ML052580574

Allegation Review Board Disposition Record, Allegation No. R1-2002-A-0018

ML052580574
Person / Time
Site:	Hope Creek
Issue date:	02/20/2002
From:	NRC Region 1
To:
References
FOIA/PA-2004-0314, R1-2002-A-0018
Download: ML052580574 (2)

Text

g:\alleg\panel\2002001 8arb.wpd ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DISPOSITION RECORD Allegation No.: RI-2002-A-0018 Branch Chief (AOC): Mever Site/Facility: Hone Creek Acknowledged: No ARB Date: 2/20/2002 Confidentiality Granted: No Issue discussed: Concern with the revocation of a reactor operator's license for alleged insubordination. (See attached allegation receint form for further details)

Alleger contacted prior to referral to licensee (if applicable)? Yes - alle-ier does not want the issue referred for fear that his identity will be revealed ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DECISIONS Attendees: Chair - Holian Branch Chief (AOC) - Meyer SAC - Vito 01 Rep. - Monroe RI Counsel - Fewell Others - Barklev. Caruso. Conte. Crleniak DISPOSITION ACTIONS: (List actions for processing and closure. Note responsible person(s),

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

1) Provide an acknowledgment/closeout letter to the alleger. Indicate that this matter appears to us to involve an internal personnel matter within PSEG's control. No indication of discrimination or retaliation for raising safety concerns has been made by the alleger nor by the RO during our conversation with the individual. In addition, our review has not indicated that PSEG violated shift manning requirements during the brief period when the RO was being escorted to the gate.

Responsible Person: Barklev ECD: 3/8/2002 Closure Documentation: Completed:_

SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT: The risk significance of these concerns is very low as there is no evidence of PSEG violating shift manning requirements and the affected RO has not brought a case of alleged H&ID to the NRC directly during our conversations with the individual regarding his possible appeal rights.

PRIORITY OF 01 INVESTIGATION: N/A 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):

The affected RO has not personally raised a concern with potential discrimination by PSEG in this matter and the alleger has not provided evidence of a prima facie case in this matter.

Rationale used to defer 01 discrimination case (DOL case in progress):

ENFORCEMENT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CONSIDERATION (only anplies to wrongdoing matters (including discrimination issues) that are under investigation by 01. DOL, or DOJI:

What is the potential violation and regulatory requirement?_

When did the potential violation occur?_

(Assign action to determine date, if unknown)

ARB MINUTES ARE REVIEWED AND APPROVED AT THE ARB

2 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)