97-1857. Joseph R. Bynum; Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-Licensed Activities (Effective Immediately)  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 17 (Monday, January 27, 1997)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 3923-3925]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-1857]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    
    [IA 96-101]
    
    
    Joseph R. Bynum; Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-Licensed 
    Activities (Effective Immediately)
    
    I
    
        Since April 1993, Joseph R. Bynum has held the position of Vice 
    President, Fossil Operations in the Fossil and Hydro Power organization 
    of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA or Licensee). At the time of the 
    events described in this Order, Mr. Bynum was employed as Vice 
    President, Nuclear Operations, in the Licensee's corporate organization 
    and was responsible for the oversight of TVA's nuclear program at its 
    four nuclear reactor sites. During this time, the Licensee held five 
    operating licenses and four construction permits issued by the Nuclear 
    Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50. 
    License Nos. DPR-77 and DPR-79 authorized the Licensee's operation of 
    the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in Soddy-Daisy, Tennessee; License Nos. DPR-
    33, DPR-52, and DPR-68 authorized operation of the Browns Ferry Nuclear 
    Plant in Athens, Alabama; Construction Permit Nos. CPPR-91 (now 
    Operating License NPF-90) and CPPR-92 authorized the construction of 
    the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant in Spring City, Tennessee; and Construction 
    Permit Nos. CPPR-122 and CPPR-123 authorized the construction of the 
    Bellefonte Nuclear Plant in Scottsboro, Alabama.
    
    II
    
        Following receipt of information regarding alleged discrimination 
    against Mr. William F. Jocher, former Manager, Chemistry and 
    Environmental Protection in TVA's corporate organization, the NRC 
    Office of Investigations (OI) initiated an investigation, Case No. 2-
    93-015, on April 15, 1993. OI completed its investigation on August 31, 
    1995, and concluded that: (1) Mr. Jocher ``was engaged in protected 
    activities during his employment at TVA, and received an adverse 
    employment action in the form of a threat of termination by TVA if he 
    did not resign''; (2) ``the reason proffered by TVA for this adverse 
    action, namely that Jocher's performance in the area of management 
    skills was inadequate, was primarily pretextual''; and (3) ``despite 
    denials by the TVA managers involved, the methodology of Jocher's 
    engagement in protected activity was the primary reason for the adverse 
    action'' against him.
        In addition, on June 29, 1993, Mr. Jocher, filed a complaint with 
    the U. S. Department of Labor (DOL). In his DOL complaint, Mr. Jocher 
    alleged that he was forced to resign from employment with TVA as a 
    result of carrying out activities protected by the Atomic Energy Act of 
    1954. He further stated that his forced resignation was based on his 
    activities in revealing deficiencies in the plant chemistry programs at 
    the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, revealing TVA's non-compliance with NRC 
    approved guidelines, and revealing inconsistencies between actual facts 
    and TVA management's reports to the NRC and other TVA oversight groups.
        DOL efforts to conciliate the matter between Mr. Jocher and TVA 
    were unsuccessful, and on April 29, 1994, the DOL District Director 
    (DD) issued the initial finding of the DOL compliance action in the 
    case. The DOL DD concluded that Mr. Jocher was a protected employee 
    engaged in protected activity within the scope of the Energy 
    Reorganization Act, and that discrimination, as defined and prohibited 
    by the statute, was a factor in the actions which comprised his 
    complaint.
        Following an appeal by TVA, administrative hearings were conducted 
    before the DOL Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). On July 31, 1996, the 
    DOL ALJ issued a Recommended Decision and Order (RDO) in the case (DOL 
    Case No. 94-ERA-24) finding that TVA discriminated against Mr. Jocher 
    in violation of Section 211 of the Energy Reorganization Act. On 
    November 20, 1996, the ALJ issued a Recommended Order of Dismissal, 
    based on a conciliation agreement between Mr. Jocher and TVA, and on 
    November 22, 1996, the DOL Administrative Review Board issued a Final 
    Order Approving Settlement and Dismissing Complaint.
        Both the ALJ and OI stated that Mr. Joseph R. Bynum, the former 
    Vice President of Nuclear Operations of TVA, ordered the forced 
    resignation of Mr. Jocher. By letter dated August 26, 1996, Mr. Bynum 
    was informed of the DOL findings and the OI investigation results and 
    requested to attend a predecisional enforcement conference. On 
    September 23, 1996, a closed, transcribed conference was conducted with 
    Mr. Bynum, legal counsel, and management representatives of TVA. During 
    the conference and in a written statement provided to NRC Region II 
    prior to the conference, Mr. Bynum vigorously denied any violation of 
    10 CFR 50.5, Deliberate Misconduct, and stated that he did not 
    discriminate against Mr. Jocher for engaging in protected activities. 
    He attributed his decision to ask for Mr. Jocher's resignation to Mr. 
    Jocher's poor management skills, and stated that he (Mr. Bynum) used 
    poor judgement in not coordinating the personnel action with the 
    appropriate TVA offices (i.e., Human Resources, Office of General 
    Counsel). Mr. Bynum provided a detailed description of the events and 
    circumstances surrounding Mr. Jocher's departure and addressed specific 
    conclusions drawn by the DOL ALJ.
        Based on the NRC staff's review of the evidence gathered by OI, the 
    ALJ decision, and the views presented by Mr. Bynum at the predecisional 
    enforcement conference, the NRC staff is satisfied that discrimination 
    against Mr. Jocher by Mr. Bynum, who is currently the TVA Vice 
    President for Fossil Operations, as described in the ALJ RDO and the OI 
    Report, had occurred when Mr. Bynum ordered the forced resignation of 
    Mr. Jocher. In reaching this determination the staff considered among 
    other things: (1) The close timing between some of the protected 
    activities in March 1993, i.e., formal notification by the NRC that it 
    would be investigating the safety issues raised by Mr. Jocher, and the 
    adverse action taken against Mr. Jocher on April 5, 1993; (2) 
    statements made by TVA managers that Mr. Bynum ordered the forced 
    resignation of Mr. Jocher; (3) inconsistent statements made by Mr. 
    Bynum and the two managers who carried out the forced resignation of 
    Mr. Jocher with respect to why and how the employment decision was 
    made, and whether Mr. Jocher was placed in a six month improvement 
    program in March, 1993; (4) inconsistencies in the various statements 
    given by Mr. Bynum regarding his knowledge of Mr. Jocher's protected 
    activities, most notably the
    
