ML062160230

Partially Deleted Paper Re Summary Information

ML062160230
Person / Time
Site:	Salem, Hope Creek
Issue date:	08/02/2006
From:	- No Known Affiliation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
FOIA/PA-2005-0194
Download: ML062160230 (2)

Text

Summary Informatio Interviewed on 10/29/03, W/O counsel present - employed at Salem sin been 407 ince 1999.

Discussion of issue with Salem I valve BF19 (feed reg. Valve) approximately mid 10/03-he Ids this as a production over safety issue (p. 12-17+).

ýP. 19-24) Disappearance, of Mnf~cations - has had much difficulty locating them in the system Can,2 d 1 notification written on it and Sw2tNo indication or info that any notifications have been falsely altered.

Subject will raise concerns and has done so - YES Subject would raise concerns if necessary - YES and adds his mgmt tells them - if you have an issue - bring it up Subject raises concerns for others, why? All~ - YES, "because they don't want to deal with it" - "don't want to bring it up" - "don't want to have their names tied to it" So at times they come to him with issues to raise Subject won't raise concerns-why? Says they try to fix things in-house first because if it can be fixed in-house "we can keep you guys out of it."

Others do raise concerns - YES Others don't or hesitate to raise concerns - Says employees may be hesitant to raise concerns to their mgmt. (P. 60) In last 1.5 years had escalating battle between workers and mgmt - thinks it started when INPO gave them a 3 rating. (p. 62)

• • Thinkse 11 help fix the environment.

Never seen other union members intimidating or threatening other members to not raise issues (like what we heard froxt Hope Creek)

Experienced retaliation for raising concerns (if yes, give brief summary of circumstances.

Identify for self or others) - NO - But feels that who raise issues and jump up and down are looked down upon by mgmt and their peeas said openly "you u s get me in trouble al of the tim nksI has had his job threateried becausep acked up the NEOs. Thinks !r'har!@assed by the supervisors because he raises issues.

• 3~U~ia8i~~ &iLCdWG iiib wa e.d a in accordance with the Freedom of Infolmatloa Act exemptions' 2 C FOJA- cX'~-~

d

• If subject discussed incidents/events, briefly describe the incident and identify what they offered the incident as an example of, for example:

unsafe acts (industrial), schedule pressures, production over safety, questionable conservative decision making by management (P. 28- )'II *only way to close it was to shut down.k rabbed work control su*pv and didn't take any operators and7 Production over safety issue "megawatt mentality" and unsafe act.

(P. 34- 40) Salem 2 bolting issue on RHR Heat Exchanger in summer 2001 or 2002. The fix was deferred because they didn't want to extend the refuel outage.

(P. 44- ) Grassing in intake structures issue - did right thing but% opined that 0k was under pressure from sr. mgmt - he looked "uncomfortable."

If the subject offered information regarding other problems with SCWE, briefly identify (such as the CAP, the processing of notifications, handling of routine maintenance)

OnLrn HARVINIJ(p. 72-) corroborates that one NEO said in group meeting "how do we stop being white noise". Most of the NEOs (but not him) still feel they are white noise.