ML20217A880

Errata to SECY-97-147, Re-Evaluation of SECY-96-199 Issues, Plan to Better Focus Resources on High Priority Discrimination Issues. Attached Memo Provides Supplemental Info Re SECY-97-147

ML20217A880
Person / Time
Issue date:	08/07/1997
From:	NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
To:
References
SECY-96-199-C, SECY-97-147-01, SECY-97-147-1, SECY-97-147-ERR, SECY-97-147-R, NUDOCS 9709230060
Download: ML20217A880 (4)

Text

_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ - . _ _ . _ . _

i

, l RELEASED TO THE PDR l

• { Tlt9/4y g- $

. cate .mit:ais. .

i 4

l; August 7, 1997 -

l t

2 C O R R- E C T I O N N O T I C E I-

! TO ALL HOLDERS OF

(-

SECY-97-147 - RE-EVALUATION OF SECY-96-199 ISSUES; PLAN TO-l BErrER FOCUS RESOURCES ON HIGH PRIORITY DISCRIM1 NATION ISSUES i

l THE ATTACHED MEMORANDUM PROVIDES SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION RELATED-

) .TO:SECY-97-147, t-i 3-i l .- ATTACHMENT:

1 AS STATED 4

f.

t i-F THE' SECRETARIAT i

n sk V ip c y_; g y l , y s a,- 0) i j , ,, 7s. n1

, . gut t

i i

i j

9709230060 970807" PDR SECY h! h l 97-147 R PDR e

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

*pma

, g

[ \

j-UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

1. WASHINGTON, D.C. 2056Mm01 4%

4... August 7, 1997 MEMORANDUM T0: Andrew L. Bates, Senior Level Advisor 0ficeofphe ecretary of the Commission 4.

Assistant for Operations FROM:

fq ames'L.

Office of thefduf' ~ Bl a for Operations Executive Director

SUBJECT:

AMENDMENT TO SECY-97-147, DATED JULY 14, 1997 Appendix D to SECY-97-147, dated July 14, 1997, recommended various adjustments to the NRC's enforcement processes and proposed changes to the Enforcement Policy published on March 24, 1997, in the Federal Reaister (62 FR 13906). The staff proposed, among other things, that in the eighth paragraph of Section V, "Predecisional Enforcement Conferences," of the Enforcement Policy the word "normally" be added to reflect cases where the enforcement action contemplated may be directed to individuals because it would not be appropriate to release the Office of Investigations (01) report. In such cases, the associated predecisional enforcement conference should not be open to public observation. In most cases involving discrimination, action would either be contemplated to be issued against individuals or the action against the licensee would highlight the performance of the individuals involved in the discrimination. Thus, the staff believes that most reports will not be disclosed and therefore, "may" is a better term than "normally."

In addition, since the conference is not a hearino, it would be helpful to clarify the policy by stating that the purpose of the complainant's participation in a conference is to provide information to the NRC to assist the NRC staff in its enforcement deliberations. Again to make clear a hearing is not involved, the words " rebut" and " rebuttal" are proposed to-be changed.

A revised paragraph providing the recommended changes to the Enforcement Policy along with a comparative text is enclosed.

cc w/attachs:

A. Thadani, DEDE J. Lieberman, OE G. Caputo, 01 J. Goldberg, OGC e

REPLACEMENT PARAGRAPH FOR SECTION V 0F THE ENFORCEMENT POLICY For a case in which an NRC Office of Investigations (01) report finds that discrimination as defined under 10 CFR 50.7 (or similar provisions in Parts 30, 40. 60. 70. or 72) has occur y.i. the OI report may be made public, subject to withholding certain information (i.e., after appropriate redaction), in which case the associated predecisional enforcement conference will normally be open to public observation. In a conference where a particular individual is being considered potentially responsible for the discrimination the conference will remain closed. In either case (i.e., whether the conference is open or closed). the employee or former employee who was the subject of the alleged discrimination (hereafter referred to as *

• complainant) will normally be provided an op)ortunity to participate in the predecisional enforcement conference wit 1 the licensee / employer. This participation will normally be in the form of a complainant statement and comment on the licensee's presentation, followed in turn by an opportunity for the licensee to res)ond to the complainant *s presentation. In cases where the complainant is unaale to attend in person, arrangements will be made for the complainant's participation by telephone or an opportunity given for the comalainant to submit a written response to the licensee's presentation. If tie licensee chooses to forego an enforcement conference and, instead, res)onds to the NRC's findings in writing, the complainant will be provided t1e opportunity to submit written comments on the licensee's response. For cases involving potential discrimination by a contractor or vendor to the licensee, any associated predecisional enforcement conference with the contractor or vendor would be handled similarly. These arrangements for complainant participation in the predecisional enforcement conference are not to be conducted or viewed in any respect as an adjudicatory hearing. The aurpose of the complaint's participation is to provide information to the NRC to assist it in its enforcement deliberations.

. w.

COMPARATIVE TEXT REPLACEMENT PARAGRAPH FOR SECTION V 0F THE ENFORCEMENT POLICY For a case in which an NRC Office of Investigations (01) report finds that discrimination as defined under 10 CFR 50.7 (or similar provisions in Parts 30, 40, 60,- 70. or 72) has occurred, the OI report 'will, [msi] be made public, subject to withholding certain information li.e,, after appropriate

.redactionL (and any rc ultingt [inMichichseithe] associated] predecisional enforcement conference will normally be open to public observation. In a conference where a particular individual is being considered potentially responsible for the discrimination..

the conference will remain closed. In either case (i.e., whether the conference is open or closed), the employee or former employee who was the subject of the alleged discrimination (hereafter referred to as

complainant) will normally be provided an op)ortunity to partici the predecisional enforcement conference [WithitleBitensee/ employer]pate . This in participation will normally be in the form ~ofTcoinplainant~ statement and Womentioh]

uthe Ticensee(^rc:entatien in fellewup tc"s presentation, followed in . turn by an op licensee to (rebut) [respondjto] the complainant's presentation. In cases where the complainant is unable to attend in person, arrangements will be made for the complainant *s participation by telephone or an opportunity given for the complainant to submit a written rebuttal) [

presentation.Ifthelicenseechoo(sestofor.re'sponse]tothelicensee's ego ari^ enforcement conference and, instead, responds to the NRC's findin provided the opportunity to submit /+gs in writing, the complainant will be licensee's response. For cases involv -ng written f rebuttal] [ comments'] on the potential discriminat' ion'by a

. contractor or vendor to the licensee, any associated predecisional enforcement conference with the contractor or vendor would be handled similarly. These arrangements for complainant participation in the predecisional enforcement

-conference are not to be conducted or viewed in any respect as an adjudicatory hearing. artiEipatii'on;isitoihr6ilide informatio. [ThegurposesofEthe) complaint @its;enforcementidelibetationsi) rntohhe-;NRC$ofassistiit@g

- _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _