ~

l 4 l

l l

4

• - SENDER: I j ecommme nome i anaar a hw scenorus een com.

e acompens name 3. da, are e.

.8d" 76 1 uleo wish to receive the fosowing services (for an i

j card to you.

extra fee):

l

, l epee yew name and edeene on to emescri vue sewn to se front of thw meu smoon, or on wie back N speos does not come-

1. Omorse of aus sorm so vies we can re Addressee's Addwas i I

, awine'steman Jtenege > won the rnadensee below em article number. 2. O Restr6cted Delivery g aThe Auswn Aeongs une show to whom en erects wee esevered and the dele dutwared. Consult postmaster for foe.

g 4a. Artc6e Number i 3

I m.a.Artcle aECRGE Addressedto:

Nc)DDt E.Sfod Z- 238-504-3.9 7 e . :s A W NEY AT'tALO O Certified bl 8@ SEL.K/RK ORi M O Express Mall O Insured I

8/4 M /dd6 d 4 4 4 4. X 2d;r g D RetumReceiptforMarchandse O COD

7. Date o' Delivery

5. R

- /

(Pnnt Name)

/-14-77

8. Aodressee's Andress (Onlyitrequested I- - and fee is poid) $;~

I g 6Ggnabre:(AddresseeorAgent) j X D0mestic Retum Receipt

~ PS Form 3811, December 1994__

O

\

g.

i :' g-r A

1

(

I I .

l UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE

• .SN

~ .,

~

J ; , ,

e,iot you, o.ggr.j zie coa io isi. oox . q no. so/e Mr I t

AiT An.)M, 6A i i

3030 ( '

l

. I I s ,II, Il,,, ,,II,1I,, ,,,,IlII,,, \ ,, \ ,,1,,I, \, \,,1,,I, I,I,1, ,,Il l

[ ,

e'

I l ,

I

- *FM INTERNAL USE ONLY* My EICS ENFORCEMENT WORKSHEET EICS MEETING NOTES AND DOCUMENTATION OF UNDERSTANDING EA NUEER: N-89A _

ATTENDEfS FACILITY: .MA d4 M /A h p

SUBJECT:

// 8 dM44* M f.W

[ ] PANEL [ ] PEC [ ] CAUCUS I.@##

[r] OI BRIEF [ ] RA BRIEF 9. M

[ W OTHER b d M b ll0 Q-NWV idhad-INSPECTION END DA PREPARED BY: N//d DATE:

8 7 TIME: M 'I /'A -

I. EICS STAFF N0kkS:

$6

• bb f I [)

l

{

\ ,

NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSU THOUT TliE -

{ !

APPR0yAyL INISTRAT & T0n II E \

i

+

O ,

o 2

• FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY*

ENFORCEMENT ACTION WORKSHEET EICS HEETING NOTES AND DOCUMEN)ATION OF UNDERSTANDING II. RISK ASSESSMENT III. CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSMENT PROCESS First non-willful St III violation in 2 years /2 inspections? YES or NO A.

Previous escalated cases:

B. Identification Credit? YES or NO -

N/A NRC identified?

Licensee identified?

Revealed through an event?

Prior Opportunities?

C. Corrective action credit? YES or NO -

N/A Immediate corrective actions:

Long term corrective actions to prevent recurrence:

Reason for corrective action credit:

D. Discretion applied? 'YES or NO Reason why:

E. Civil Penalty:

F. Reconnendation for predecisional enforcement conference:

G. Lessons Learned Action Items:

^

, NOT FOR PUBLIC' DISCLOSURE WITHOUT THE REGIONAL INISTRAT ' REGION II AFPRQALOF\

j 3

• FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY*

ENFORCEMENT ACTION WORKSHEET EICS MEETING NOTES AND DOCUMENTATION OF UNDERSTANDING NOTE: Complete the following information for each violation APPARENT VIOLATION:

IV. Documentation of Enforcement Panel / Caucus Understanding A. Preliminary Severity Level (Prior to Application of any Discretion, From Part I)

B. Increase Severity Level based on Aggregation?

C. Increase Severity Level for Repeat Violations?

(Address requirements of ROI 0903)

D. Increase Severity Level for Wi11 fulness?

E. SEVERITY LEVEL SUPPLEMENT /SECTidN F. Recossended Civil Penalty ._

G. Predecisional Enforcement Conference Necessary?

H. Revision to Draft NOV Required?

I. Formal Review by OE Required?

J. Special Action Items / Message to Licensee /Connents:

l 4

7 PUBLICAISC10SURE WIT 110lR41U-APPROVAL OF GIONAL ADMINISTRATOR, REGION II

9,

.?_ (

4

• FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY*

ENFORCEMENT ACTION WORKSHEET EICS MEETING NOTES AND DOCUMENTATION OF UNDERSTANDING l

FACILITY: EA NUEER: PAGE NO:

l m

eurup NOT FOR PUBLIC DISC!.DSURE WITH0 LIT TH CAP ONAVADMINTSVIATOR, REGION II

t

~

EICS_ STAFF. NOTES FACILITY:

