ML052570126
| ML052570126 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 08/08/2002 |
| From: | NRC Region 1 |
| To: | |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2004-0314, RI-2002-A-0097 | |
| Download: ML052570126 (2) | |
Text
i. 7 A
A g:\\,a11eg~panel\\20020097arb.wpd ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DISPOSITION RECORD Allegation No.: RI-2002-A-0097 Site/Facility: Salem / Hone Creek ARB Date:
818/2002 Branch Chief (AOC): Meyer Acknowledged: Anonymous Confidentiality Granted: N/A Issue discussed: Organizational changes have applied a production over quality approach to the Procurement function (Procurement Assessment Dept.). making employees hesitant to raise safety concerns. Issues raised to Human Resources and Employee Concerns have not been taken seriously.
Alleger contacted prior to referral to licensee (if applicable)? N/A ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DECISIONS Attendees: Chair - Clifford Branch Chief (AOC) -
Meyer SAC - Vito 01 Rep. - Monroe RI Counsel -
Others -
Crleniak. JWhite DISPOSITION ACTIONS: (List actions for processing and closure. Note responsible person(s), form of action closure document(s), and estimated completion dates.)
- 1)
Refer this concern to PSEG for their review and response. DRP (with DRS assistance) to review licensee's response for indications of any possible chilling effect or lack of adequate independence of the QA function in procurement.
Responsible Person: Mever/Barklev Closure Documentation:
ECD:
8/30/2002 Completed:
- 2)
Review licensee response - DRS to assist Responsible Person: Mever/Barklev Closure Documentation:
ECD:
10/16/2002 Completed:
- 3)
Repanel if indications of chilling effect or lack of adequate independence of the QA function in procurement - if no close allegation file.
Responsible Person: SAC Closure Documentation:
ECD:
10/16/2002 Completed:
- 4)
Closeout memo - DRP to provide Enclosure 1 to closeout memo.
Responsible Person:
Barklev Closure Documentation:_
ECD:
10/31/2002 Completed:
SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT: The risk significance of this allegation is considered low given the absence of specific examples where the alleged production pressure has resulted in the release and use of inadequatelunqualified safety-related parts.
PRIORITY OF 01 INVESTIGATION:
NIA If potential discrimination or wrongdoing and 01 is not opening a case, provide rationale here (e.g., no prima facie, lack of specific indication of wrongdoing):
ARB MINUTES ARE REVIEWED AND APPROVED AT THE ARB
I 2
Rationale used to defer 01 discrimination case (DOL case in progress):
ENFORCEMENT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CONSIDERATION (only applies to wrongdoing matters (including discrimination issues) that are under investigation by 01, DOL. or DOJ):
What is the potential violation and regulatory requirement?
When did the potential violation occur?
Once date of potential violation is established, SAC will assign AMS action to have another ARB at four (4) years from that date, to discuss enforcement statute of limitations issues.
NOTES:
Distribution: Panel Attendees, Regional Counsel, 01, Responsible Individuals (original to SAC)