ML052620025

Allegation Review Board Disposition Record. Allegation No. RI-2002-A-0051

ML052620025
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	04/12/2002
From:	NRC Region 1
To:
References
FOIA/PA-2004-0314, RI-2002-A-0051
Download: ML052620025 (2)

Text

p. -

I4 ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DISPOSITION RECORD Allegation No.: RI-2002-A-0051 Branch Chief fAOC): Meyer Site/Facility: Salem Acknowledged: No ARB Date: 4/12/2002 (Ad Hoc) Confidentiality Granted: No Issue discussed: Original Allegation - Letter from Congressman Edward Markev of Massachusetts regarding the adeauacv of security at Salem (among other sites). sDecificallv the acceotability of granting temDorarv unescorted access to vital areas for outaae workers.

Alleger contacted prior to referral to licensee (if applicable)? N/A - Conaressman Markev expects a direct reply from Chairman Meserve in 15 days - no referral Dossible ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DECISIONS Attendees: Chair - Holian Branch Chief(AOC) - Barklev (acting) SAC - Vito 01 Rep. - Letts RI Counsel - Fewell Others -

DISPOSITION ACTIONS:

Allegation reviewed by Greg Smith at site on April 11, 2002. Reply to Congressman Markey will be handled by the Green Ticket reply versus the allegation management system.

Coordinate w/G. Tracy re: response to Congressman Markey.

1) Region I to contact G. Tracy's office to request inclusion on concurrence to Green Ticket response Responsible Person: SAC/Meyer ECD: 4/12/2002 Closure Documentation: Completed:

2) When Region I is called upon to concur in response to Green Ticket, reconvene ARB to determine whether any additional actions are required re: the Salem allegation.

Responsible Person: SAC/Meyer ECD: 4/25/2002 Closure Documentation: Green Ticket Resnonse Completed:

SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT: The risk significance of this allegation is very low as the matter was inspected by Greg Smith on April 11, 2002, and PSEG compliance with the NRC's current security requirements was confirmed.

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):

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):R\

What is the potential violation and regulatory requirement?

When did the potential violation occur?_

K/

4 I A 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)

ARB MINUTES ARE REVIEWED AND APPROVED AT THE ARB