ML20132H060

Requests Technical Assistance in Reviewing Project Re Guidance Document for Review of Twrs Privatization Contractor Employee Concerns Mgt Sys, Dtd Oct 1996

ML20132H060
Person / Time
Site:	07003091
Issue date:	12/20/1996
From:	Pierson R NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:	Piccone J NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
References
NUDOCS 9612270126
Download: ML20132H060 (2)

Text

.

y-t UNITED STATES h bOh

1. E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0(X)1 8 December 20, 1996

\ . . . . . ,o MEMORANDUM T0: Josephine M. Piccone, Chief Operations Branch Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety ,

FROM: Robert C. Pierson, Chief Special Projects Branch Mb Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards s I

SUBJECT:

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE REQUEST - REVIEW 0F DOE HANFORD TANK )

WASTE REMEDIATION SYSTEM (TWRS) REVIEW GUIDANCE FOR EMPLOYEE CONCERNS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM The Special Projects Branch requests technical assistance in reviewing the following project: j Proiect: Guidance document for the Review of the TWRS Privatization Contractor Employee Concerns Management System, dated October 1996.

Casework /RITS/ TAC Nos: 70-3091020S/214A/L32008 Reauested Action: The above referenced document is to be used by the Regulatory Unit at the DOE Hanford Site to guide the review by the DOE staff of Employee Concerns Management Systems that will be described in documents submitted to the Regulatory Unit by DOE contractors who are working under a privatization program being managed by DOE Hanford. The document will be used to determine the adequacy and basis for the approval by the DOE Hanford ,

Regulatory Unit of the contractors' employee concerns programs (ECP). Since '

the goal of the NRC involvement in this project is the eventual transition to 1 a condition whereby the DOE contractors become NRC licensees, the review ,

should be conducted as if the review document was to be used by NRC staff to I evaluate the employee concerns program of an NRC licensee. The requested target date for completion is January 10, 1997. . Comments should be directly identified with the paragraph identifiers used in the document and should  !

identify the issue and identify the basis for the issue; e.g., refer back to j an NRC requirement or guidance document. A conclusion should be provided as i to whether the guidance would be adequate for conducting an NRC review and evaluation of a licensee's ECP. The format used may list comments by j paragraph identifier. A copy of the document has been previously provided to '

Bob 0'Connell.

Please provide the information requested below and return a completed copy to the Licensing Assistant (LA) or Project Manager (PM).

Name of Reviewer: 1 i

INMS's Projected Completion Date: ,

IM0B Branch Chief Signature:

h Contacts: PM: Robert E. Shewmaker, 415-6713 m t, LA: D. Amy Hoadley, 415-8129 git "

9612270126 961220 PDR ADOCK 07003091 C PDR

J. M. Piccone  ;

P The above TAC No. should be referenced in future correspondence related to this request and on the RITS Report for recording staff time expended on this

effort.

Docket 70-3091 i l

Attachment:

Guidance for Review of TWRS_Privatization Contractor Emolovee Concerns Manaaement System, October 1996 4

i l

Docket 70-3091 g:\ TAR-ECP.RU DISTRIBUTION: (Control No: 020$)

Docket 70-3091 I""NRC File ~ Center'

~

PUBLIC SPB r/f FCSS r/f OFC SPB LM , SPB h SPB SPB n NAME RShewmaked bkDAHoadley MTokahd#r RPihi!son DATE l G/19/96 [ /l# /96 E = COVER & ENCLOSURE

/2 //9 /[6 N = NO COPY 11/t /96 C = COVER OFFICIAL RECORD COPi

w .. l RUREG 96-0.

Revision t i

l i

l Guidance for Review of l TWRS Privatization Contractor

! Employee Concerns Management System ,

NT og O . ..

9

.t l

o%7Esofr ,

1 October 1996 4

l Office of Radiological, Nuclear, and Process l Safety Regulation for TWRS Privatization Contractors l

i Richland Operations Ofrice

! PO Box 550 l Richland,WA 99352 1

% ilig ea 9__ OE P _ _

l PREFACE l

ne Department of Energy's (DOE) Richland Opersuons Office as the Pohey) athd implemented through the document enntle I (RL) issead the TWRS Prnwazaaon Regisestfor Proposal (RFP) Memorandum of Agreement for rhe Execurwn of Radwlogsca for Hanford Tank Waser Rermutanon System (TWRS) Pnvatsza- Nuclear, and Process Safety Regul anon of the 1WR5 Prrvanzano noe in February 1996. Offerors were requested to subnut pro- Contractors (refened to as the MOA). The Pohey is signed is posais for the meal processtag r,f the tank waste at Hanford the Under Secretary of Energy; the Manager. RI.; the Asststar Some of des radioacave waste has been stored in large under- Secretary for Environment. Safety and Health (ASEH); and th ground storage tanks at the Hanford Sne smce 1944 Cunently. Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (ASEM.

approumssely 56 nalbon sanoes of waste contamung approu- he MOA is signed by the Manager. RL: the ASEH. and the namely 240.000 raeanc tons of processed cherrucals and 250 ASEM. De nature and charactensucs of this regulanon are alsi mega< anes of radeonuclides are being stored in 177 tanks. specified in these docurnents. The MOA details certaan interac ;

Dese causue wasses are se the form of hquads, slurnes, saltcakes, uans among RL the ASEH, and the ASEM as well as their te i and sludges. The wastes stored in the tanks are defmed as high- spective roles and responsibthties for implernentauon of thi. '

level reaa=<*ve wasee (10 OR Part 50. Appendia F) and haz. regulation.

anloos wasee (Resource Conservance and Recovery Act).

