[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 197 (Thursday, October 10, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63169-63170]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-25844]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[EA-02-124; Dockets Nos. 50-456; 50-457, 50-454; 50-455, 50-461, 50-10; 
50-237; 50-249, 50-373; 50-374, 50-352; 50-353, 50-219, 50-171: 50-277; 
50-278, 50-254; 50-265, 50-289, 50-295; 50-304; Licenses Nos. NPF-72; 
NPF-77, NPF-37; NPF-66, NPF-62, DPR-2; DPR-19; DPR-25, NPF-11; NPF-18, 
NPF-39; NPF-85, DPR-16, DPR-12; DPR-44; DPR-56, DPR-29; DPR-30, DPR-50, 
DPR-39; DPR-48]


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and AmerGen Energy Company, LLC; 
Braidwood Station, Units 1 & 2, Byron Station, Units 1 & 2, Clinton 
Power Station, Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 1, 2 & 3, LaSalle 
County Station, Units 1 & 2, Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 & 2, 
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Peach Bottom Atomic Power 
Station, Units 1, 2 & 3, Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 & 
2, Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Zion Nuclear Power 
Station, Units 1 & 2; Confirmatory Order Modifying Licenses (Effective 
Immediately)

    Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) and AmerGen Energy Company, 
LLC (AmerGen) (Licensees) are the holders of twenty-one NRC Facility 
Operating Licenses issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or 
Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR part 50, which authorizes the operation 
of the specifically named facilities in accordance with the conditions 
specified in each license. Licenses No. NPF-72 and NPF-77 were issued 
on July 2, 1987, and May 20, 1988, to operate the Braidwood Station, 
Units 1 and 2. Licenses No. NPF-37 and NPF-66 were issued on February 
14, 1985, and January 30, 1987, to operate Byron Station, Units 1 and 
2. License No. NPF-62 was issued on April 17, 1987 to operate the 
Clinton Power Station. Licenses No. DPR-2 and DPR-25 were issued on 
September 28, 1959, and January 12, 1971, to operate Dresden Nuclear 
Power Station, Units 1 and 3 (Dresden Station Unit 1 is currently in 
decommissioning). License No. DPR-19 was extended on February 20, 1991, 
for Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2. Licenses No. NPF-11 and NPF-
18 were issued on April 17, 1982, and February 16, 1983, to operate 
LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2. Licenses No. NPF-39 and NPF-85 
were issued on August 8, 1985, and August 25, 1989, to operate the 
Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2. License No. DPR-16 was 
extended on July 2, 1991, for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating 
Station. License No. DPR-12 was issued on January 24, 1966, to operate 
Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 1, which was shut down on 
October 31, 1974, and is in safe storage. Licenses No. DPR-44 and DPR-
56 were issued on October 25, 1973, and July 2, 1974, to operate Peach 
Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 & 3. Licenses No. DPR-29 and DPR-
30 were issued on December 14, 1972, for the operation of both units at 
the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2. License No. DPR-
50 was issued on April 19, 1974, to operate the Three Mile Island 
Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1. Licenses No. DPR-39 and DPR-48 were 
issued on October 19, 1973, and November 14, 1973, for operation of the 
Zion Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (the Zion Station is 
currently in decommissioning).
    On January 29, 2001, the NRC Office of Investigations (OI) 
