24340 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 14, 1996 / Notices

8The expectation that employees provide safety

and compliance concerns to licensees is not

applicable to concerns of possible wrongdoing by

NRC employees or NRC contractors. Such concerns

are subject to investigation by the NRC Office of

Inspector General. Concerns related to fraud, waste

or abuse in NRC operations or NRC programs

including retaliation against a person for raising

such issues should be reported directly to the NRC

Office of the Inspector General. The Inspector

General’s toll-free hotline is 800–233–3497.

9 Except for the reporting of defects under 10 CFR

Part 21 and in the area of radiological working

conditions, the Commission has not codified this

expectation. Licensees are required by 10 CFR 19.12

to train certain employees in their responsibility to

raise issues related to radiation safety.

10The Commission intends to protect the identity

of individuals who come to the NRC to the greatest

extent possible. See ‘‘Statement of Policy on

Protecting the Identity of Allegers and Confidential

Sources.’’

will enhance the effectiveness and

safety of the licensee’s operations.

Responsibilities of Employers and

Employees

As emphasized above, the

responsibility for maintaining a safetyconscious environment rests with

licensee management. However,

employees in the nuclear industry also

have responsibilities in this area. As a

general principle, the Commission

normally expects employees in the

nuclear industry to raise safety and

compliance concerns directly to

licensees, or indirectly to licensees

through contractors, because licensees,

and not the Commission, bear the

primary responsibility for safe operation

of nuclear facilities and safe use of

nuclear materials.8 The licensee, and

not the NRC, is usually in the best

position and has the detailed knowledge

of the specific operations and the

resources to deal promptly and

effectively with concerns raised by

employees. This is another reason why

the Commission expects licensees to

establish an environment in which

employees feel free to raise concerns to

the licensees themselves.

Employers have a variety of means to

express their expectations that

employees raise concerns to them, such

as employment contracts, employers’

policies and procedures, and certain

NRC requirements. In fact, many

employees in the nuclear industry have

been specifically hired to fulfill NRC

requirements that licensees identify

deficiencies, violations and safety

issues. Examples of these include many

employees who conduct surveillance,

quality assurance, radiation protection,

and security activities. In addition to

individuals who specifically perform

functions to meet monitoring

requirements, the Commission

encourages all employees to raise

concerns to licensees if they identify

safety issues 9 so that licensees can

address them before an event with

safety consequences occurs.

The Commission’s expectation that

employees will normally raise safety

concerns to their employers does not

mean that employees may not come

directly to the NRC. The Commission

encourages employees to come to the

NRC at any time they believe that the

Commission should be aware of their

concerns.10 But, while not required, the

Commission does expect that employees

normally will have raised the issue with

the licensee either prior to or

contemporaneously with coming to the

NRC. The Commission cautions

licensees that complaints that adverse

action was taken against an employee

for not bringing a concern to his or her

employer, when the employee brought

the concern to the NRC, will be closely

scrutinized by the NRC to determine if

enforcement action is warranted for

discrimination.

Retaliation against employees engaged

in protected activities, whether they

have raised concerns to their employers

or to the NRC, will not be tolerated. If

adverse action is found to have occurred

because the employee raised a concern

to either the NRC or the licensee, civil

and criminal enforcement action may be

taken against the licensee and the

person responsible for the

discrimination.

Summary

The Commission expects that NRC

licensees will establish safety-conscious

environments in which employees of

licensees and licensee contractors are

free, and feel free, to raise concerns to

their management and to the NRC

without fear of retaliation.

Licensees must ensure that

employment actions against employees

who have raised concerns have a wellfounded, non-discriminatory basis.

When allegations of discrimination arise

in licensee, contractor, or subcontractor

organizations, the Commission expects

that senior licensee management will

assure that the appropriate level of

management is involved to review the

particular facts, evaluate or reconsider

the action, and, where warranted,

remedy the matter.

Employees also have a role in

contributing to a safety-conscious

environment. Although employees are

free to come to the NRC at any time, the

Commission expects that employees

will normally raise concerns with the

involved licensee because the licensee

has the primary responsibility for safety

and is normally in the best position to

promptly and effectively address the

matter. The NRC should normally be

viewed as a safety valve and not as a

substitute forum for raising safety

concerns.

This policy statement has been issued

to highlight licensees’ existing

obligation to maintain an environment

in which employees are free to raise

concerns without retaliation. The

expectations and suggestions contained

in this policy statement do not establish

new requirements. However, if a

licensee has not established a safetyconscious environment, as evidenced by

retaliation against an individual for

engaging in a protected activity,

whether the activity involves providing

information to the licensee or the NRC,

appropriate enforcement action may be

taken against the licensee, its

contractors, and the involved individual

supervisors, for violations of NRC

requirements.

The Commission recognizes that the

actions discussed in this policy

statement will not necessarily insulate

an employee from retaliation, nor will

they remove all personal cost should the

employee seek a personal remedy.

However, these measures, if adopted by

licensees, should improve the

environment for raising concerns.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day

of May, 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John C. Hoyle,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 96–12028 Filed 5–13–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Nuclear

Regulatory Commission.

DATE: Weeks of May 13, 20, 27, and June

3, 1996.

PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference

Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,

Maryland.

STATUS: Public and Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

Week of May 13

Monday, May 13

2:00 p.m.

Briefing on Commonwealth Edison (Public

Meeting)

Wednesday, May 15

2:00 p.m.