'/ 4AA/ % ! d h r r w g

[ ] EEF PAEEL DATE: ATTEEDEES

[ ] EEF CONF CASE NO: AJ:#4u

[] CAUCUS IR ED: u e

[] Other DUE TO OE /rfs # ' 2 EA NO: &/C LAST DATE OF INSPECTION: #w "

INSPECTOR:

STELET: TEEM:

RESPONSIBLE DIVISION:

RESPONSIBLE SECTION:

SUBJECT:

1I NOTES: B/?wb M ab I M Me A88~ AL Sd/--

au t/s , ' au ?x J w ce<A - $nfda'

$l kb r$- u 6%w~ b S$/Al >mn%- '

if l 0/?< W & W Cf rt WA " M W u. /Jn ECW d Bf. "Sm/ %en '

d'~ EP n Amu- l coauw Dwank.l -

brain g sad $2 a " o6 'd " -

l

.I 1

OE NOTIFIED: SL SUP: CP:

ElC SCREDULED: LOCATION: ,

D t

O 4

_A, t h_W 2n2 kT'7) 595 o 9

I l

O

)

I

L l

. \ ,

, \ f tx i I

t

i

\m TN/A SLC 4o H n.w Mewsch 423 7s I- 8447 e JY,

, L OD /

9,O ~/ /

V 1'

6 4

4 9

f*

i o

L

e '

~ b !' -

i TVA letter: -\

The NRC has concluded that information regarding the reason for the violation, the corrective actions taken and planned to correct the violation and prevent recurrence and the date when full compliance will be achieved has already been adequately addressed during the predecisional enforement conference and in your letter of January 4, 1996. Therefore, you are not required to respond to this letter on these issues, unless the information you have provided does not accurately reflect your corrective actions or your position. You are required '

to respond to the proposed imposition of civil penalty and should do so in accordance with the instructions in the Notice of Violation.

i l

SWEC Letter: Add to end of para .......with the most recent meeting occurring after the SOL's Decision and Order. . . . . . . . . Finally, and importantly, in your letter of January 3, 1996, you have indicated that you have undertaken to compensate Mr. Harrison in compliance with the SOL's Decision and Order.

You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions  !

specified in the enclosed Notice of Violation (Notice) when preparing your response. In your response, you should document the specific actions taken ]

~

and any additional actions you plan to prevent recurrence. Specifically, as a major contractor to Commission licensees, it is important that your supervisors and managers fully understand that employees should be free to raise concerns and that discrimination will not be tolerated. Therefore, you are required to paovide a written response addressing the actions taken or planned to assure that your managers working on contracts for Commission licensees have received adequate training in implementation of the requirements of Section 211 of the ERA and 10 CFR 50.7. In addition, your response should describe the actions taken or planaed to assure that the 1 subject employment action did not have a chilling effect in discouraging other SWEC employees from raising real or perceived safety concerns. Your response should be submitted under oath or affirmation and may reference or include previously docketed correspondence, if the correspondence adequately addresses the required response. After reviewing your m ponse to this Notice, including your proposed corrective actions m results of future inspections, the NRC will determine whether atoer NRC enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with NRC reg. itory requirements. ,

1 I

I J

(.\

EA NUMBER REQUEST FORM TO: OEMA!L OR FAX TO OE FROM: ANNE T. BOLAND REGIONAL CONTACT f I

DATE OF REQUEST 09/28/95 REGION 11 LICENSEE TENN SSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY FACILITY / LOCATION BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT: ATHENS, ALABAMA UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 LICENSE / DOCKET NO(S). 50-259, 260. AND 296/DPR-33, 52, 68 I

LAST DAY OF INSPECTION AUGUST 22,1995 (SOL / DOL DECISION DATE)

Of REPORT NO. 2 93 030 DATE OF 01 REPORT DECEMBER 15,1994

SUMMARY

OF FACTS OF CASE 1 ANNUAL REPORT FORMAT FOR EATS ENTRY)(MAXIMUM OF 300 CHARACTERS)

SECRETARY OF LABOR ISSUED DECISION AND REMAND ORDER REVERSING PREVIOUS DOL DECISIONS AND FINDING THAT STONE AND WEBSTER / BROWNS FERRY DISCRIMINATED AGAINST AN IRON WORKER.