The authonty of the RU to regulate the TWRS Privatization Con j Under the pnv=nrance concept. DOE wdl purchase waste treat- tractors is derived solely fmm the terms of the TWRS Pnvanza- 1 memt services freen a contractor-owned, contractor operated tion Contracts. Its authonry to regulate the Contractors on behah I facahey under a fixed-pnce contract DOE wdl provide the waste of DOEis denved frorn the Policy. De nature and scope of this feedssock to be pr===t but maanrasa ownerslup of the waste. graalregulanon (in the sense that it is based on tenns of a con j The contractor ruust a) provide pnvase financing; b) design the tract rather than formal regulations)is delineated in the MOA the '

and facdwy; c) apply for and receive sequired pentats 1WRS Privenzauon Contracts, and the four documents (hsted :

and . d) construct the facihty and bnag it oe-bac; c) oper- below), which are incorporated into the Contracts. This soccial I ane the facility to oest the easte according to DOE specificanoos; regulauon by the RU in no way replaces any legally estabhshed j and f) deacevase the facalay. esternal regulatory authonty to regulate in accordance with their duly promulgated regulations nor reiseves the Contractors from ,

1 The TWRS Pnvanvaaa= Prograse is divided neo two phases, any obhgauons to comply with such regulat ons or to be subject to I Phase I and Phase II. Phase I e a proof-of concept /cornmercial the enforcement pracuces contamed therein. I desammeranne-acele enwt the obyecoves of wbsch are to a) dem-ossene the *d and bessaous viabihty of unsig pnvanzed The Pohey, the MOA.the TWRS Pnvanzation Contracts, and the i consrecaers so treet Hanford task wasse; b) define and maintain four documents incorporated in the Contracts define the essenual adequese levels of ' .- 1 n= dear, process, and occupa- clements of the reguisory program, which wdl be esecuted by enomal seiery; c) menseme cavtroemessal proescoon and comph- the RU and to wluch the TWRS Pnvanzmion Contractors must ,

ance; and d) mana=nany reduce hfe-cycle costs and ame re- conform. The four documents mcorporated m the Contracts (and ;

gamned to oest the tamk wasse. The Phase I effort consasts of two also incorporated an the MOA) are i parts: Part A and Part B.

Concept of the DOE Regulatory Processfor Radwlogh Part A commses of a tweary-month 6evelopnuat penod to estabhsh cal Nuclear, and Process Safety for TWRS Prsvanza. ,

appropnase and =~=ary technical, operanosmal, regulatory. non Contractors. DOF/RL 96-0005.

i===== and n=== mal elemmass. This wdl eclude idennficanon l by the TWRS Pnvenzauan Cameractors and approval by DOE of DOE Regulatory Process for Radiological. Nuclear. l appropnaar safety standards, forundanon by the Contractors a%: and Process Safety for TWRS Pnvanzauon Contrac-j approval by DOE of integrened emisty r==aag-~ pleas and tors. DOE /RL-96 0003.

psuperumon by the Contracears and evaluauon by DOE of immel safety Of the twasy-monsh pened, saatace months Top 4evel Radiological. Nuclear and Process Safety wiB he used by the Comeraceurs no develop the Part-A products Standards and Pnnciples for TWRS Pnvauzzion Con-j and four snaasks will be used by DOE to evalesac the prolucts. tractors. DOE /RL 96-0006, and Part 8 <===** of a dernaastranon period to provide tank waste Process for Estabhshing a Set of Radiological. Nu-o===r services by one or more of the TWRS Pnvat.tanon clear. and Process Safety Standards and Requirements Contractors who -fully complese Part A. Demonst auon for TWRS Pnvanzation. DOE /RL-96-60Gd wdl address a range of wastes repr===nvc of those in the 4an-ford tanks. Part B wdl be 10 to 14 years a dersoon. Wither Part in the execution of the regulatory program, the RU wdl considei i B wasecs will be prnmaat dunng a 5- so 9- penod and wiB not only the relevant approaches and practices of DOE but alst result is tresuncut of 6 to 13 percent of the ord tank wrsee. those of the Nuclear Regulsory Comrrasson (NRC). The Pohc),

states that Misse 11 wdl be a feu-acale production phase a which die re-rassmag smak wasee wd! be _ processed on a schedule that wiu "It a DOE's pohey that TWRS pnvanzed contractor

--_--__, sesmoval from all single-shelled tanks by the year actavines be regulated in a manner that assures ade-  !

