ML062000245

Interview Report of Individual

ML062000245
Person / Time
Site:	Salem, Hope Creek
Issue date:	12/22/2003
From:	Neff E NRC/OI
To:
References
1-2003-045, FOIA/PA-2005-0194
Download: ML062000245 (3)

Text

REPORT OF INTERVIEW OF KYMN HARVIN On December 22, 2003, Kymn HARVIN was interviewed by the Reporting Agent (RA), NRC, Office of Investigations (01), Region I. The purpose of the interview was to clarify information contained on tape recorded voice messages provided by HARVIN to 01 as relevant to her allegations regarding discrimination and the work environment at Salem/Hope Creek Stations.

For the most part, the messages are self-explanatory, but HARVIN provided the following information, in substance:

She believed the messages were left on her voice mail at PSEGwas between laute J2a left byand aynd_

2003. Message #1 (tape #1) dated March 3, 2003, March 31, HARVIN explained that she called a "Quakerlike clearness committee" in regard to the decision she needed to make for her future employmen P was to be part of the meeting and she IJ explained to him durin her jst week of employment at PSEG that she had changed the agenda to "nuclear safety". __ ccined to be part of the meeting and never asked rther questions. HARVIN found this to be a surprising response due to his position Cis also the voice on the third message on the second tape describing plans for an INPO visit.

The voice on the message dated March 31, 2003, is-2 The undated message ollolw that is wit - . )and HARVIN believes it is in regard to keepinM

&mployeesfrom "losingTace" over the termination of a supervisor dtwo union

,employees involved with a PR2 valve problem at Salem in late 2002. _did not want to er this issue. n s contended by the on ith threatened pickets. &deidedto

-reinstate the employees. message is about him taking the action, but not receiving backing HARVIN claimed that the statement regarding "holding the line" and stepping out front originally meant taking a line against the union, butLatpr cam t&mean bolding the line against corporate management. HARVIN heard fro ahat the "public story" was one thing in terms of the amount that would be spent for equipment reliability and safety systems, but they did not believe that amount would actually be invested.

The message embedded after for the.position was identified by HARVIN as from HARVIN reported that there were off- he-record discussio býu e March 2003 reactivity management event with Hope Creek hen he was interviewed by Winston & Strawn in regard to her allegations in April 2003. W reportedly stated that he felt he needed an attorney present because he believed his testimony would incriminate him. elo In addition to reviewing the tape recorded voice messages, HARVIN was asked about the e-mails Case No. 1-2003-045 1N.

.ormatiozi in this record was deleted EXHIBt '.

in accordance with the Freedom of Infomiation1 Ac exemptons " - PAGE L.OF 3 PAGE(S&

0o . 4t

amon and HARVIN dated September 28, 2001, October ctober 31, 2001 (copies attached). HARYIN formerly directly reported to

• at PSEG corporate before reporting to WIin 2002. The e-mails '/ (.

indicate that HARVIN is being moved from the corporate payroll to PSEG Nuclear for calendar year 2002 and her status will be re-assessed to "d termine where and how she can make her best contribution to the business" at the end of 2002. ote that it was a rotational assignment "with the understanding that there are no guarantees-beyond that."

HARVIN stated that organization went through budget cuts in 2002 that caused HARVIN's position to no Ion er be considered rotational and there was no further "dotted line" reporting to Th e rotational" no longer applied because there was no organization to which tTARVIN could return. Further, she stopped going to staff meetings related to functions other Nuclear and was removed from the PSEG corporate distribution ) -

list. She recalled thankin n mid-2002 for transferring her to his organization because there were corporate lay-offs. She believes this change would have been documented with corporate records only and she does not recall seeing any such documentation.

HARVIN pointed out that several factors were unusual in the handling of her terminat by PSEG Nuclear. She was initially called to discuss her bonus when she met with and learned of her termination. She was scheduled to conduct INPO visits related to Duke Energy assessments with others from PSEG in April 2003. She was involved with other management teams ht meetings supporting the recognized top 100 PSEG managers (she was not in top 100).

In February 2003, she worked with three directors to create 100-day plans that required follow-up. After learning of her termination in February 2003, she was interested in the Training Manager position and a Human Resources position, but learned thata hand were tied in terms of hiring decisions in March 2003. Her forty-five day placement period was shortened b two weeks (from 4/16/03 to 3/28/03). She had also made arrangements within, Pt PSEG Corporate after notified of her release on February 26,2003, to work with him at corporate and possibly join his organization. This was to occur during the first two weeks in April. She was paid by PSEG through April 16, 2003.

HARVIN summarized the concerns she presented t in"e" meetings after he, sent her to the Salem assignment resulting from tha-She identified to him union/management cncerns; eaw'eena rift the"guys

'wth licenses" and senior management regarding operatio -I decision making;

,, were an ineffective arrangement;,an as disengaged from Operations from the OS level down. She began to note concerns in March 2001, as discussed in her transcribed interview with OI/Region I dated September 9, 2003.

HARVIN also noted tha m stated in his message to hrch 24, 200 .

(recorded), that her last day was to be March 28 indicating it wa decision.l I IT:* f-*Ei-jlater informed her in his July 2003 letter that the decision was made by HR.

Case No. 1-2003-045 2 U,-*i ...

I ! ..

Eileen Neff' Special Agent Office of Investigations Field Office, Region I Case No. 1-2002-042