BRIEF

SUMMARY

OF INSPECTION FINDINGS (lF NOT SUFFICIENTLY DESCRIBED ABOVE)

_ l REASON FOR POTENTIAL ESCALATED ACT40N SUPPLEMENT Vll.B.4: ACTION BY PLAfU MANAGEMENT ABOVE FIRST LINE SUPERVISION IN VIOLATION OF 10 CFR 50.7 DELEGATED CASE YES X NO MED INST PHYSICIAN NUC PHARM RADIOG IRRAD WELL LOGGERS ACADEMIC GAUGE MOISTURE DENSITY OTHER TYPE:

CITE SIMILAR CASE: EA NO. 94-106/94-135 l SHOULD OE ATTEND ENF CONF X YES NO NONDELEGATED CASE X YES NO X NONDELEG ABLE TYPE 01 REPORT, WILLFUL COMPLEX / NOVEL DISCRETION COMM APPROVAL 01 INTEREST X SL 1 OR 2 OTHER REASON:

IS THERE A m ASl3 TO CLOSE ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE? Y/N IF YES, EXPLAIN: YES CONCERNS POTEN's ?L WRONGDOtNG/ DISCRIMINATION BY INDIVIDUAL MANAGERS EA # ASSIGNEL BY OE 95-220 DATE: 09/28/95 ES ASSIGNED R.ROSANO r

i

< 2 k CASE CHRONOLOGY RII-93-A-0096 FACILITY: BROWNS FERRY OPENED BY: O. D3MIRANDA lDATE/ INITIALS ACTIVITY SECTION  ;

/'

I L'

P

( k

~TVA 3FaP

%EC-1 'y vua . EJ1de sol jakuto bd + 04A_

/ hg(@2-7,Mqq9 Ju'w Da s pg w% Sie M . a 6~ % % s @~

fc1 & Na2,m4- % p {o u w 6 Akw p~Sa & .

f j v c L u_is, is u nodad F . ~nducu, Ma us m_

y g

w w uA wcJ m ,u.w ,6 6 u pu( % Aa. q - ~1 g62 m . -

, ((t(

v s

]

0xc 03 G l

[ )e- w( &chtpk k YEC -

sw

m.

) -

5

~

• (FACSIMILETRANSMI

~

U. S. NRC - Ril ATLANTA, GA (- F M T TO: [Ay/% led' L ( es),s/- y 74f V "b' h qs / - W rp >>M CbEC'K APPROPRIATE.' BOX: .

-INPO. -

MNBB -

PHILLIPS~

9/6 " S549

- 301/492-8.135' - 301/4924.110.

WHITE: FLINT -

WOODMONT PAYROLL

_ 301/504-2280 -

301/492-7056 - 301/49Z-4371 TRAINING:CTR. -

RI _. RHI 6157855-6543 -

235/337-5324 _.708/515'-1078.

I

- RIV 1RV -

RESIDENTSITE-817/860-8230 -I5.10/975-0351 -

(See R'everse) l OTHER: 7 O~

OFFICElLOCATION typ 7 r/ - y' f'// ,

FAX NO.: M/ -f & Pfe VERIFICATION: D / ~ *'2 7 4 NO. OhPAGES k +-TRANSMITTkLSHEET FROM: /ETE((Ls4/ssA<N T

FAX #404/331-4479 c - _ .

VERINdATION 404/33.1-5Eirl:0 b

% a *W& OM4 %f $8h e

• • • .ti'= ,,_ ' * $ _* 2, ,

-sm~ >, . . . . <.g: -

MW5' ' !y{ .,

y:~ fOc[ct3 , l... ll0 lc .

a pee - - ,

I8 rp. ,

.syg. e Q& .}

$2 TC G/6 3

Sho m  ;

67 4a A /% aA 6'9' ,

q 2zy s : t 120 k% k ~ [h m - # OSE 29 5 ,' (00G q

-si?

in Clie) b N y pe W y an- - -

Y auw, -

0+cm>4. ,

p0

CHRONOLOGY DOUGLAS HARRISON DISCRIMINATION CASE DATE ACTIVITY February 1, 1993 Date Harrison brought up fire protection concern.

February 2, 1993 Date of Harrison's notification that he was being demoted.

February 3, 1993 Date Harrison told co-worker's he was demoted because he brought up fire protection concern.

February 4, 1993 Date Harrison was transferred to outside crew.

March 30, 1993 Date of Harrison's DOL complaint j May 17, 1993 D0L, Birmingham, Alabama received a complaint from Mr. Harrison.

May 27, 1993 OI opened Case No. 2-93-030 related to Mr.

Harrison's discrimination issue.

January 17, 1994 NRC closed technical issue with Harrison via letter.

June 16, 1994 The DOL District Director found that Stone &

Webster demonstrated that Mr. Harrison's reassignment was part of a normal reassignment of personnel due to work load and manpower requirements. Mr. Harrison appealed the decision.

