ML20134K006

Discusses OI 941121 Rept 1-93-021R & 941122 Rept 1-93-021S Re Discrimination & Harassment by Plant Operations Manager & General Manager.Dol Findings Recommended to Be Considered at 941212 Meeting

ML20134K006
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	12/01/1994
From:	Holody D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:	Martin T, Vito D, Jason White NRC
Shared Package
ML20134J860	List: IR 05000227/2003030 ML20134J857 ML20134J894 ML20134J902 ML20134K006 ML20134K059 ML20134K083 ML20134K103 ML20134K114 ML20134K148 ML20134K351 ML20134K388 ML20134K418 ML20134K421 ML20134K582 ML20134K698 ML20134K857 ML20134K869
References
FOIA-96-351 NUDOCS 9702130068
Download: ML20134K006 (2)

Text

,

- - - -. = = = =

P DO NOT DISCLOSE - CONTAINS Ol INFORMATION SSHREETHIS NOTE ANMRTMHEN DC i

%d V

V D===har 1,1994 NOTE TO:

T. Martin J. White D. Vito J. Liebennan, OE i

W. Kane K. Smith W. I.ar.ning S. Barber

{

D. Cooper J. Joustra 1

FROM:

D. Holody

SUBJECT:

OI REPORT NO. 1-93-021S (SALEM) ALLEGED HARASSMENT, INTIMIDATION AND DISCRIMINATION (HI&D) i On November 21,1994, I distributed OI Report 1-93-0213 winch found HI&D in 1992 and 1993 by then Salem management against two ma=hars on the onsite Safety Review Group (SRG), namely, a Senior Staff Engmeer, and 3

l a Safety Review Engineer. Specifically, the OI investigation report (winch was referred to DOJ), found that:

i i

1.

the engmeers were harassedhatimulatad by the then Salem Operations Manager and General Manager, specifically:

g a.

on December 3,1992, when the two engmeers attempted to process a safety issue in an incident f

repont, in accordance with station ys -

, involving the qualification of commercial grade air supply setpost pressure regulators which control the service water flow to the canemia-e fan cooling units (also note that at the end of a messag in the General Manager's office, the GM told the individuals to get out of his office and thra=e-ad to have thens rennoved from the site) ;

b.

and subsequently when attempts were inade (including via a letter from the then General Manager, Salem to the General Manager, QA and Nuclear Safety Review) to have the engineers removed from any direct involvement with the site.-

2.

the Semor Staff Engineer was harassed and inei=ulatad by the then General Manager, QA and Nucimar Safety Review, who attempted to reprunned the engineer fer the h=adhng of the safety issue, while the issue of the engmeer's site access was still unresolved (also note that the General Manager, QA drafted a letter to the individual cane =ining 'ng of a repnmand nature, althoi.gh it was not sent).

Subsequently, OI provided the attached -- g,'-

' report (193-0211), dated November 22,1994, concerning whether an additionaliame= ara of HI&D occurred against the Senior Staff Engmeer. Specifically, the Senior Staff Engmeer, in a complaint to DOL, alleged that the company had denied him (-

-% and promotion to thelevel of others performing the same function based on his practice of speaking up on matters judged to adversely affect nuclear seiety and the requirements. While 01 notes that it has cloemd this case since it has been assigned a nonmal priority (after the OI prioritization sneetag on October 17,1994), I note that the DOL District Director (DD) had found in the individual's favor, notag that a position that the indivulual had been filhng was approved for permanent status on January 26,1993, after being demed previously on two occasions. DOL also indicanad that haran= the 1

Seeuor Staff Engineer was the iaen=h=e and a leading r=dulata for the position, and har==a the individual's i==adiana supervisor felt he was the lendag cambdate to fill the position, the company's failure to fill that position naast be construed as a discria==atary action. 'Ibe DOL DD had

== dad that the individual, a Grade 4, be promoted to Grade 5, and be given restitution of backpsy and legal expenses. While the company appealed that finding to a DOL AIJ, a matel-e was " - ;--

^*y reached between the parties and was approved by the Secretary of Laioor on June 8,1994.

