ML052570425

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Allegation Review Board Disposition Record, Allegation No. RI-2002-A-0137 - Salem
ML052570425
Person / Time
Site: Salem  PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 03/11/2003
From:
NRC Region 1
To:
References
FOIA/PA-2004-0314, RI-2002-A-0137
Download: ML052570425 (1)


Text

g:\alleg\panel\20020137arb4.wpd ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DISPOSITION RECORD Allegation No.: RI-2002-A-0137 Branch Chief (AOC): Meyer Site/Facility: Salem Acknowledged: Yes ARB Date: 3/11/2003 Confidentiality Granted: No Issue discussed: Alleger contends that bolting being installed (Hilti bolts) to support a modification in which cable trays are being covered with fire wrap material, will not hold up the cable trays due to added weight of the fire wrap material. Alleger forwarded new information on the technical issues on November 12, 2002.

Alleger contends he was harassed for raising this concern. Alleger isalso concerned that he will be suspended by NPS, and that this will negatively affect his ability to get work at other nuclear facilities in the near future.

Alleger also indicated that he has been put on undesirable jobs since raising his concern.

Alleger contacted prior to referral to licensee (if applicable)? NA ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DECISIONS Attendees: Chair- Rogge Branch Chief (AOC) - Meyer SAC - Vito 01 Rep. - Wilson RI Counsel - Others - White, McFadden DISPOSITION ACTIONS: (List actions for processing and closure. Note responsible person(s),

form of action closure document(s), and estimated completion dates.)

1) DRP/DRS completed review of an undated DOL complaint and did not identify any new technical issues.

Responsible Person: Barber/Lew (Schroeder) ECD:

Closure Documentation: Completed:03/11/03 SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT: The risk significance of this concern appears low since additional bolting could be added at a later date, if needed.

PRIORITY OF 01 INVESTIGATION: Alleger asserts that some of the reprimands he receive were justified because of a self admitted absentee problem, while the other reprimand are based on an overly critical subjective judgement of his workmanship on the job by his supervisor.

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):

Rationale used to defer Ol 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?_

(Assign action to determine date, if unknown)

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: (Include other pertinent comments. Also include considerations related to licensee referral, if appropriate. Identify any potential generic issues)

Distribution: Panel Attendees, Regional Counsel, 01, Responsible Individuals (original to SAC)

ARB MINUTES ARE REVIEWED AND APPROVED AT THE ARB