ML052620049
| ML052620049 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 08/06/2002 |
| From: | D'Antonio J NRC Region 1 |
| To: | Caruso J, Conte R, Vito D NRC Region 1 |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2004-0314, RI-2002-A-0099 | |
| Download: ML052620049 (1) | |
Text
I David Vito - Rl-2002-A-0099 Page 1 I David Vito - R1-2002-A-0099 Paqe ii From:
Joseph D'Antonio To:
David Vito; John Caruso; Richard Conte Date:
816/02 8:37AM
Subject:
R1-2002-A-0099 I have reviewed this document. The alleger has two main complaints, H&l and improper use of Technical Specification grace period.
As he describes it, I don't think there's an issue with the TS grace period. He says that due to the way they schedule work, ALL annual and 18 month surveillances get alternately "short cycled" then extended into the grace period over a three year period. Allowing scheduling flexibility like this is what the grace period is for, reference T.S. 4.0.2 basis.
The H&l appears significant. Essentially, he provides a diary of how he was harrassed out of the company for complaining about inadequacies in a work control and tagging software tool. However, his counterpart at Salem doesn't seem to have had a problem, and PSEG will probably claim his treatment was due to the way he handled the issue and that he was expected to get his job done despite the software problem.