Briefing on Performance Assessment

Program in HLW, LLW, and SDMP

(Public Meeting)

(Contact: Norman Eisenberg, 301–415–

7285)

3:30 p.m.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 14, 1996 / Notices 24341

1Schedule 15G explains the risks of investing in

penny stocks; important concepts associated with

the penny stock market; the broker-dealer’s duties

to customers; a toll-free telephone number through

which a customer may inquire about the

disciplinary history of a broker-dealer; the

Continued

Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (if

needed)

Week of May 20—Tentative

Wednesday, May 22

10:00 a.m.

Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (if

needed)

2:00 p.m.

Briefing by International Programs

(Closed—Ex. 1)

Friday, May 24

9:30 a.m.

Meeting with Advisory Committee on

Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) (Public

Meeting)

(Contact: John Larkins, 301–415–7360)

Week of May 27—Tentative

Thursday, May 30

2:00 p.m.

Briefing on Status of Dry Cask Storage

Issues (Public Meeting)

(Contact: William Travers, 301–415–8500)

Friday, May 31

10:00 a.m.

Briefing on NRC Inspection Activities

(Public Meeting)

(Contact: Bill Borchardt, 301–415–1257)

11:30 a.m.

Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (if

needed)

Week of June 3—Tentative

Monday, June 3

10:00 a.m.

Briefing on Part 100 Final Rule on Reactor

Site Criteria (Public Meeting)

Thursday, June 6

3:30 p.m.

Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (if

needed)

*The schedule for Commission

meetings is subject to change on short

notice. To verify the status of meetings

call (Recording)–(301) 415–1292.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Bill Hill (301) 415–1661.

This notice is distributed by mail to several

hundred subscribers; if you no longer wish

to receive it, or would like to be added to it,

please contact the Office of the Secretary,

Attn: Operations Branch, Washington, D.C.

20555 (301–415–1963).

In addition, distribution of this meeting

notice over the internet system is available.

If you are interested in receiving this

Commission meeting schedule electronically,

please send an electronic message to

alb@nrc.gov or gkt@nrc.gov.

Dated: May 10, 1996.

John C. Hoyle,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 96–12214 Filed 5–10–96; 12:28 pm]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

POSTAL SERVICE

Sunshine Act Meeting; Notice of Vote

To Close Meeting

At its meeting on May 6, 1996, the

Board of Governors of the United States

Postal Service voted unanimously to

close to public observation its meeting

scheduled for June 3, 1996, in

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The

members will consider a filing with the

Postal Rate Commission for

classification reform of special services.

The meeting is expected to be

attended by the following persons:

Governors Alvarado, Daniels, del Junco,

Dyhrkopp, Fineman, Mackie,

McWherter, Rider and Winters;

Postmaster General Runyon, Deputy

Postmaster General Coughlin, Secretary

to the Board Koerber, and General

Counsel Elcano.

The Board determined that pursuant

to section 552b(c)(3) of title 5, United

States Code, and section 7.3(c) of title

39, Code of Federal Regulations, this

portion of the meeting is exempt from

the open meeting requirement of the

Government in the Sunshine Act [5

U.S.C. 552b(b)] because it is likely to

disclose information in connection with

proceedings under Chapter 36 of title

39, United States Code (having to do

with postal ratemaking, mail

classification and changes in postal

services), which is specifically

exempted from disclosure by section

410(c)(4) of title 39, United States Code.

The Board has determined further that

pursuant to section 552b(c)(10) of title 5,

United States Code, and section 7.3(j) of

title 39, Code of Federal Regulations, the

discussion is exempt because it is likely

to specifically concern participation of

the Postal Service in a civil action or

proceeding involving a determination

on the record after opportunity for a

hearing.

The Board further determined that the

public interest does not require that the

Board’s discussion of these matters be

open to the public.

In accordance with section 552b(f)(1)

of title 5, United States Code, and

section 7.6(a) of title 39, Code of Federal

Regulations, the General Counsel of the

United States Postal Service has

certified that in her opinion the meeting

may properly be closed to public

observation pursuant to section 552b(c)

(3) and (10) of title 5, United States

Code; section 410(c)(4) of title 39,

United States Code; and section 7.3 (c)

and (j) of title 39, Code of Federal

Regulations.

Requests for information about the

meeting should be addressed to the

Secretary of the Board, Thomas J.

Koerber, at (202) 268–4800.

Thomas J. Koerber,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–12201 Filed 5–10–96; 1:39 pm]

BILLING CODE 7710–12–M

POSTAL RATE COMMISSION

[Docket No. A96–14; Order No. 1109]

Forest Grove, Montana 59441 (May A.

Charbonneau, Petitioner); Notice and

Order Accepting Appeal and

Establishing Procedural Schedule

Under 39 U.S.C. 404(b)(5); Correction

AGENCY: Postal Rate Commission.

ACTION: Correction.

SUMMARY: In notice document 96–10340

beginning on page 18632 in the Federal

Register issue of Friday, April 26, 1996,

make the following correction:

On page 18632 in the second column,

the expiration date of the Commission’s

120-day decision schedule was

previously listed as August 20, 1996.

This should be changed to read August

13, 1996.

Dated: May 9, 1996.

Margaret P. Crenshaw,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–12082 Filed 5–13–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment

Request

Upon Written Request, Copies

Available From: Securities and

Exchange Commission, Office of Filings

and Information Services, Washington,

DC 20549.

Extension: Rule 15g–2; SEC File No.

270–381; OMB Control No. 3235–0434.

Notice is hereby given that pursuant

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities

and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) is publishing the

following summary of collection for

public comment.

Rule 15g–2 requires broker-dealers to

provide their customers with a risk

disclosure document, as set forth in

Schedule 15G,1 prior to their first non-