June 22, 1994  % e TVA IG concluded its investiga' . into the Harrison case and concluded tha' ..re was insufficient evidence of wronr' sing to substantiate his allegation of discrimination.

November 8, 1994 The ALJ found that it was unlikely that the action taken was due to the protected activity and recommended that the case be dismissed.

December 15, 1994 01 closed its case into the matter and concluded that Mr. Harrison's allegations of discrimination were unsubstantiated. Note: The conclusion wa based on a review of the D0L District Director and ALJ decisions as well as the 1VA IG report.

acember 22, 1994 OE issued a memorandum to Region 11 stating that f

k c\

9 v

')

l based on the 01 conclusion, further enforcement action was not appropriate and the matter should be closed.

May 17, 1995 The 01 synopsis was transmitted to TVA indicati g that the allegations of discrimination were not substantiated and that no further action was planned.

August 22, 1995 The Secretary of Labor reversed lower D0L ,

decisions and found that Stone and Webster  !

Engineering Group discriminated against Mr.

Harrison.

October 18, 1995 Letter to TVA, Stone and Webster, and Mr. Ehele confirming the enforcement conference l arrangements for October 30, 1995.

l l

l l

I r .

f 1

- m NEWS RELEASE l

TVA Nucient Encoumges Onen Communientions TVA Nuclear officials said TVA is continuing to provide an open environment for raising safety concerns at its facilities following notification of a proposed $80,000 fine by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an incident that occurred several years ago.

" Safety is the first priority at all of TVA's nuclear power facilities," said Oliver Kingsley, president, TVA Nuclear. "All employees and contract workers have a duty to express safety and quality concems, and we will continue to ensure a working j 1

environment where they can do so without fear of reprisal."

The incident that resulted in the proposed penalty occurred at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in early 199?, when an employee working for Stone and Webster Engineering Corp. aller,ed that he was demoted for raising fire protection-related issues.

Although TVA personnel were not involved in the incident, the NRC holds TVA responsible for the actions.of its contractors.

TVA took prompt actions to respond to the matter, and this was recognized by the NRC. Actions taken by TVA included having the Inspector General investigate the matter and requesting SWEC to provide written steps it would take to ensure employees felt free to express safety issues.

-MORE c

20*d 6PPPIEIFOPT6 01 9011t:n3d 0103i 0h1 WOdd 22:ST 966T-ST-E33

o

[ .. Ee*a moi -

f . .

2-The allegations were not substantir.ted in reviews by TVA's Ofiice ofInspec:or General, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office of Investigations, or the Dei . ent ofLabor Wage and Hour Division and Administrative Law Judge decisions.

However, the Secretary of Labo: overturned the ALJ's decision and found SWEC took actions against the individual for raising safety concerns.

" Surveys conducted since 1993 by TVA and NRC show that employees and contractors at the nuclear power plants feel free to raise safety concerns," said Kingsley.

"We recognize efforts must continue in this area; however, the actions TVA has taken to date have resulted in a more open and honest environment at our facilities. We will continue to encourage employees and contractors to bring concerns to the attention of snannynf "

TVA is reviewing the notice of violation and will respond to the NRC within the required timeframe.

Contact:

Kay Whittenburg, chattannnga,(423) 751-7152 or Media Relations, Knoxville, (423) 632-6000 I

(Mailed / faxed February 15,1996) k:msdia:awsret:bfnpsn. doc l

l .

E0*d 6PttTEPet T6 ' 01 SHOlitfBd UIG34 Urti N0dd E :ST. 966T-ST-83d

p .

'g.

l k

SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT INPUT FOR INSPECTION REPORT NO.: 50-327,328/97-08 l

DATES OF INSPECTION: None.

A. Inspector.

L W. H. Miller, Jr., Reactor inspector Date Signed Approved By:

C. A Julian, Acting Chief Date Signed Specialinspection Branch Division of Reactor Safety B. 1.0 Persons Contacted:

Not Applicable.

C. IV. Plant Support F8 Miscellaneous Fire Protection issues F8.1 (Closed) 50-327,328/EA 97-092 01014, Failure to Perform Hourly Fire Watch Patrols for Degraded Fire Protection Components.

This violation was identified during an investigation by the NRC Office of Investigation and was issued to the licensee by NRC's letter dated March 14,1997. TVA responded to this violation by letter dated 'une 9,1997. This response provided additional information on the fire watch violation at Sequoyah and reque&d that the characterization of this violation be changed to a non-cited violation, since the licensee identified the violation, took immediate corrective action and reported the violation to the NRC. TVA's response also provided a description of the management oversight of the Sequoyah fire watch program, including the disciplinary action taken against the personnel who failed to perform required fire watch duties; an explanation of the

. reasons the bar code reader initially used to document the fire watch rounds was discontinued and a description of the scanner device currently being used to verify that  !

the fire watch patrols were being properly performed; and the training provided for the fire watch personnal.