2018. The obpectives of Phase 11 are to a) tmpiernent the lessons quate radiological, nuclear, and process safety by ap-learned from Phase I; and b) prowss all tank waste into forms phcanon of regulatory concepts and pnnciples consis-

==naha* for Saal disposal tent with those of the Nuclear Regulatory Commis sion."  ;

A key clesment of the TWRS Pnvatuanon Contracts a DOE  !

regulance of redsological, nuclear, and process safety through the To tius end, the RU will interact with the NRC (under the provi i establashament of a specifically chartened, dedicated Regulatory sions of a memorandum of understanding with the NRC) dunn i Unst (RU)at RL Thas regulance by the RU is authorued by the development of regulatory guidance and dunng execution of th I docuenent ===laf Policy Jbr Radaological. Nuclear. and Process regulatory program to ensure implementauon of this pohsy.

Sqfety Regademon of 1WRS Prrunnzatwo Contractors (refened to i

AE daemmaents baued by the Omce of 8 " J -5 Nuclear, ased Process Safety Ray =a.es== for TWRS Privatizatian Contracters are avaliable to the psahhe through the dot /RL Putae Reading Remus at the Washington State University, Trl-Clains (Namp= 100 Sprout Road, Roams 130 West, Richland, Wanhington.

. - . . - - - . - - - , - - - . ~ ~ _ ._- . _. _. - - .- . - ~ .~ . - - - . .

I

. Attnbute Guid.mee Employee Concerns i

Table of Contents l i

1.0 I N T R O D U C T I O N. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1

.........................................................................,,,,,,,,,,,,,,3 Whistleblower Protectica... . .

2.2 Regulatory Enforcement and Oversight..

. .1 2.3 Privatization Approach.. . ..

. .1 '

3.O . .1 P U R P O S E ................................................................................. ........... 2 .

4.0 STRUCTURE.........................................................................................2 5.0 EMPLOYEE CONCERNS PROGR AM REQUIREMENT............. ....... .l

5.1 Requirement

Employee Concerns Management System .. . ,

5.2 intent., . . . .. .. ..

.2 I

.2 5.3 Attributes .. .. .

............... . . . . . . . .2 6.0 , ,

ATTRIB UTES FOR KEY PR OG R AM ELEMENTS. . . .. . ...... . . . . . . . ..

6.1 67 Key Element 1 - Commitment to DOE Policy on Employee Concerns.. . . i Key Element 2 - Designation of Employee Concerns Manager..

.. . . .3 l 6.3 . .. .. . .4 6.4 Key Element 3 - Notification of Employees and Establishing a Hotline. ... . . .. .4  !

6.5 Key Element 4 - Operation of an Employee Concerns Management System . .

Key Element 5. Identification of Significant Issues. . .. ....5 ,

7.0

. . . . . .6

)

G EN 7.1 E R A L S U B M ITTA L EX PE CTA TIO N S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Existing ECP.. . . . . . . .

7.2 Other Approaches..

. . . . . ..7

.. ... .. .7- {

i i

l 1

l 1

l i

l i

i I

i Rl/ REG-96-03 Ret 0.10-29 96 i

I

( , Attnbute Gunt.mcc EmNoyee Concerns

1.0 INTRODUCTION

tributes section of this guidance document. This ,

document will help DOE reviewers to determine the ne Department of Energy (DOE) promotes a culture adequacy and responsiseness of a Contractor's ECP.

of operation in which expression and timely resolu-tion of employee Environment, Safety, & Health The Office of Radiological, Nuclear, and Process (ES&H) concerns occurs. Situations in which safety Safety Regulation for TWRS Privatization Contrac-and health issues go unaddressed with the possible tors, referred to herein as the Regulatory Unit (RU), a result of avoidable risks to workers, the public and does not investigate Whistleblower complaints for the environment must be avoided. His expectation is purposes of employee protection under the law. l reflected in the document Top-Level Radiological. Complaints of prohibited Contractor activity will be Nuclear, and Process Safety Standards and Principles referred to the DOL. Hosever, the RU will act to for 7WRS Pnvati:ation Contractors, DOE /RL ensure that potentially unsafe conditions are promptly 0006 for the Tank Waste Remediation System investigated and remediated, if necessary, to restore (TWRS) Privatization Program. 'The principal objec- adequate protection of workers, the public, and the  :

tive of the Employee Concerns Program (ECP), re- environment. -

quired by the TWRS Privatization Contract, is to promote prompt identification and resolution of em- 2.2 Regulatory Enforcement and Over-ployee concerns without the need for sanctions to the sight Contractor or the employee. He alternative to an effective concerns management program can be legal In addition, the DOE (10 CFR 820) and the NRC (10 proceedings or regulatory action. CFR 2 and 19) each provide for additional sanctions '

under their enforcement of nuclear safety rules and

2.0 BACKGROUND

regulations if such employee discrimination is deter-mined to result in a substantive diminishment of j 2.I Whistleblower Protection compliance , with nuclear safety requirements. NRC j enforcemen' policy provides that the seventy level i Federal Law prohibits discrimination against those assigned a violation for reprisal may be graded upward employees who raise safety concerns.. Prohibited as the level of management involvement in the pro-action by its contractors is acted upon by the DOE in hibited activity rises.. This indicates the importance several ways. This includes !cgal protection of em- the NRC places upon maintaining an open environ-ployee rights, including directed restoration of em- ment for the expression of concerns within its licen-ployee privileges and benefits if denied by prohibited sees' organizations. De DOE is committed to a Contractor activity. For most regulated activities, the regulatory process consistent with NRC's principles Department of Labor (DOL) is the agency which in- and concepts.