    [[Page 3924]]
    
    post-polygraph interview where he stated that he was aware that Mr. 
    Jocher had submitted several safety complaints and Significant 
    Corrective Action Reports, in light of TVA's processes for handling 
    safety issues of which Mr. Bynum should have been fully cognizant; (5) 
    the results of Mr. Bynum's voluntary polygraph examination which 
    indicated deception with respect to key questions related to the 
    termination of Mr. Jocher; and (6) the lack of adequate documentation 
    by TVA as to Mr. Jocher's inadequacies as a TVA manager.
        The staff adopts, in essence, the conclusions reached by OI and the 
    DOL ALJ and believes that Mr. Jocher would not have been forced to 
    resign on April 5, 1993 but for his engaging in protected activities. 
    Therefore, it is concluded that, on April 5, 1993, Mr. Bynum's 
    deliberate actions against Mr. Jocher were in violation of Section 211 
    of the Energy Reorganization Act and 10 CFR 50.5, Deliberate 
    Misconduct. Further, Mr. Bynum's actions caused TVA to be in violation 
    of 10 CFR 50.7, Employee Protection.
    
    III
    
        Based on the above, the staff concludes that Mr. Joseph R. Bynum, 
    an employee of the Licensee, has engaged in deliberate misconduct in 
    violation of 10 CFR 50.5 that has caused the Licensee to be in 
    violation of 10 CFR 50.7. NRC must be able to rely on the Licensee and 
    its employees to comply with NRC requirements, including the 
    requirement that prohibits discrimination against employees for 
    engaging in protected activities. Joseph R. Bynum's actions in causing 
    the Licensee to violate 10 CFR 50.7 have raised serious doubt as to 
    whether he can be relied upon to comply with NRC requirements in the 
    future.
        Consequently, I lack the requisite reasonable assurance that 
    licensed activities can be conducted in compliance with the 
    Commission's requirements and that the health and safety of the public 
    will be protected if Joseph R. Bynum were permitted at this time to be 
    involved in NRC-licensed activities. Therefore, the public health, 
    safety and interest require that Joseph R. Bynum be prohibited from any 
    involvement in NRC-licensed activities for a period of five years 
    retroactive to May 1, 1993, the date in which he was transferred out of 
    the Licensee's nuclear organization. If Mr. Bynum is currently involved 
    in or overseeing NRC-licensed activities at TVA or any other licensee 
    of the NRC, he must immediately cease such activities, and inform the 
    NRC of the name, address and telephone number of the employer, and 
    provide a copy of this order to the employer. Additionally, Joseph R. 
    Bynum is required to notify the NRC of his first involvement in NRC-
    licensed activities following the prohibition period. Furthermore, 
    pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, I find that the significance of Mr. Bynum's 
    conduct described above is such that the public health, safety and 
    interest require that this Order be immediately effective.
    