initiated an investigation to determine if a former Exelon employee 
performing work at the Byron Station had been discriminated against for 
raising safety concerns. In its Report No. 3-2001-005, issued March 26, 
2002, OI concluded that an Exelon corporate manager deliberately 
discriminated against the former employee on August 25, 2000, in 
violation of the NRC regulations prohibiting employment discrimination, 
10 CFR 50.7, ``Employee Protection,'' by not selecting the employee for 
a new position. On June 17, 2002, the NRC staff contacted Exelon 
management to schedule a predecisional enforcement conference. To 
expedite resolution of this matter, Exelon requested the opportunity to 
present a settlement proposal to the NRC prior to a predecisional 
enforcement conference. The NRC staff agreed to this request.
    Representatives of Exelon met with the NRC staff on July 2, July 
18, July 30, September 9 and September 11, 2002, to discuss the terms 
of the Exelon settlement proposal. In an August 5, 2002 letter, Exelon 
described the proposed settlement and on September 27, 2002, the 
Licensees committed to a number of corrective actions with respect to 
employee protection, agreed to have the corrective actions confirmed by 
Order, and admitted that a violation of 10 CFR 50.7 had occurred. The 
corrective actions include, but are not limited to, counseling 
management personnel involved in the violation of 10 CFR 50.7, and 
training all vice-presidents and plant managers throughout the 
Licensees' organization (at every nuclear station and at corporate 
headquarters) on the provisions of the employee protection regulation. 
These individuals, in turn, will train their subordinate managers. The 
Licensees will also modify management training programs as appropriate 
regarding the provisions of 10 CFR 50.7.
    On September 27, 2002, the Licensees consented to issuance of this 
Order with the commitments described in Section V below, waived any 
right to a hearing on this Order, and agreed to all terms of this 
Order, including that it shall be effective immediately.
    I find that the Licensees' commitments as set forth in Section V, 
below, are acceptable and necessary, and conclude that since Exelon 
admitted the violation of 10 CFR 50.7 and since the Licensees committed 
to taking comprehensive corrective actions by implementing this 
Confirmatory Order, the NRC staff's concern regarding employee 
protection can be resolved through confirmation of the Licensees' 
commitments by this Order. I further find that the Licensees' approach 
to resolving this matter is salutary and efficient, and that this 
resolution is in the public interest. Accordingly, the NRC staff 
exercises its enforcement discretion pursuant to Section VII.B.6 of the 
NRC Enforcement Policy and will not issue Notices of Violation or a 
civil penalty in this case.
    Accordingly, pursuant to sections 103, 104b, 161b, 161i, 161o, 182 
and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the 
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202 and 10 CFR Part 50, it is 
hereby ordered, effective immediately, that license Nos. NPF-72, NPF-
77, NPF-37, NPF-66, NPF-62, DPR-2, DPR-19, DPR-25, NPF-11, NPF-18, NPF-
39, NPF-85, DPR-16, DPR-12, DPR-44, DPR-56, DPR-29, DPR-30, DPR-50, 
DPR-39, and DPR-48 are modified as follows:
    1. Exelon will counsel and coach personnel involved in the 
violation of 10 CFR 50.7, which occurred on August 25, 2000, to 
emphasize the importance of a safety conscious work environment and 
provisions of 10 CFR 50.7. The counseling will be conducted by a 
corporate Exelon executive not involved in the violation described 
herein and who shall be senior to those counseled.