Based on NRC's evaluation of the licensee's response and information obtained during an inspection performed in March 1997, that was documented by NRC Inspection Report 50-327, 328/97-03, this Severity Level IV violation has been changed to a non-cited violation and is identified as NCV 50-327,328/97-08-xx.

7. Exit Interview Not applicable.

j ^

r U

r

a .

o 2

Iygg item Number Status i Descriotion and Reference j OPENED

\

NCV 50-327,328/97-08-xx CLOSED Failure to Perform Hourly Fire Watch Patrols for Degraded Fire Protection Components. (Section F8.1) )

CLOSED VIO 50-327,328/EA 97-092 01014 CLOSED Failure to Perform Hourly Fire Watch i Patrols for Degraded Fire Protection Components. (Section F8.1) .

E. 8.0 Acronyms and Initialisms IFl inspector Follow-up item NCV Non-Cited Violation '

NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission VIO Violation F. Summary Statement PLANT SUPPORT The fire watch violation identified during an investigation by the NRC Office of I investigation was changed from a Severity LevelIV Violation to a non-cited violation.

(Section F8.1)

G. IFS Forms: ATTACHED.

H. Completed NOV; NONE.

l. Paragraph to be added to the cover letter of the llR, if required: NONE.

NOTE FOR DRS: The report file name is S:\DRS\ SIB \lNPUTS\ SEQ 97-08.WMM

y

%)

March 30, 1993 Office of the Administrator Wage and Hour Division Employment Standards Administration Room 53502 U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC. 20210 To Whom It May Concern:

My name is Douglas Harrison. I art. Employed by Stone &

Webster Engineering Corporation, who is a contractor at Browns

~

Ferry Nuclear Plant in Decatur, Alabama.

i

~ I My position there was General Foreman. On February 1, 1993, I conducted our weekly safet;y meeting. The workers who worked '

for me brought up the subject of firewatch in the drywell in Unit 3 Reactor. Their concern was that adequate coverage was not being obtained the way it was being carried out. This concern i arose from the worker's being taught one thing at the firewatch training that they received . from the employer and supervision implementing something different. The foreman over these workers I

also had brought this up once before. So that day after the i

safety meeting I decided to see what I could do about this l problem.

As a part of my general foreman duties I was to make sure L that everybody was on the same page. The first place I went was to firewatch training and spoke with David White or David Jones.

He said that Stone & Webster had not been following the firewatch procedure since work started in the U-3-Drywell. He advised me to go to fire protection which is controlled and maintained by I~ T.V.A. and talk to Mr. R.V. White.

In talking with Mr. White he said that he would look into the matter and told me to have Steve Ealey call or come by to see him.

After leaving fire protection I decided to get with the firewatch general foreman over the labors and talk .with Steve Ealey. We met with Mr. Ealey at his office and talked about the problem. Mr. Ealey was adamant about the number of hour.s that was being used by the labors for firewatch. 'After the discussion it was agreed that the firewatch would have more men per ' entry into the drywell as to have adequate protection for fire protection.

However, the next day they had the same amount of labors on firewatch. f:o I started again at fire protection and was told

/[]l

o I ,

that Mr. Ealey had never contacted thcm at all. I informed them that the problem .was still there. I don't know what happened after that.

When I left fire protection I attended a class for Discrimination against Minoritieu. After that class I was informed that I was being cut back to foreman which is about a two dollar reduction in pay. After civing it some thought I decided I would not let them penalize ~one of my foreman for me trying to make Stone & Webster adhere to the fire protection. So I told my supervisor to cut me back to just a laborer and leave my two foreman where they were. The reason for me doing all I could do to get this problem resolve was to insure that a.nyone working for me was in compliance with plant procedure. l l

There are some ir>n workers I know wr.a can't work et Brown's 1 Ferry until 1999 for not following procedure. I feel that I was singled out because I was attempting to keep my foreman and men in compliance with the plant's rules.

The next morning after I was cut back, I informed the men and they refused to work without proper fire protection. Mr.

Ealey at this time made the moves necessary to correct the problem. After this, all the men knew I had been hung out to dry. If another problem like this arises no one will say anything for fear of retaliation by Stone & Webster management.

After being cut back.I was transferred out of the drywell to a different job.

This needs to be addressed so craftsmen can work and report unsafe practices without worry for their job.