vestigates these situations. Previous action under these laws represents a body of legal and administra- As a matter of practice, both NRC and DOE encour-tive experience that establishes an accepted practice age selfidentification and resolution of safety con-of protected activities. cerns between employee and employer. Ev:d.ra of openness in the treatment of concerns about regulated In the Energy Policy Act of 1992, a new section on activities is generally accepted as consistent with high worker protection -- 211 to the Energy Reorganiza- levels of integrated safety management. In turn, this tion Act of 1974 - provides additional clarity on the openness can result in reduced reliance upon enforce-description of covered employees and protected activi- ment action by the regulators to ensure adequate pro-ties. DOE contractors, provided nuclear hazards in- vision of safe facility operation. DOE policy regard-demnification under Part 170d of the Atomic Energy ing its commitment to effective treatment of em-Act, are explicitly included. The TWRS Privatization ployee concerns is found in DOE Order 5480.29. De Contracts include such indemnification. DOE's approach to management of ES&H concerns

! encourages reporting and p6cvides protection for em-

! Remedy for reprisal against protected employee ac- playees who may fear repcisal for their actions or tions occurring in Contractor-owned facilities is who have been unable to ob'ain satisfactory resolu-i available under 29 CFR 24, administered by the tion of their concern directly fom their employer.

DOL. The potential exists for Privatization Contrac-tot actions to fall under 10 CFR 708, a similar regu- 2.3 Privatization Approach )

lation administered by the DOE if Govemment-owned nuclear facilities or equipment are involved. He ex- The DOE Manager, Richland Operations Office l pectation of DOE is that employees will usually (RL).has expressed by means of the Environment, I seek redress by means of the DOL rules. Communi- Safety and H,:alth Standard of the TWRS Pnvatiza-cation of DOE's expectations is addressed in the at- tion Contracts, a formal requirement that Contractors i

R11 REG 96-03 Ret O.10-29 96 Page 1 of 7

. ~ - - ~ - - - _ - - - . ~ _ . - - . . - - ~ . - _

Attnbute Guidance Employee Concerns 8

t develop their own ECP. DOE Order 5480.29 is refer- forms the basis for the RU perspective. In Section 6.

enced for development of this deliverable. De guid- the key elements of an acceptable ECP are desenbed.

ance document herein provides DOE reviewers with Specific sources are identified to assist in understand-the key elements and expectations of an effective arti ing the reason for including that element. Attributes that further describe successful components of the key acceptable ECP.

' elements are also described in this section. Section 7 In the discharge of its responsibilities under DOE highlights general information that may further fa-Order 5480.29 RL has instituted an Employee Con- cilitate review of the Contractor's ECP.

cerns Management System that applies to its entire area of responsibility. De RU Employee Concerns 5.0 EMPl.OYEE CONCERNS PRO.

Manager (ECM), designated for this program, will GR43f REQUIREMENT coordmate and oversee the activities of all Contractor-maintained ECPs. Routine reporting, identified 1.y 5.1 Requirement: Employee Concerns the Order, will be through this individual. This Management System document establishes minimum expectations for the exchange of information between the Contractor's The following singular requirement exists: the Con-ECP Manager and the RU ECM. It is expected that tractor shall prepare and submit to the DOE RU for Contractor employees will be appraised of the oppor- eview and approval a description of an Employee tunity they have to raise concerns with the RU ECM Concems Management System (Table S4-1 Radio-as desenbed in the attributes identified herein. logical Nuclear, and Process Safety Deliverables for i Part A and Part B).

For the TWRS Privatization Contractor, the RU is the focal point for implementation of the ECP proc- 5.2 Intent ess. It is the expectation of the Director of the RU.

the Regulatory Official (RO), that once the proFram De required deliverable communicates the importance is approved, it will be maintained under the RU DOE places upon the Contractor'= establishing of an docket for the Contract. Implementation of the ECP atmosphere of performaace which encourages identifi-will receive routine oversight by the RU ECM. De cation and disposition of employee concerns within RU will disposition concerns related to nuclear, radio- its own management structures to the maximum ex-logical, and process safety and health. Environmental tent practicable. This expectation applies to the concerns will normally be communicated by RU to standards identification activities and continues the lead regulator for environmental protection. through each subsequent regulatory action covered by the Contract.

