[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 75 (Tuesday, April 19, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-9364]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: April 19, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-335, 50-389, 50-250, 50-251]

 

Receipt of Petition for Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206

    Notice hereby given that by Petition dated March 7, 1994, Thomas J. 
Saporito, Jr. (Petitioner), has requested that the NRC taken action 
with regard to the Florida Power and Light Company. Specifically, the 
Petitioner requests that the NRC: (1) Submit an amicus curiae brief to 
the Department of Labor (DOL) regarding his complaints number 89-ERA-
007 and 89-ERA-017 concerning the Petitioner's claim that the licensee 
retaliated against him for engaging in protected activity during his 
employment at Turkey Point Nuclear Station in violation of 10 CFR 50.7; 
(2) institute a show cause proceeding pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202 to 
modify, suspend or revoke the licensee's licenses authorizing the 
operation of Turkey Point; and (3) institute a show cause proceeding 
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202 and order the licensee to provide the 
Petitioner with a ``make whole'' remedy, including but not limited to, 
immediate reinstatement to his previous position, back wages and front 
pay with interest, compensatory damages for pain and suffering, and a 
posting requirement to offset any ``chilling effect'' Petitioner's 
discharge may have had upon other employees at the Turkey Point and St. 
Lucie Nuclear Stations.
    The Petitioner's stated bases for his requests can be summarized as 
follows: (1) Although the NRC generally defers to the DOL process 
before taking action against a licensee, in this case the 
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) rendered a decision, enabling the NRC to 
take the action Petitioner requests, particularly to offset any 
``chilling effect'' which may have resulted from the licensee's action; 
(2) under the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with DOL, there are 
times NRC actions are warranted notwithstanding the ongoing DOL process 
because of the significance of the issues to public health and safety; 
(3) the record in this case contains evidence which was ignored by the 
ALJ, and the NRC should weigh the entire record in determining whether 
the licensee violated the Energy Reorganization Act (ERA) and 10 CFR 
50.7; (4) the ALJ erred in several respects as a matter of law in 
reaching his decision that the Petitioner was not discriminated 
against; (5) the adverse action by the licensee occurred immediately 
after the Petitioner was in contact with the NRC and filed complaints 
under the ERA with DOL; (6) the licensee's actions against the 
Petitioner constitute a ``hostile work environment'' and the NRC is 
mandated by Congress to ensure that a non-hostile work environment 
exists at NRC-licensed facilities; (7) the NRC has a duty to ensure 
that licensee employers maintain a work environment which encourages 
employees to raise safety issues, which is not the situation at Turkey 
Point because of the licensee's continuing retaliation against 
employees who do so; (8) the licensee illegally interrogated Petitioner 
about his protected activity; (9) if the NRC fails to act, it will 
contradict its own regulations that recognize the right of employees to 
bypass management and report their concerns directly to the NRC; (10) 
the NRC has expressly defined ``protected activities''; (11) the 
licensee's request that Petitioner be examined by a company doctor was 
unjustified; (12) the licensee's disparate treatment of Petitioner was 
illegal and must be challenged by the NRC; and (13) the NRC is required 
to act by virtue of its regulations at 10 CFR 50.9 which provide that 
the DOL process is an extension of NRC authority.
    The request is being treated pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 of the 
Commission's regulations. The request has been referred to the 
Director, Office of Enforcement.
    A copy of the Petition is available for inspection at the 
Commission's Public Document Room at 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20555.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of April 1994.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James Lieberman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 94-9364 Filed 4-18-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M