S cerel yours, f W $O W I Doug as W. Harrison

+.

xc: Douglas W. Harrison Oscar DeMiranda 1

-Sworn to and subscribed before me on this 5e day of April, 1993.

i NOTARY PUBLIC /

MY COMM15510N EXPIRES 12 03-95

ALLEGATION REVIEW PANEL DATE OF ARP: 5/27/93 ALLEGATION No. RII-93-A-0096 DATE rec?iVED: 5/25/93 PANEL NO. */]1 []2  !]3 !)4 NAME WJ ALLEGER: DOUGLAS W. HARRISON BC/SC:

SUBJECT:

FIREWATCH ACTIVITIES FACILITY,jh]F:

.[]B&W []BELLEFONTE [/]BR0VisS FERRY  !] BRUNSWICK [] CATAWBA

[]ChY"!AL RIVER []FARLEY [] GRAND GULF [] HARRIS. [] HATCH

[]MCGUIRE []NFS [] NORTH ANNA []OCONEE [] ROBINSON

.[]ST.LUCIE []SEQUOYAH [] SUMMER []SURRY

[] TURKEY POINT []V0GTLE [] WATTS BAR

[/lEIONE & VEBSTER TYPE: FUNCTIONAL AREA: SOURCE

[/] A. REACTOR [] A. OPERATION [] A. CONT EMPLOYEE

[] 8. VENDOR [] B. CCNSTRUCTION [] B. FORMER EMPL

[] C. MATERIAL NO. [] C. SAFEGUARDS [] C. ANONYMOUS

[] D, SAFEGUARDS [] D. TRANSPORTATION [/] D. LIC EMPLOYEE

[] E. OTHER [] E. EMER PREP [] E. NEWS HEDIA

[/] F. ONSITE H&S [] F. ORGANIZATION

[] G. OFFSITE E&S [] G. OTHER

[] H. OTHER NO. OF CONCERNS: 1 OI [)YES []MO DOL [/]YES [)NO REPANEL []YES []NO CONFIDENTIALITY GRANTED []YES [/)NO SCHEDULED COMPL. DATE: 08/25/93 ACTION:

ASSIGNED TO: PB1 PB2 PB3 RPB4 NMSS RPEP SGA EICS ENG OI PANEL ATTENDEES:

ORA DRP DRS DRSS O!.

[]EBNETER []MERSCH0FF []GIBSON []STOHR []VORSE

[]REYES [] JOHNSON [] []MALLETT [] TATE

[]JENKINS []VERRELLI []JULIAN [] CLINE

, [] EVANS []SINKULE []PEEBLES [] COLLINS

[]DEMIRANDA []HERDT [] [] i

[]IGNAT0NIS [] [] []

[] TROJAN 0WSKI [] []

[] SLACK [] []

i. ,

< /

(;\j\'

(

r ALLEGATION REVIEW

SUMMARY

DATE OF ATP: 5/27/93 ALLEGATION NO. RII-93-A-0096 DATE RECEIVED: 5/25/93 PANFL NO. [/)1 [12 [13 []4 BC/SC:

SUBJECT:

FIREWATCH ACTIVITIES FACILITY NAME:

[]B&W []BELLEFONTE [/] BROWNS FERRY J. [] BRUNSWICK [] CATAWBA

[] CRYSTAL RIVER []FARLEY [] GRAND GULF [] HARRIS [] HATCH

[]MCGUIRE []NFS [] NORTH ANNA []OCONEE [] ROBINSON

[]ST.LUCIE []SEQUOYAH [] SUMMER []SURRY

[] TURKEY POINT []V0GTLE [) WATTS BAR

[/] STONE & VEBSTER NO. OF CONCERNS: 1 OI []YES [/]NO DOL [/]YES []NO REPANEL []YES [/)NO CONFIDENTIALITY GRANTED []YES [/)NO SCHEDULED COMPL. DATE: 08/25/93 ACTION: DRP/RPB4 RESIDENT INSPECT i

ASSIGNED TO: JtPR4 PANEL ATTENDEES:

ORA DRP DRS DRSS OI

[]EBNETER []MERSCH0FF []GIBSON []ST0HR []VORSE

[]REYES [/] JOHNSON [] []MALLETT [/] TATE

[/]JENKINS []VERREL LI []JULIAN [] CLINE [/] ROBINSON

[] EVANS []SINKULE []PEERLES [] COLLINS

[/]DEMIRANDA []HERDT [/]ELAKE []

[]IGNAT0NIS [/]GIBBS [] []

[] TROJAN 0WSKI [/]BELISLE []

[/] SLACK [] []

f/

( V

i

.._. . IVIA51EK i AN 2 i BB

1. IIAME: MAI7.RisoW , htELAS DATE: / /

2. ALGNO: RII-93-A- CO9fo

3. LIC: "TVA ********* SEQ N0: A l **********

4. FAC: D O W Ali M / '*

5. CONTRACTOR: STd;4E her1LsR*

6. TYPECMPLT: DISCR R BLI T 0 *

7. ERANO: k -ERA M *

8. EICSNO: *

)

