Sample Factual Summary Of Office Of Investigation Report - Discrimination printable pdf download

SAMPLE FACTUAL SUMMARY OF OFFICE OF INVESTIGATION

REPORT - DISCRIMINATION

PREDECISIONAL INFORMATION - NOT FOR RELEASE

WITHOUT APPROVAL OF DIRECTOR, OE

SUMMARY OF OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI) REPORT NO. 5-1999-001 Rev. #

OI Report No. X-YYYY-XXX involves a Supervisor of Operations (Supervisor) at the Alpha

Nuclear Plant, who was transferred to a less-desirable, non-managerial position by licensee

management for allegedly raising safety concerns. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.7, discrimination by

the licensee against an employee for raising safety concerns is prohibited.

Element 1: Did the Employee Engage in Protected Activity?

[Describe the specific evidence supporting a conclusion that the employee engaged in

protected activities, e.g., “The Supervisor testified that he raised numerous nuclear safety

concerns to the Manager of Safety and Quality Assurance, as well as other managers at the

Alpha Nuclear Plant. His testimony is corroborated by plant documents which establish that the

concerns were formally raised. The managers admitted to OI that the Supervisor raised

concerns. The concerns involved safety-related functions performed by quality systems

engineers, including [Be as specific as possible].”]

Element 2: Was the Employer Aware of the Protected Activity at the Time of the Adverse

Action?

[Describe the evidence supporting a conclusion that specific Licensee personnel who served in

a supervisory or managerial capacity were aware that the employee engaged in protected

activities, e.g., “The Supervisor created documentation of his safety concerns to management

in early December, 2005, and testified that he verbally related his concerns to management at

the same time. During OI’s investigation, the Manager of Safety and Quality Assurance and

other managers at the Alpha Nuclear Plant testified that as of December 15, 2005, they were

aware that the Supervisor had raised nuclear safety concerns.”]

Element 3: Was an Adverse Action Taken Against the Employee?

[Describe specifically what action was taken against the employee; indicate whether such action

occurred after the employee engaged in protected activities; and describe why the action was

adverse to the employee, e.g., “On January 10, 2006, the Manager of Safety and Quality

Assurance notified the Supervisor that he was being reassigned to a non-managerial position in

the Licensee’s training division, which is outside the Licensee’s compliance monitoring

organization. This action took place approximately one month after the Supervisor had raised

the safety concerns described above. The evidence indicates that the position to which the

Supervisor was transferred had no supervisory responsibilities, and was generally considered a

less desirable position than the Supervisor of Quality Systems.”]

Element 4: Was the Adverse Action Taken, at Least in Part, Because of the Protected

Activities?

[Describe specifically the evidence supporting a conclusion that there was a causal connection

between the protected activities and the adverse action. Include an analysis of reasons

Sample Factual Summary Of Office Of Investigation Report - Discrimination