3.0 PURPOSE 5.3 Attributes his documer.t sets forth the general basis that the Submittal of a Contractor-developed plan that de- ]

RU will ust *o review the Contractor's ECP. It will 4 scribes an ECP acceptable to the RO completes this be used by the RU to determine the mequacy and ba-sis for approval by the RO of the Contractor's ECP. requirement. Attributes of an acceptable submittal are expected to reflect those common to previously ac- ,

STRUCTURE cepted programs as described in the next section of l

.l . 0 this guidance document. No individual attribute is This Fuidance document desenbes the requirements, mandatory, but a submittal containing most of the key program elements, and attributes of an acceptable key elements expressed in Section 6 should provide the reviewer with a persuasive basis for concluding TWRS Privatization Contractor ECP that is consis- that the Contractor is on record as encouraging the j tent with the foregoing principles. RU reviewers of the Contractor's proposed ECP will confirm that the report of ES&H concerns and has provided for the timely, documented disposition of such concerns.  ;

anticipated elements are present in the program. De '

information described herein suggests the acceptable 6.0 ATTRIBUTES FOR KEY PRO.

characteristics and typical means to be employed to j satisfy DOE expectations. Other means and methods GRAM El.EMENTS may be suggested and will be evaluated by the RU.

The following key program elements have been iden-Approvd of the Contractor's ECP by the RO will reflect confirmation that requirements are sausfied- tified based upon the characteristics found in accept-able, existing DOE Employee Concerns Management Section 5 of this document presents requirements policy and practice.

invoked by the TWRS Privatization Contract, which Ret 0. 10-29 96 R11 REG.96-03 Page 2 of 7

~ - -

l i -

, Attnbute Guidance Employee Concerns 6.1 Key Element 1 . Commitment to ity and from a posinon that mdicates hne manage.

DOE Policy on Employee Concerns ment acceptance for the safe operation of the facihty.

The term " employee rencem" should be defmed (e.g., l 1

6.1.1 Descriotion RLID $480 29. 5 a l 1

ne Department, by means of regulations and orders. Submittal exoectano De Contractor's ECP sub- i has established a fundamental policy that encourages mittal should make clear to any reader that formal '

prompt reporting of ES&H concerns as well as the commitments hase been made by Contractor man- l prompt resolution of defective conditions identified by agement to adopt or exceed the provisions of DOE those reports. Resolution of concerns at the lowest policy for the management of safety concerns. ,

management level practicable is encouraged. Applica- i ble regulations expressly prohibit reprisals against 6.1.4.2 Attribute 2 - Prohibit reprisals 1 employees who legitimately exercise their right to l report concerns. An acceptable ECP should commit Descriotion It is the policy of DOE that employees  ;

to adoption of the DOE policy as its basis. of contractors to DOE should be able to provide in- I formation without fear of reprisal. Reprisal is said to 6.1.2 Source occur when prohibited acts (29 CFR 24.2) are taken against a protected individual. An act of reprisal can

1) DOE Order 5480.29 Employee Concerns Man- be taken without the knowledge of contractor execu-1 agement System, Section 5. Policy tive management and still result in liability to the  ;

" organization. (Note: when nuclear safety requirements j

2) Top level Radiological, Nuclear, and Process are involved,10 CFR 820 may be invoked). A goal I Safety Standards and Principlesfor TWRS Priva-of an effcctive ECP should be to preclude the templa- i ti:ation Contractors, DOE /RL 96-0006, Pnnci-tion to resort to repnsal as a means of dealing with i ple 4.1.4, Safety / Quality Culture employee concerns. I

3) Richland Implementing Directive (RL1D),

5480.29 RL Employee Concems Program, Submittal exoectation - The Contractor's ECP sub-(December 12,1994), Section 5.2 mittal should state, for the benefit of management and j employees, that reprisal undertaken at any level of I management authonty is unacceptable practice. , De 6.1.3 Justification conditions that constitute repnsal should be made known to employees and managers throughout the This element promotes regulatory stability and reli- organization.

ability by demonstrating a shared DOE and Contractor commitment to a Safety / Quality Culture, , by means 6.1.4.3 Attribute 3 Responsiveness of attention to the timely identification of potential i safety concerns. DOE policy arx' practice are well- Descriotion - Employee concern reports sno !d he established and are considered to provide an effective managed in a manner that assures prompt identifica-overall means of TWRS Pnvatization Contract im' tion, prioritization, evaluation, corrective and protec-plementation. Note: he RU ECP Manager per' tive response to safety deficiencies, and resolution of forms the duties of the RL ECP Manager for DVRS concems ratsed by Contractor or subcontractor em-Privatization Contracts.

p goye,3, 6.1.4 Attributes Submittal exoectation - De Contractor's ECP sub-mittal should provide mechanisms for responsive 6.1.4.1 Attribute 1 - Communicate corporate com- treatment of concerns consistent with the DOE pro-mitment to management of employee ES&H gram standards found in DOE Order 5480.29, Section concerns as an element ofits safety program. 9, Descriotion - To be consistent with the DOE- 6.1.4.4 Attribute 4 - Communicate DOE support for stipulated top-level safety principles, strong declara- employee use of the Contractor ECP.

