U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region IV

611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

Arlington, Texas 76011-8064

RIV: 97-67 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Breck Henderson November 4, 1997

OFFICE: 817/860-8128

NRC PROPOSES $10,000 FINE AGAINST MATTINGLY

FOR FIRING WHISTLEBLOWER

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a $10,000 fine against

Mattingly Testing Services Inc. of Great Falls, Montana, for firing a radiographer who

had reported safety violations to the NRC.

Mattingly Testing, a small company licensed by the NRC to perform radiography,

dismissed the employee in April 1995 after he reported to the NRC that Mattingly

Testing had violated a number of NRC requirements governing the use of radiographic

cameras. The cameras use sealed radioactive sources to detect flaws in metals and

other materials.

An NRC inspection substantiated the employee’s allegations. The agency cited

Mattingly Testing for significant violations, including allowing inadequately trained

employees to work in radiography and failure to properly secure radiographic cameras,

and fined it $15,500 in May 1995. An order was also issued requiring Mattingly to have

periodic audits performed by an independent auditor.

After his dismissal, the individual charged that Mattingly Testing had fired him in

retaliation for raising safety concerns. Under federal law and NRC requirements,

employees who raise safety concerns are protected from discrimination by their

employers.

His claims were heard before a U.S. Department of Labor administrative law

judge and were investigated by the NRC’s Office of Investigations. In March 1997, the

administrative law judge concluded that Mattingly Testing discriminated against the

employee when it fired him, reversing an earlier decision in favor of Mattingly Testing.

The NRC Office of Investigations reached the same conclusion in an inquiry

concluded on April 16, 1997. On April 18, a Department of Labor Administrative

Review Board approved a settlement between Mattingly Testing and the individual, thus

ending the Department of Labor proceedings prior to its reaching a final decision.

During Department of Labor proceedings and a conference with NRC staff,
Mattingly Testing said that it had fired the individual because he had performed a poor

inspection and had missed a significant number of welding defects on girders intended

for use on a bridge project.

In a letter to Mattingly Testing, NRC Region IV Regional Administrator Ellis W.

Merschoff said, ``Notwithstanding this argument, the NRC has determined that

(Mattingly Testing) has not shown that it would have terminated the former employee

solely for having conducted a poor inspection, absent his having brought safety

concerns to the NRC.”

The NRC categorized the violation as Severity Level III under its four-level

enforcement system. Level IV is the least serious. The NRC doubled the fine from the

base minimum of $5,000 because Mattingly Testing did not identify the violation, and

because it has not provided to NRC information on specific actions it has taken to

ensure that the individual’s firing does not have a chilling effect on other employees

raising safety concerns to NRC.

Mattingly Testing has 30 days to pay the fine or file a protest. If the protest is

denied, the company may request a hearing.

###