Since a collegial meeting is acha& dad with OE and other HQ omcas for Da==har 12 at 2:00 (preceded by as laternal RI meeting at it), I rec=====d that this DOL DD fhading also be emesidered at that snesting.

In addition to this supplemental OI report, I've also =**mehad (1) the DOL Comiplinace Omeer's Report (previously provided to the staff) which provides the basis for the DOL DD conclusion; and (2) the licassee's

- to o cinim.g sneco.tte, i. whicia.aes.see takes w.i e. dol DD o.ciusion.

DO NOT-D1SCLOSE6AINS Ol1NFORMATION/N"

%ED TATS 4f0TE AND IMPDMf WHENM 9702130068 970207 Q

V PDR FOIA 4

O'NEILL96-351 PDR

e as ra c,,,

1. g UNITED STATES y.

) (

l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4

o o

OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE. REGION I

,o*

475 ALLENDALE ROAD KING OF PRUSSIA. PENNSYLVANIA 19406 2

j November 22, 1994 MEMORANDUM T0:

Thomas T. Martin, Regional inistrator Region I FROM:

Barry R. Letts, Director 1

Office of Investigations Field Office, Region I

SUBJECT:

SALEM GENERATING STATION, UNITS I AND 2: ALLEGED HARASSMENT, INTIMIDATION, AND DISCRIMINATION (CASE NO. I-93-021S) 2 l

Enclosed, for whatever action you deem appropriate, is the Office of Investigations (01) Report of Investigation concerning the above matter.

Neither this memorandum nor the report may be released outside the NRC without l-the permission of the Director, 01.

Internal NRC access and dissemination should be on a need-to-know basis. Treat as " Official Use Only."

Enclosure:

Report w/ exhibits cc w/ encl:

J. Weddle, OI:HQ 1

A O'

p h

1 j

g i

f.

,y

"**s4

.c.

M t

l 5

4 1

1 1

1

-);12

...y.

a..

a

.o..-

.r,,

- n.

i 1.c 5 ;

G M7

[., ~ ;.

n.<

t., L.; +:.,, iI ' 1 y..

, 9.? $h'%f.

0 i

l

\\

i f 4: n%Q'xQ4 l M.L..$k -; ?pS,g

, m.4;.y..

'-it r

i W,*::"t *,7.

• 1, j h, "',+, I ~

,.7,

..as? ; '

• 4

..i

.. ig '. *. ' 'p*#

9 3

3 i b,.,$RpTc *g$. 5

• 4,j '

.g

?

i M. :,.1 '

J ~XLL;EG..E.....,,.

. ~.. &,j}

i %WM96 DISC (M i

W#Wh(Y f %'9$l.43;{9 w4

. M. T;.'",

p2.jp.

> :g it,, g [yp' o,

' ~ -... gyp,

~,

y #[.,;. :y.. ;xp, Age y

n s. s.

I i

\\.

j j {,s jk'*;;g.

s-l >,y; '. -

.:.r % wacm.

l D

' N.'.

MYh.j.,

..v.jt,.3 l $. q

&..c N) @c.Q t?)Tsg 34 1 ".,

. M.. / '

l @ ;+.,.... ;,.

" T' ! '

3 yJ:r. Office of Investiga t

Nig '.

'. Q.5 &4fl.

I DC *neported by os.n%l!$:.nk v 9

. a : syy g

x v

b..!

\\

cn;@,k:,Q~,'e; 'iff, {

u.

c_-,-.:.. s:.7

. f *Q,

..;, 3[: c', j p.g *.

.t

o. y..

f.;q. t; y

rc.7,.,.

,a'g,r

,,,,f

,,,, Q,.,::M'y 0

. D i,f:.h..

b 2'

f' s s

(*f? '- -

1

) y +,hs 1 A U

• d 0$'; p. 1,W,. s.:'.'.i '

? -.

.P s

?:.

?

~

a

\\i a '9ig:

t vi.,V -Gl -+ %[- $1f].

lh

.-'.,%}f3}J

)

,.j04y j f..', e t 0,$ 'Tg

.,,f jJ. r.

.,: dh

~

, c.-

'.'b 7,. - 4

, >2 t....

hk 4; ykh. f,4j.)?%;;&a;.V!4i ii" p.