tion of corporate intentions regarding the potentially sensitive matter of employee concems is needed Descriotion - Consistent with the DOE-stipulated Such a declaration can ensure that the opportunity to top-level safety principles, an atmosphere of open communicate safety concerns is taken senously by communication should exist within the Contractor's management and is accepted and used by employees organization that encourages the expression of ES&H at every level in the organization. This declarauon concerns and promotes their resolution at the lowest should be made at a sufficiently high lesel of author- level practicable. However, conditions can anse RUREG-96-03 Ret O.10 29 96 Page 3 of 7

- - - _ - - . - . . - . ---- -- - - . - . - - - _ _ - . .. . _ . . ~- _

j -

Attnbute Guidance Employee Concerns i

! where employees believe that recourse to their em- Descriorion - The treatment of employee concerns ployer is not effective. Employees should be advised requires awareness of a number of special considera- [

that they are not obligated to express their concern tions that need to be kept in mind dur.ng disposition  ;

prior to notification of the RU or other authorized of the concern. The individuals responsible for man-Government agency that could receive employee con- aging the ECP should be formally designated by i

. cerns, management and possess a thorough knowledge of f their duties. Designees should be made known to the Submittal exrectation - The Contractor's ECP sub-RU ECM mittal should encourage employees to bnng concems to the attention of Contractor management by the Submittal einectation - The Contractor's ECP sub- ,

most effective means available. Policy should also mittal should provide for the formal designation of its indicate that use by an employee of the RU or other Employee Concerns Program Manager (s). The pro-appropriate agency employee concerns program is gram should provide for periodic submission to the permitted. An acceptable structure of the resolution RU ECM of a complete list of its Program Manag-process is found in RLID 5480.29 Attachment 1. b. ers, including their names, titles, and telephone num-(5). bers. This notification supports cooidination of re-6.2 Key Element 2 - Designation of Em-ployee Concerns Manager 6.3 Key Element 3 - Notification of Employees and Establishing a Ilot-6.2.1 Descrmtion line i

The designation of an individual with appropriate 6.3.1 Descriotion management authority is needed to ensure that the

ECP incorporates attributes of objectivity, confidenti- The effectiveness of any ECP depends upon the

ality, and privacy in established mechanisms for the awareness of employees that their concerns are wel-implementation and maintenance of the program. An come and upon the provision of a simple and confi-acceptable program should incorporate provisions for denual means of reporting concerns. Notification designating an ECP Manager. ensures Contractor employees are aware that recourse to the RU ECP is available and communicates the 6.2.2 Seurte option of seeking remedy if they believe discrimina-

i. tion has occurred as a result of engaging in protected

1) DOE Order 5480.29. Employee Concerns Man- activity. The use of a telephone hotline permits noti-agement Systern, Section 9.b fication of concerns upon short notice and during any shift of work. This element incorporates standard

. 2) RLID 5480.29. RL Employee Concerns Pro- features of established DOE ECPs.

I gram, (December 12, 1994), Section 6.2 & At-tachment 1 6.3.2 Source

! 6.2.3 Justification 1) DOE Order 5480.29. Employee Concerns anagemem stem Sechon %

This element ensures compatibility between the pnn-cipal RU mechanism responsible for program imple- 2) RLID 548029. RL Employee Concerns Pro-mentation and maintenance and thattstablished in the gram, (December 12, 1994), Section 6.2 & At-Contractor's ECP. An acceptable program should tachment 1 provide for reasonable alignment of Contractor arul RU functions, so that the status of outstanding con-6.3.3 Justification cerns is made available to the RO.

RL has well established mechanisms for the commu-6.2.4 Attnbutes nication of rights and responsibilities to those wish-ing to make use of employee concerns programs. An 6.2.4.1 Attribute 1 - Formally designate one or more acceptable p sgram should reflect mechanisms similar individuals to be responsible for management i-to those presently in use. A Contractor's existing of the implementation and m.untenance of the program.previously accepted by DOE, would be evi-ECP. dence of meeting this element.

4 Page 4 of 7 Ret 0,10-29 96 RUREG 96-03

Attnbute Guidance Employee Concems ,

j .

-[

• 6.3.4 Attributes 6.4.2 Source l

l 6.3.4.1 Attribute 1 Provide effective communication 1) DOE Order 5480.29 Employee Concerns Man- ,

methods for assuring that employees are agement System Sections 9.a. & b. '

l aware of the ECP and how to use it.

2) RLID 5480.29. RL Employee Concerns Pro-gram, (Decembes 12, 1994), Section 6.2 & At-  ;

Desciiotion . The Contractor should take action to tachment 1. i ensure that the provisions of its ECP are commum.- >

cated io all employees. Program guidance should pro- i vide for an information poster with instructions for 6.4 3 Justification

! its pror.iinent display in the work place. De poster l should address the employees' right to recourse di- RL has well-established administrative controls con-rectly to the DOL from prohibited acts under 29 CFR sistent with DOE policy, appropriate to an employee l

24. In some instances, recourse is to DOE under 10 concerns program. An acceptable program should CFR 708. He RU ECM can assist employees who reDect mechanisms similar to those presently in use.

believe a formal complaint is warranted. A Contractor's existing, previously accepted program would be evidence of meeting this elemer.t.