    IV
    
        Accordingly, pursuant to sections 103, 161b, 161i, 182 and 186 of 
    the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's 
    regulations in 10 CFR 2.202, 10 CFR 50.5, and 10 CFR 150.20, it is 
    hereby ordered that:
        A. For a period of five years from May 1, 1993, Joseph R. Bynum is 
    prohibited from engaging in, or exercising control over individuals 
    engaged in NRC-licensed activities. NRC-licensed activities are those 
    activities which are conducted pursuant to a specific or general 
    license issued by the NRC, including, but not limited to, those 
    activities of Agreement State licensees conducted pursuant to the 
    authority granted by 10 CFR 150.20. This prohibition includes, but is 
    not limited to: (1) Using licensed materials or conducting licensed 
    activities in any capacity within the jurisdiction of the NRC; and (2) 
    supervising or directing any licensed activities conducted within the 
    jurisdiction of the NRC.
        B. Following the five-year period of prohibition in Section IV.A 
    above, at least five days prior to the first time that Joseph R. Bynum 
    engages in, or exercises control over, NRC-licensed activities, he 
    shall notify the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear 
    Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, of the name, address, 
    and telephone number of the NRC or Agreement State licensee and the 
    location where the licensed activities will be performed. The notice 
    shall be accompanied by a statement that Joseph R. Bynum is committed 
    to compliance with NRC requirements and the reasons why the Commission 
    should have confidence that he will comply with applicable NRC 
    requirements.
        The Director, Office of Enforcement, may, in writing, relax or 
    rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration by Mr. Bynum of 
    good cause.
    
    V
    
        In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, Joseph R. Bynum must, and any 
    other person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an answer to 
    this Order, and may request a hearing on this Order, within 20 days of 
    the date of this Order. Where good cause is shown, consideration will 
    be given to extending the time to request a hearing. A request for 
    extension of time must be made in writing to the Director, Office of 
    Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555, 
    and include a statement of good cause for the extension. The answer may 
    consent to this Order. Unless the answer consents to this Order, the 
    answer shall, in writing and under oath or affirmation, specifically 
    admit or deny each allegation or charge made in this Order and shall 
    set forth the matters of fact and law on which Joseph R. Bynum or other 
    person adversely affected relies and the reasons as to why the Order 
    should not have been issued. Any answer or request for a hearing shall 
    be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
    Attn: Chief, Docketing and Service Section, Washington, DC 20555. 
    Copies also shall be sent to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. 
    Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, to the Assistant 
    General Counsel for Hearings and Enforcement at the same address, to 
    the Regional Administrator, NRC Region II, 101 Marietta Street, Suite 
    2900, Atlanta, GA 30323, and to Joseph R. Bynum if the answer or 
    hearing request is by a person other than Joseph R. Bynum. If a person 
    other than Joseph R. Bynum requests a hearing, that person shall set 
    forth with particularity the manner in which his or her interest is 
    adversely affected by this Order and shall address the criteria set 
    forth in 10 CFR 2.714(d).
        If a hearing is requested by Joseph R. Bynum or 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.
        Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), Mr. Joseph R. Bynum, or any 
    other person adversely affected by this Order, may, in addition to 
    demanding a hearing, at the time the answer is filed or sooner, move 
    the presiding officer to set aside the immediate effectiveness of the 
    Order on the ground that the Order, including the need for immediate 
    effectiveness, is not based on adequate evidence but on mere suspicion, 
    unfounded allegations, or error.
        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 IV above shall be effective and final 20 days from 
    the date of this Order
    
    [[Page 3925]]
    
    without further order or proceedings. If an extension of time for 
    requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions specified in 
    Section IV shall be final when the extension expires if a hearing 
    request has not been received. An answer or a request for hearing shall 
    not stay the immediate effectiveness of this Order.
    
        Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of January 1997.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    Edward L. Jordan,
    Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory Effectiveness, Program 
    Oversight, Investigations, and Enforcement.
    [FR Doc. 97-1857 Filed 1-24-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
01/27/1997
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
97-1857
Pages:
3923-3925 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
IA 96-101
PDF File:
97-1857.pdf