[[Page 63170]]

    2. An Exelon corporate executive will train and coach every 
executive-level employee (defined to include plant managers and all 
vice-president level personnel) throughout the licensed organizations, 
including every nuclear station and headquarters, on the employee 
protection provisions of 10 CFR 50.7. The sessions will be conducted by 
an Exelon executive knowledgeable about the issues involved in the 
August 25, 2000, violation and will be held in small groups to assure 
focus and interactive involvement of every executive. The sessions will 
include a case study of the selection decision that caused this 
enforcement action and a discussion of the lessons learned.
    3. Each executive trained pursuant to Paragraph 2 above will be 
provided a communications package for use in training the managers in 
that executive's chain-of-command regarding these issues and the 
Licensees' expectations for handling employee interactions.
    4. The Licensees will enhance training on the prevention of 
employment discrimination beyond that in its existing management 
training programs. Lesson plans and other materials used in management 
training programs on the prevention of employment discrimination will 
be reviewed and revised as appropriate to address maintaining a safety 
conscious work environment and the employee protection provisions of 10 
CFR 50.7. The on-going training will be conducted at a frequency 
consistent with the Licensees' existing policies, practices and 
procedures.
    5. The Licensees will review the internal candidate selection 
process to ensure that the process incorporates the principles of 
employee protection under 10 CFR 50.7.
    6. A communication will be distributed to all employees of the 
Licensees' organizations that strongly reaffirms management's 
commitment to fostering a safety-conscious work environment in all 
organizations at all sites and in its headquarters organization. The 
Licensees will also reaffirm to all employees the Licensees' 
commitments to a strong and viable Employee Concerns Program and will 
reiterate the various means that all employees may employ to raise 
issues that may be of concern to them.
    7. Exelon will review all work environment surveys conducted since 
September 2000 at the Byron Station (where the former employee 
previously worked) to assure that management responses to any findings 
were implemented to assure that no residual effect exists in the 
safety-conscious work environment at the station as a result of the 
selection decision. Exelon will provide to the Regional Administrator, 
NRC Region III, Lisle, Illinois, a written description of the results 
of this review and any actions taken or planned to be taken to assure 
that a safety conscious work environment exists at the Byron Station.
    8. The Licensees will accomplish these actions within six months of 
the date of this Order and will furnish a written report of the results 
achieved to the Director, Office of Enforcement, within 30 days 
following completion.
    The Director, Office of Enforcement may relax or rescind, in 
writing, any of the above conditions upon a showing by the Licensees of 
good cause.
    Any person adversely affected by this Confirmatory Order, other 
than the Licensees, may request a hearing within 20 days of its 
issuance. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to 
extending the time to request a hearing. A request for extension of 
time in which to submit a request for a hearing must be made in writing 
to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and include a statement of good cause 
for the extension. Any request for a hearing shall be submitted to the 
Secretary, Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Chief, Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff, 
Washington, DC 20555. Copies of the hearing request shall also be sent 
to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555; to the Assistant General Counsel for 
Materials Litigation and Enforcement at the same address; to the 
Regional Administrator, NRC Region III, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 
60532-4351; to the Regional Administrator, NRC Region I, 475 Allendale 
Road, King of Prussia, PA 19406-1415; and to the Licensees. Because of 
continuing disruptions in delivery of mail to United States Government 
offices, it is requested that requests for hearing be transmitted to 
the Secretary of the Commission either by means of facsimile 
transmission to 301-415-1101 or by e-mail to [email protected] and 
also to the Office of the General Counsel either by means of facsimile 
transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to [email protected]. If 
such a person requests a hearing, that person shall set forth with 
particularity the manner in which his interest is adversely affected by 
this Order and shall address the criteria set forth in 10 CFR Sec.  
2.714(d).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The most recent version of Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations, published January 1, 2002, inadvertently omitted the 
last sentence of 10 CFR 2.714(d) and subparagraphs (d)(1) and (2), 
regarding petitions to intervene and contentions. Those provisions 
are extant and still applicable to petitions to intervene. Those 
provisions are as follows: ``In all other circumstances, such ruling 
body or officer shall, in ruling on--(1) A petition for leave to 
intervene or a request for hearing, consider the following factors, 
among other things: (i) The nature of the petitioner's right under 
the Act to be made a party to the proceeding. (ii) The nature and 
extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in 
the proceeding. (iii) The possible effect of any order that may be 
entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. (2) The 
admissibility of a contention, refuse to admit a contention if: (i) 
The contention and supporting material fail to satisfy the 
requirements of paragraph (b)(2) of this section; or (ii) The 
contention, if proven, would be of no consequence in the proceeding 
because it would not entitle petitioner to relief.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If a hearing is requested by a person whose interest is adversely 
affected, the Commission will issue an Order designating the time and 
place of any hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered 
at such hearing shall be whether this Order should be sustained. In the 
absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of an extension 
of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions specified in 
Section V above shall be final twenty (20) days from the date of this 
Order without further order or proceedings. If an extension of time for 
requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions specified in 
Section V shall be final when the extension expires if a hearing 
request has not been received. A request for hearing shall not stay the 
immediate effectiveness of this order.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 3rd Day of October 2002.

    For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Frank J. Congel,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 02-25844 Filed 10-9-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P