Submittal expectation . He Contractor's ECP sub-

.mittal should describe an information poster which 6.4.4 Attnbute will be used to inform employees of the Contractor's .

policy on concems mtnagement and of the options 6.4.4.1 Attribute 1 - Establish prompt contact with l for initiating a concern. Information regarding report- the employee to conGrm understanding of the l ing of prohibited acts should be included. concern.

6.3.4.2 Attribute 2 - Establish a 24-hour telephone Descriotion - Concerns may be registered in either-l capability for easy access and timely report- written or verbal form. Experience suggests that l- ing. prompt follow-up with the employee making the l

report can ensure that resolution efforts are properly Description - Establishing a hotline for the receipt of focused and directed. DOE encourages the resolution initial notifications of concerns is a standard feature of of concerns by established Contractor corrective x-DOE ECPs. (DOE Order 5480.29. Section 9.a.(6), tion systems. Records of concern should identify if

9.b.(9)(a)) It is acceptable to use a recording device use of normal systems for de6ciency reporting have j for the initial report if it is secured in a controlled area been attempted or if reasons exist for dissatisfaction such as a locked of5cc or a locked cabinet in a limited with reporting by those means.

access area.

Submittal exnectation - ne Contractor's ECP sub-

~

Submittal exoectation - The Contractor's ECP sub- mittal should provide for employce acknowledgment mittal should describe the provisions for establishing regarding intent of the concern, ~iority determind a secure (i.e., conndential) hotline consistent with the tion, and an established schedule for resolution- of referenced standard. within 5 working days of the receipt of the concern.

(DOE Order 5480.29,9.f (1))

6.4 Key Element 4.- Operation of an l Employee Concerns Management 6.4.4.2 Attribute 2 - Establish and maintain a report ;

tracking system.

f System 6.4.1 Dascriotion Descriotion A formal system is needed to ensure j that traceable records exist of actions taken to resolve An acceptable ECP should include procedures de- the concern.

l l; signed to provide prompt identincation, prioritization.

evaluation,and corrective and protective response ard Submittal exoectatiorr - The Contractor's ECP sub-I resolutien of employee concerns. Provisions for pro- mittal should desenbe the information to be main-tection of privacy and conndentiahty are needed. This tained by its Employee Concerns Manager that pro-clement incorporates standard features of established vides unique traceability of the disposition of each DOE ECPs. concert, received. The prionty assigned, the indmd.

ual assigned to investigate, and evidence of completed !

' actions within the required time frames should be 4

.ome of the information included. Other information which may support the generation of periodic reports i

Rev. O,10-29-96 Page 5 of 7 R11 REG-96-03

- MW* - , _ __ - _. _ ,_ _ . ~ _ _ . .

Attnbute Gmdance Employee Concerns

, or analysis of trends may, but need not, be included in programs as described in RLID $480.29. Alignment the tracking system. (RLID 5480.29, Attachment of Contractor ECP response cycles to those used by 1.b.(7)) the RU is desirable. Provisions for acceptable devia-tions, if formalized, are acceptable.

6.4.4.3 Attribute 3 - Establish standards for adequate investigation of concerns. Submittal expectation - The Contractor's ECP sub-mittal should describe the expected timeline for proc-Descnotion - The thorough investigation of concerns essing of concerns. All evaluations should normally is essential to meeting the objectives of 'he ECP. be completed within 30 working days. Exceptions to The entena established for the conduct of concem the 30-day evaluation for any concern should be for-resolution can be indicauve of management's com- mally documented with intended completion dates mitment to the program, identified and reviewed by a designated senior manager to indicate concurrence with this exception.

Submittal exoectation - The Contractor's ECP sub-mittal should describe the enteria that assigned inves- 6.4.4.6 Attribute 6 - Develop and submit periodic rigators use in the evaluation of the concern. Evaluat- reports of the status of concerns to manage-ing and determining the significance of emplojee ment.

concerns requires professional judgment and should generally be perfonned by a senior line manager or Description - The significance of employee concerns ES&H staff member. Acceptable criteria to be con- to the effectiveness of the Contractor's safety man-sidered as standards are found in DOE Order 5480.29, agement plan warrants the periodic notification to Chapter 1,6.a. senior management of the status of outstanding con-cerns.