~

1 e, :. } '5,]

,_._ [,_

Q r; m: -

~~

~

^-

~~

~

Title:

SALEM GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2:

ALLEGED HARASSMENT, INTIMIDATION, AND DISCRIMINATION 4

Licensee:

Case Number:

1-93-021S Public Service Electric and Gas Company Report Date: November 9,1994 P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Control Office: OI:RI l

Docket Nos.: 50-272/311 Status: CLOSED Reported by:

Reviewed and Approved by:

\\

bh4%%

w Kristin L. Monroe, Investigator Barry R.' Lbtts, Director Office of Investigations Office of Investigations Field Office, Region I Field Office, Region I MARNING Th tached document / report has not been reviewed pursuant to ma erial eted.

1 i

outside NRC. Treat as "0FMc1AL4SE ONLY."

poi 4I-d f

• f Copy of

=====:r - - - -

i

~

SYNOPSIS i

On October 4,1994, the Office of Investigations (01), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 4

Commission (NRC), Region I, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, initiated an investigation into the alleged harassment, intimidation, and discrimination 4

(HI&D) of a former Senior Staff Engineer, Salem Generating Station (SGS),

Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G), for raising nuclear safety Concerns.

1 After a preliminary review of this matter and coordination with the Regional 1

Administrator, it has been determined that this matter is a normal priority.

a Due to 01:RI pursuing investigations with higher priorities, this matter is being closed.

1

'll Case No. 1-93-0215 1

r. _

i l

l l

l l

l l

l THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 1

I:

9 Case No. 1-93-021S 2

^

' ~~

' ^ ~ ~~

- ~

~-

~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ '

-" - ^-~~ ~ ~-- --~

~

\\

l 6

ACCOUNTABILITY The following portions of this Report of Investigation (Case No. 1-93-0215) will not be included in the material placed in the PDR.. They consist of pages 3 through 11.

l l

l l

l l

1 Case No. 1-93-021S 3

1 i

1 l

'I l

1

.1 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY i

4 1

I l

Case No. 1-93-0215 4

1 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS EA91 SYNOPSIS 1

ACCOUNTABILITY 3

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 7

DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION 9

Purpose of Investigations...................... 9 i

Background.............................. 9 Interview of Alleger 9

Summary of Investigative Activity.................

10 Coordination with NRC Staff....................

10 Closure Information........................

10 LIST OF EXHIBITS............................

11 1

'l

\\

t i

i I

1 1

O e

l l

i Case No. 1-93-021S 5

_ = - - -

b l

i i

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY Case No. 1-93-021S 6

=.:... --. : - -

1 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A11eaation: Harassment. Intimidation. and Discrimination of a Former Senior Staff Enaineer 10 CFR 50.5:

Deliberate misconduct (Editions 1992 through 1994; Effective September 16,1991) 10 CFR 50.7:

Employee protection (Editions 1989 through 1994) i l

Case No. 1-93-021S 7

s THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY i

4 l

Case No. 1-93-021S 8

_. _ _ _ Z

~

~ ~ ^ ~ ' =rr 7 ~ - ~ -

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~~ ^

\\.

s-DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION I

i Purnose of Investiaation This investigation was initiated to determine whether Bert E. WILLIAMS, former i

1 Senior Staff Engineer, Onsite Safety Review Group (SRG), Nuclear Safety Review (NSR), Sales Generating Station (SGS), Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G), was harassed, intimidated, and discriminated (HI&D) against for raising nuclear safety concerns (Exhibit 1).

j Backaround On December 3, 1992, WILLIAMS participated in writing an Incident Report (IR) that pertained to problems with the Containment Fan Coil Units (CFCUs) for SGS Units I and 2.

Alleged harassment and intimidation of WILLIAMS occurred when j.