9. OINO: *

10. DATECMPLT: US / 30 / 43 *

11. DTRCVDOL: 05 / l 7 /f>3 *

]

12. DTRCVRII: 05 / 2T / 93 .*

13. DOLOFF: 3tRMI AMAM , AL *

14. DOLCO: M. CASEI *

15. DD-DEC: FOR COMP 0 FOR RESP K -

16. DT-DD-DEC: Ob / /b / 93 *

17. FNDAPLD: YESg NO0 *

18. APLDBY: COMP % RESP 0

19. ALJ: 2 MALAMhNI *

20. ALJRDO: *

21. DTRDO: / / *

22. SOLDEC: *

23. DTSOLDEC: / / *

24. ENFACTION: YES0 NO0 *

25. EANO: *

26. ENFCONFDT: / / *

27. N3V-DT: / / .*

28. CCL-DT: / /_,

• l

29. DTLICRESP: / /- *

30. STATUS: 00 P0 E0 C 0* I

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • l

31. REMARKS: [ ] DELETE REMARKS AND ADD A/I 1 h [N] OE/EICS ON SERh CE LIST F l 7 l

/ \.

\ \"

I'

1. NAME: MIMI SDb DATEt h @ /

2. ALGNO: RII- -A-

3. LIC: A- **********

• • • • • • • • • SEQ N0:

4. FAC: *

5. CONTRACTOR: *

6. TYPECMPLT: DISCR0 suST 0 *

7. ERAM0: -ERA- *

8. EICSNO: *

9. OINO: _

10. DATECMPLT: / / *

11. DTRCVDOL: / *

/__

12. DTRCVRII: / _j .

13. DOLOFF: *

14. DOLCO:

15. DD-DEC:

16.

FORCOMP0FORRESPf*

DT-DD-DEC:Ob /h' 93 / *

17. FNDAPLD: YES0 NO0 *

18. APLDBY: COMP 0 RESP *

19. ALJ: *

20. ALJRDO: / *

21. DTRDO: / /I / *

22. SOLDEC: I / *

23. DTSOLDEC: / / / *

24. ENFACTION: YES0 00 *

25. EANO: *

26. ENFCONFDT: / // *

27. NOV-DT: / /i / *

28. CEL-DT: j_ /// *

29. DTLICRESP: / /// *

30. STATUS: 00 P0 C 0*

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • f/0 **********************************************

31. REMARKS: / [ ] DELETE REMARKS AND ADD A/I l l [Y) [N] OE/EICS ON SERVICE LIST

_ )f u

J

~

i o

t

1. NAME: NATUll504. 30l4Alo.5 ' DATE:h

2. ALGNO: RII- -A- #

3. LIC: WA ********* SEQ N0: AN **********

4. FAC: Bi2OMAS f5:EE/ Spy

5. CONTRACTOR: NTD O E 1 M W

' \

6. TYPECMPLT: DISCR0 BLIST0 ,

7. ERANO: -ERA-f ,; 1  ;

8. EICSNO: \

9. OINO:

y f 10.

'j '

.g '

DATECMPLT: 05/ 30/ G3 e / . )

11. DTRCVDOL: $1_/ 17 / 93 "

b

12. DTRCVRII: $ % / 9 3 ,

13. D0LOFF: 3tEMiddAM .' AL. -

14. DOLCO: Mi CAS6/

15. DD-DEC: FOR COMP 0 FOR RESP 0 16.

DT-DD-DEC: / ,. _f ___

l

17. FNDAPLD: YES0 NO0

18. APLDBY: COMP 0 RESP 0

19. ALJ:

20. ALJRDO:

21. DTRDO: / /

22. SOLDEC: i

23. DTSOLDEC: / N

24. ENFACTION: YES0 NO

25. EANO:

26. ENFCONFDT: / /

27. NOV-DT: / /

28. l CEL-DT: / /

29. DTLICRESP: / /

30. STATUS: 00 P0 E0 C0

31. REMARKS:

[ ] DELETE REMARKS AND ADD A/I

[Y) [N] OE/EICS ON SERVICE LIST

r

"# m v 4 . : ::v . c, . .v , , , ...- s,. ,,,,

l FAX COVER g

- M Send To:

~

Name. D O Date: .

Company: !b Address:

Phone: YOY /" /kh Fax Number; YOY) bbl- 6 Yll Verifcation Number: __

Number of pages including cover;  !!