6.4.4.4 Attribute 4 - Establish provisions for main-taining privacy and confidentiality of infor- Submittal expectation The Contractor's ECP sub-mation and sources. mittal should address periodic reporting of the status of concems to its senior management. An informa-Descriotion - It is customary, as part of encouragmg tion copy of each periodic status report should be employees to be forthcoming about safety concerns, provided to the RU ECM. Typical report contents are to offer the opportunity for confidential treatment of described in RLID 5480.29, Act.1, b(7).

their concern and identity. Mechanisms should be established so that, if confidentiality is requested. 6.5 Key Element 5 Identification of information used to permit concern resolution will Significant Issues not result in disclosure of privileged information or i the identity of the person providing the information. 6.5.1 Descriotion Submittal expectation - The Contractor's ECP sub- The primary objective of the ECP is to assure em-mittal should desenbe provisions for the confidential ployees that their concems about safety will be n-treatment of employee information and identity. Re- spected and addressed. The significance of a reported cords of employee decisions (i.e., choices) concerning concern should be promptly established. Issues may their identification during the resolution process exist which are indicative of potentially substantial should be prepared. Appropnate training for those breakdowns in the functioning of a Contractor's in-responsible for ECP management regarding such pro- tegrated safety management system. These break-visions should be provided. Maintenance of a secure downs could be in the form of imminent hazards not storage system that contains all materials de$ eloped recognized by the reporting employee as evidence of for the evaluation of the employee concern from iden- non-compliance with regulatory requirements. This tification through resolution to closure should be element reflects standard features of established DOE provided. (DOE Order 5480.29,9.a. (4) & (8)) ECPs.

6.4.4.5 Attribute 5 - Establish standard response 6.5.2 Source times for disposition of meerns

1) DOE Order 5480.29. Employce Concerns Man-Descnotion Prompt acknowledgrrm pnontizauon- agement System, Section 9.d & Chapter 1.

investigation and disposition 01ihe concern are in the best interest of the employee, the Coctractor, and the 2) RLID 5480.29, RL Employee Concerns Pro-DOE. A routine time cycle for completion of stan- gram, (December 12,1994),, Section 5.2 dani actions leading to closure k enntamed in DOE Page 6 of 7 Res. O.10 29 96 RUREG-96-03

1 Attnbute GutJance Engloyee concerns l a i

• t 6.5.3 .fustification 1988 (PAA) should be in accordance with the regula-tions implementing the PAA.

Concerns presented by employees may not reflect a full understanding of the safety significance of the 6.5.4.3 Attribute 3 - Monitor program results for i situation surrounding an issue. Responsible manag- trends of performance against program goals.

ers are expected to remain cognizant of the overall

! status of conformance with agreed-upon commitments Desenntion - Oserall experience with use of the ECP and accepted standards. Criteria are needed to ensure can provide insight Una the Contractor's effectiseness j that information that may impact that status is prop- in meeting the goals of its integrated safety manage- i erly evaluated if raised within the ECP. An accept- rnent program. Penodic evaluation of the program's l able program should reflect, as a minimum, the record is appropnate when it has been significantly  ;

screening custemarily used in established DOE pro- used i grams.

Submittal exnectation - The Contractor's ECP sub- {

6.5.4 Attributes mittal should establish provisions for a quarterh re- I port of all employee concerns initiated, closed, or 6.5.4.1 Attribute 1 - Establish criteria for evaluation remaining unresolved during the past quarter. This of the significance and prionty of the concern report should be submitted to the Contractor's senior  ;

resolution. management with an information copy to the RU ECM. An acceptable format would be consistent l Description - One objective of the ECP is to ensure with the criteria established in RLID 5480.29, At-that legitimate safety concerns that have not been tachment 1.b.(7).

identified by any other means are captured for appro-priate action. In addition, the employee making a 7.0 GENERAL SUBMITTAL EXPEC-report may not fully appreciate the significance of the TATIONS l conditions that prompted his concern.

7.1 Existing ECP Submittal exnectation - The Contractor's ECP sub-mittal should establish criteria for evaluating the sig- The Contractor may submit for conmderation an ex-nificance of reported concerns. Criteria should iden. isting ECP that has been previously approved by lify the priority of response and the conditions under DOE. The review of the submittal will be conducted which the concern will be examined by other parties. against the guidance in this document to determme Acceptable enteria for evaluating sigmficance are adequacy.

found in DOE Order 5480.29,9.d.

7.2 Other Approaches 6.5.4.2 Attribute 2 - Establish enteria for referral of concerns to affected DOE groups or other The Contractor is encouraged to adopt the guidance agencies. provided in this document. However, other ap.

i proaches to definition and management of an ECP Description - This attribute provides for a prompt may be ac'ceptable. This guidance for reviewers has evaluation of the potential urgency of action and en. been provided in order that external stakeholders may sures the appropriate involvement of other responsi. understand the basis from which a determination of ble parties. adequacy was established. A Contractor's substan- l tially alternative approach should provide appropriate Submittal exnectation - The Contractor's ECP sub. definition ofits basis for adequacy. Lack of clanty in mittal should establish categories of concerns that this regard may be grounds for a finding that the warrant notification to other responsible parties. submittal is inadequate.

Other parties should include responsible regulatory agencies if conditions exist that are reportable by regulation or agreement to those agencies. It should be made clear that such reporting is the responsibility of the Contractor and not the employee. Representa-tive categories for involvement of other responsible parties are given in DOE Order $480.29, 8 f. (8).

'Ihese categories are suggestions only and may be tailored by the Contractor. However, disposition of potential violation of rules subject to the enforcement authority of the Price-Anderson Amendments Act of RUREG-96-03 Rev. O.10-29 96 Page 7 of 7