WILLIAMS and Paul CRAIG, Safety Review Engineer, SRG, SGS, attempted to file the IR with Vincent POLIZZI, Operations Manager, SGS, and Cal VONDRA, General Manager, SGS. The alleged harassment and intimidation continued when POLIZZI prepared a memorandum, at the request of and for the signature of VONDRA, J

addressed to Lawrence REITER, former General Manager, Quality Assurance /NSR, SGS, and the third tier supervisor of WILLIAMS and CRAIG. The memorandum requested that WILLIAMS and CRAIG "... be removed from any direct or i

indirect involvement with Salem Station." OI opened case No. 1-93-021R and j

g substantiated harassment and intimidation in that scenario (Exhibit 1).

morandumT ay 27, 1993, to William CIANFRANI, On-Site Safety Review Engineer, NSR,

, WILLIAMS requested an increase in grade and salary.

j WILLIAMS based his reques upon the fact that he had performed the same j

functions as the engineers his group, however, WILLIAMS' salary was less j

(Exhibit 2, p. 3).

In a memorandum dated June 30, 1993, to WILLIAMS from l

Bruce E. HALL, Manager, NSR, WILLIAMS was informed that his request could not be granted because there was "no reasonable basis" for the request (Exhibit 2, pp. 4 and 5).

I On July 15, 1993, WILLIAMS filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), alleging that PSE&G had denied his compensation and promotion to the i

level of others who performed the same function, because he had often been a 1

j "whistleblower" on matters affecting public safety at PSE&G (Exhibit 2, pp. I and 2).

In a letter dated October 19, 1993, to Steven MILTENBERGER, Vi:e President and Chief Nuclear Officer, PSE&G, from Richard C. RICHARDS, District Director, j

DOL, RICHARDS advised that DOL had found in favor of WILLIAMS. DOL determined l

that WILLIAMS was a protected employee who hsd engaged in a protected activity j

and that discrimination was a factor in the actions that comprised WILLIAMS' I

i complaint (Exhibit 3, p. 1). PSE&G appealed that decision, but reached a settlement with WILLIAMS before going to a hearing.

Interview of Allecer t

I On September 29, 1993, and June 13, 1994, WILLIAMS was interviewed concerning q

i j

Case No. 1-93-0215 9

l 1

-.,, ~.

a

-c+-a

his allegation of harassment, intimidation, and discrimination. WILLIAMS advised that he had reviewed [ safety) issues that he had raised during the course of his career. WILLIAMS continued that it seemed to him that he had been penalized for rasing the [ safety) issues. WILLIAMS continued that there had been many references [in his performance appraisals) to his " unyielding attitude" (Exhibit 4, p. 92). WILLIAMS stated that he thought that performance appraisals had been used to " sandbag" him (Exhibit 4, p. 96).

WILLIAMS advised that life with PSE&G safety review is intimidation. WILLIAMS continued that 'f an individual is not prepared to stand up and support a i

safety issue, 'aen the issue should not be raised (Exhibit 5, p. 55).

Summary _nf_Investinative Activity During the course of the investigation, Scott GILLESPIE, WILLIAMS' former supervisor was interviewed (Exhibit 6).

In addition, the reporting investigator reviewed various documents, including: the DOL narrative report regarding WILLIAMS' complaint (Exhibit 7); Professional / Technical Performance Planning Appraisals; and documents provided by WILLIAMS.

Coordination with NRC Staff On October 17, 1994, the Field Office Director, 01:RI met with the Regional Administrator, NRC:RI to discuss the open 01:RI inventory. During a discussion of this investigation, the Regional Administrator indicated that this investigation should be a normal priority..

Closure Information 3ased on a determination that this investigation is of a normal priority, higher priority cases take precedence and this case is being closed.

If, at a future date, information is developed which raises the priority of this case, 01:RI will re-evaluate the matter.

B Case No. I-93-021S 10

4, s

LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit No.

Descriotion 1

01 investigation Status Record for 01 Case No. 1-93-0215.

2 WILLIAMS' complaint to the DOL, dated July 15, 1993.

3 Letter dated October 19, 1993, to Steve MILTENBERGER, Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer, PSE&G, from Richard C. RICHARDS, District Director, DOL.

4 Testimony of WILLIAMS, dated September 19, 1993.

5 Testimony of WILLIAMS, dated June 13, 1994.

6 Testimony of GILLESPIE, dated December 14, 1993.

7 Letter dated November 3, 1993, to Dan HOLODY, Enforcement Officer, NRC, from Dominick J. DENATO, Assistant District Director, DOL, forwarding DOL Narrative Report.

l

• i Case No. 1-93-0215 11

.