ML20205M727

Discusses OI Repts 1-96-002,1-96-007 & 1-97-007 Conducted at Nneco,Millstone Station.Commission Concluded That Discrimination Occurred Based on Results of Investigations in Case Number 1-96-002 & 1-97-007

ML20205M727
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	04/06/1999
From:	Miller H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:	Kenyon B NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO.
Shared Package
ML20205M713	List: ML20205M710 ML20205M720 ML20205M727 ML20205M735 ML20205M744
References
EA-98-325, NUDOCS 9904160026
Download: ML20205M727 (5)

Text

p

. , f ung ENCLOSlJRE 8 kg UNITED STATES

[ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

, L j REGloN I o, -

475 ALLENDALE ROAD

% ,o KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406-1415 l April 6,1999 l

EA 98-325 Mr. Bruce Kenyon  ;

NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY f

Post Office Box 128 Waterford, Connecticut 06385

SUBJECT:

NOTICE OF VIOLATION (Office of Investigations Reports 1-96-002,1-96-007, and 1-97-007)

Dear Mr. Kenyon This refers to the subject investigations conducted by the NRC Office of Investigations (01) at Northeast Nuclear Energy Company's (Northeast or Licensee) Millstone Station and to the Report of Review conducted by the Millstone independent Review Team which was recently appointed and directed by the Commission to independently review and make recommendations on these 01 cases. The referenced Ol investigations were initiated in 1996 and 1997 to investigate allegatior that various employees and supervisors at Millstone Station had been subject to retaliatior . engaging in protected activities. Following the issuance of the 01 reports and an "Evt. inquiry" by the NRC Office of Inspector General, the Commission appointed a Millstc Independent Review Team (Independent Review Team) to conduct an independent review of, and make recommendations on, the 01 investigations. The independent Review Team completed its assessment work and provided its report and recommendations to the Commission on March 12,1999.

The Commission has concluded that discrimination occurred based on the results of the i investigations in 01 Case No.1-96-002 involving two supervisors demoted as a result of a 1993 reorganization and in 01 Case No.1-97-007 im olving a supervisor who was terminated in 1995.

A Notice of Violation (Notice) for the violations associated with these investigations is provided in ,

Enclosure 1. The specific violations contained in this Notice are discussed below. As to 01  !

Case No.1-96-007 involving three employees terminated as a result of a 1996 workforce reduction program, the NRC has determined that insufficient evidence was found to conclude that discrimination occurred.

l 01 Case No.1-96-002 With regard to 01 Case No.1-96-002, the Independent Review Team found that protected activities were contributing factors in the demotion and removal from supervisory activities of a Supervisor in the Performance Engineering group and a Supervisor in the Engineering _

Mechanics group in a reorganization of Millstone's nuclear engineering functions in November l 1993. A summary of the NRC's conclusions in Ol Case No.1-96-002 is provided in '

Enclosure 2.

l

1. Suoervisor in the Performance Enaineerina aroup - The Supervisor in the Performance l

l- 9904160026 PDR 990406 ADOCK 05000245 i .C PDR

i 2

Engineering group engaged in protected activities with regard to CU-29 check valve operability issues and his active support of another Millstone employee who had raised safety concems about spent fuel off-loading practices at Millstone. The investigatory record produced in 01 Case No.1-96-002 and the Independent Review Team's detailed review led the Commission to the conclusion that the Performance Engineering group Supervisor's protected activities were a contributing factor in his demotion and that the demotion was, thus, discrimination which is )

prohibited by 10 CFR 50.7. This violation is item A. In the enclosed Notice.

2. Suoervisor in the Enaineerina Mechanics aroup - The Supervisor in the Engineering Mechanics group engaged in protected activities with regard to the safety-related motor-operated valve program, turbine-building secondary closed cooling water (TBSCCW) heat exchanger issues, and reactor coolant pump maintenance problems at Millstone. The investigatory record produced in 01 Case No.1-96-002 and the Independent Review Team's

- detailed review led the Commission to the conclusion that the Engineering Mechanics group Supervisor's protected activities were a contributing factor in removing from his responsibility the motor operated valve program and the TBSCCW heat exchanger issue, and in his demotion and

' thus the removal of responsibilities and the demotion were discrimination which is prohibited by 10 CFR 50.7. This violation is described as item B. in the enclosed Notice.

s ,- I

. Ol Case No. 1-97-007

' With regsrd to 01 Case No.1-97-007, the independent _ Review Team found that protected j

' activity was a contributing factor in the dismissal of a Supervisor, Electrical Engineering, in the l

.. Engineering Services Departmant at Millstone Unit 2 in August 1995. A summary of the NRC's i conclusions in 01 Case No. 1-97-007 is provide'd in Enclosure 3.'

The Supervisor, Electrical Engineering, in the Engineering Services Department engaged in protected activities when he reported to higher-level management E.T.';a Millstone Nuclear

, Safety Concems Program that his immediate superior- the M,snager of Nuclear Design Engineering - had threatened him and another employee with dismissal if work on an Engineered Safeguards Actuation System modification to which his electrical engineering group i had been assigned was not completed before the scheduled conclusion of a Millstone Unit 2 refueling outage. The investigatory record produced in 01 Case No.1-97-007 and the

' independent Review Team's detailed review leaa the Commission to the conclusion that the Electrical Engineering Supervisor's protected activity was a contributing factor in his dismissal and that the dismissal was, thus, discrimination which is prohibited by 10 CFR 50.7. This violation is item C. in the enclosed Notice.

