ML062210533

E-Mail from Holody to Blough, Allegation Related Material - Meeting W/Alleger

ML062210533
Person / Time
Site:	Salem, Hope Creek
Issue date:	03/05/2004
From:	Holody D NRC Region 1
To:	Blough A, Meyer G, Vito D NRC Region 1
References
FOIA/PA-2005-0194
Download: ML062210533 (2)

Text

David-Vito - Re; Aleoation-related material - - meetino w/ allea Paae 111II 9

- maerii metin I avi-Via -- -Re~ wIallaerPawe

~leatin-rlate From: Daniel Holody ý"/

To: A. Randolph Blough; David Vito; Glenn Meyer Date: 3/5/04 9:38AM

Subject:

Re: Allegation-related material - - meeting wI alleger Glenn After discussions with Dave Vito, I spoke with Randy and we agree that this additional information regarding the SCWE allegation should be added to the existing allegation file as part of the SCWE concern. A separate allegation file is not needed since this is part of the existing SCWE issue.

Regarding her statement that a union steward had voiced to a member of the USA team that the ongoing USA review was not talking to the right people, and that PSEG may have stacked the interview list to promote favorable outcomes, I would expect that our questions at the 3118 meeting would address that type of concern even if the issue had not been raised to us by the alleger. That is, I would think our questions for the licensee at the 3/18 meeting would include the following, at a minimum, (Randy asked that I forward them to you):

How did you select the individuals interviewed by the IAT and USA Who selected them.

How did you ensure that your sample of individuals included not just a good cross section of individuals by level in the organization or discipline, but also a cross section of individuals who might possess a level of discontent in the organization.

Why did you decide to speak to individuals in groups, rather than individually How do you assure that people would speak freely in groups, knowing that anyone in the group (including the interviewers) could leak information about what someone else said, and it would be difficult to ascertain who was leaking the information What percentage of individuals interviewed were former employees How did you decide which former employees were selected Did you select both those who left voluntarily and those who were asked to leave.

dan

>>> A. Randolph Blough 03105104 08:48AM >>>

Allegation related material:

i accepted a drop-in meeting with the alleger yesterday from 4:15-5:25 pm.

it was a very cordial meeting. key points of discussion:

1. she commented that the feb 27 PSEG response didn't say very much

2. she will not be at the march 18 meeting, but dave lochbaum will. She opined that PSEG will lie to us at the meeting and that will prove they are untrustworthy.

3. she asked if we would compel public release of the Synergy results; i responded that we did not believe we could legally force them to make it public, but that we had not decided whether or how much to press them on it. We talked about the Synergy survey at some length, and i limited my discussion to the parts she has already provided to us.

4. we discussed at length her view that the plant should be shutdown and our view that there are still substantial margins of safety.

,lunation inthis record was de,eCed / /103t

,n accordance withethe Freedom of InformatIO0 Act, exeMptions BDIA-r "'WIN

Paae 21

~b~vidNiif~I- Re:Alle~ation:reIatedmatenai.: meeting wiaUeger

ýe*'nlle afion-related material - - meeting P

5. She said that a as concered, and had voiced to a member of the USA team on-site thisweek, that the ongoigOUSA review was not talking to the right people. She Implied (without providing additional basis) that PSEG may have stacked the Interview list to promote favorable outcomes. lia-_

6. she offered several complaints aboutyle. She complained abou letters to the site; that he did not know th managers at e time they were selected tb-teir positions last year. that the selection process was run too much by the lave s; and that, when concerns arose that confidential details of the selection process may be leaking,* issued an edict that mangers had until a saidcdate to confess if they had leaked anything, or the guilty would be fired.

7. Regarding her plans for the march 28 spe at aq unplug salem event, she said she plans: to call for the resignation of five top execs, sparing on o call for SID of the plants, and for any unit that is down to stay down (Sal starts a refueling out e eekend after her talk); to not criticize the NRC (although she realizes that, if asked, we will not comment about specific managers; and will explain our reasons for allowing the plant to continue ops). she is clearly very nervous about her march 28 speaking engagement, but says she owes it to the folks who are still on-site.

For the Items highlighted In bold above, Glen, Dan, Dave and I will confer and decide whether anything should be pursued now or, more likely, just factored into our preps for the March 18 meeting.

randy CC: Brian Holian; Diane Screnci; Eileen Neff; Ernest Wilson; Hubert J. Miller, James Wiggins; Karl Farrar, Leanne Harrison; Scott Barber, Theodore Wingfield