Subject; a" ((l86Al b 1 From: Tennep Vaney Authonty Name: b &

Organizaton: [YA Addes:

Pnone: {ON 7)/' [N 7 Fax Number N) 78/'[773 Verifcation Number:

Specialinstructions:

important! ff you do not receive aff pages, caN us back immediately W A 15538 (F RM Me) 1 L l

'D NO'J-06-1995 16:40 ,

o4- * ~ ~ - ~+

1 FAX COVER Send To:

Name- MAA t 8668k Date: // & 96 y I t AAdI p.o Company: Aen c .J - (L Address:

Phone: #o 3 % i - c> % d ~2 Fax Number: ~

O' $3l ~

9 6~7 b

/

Venfication Number.

Number of pages including cover; /[

Subje::t: O' "'d C S ffGC:7 -

s sJS C- EFN From: Tennessee ValkrfAuthority Name:

par dA#t64 _

Organation: TdA t-t C 6.)S/ J y Address:

Phore; Fax Number:

Venhcstion Number:

SpecialInstructions:

Importantl if you do not receive all pages, call us back immediately vA sss;n si -nv nr

1 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION II ATLANTA, GEORGIA I

ENFORCEMENT AND INVFSTIGATION COORDINATION STAFF l

d6Aco TO: icK SUBJECT.

OE (301+415-3431)

O WF (301+415-2260)

(030 '

O OTHER DATE: M 1

I t  :

U ,

PiO. OF PAGES + TRANSMr1TAL SHEET  ;

l FROM: LINDA J. WATSON or ANNE T. BOLA 13 OFFICE: 404+331-4192 FAX: 404+331-6471 SENT BY: TIME:

July 1,1993 FACT SHEET FOR DISCRIMINATION CASES COMPLAINANT [ COMP]: HARRISON, Douglas ERA NO.:

LICENSEE / FACILITY: TVA/ BROWNS FERRY CONTRACTOR: STONE & WEBSTER l

DESCRIPTION OF PROTECTED ACTIVITY: COMP wM 3 General Foreman and i identified concerns related to fire protection at the facility and the fact that Stone

& Wesbster were not adSering to fire protection requirements.

DESCRIPTION OF ALLEGED DISCRIMINATION: COMP was demoted from General Foreman to Foreman ostensibly because of a cut back. COMP did not want to go to a foreman position because it would have meant that one his two foreman would be demonted. COMP requested that he be cut back to laborer.

DATE OF DISCRIMINATION: 04/02/93 DATE OF COMPLAINT: 03/30/93 DATE COMPLAINT RECEIVED BY DOL: 05/17/93 LICENSEE'S EXPLANATION OF ACTION:

DISCUSSION:

ACTIONS TAKEN TO MAKE COMPLAINNiT WHOLE:

CULPABLE LICENSEE MANAGER (S) [CLM]: vuctuor uAur, rirte, Ano wurrurn etuis STILL WITH LICENScr AND IN Wuf 1 MAPA CITY If KNOWNI ACTIONS TAKEN AGAINST CLM:

SETTLED: DATE SETTLED:

SETTLEMENT CONDITIONS: j I

THIS DOCUMENT CONTA!WS PREDECISIONAL INFORMATION IT CAN WOT BE RELEASED OUTSIDE THE WRC 1 W11F'VT THE APPROVAL OF THE REGIOkAL ADMlWISTRATOR ) [

\ l

\ l l '

t

DISTRICT DIRECTOR'S DECISION: On 06/16/93, DD found "!t is felt that Stone &

Webster Engineering Corporation has demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that your reassignment was found to be part of a normal reassignment of personnel due to work load and manpower requirements and that same action would have taken place in absence of the " protected activity" you alleged occurred,"

DOL ALJ DECISION:

SECRETARY OF LABOR DECISION:

DOL ALJ REVISED DECISION tirArtsscAstri:

NRC ACTIONS TAKEN:

DISCUSSED WITH 017:

CHILLING EFFECT LETTER [CEL] SENT7:

ENFORCEMENT ACTION ISSUED SVCLUDEtA No.1:

CLOSEOUT ACTION toruta rxAnenfonctuturs:

BEMARKS:  !

THl.S DOCUMENT CONTAINS PREDECISIONAL INFORMATION IT CAN WOT BE RELEASED OUTSIDE THE NRC WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE REG 10EAL ADMINISTRATOR

=' N m m FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION II ATLANTA, GEORGIA ENFORCEMENT AND INVESTIGATION COORDINATION STAFF TO: N N 4TOU lD8 L -

SUBJECT:

954M-h

~

C OE (301+504-3431)

D WF (301+504-2260)

C OTHER b~ bb IsATE: M -I E _

NO. OF PAGES O + TRANSMITTAL SHEET FROM: BRUNO URYC, JR.

OFFICE: 404+331-4t#2Tf07 FAX: 404+331-4479 SENT BY:

TIME: l274) W , \ / \'

\

(\"