The three violations described in the enclosed Notice involved cctions by plant management.

Violation A. involves actions by a former Millstone Vi::e President for Nuclear Engineering 8

Northeast was previously informed in a letter from W.D. Lanning, NRC, to Mr. M.L.

Bowling, dated August 26,1998, that NRC staff had concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to conclude that discrimination had occurred in this case. The Commission has reopened this case and, after reevaluation, has concluded, as noted above, that discrimination occurred.

. 3 Services. Violation B. involves actions by the former Millstone Vice President for Nuclear Engineering Services and two former Directors of the Engineering Department. Violation C.

involves actions by a former Director of Nuclear Engineering and a former Manager of Nuclear Design Engineering. The Comrnission considers such violations to be of very significant regulatory concem. Retaliatory personnel actions are very serious matters and will not be tolerated by the NRC. Accordingly, the three violations have each been evaluated as a Severity Level 11 violation in accordance with Supplement Vil, B.4 of the General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions, NUREG-1600, Rev.1,63 FR 26630,266S2 (May 13, 1998).

Under the NRC's Enforcement Policy, a civil penalty is normally considered for Severity Level 11 violations. However, the NRC recognizes that subsequent to the actions that are the subject of these violations, the NRC issued an Order Requiring Independent Third Party Oversight of Northeast Nuclear Energy Company's implementation of Resolution of Millstone Station Employees' Safety Concems (October 24,1996). The Order mandated independent oversight and substantial corrective action with regard to employee concems, past discrimination and a safety conscious work environment at the Millstone site. In response to that Order, the licensee retained an independent consultant approved by the NRC to review and assess the Millstone Station employee safety concems problems and to oversee the licensee's resolution of those problems. In January 1999, the Commission held a public meeting to assess the results of the Licensee's work under the October 1996 Order. Following that meeting, the Commission determined that the Licensee had made progress in addressing the problems that prompted the Order sufficient to warrant closing of the Order. In recognition of the fact that the Licensee has taken substantial actions to address and correct the general and widespread employee concems and discrimination problems that existed at the time of the violations discussed herein, the Commission has authorized the staff to exercise discretion pursuant to the Special Circumstances provisions of Section Vll.B.6 of the Enforcement Policy and to refrain from issuing a civil penalty in this case. But for those broad corrective actions, a substantial civil penalty would have been issued.

Nevertheless, given the high level of the management involved in these violations, the Commission has directed the issuance of the above described Notice of Violation for the three violations of 10 CFR 50.7. The issuance of the Notice is intended to make clear that there must not be a repetition of discrimination on the part of Northeast and its managers. In that regard, your efforts to maintain a safety-conscious work environment must continue. The need for such action is reinforced by the relatively recent discrimination matter in 1997 that was the subject of the March 9,1999 civil penalty action ( EA 97-46).

Although the NRC has information on your general corrective actions with regard to your overall employee concems and discrimination problems, it does not have information on specific corrective actions taken or planned with regard to the specific violations discussed herein.

Consequently, you are required to respond to this letter and the enclosed Notice within 30 days of the date of this letter. You should follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice in preparing your response. In your response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional actions you plan to prevent recurrence. After reviewing your response to this notice, the NRC will determ;ne whether further NRC action is necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements. l l

A copy of the Independent Review Team's report with A%chment 5, and a March 31,1999, i

i

~

. 4 mhmorandum of clarification from the Review Team is provided in Enclosure 4.

I in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790, a copy of this letter and your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.

Sincerely, c

Hubert J. N er Regional A' ministrator Docket Nos. 50-245; 50 336; 50-423 Ucense Nos. DPR-21; DPR-65; NPF-49 Enclosures; (1) Notice of Violation (2)

SUMMARY

- 01 CASE NO.196-002 (3)

SUMMARY

- 01 CASE NO.1-97-007 (4) Independent Review Team report with Attachment 5 and clarification memorandum 1

1 1

l l

o

5 cc: w/ encl:

L. Olivier, Senior Vice President & Chief Nuclear Officer J. Carlin, Vice President - Human Services F. Rothen, Vice President, Work Services

.M. Brothers, Vice President - Operations R. Necci, Vice President - Nuclear Oversight and Regulatory Affairs D. Amerine, Vice President - Human Services E. Harkness, Director, Unit 1 Operations L Cuoco, Esquire

~ G. Hicks, Director, Nuclear Training Services (CT)

J. Price, Director - Unit 2 Operations C. Schwarz, Director - Unit 3 Operations S. Shermar., Audits and Evaluations J. Egan, Esquire N. Burton, Esquire V. Juliano, Waterford Library J. Buckingham, Department of Public Utility Control S. Comley, We The People D. Katz, Citizens Awareness Network (CAN)

R. Bassilakis, CAN J. Block, Attomey, CAN S Luxton, Citzens Regulatory Commission (CRC)

T. Concannon, Co-Chair for NEAC E. Woollacott, Co-Chairman, NEAC Representative G. Hamm State of Connecticut SLO Designee i

4 J

l 1