ML062540375
| ML062540375 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 10/20/2003 |
| From: | Vito D NRC Region 1 |
| To: | Meyer G NRC Region 1 |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2005-0194, RI-2003-A-0110 | |
| Download: ML062540375 (7) | |
Text
.javid-/ito - RI-2003-A-01 10 Acknowledgment Letter From:
David Vito To:
Glenn Meyer Date:
10/20103 3:24PM
Subject:
RI-2003-A-01 10 Acknowledgment Letter SENSITIVE ALLEGATION INFORMATION PROTECT APPROPRIATELY InformatioR in this record was deleted in accordance with teFreedom of Information Act, exemptions FOIA-Pagem 1
'V
IDavid Vito - Salem/H C allegation stuff Paqel 1 From:
David Vito To:
John Jolicoeur Date:
10/17/03 11: 10AM
Subject:
Salem/H C allegation stuff SENSITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL ATTACHED PROTECT APPROPRIATELY
- John, The Allegation Receipt Form and the acknowledgement letter (which was sent out yesterday) are attached. The acknowledgement letter is much more detailed in terms of the description of the concerns because after initial receipt, we had a 6 hour6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> interview with the alleger, and we have also' been provided with a considerable amount of additional supporting documentation.
David Vito - RI-2003-A-0110 Ack. Letter. & Ack. Letter Excerpt re: Initial SCWE Response Page1 From:
David Vito To:
Hubert J. Miller Date:
10/16/03 1:35PM
Subject:
RI-2003-A-01 10 Ack. Letter. & Ack. Letter Excerpt re: Initial SCWE Response SENSITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL - PLEASE TREAT SENSITIVELY
- Hub, See attached.
DR~vid Vito -Ack. Leftter for RI-2003-A-01 10 Pagejf From:
David V,ito Q To:
Lisamarie Jarriel Date:
10/16/03 4:44PM
Subject:
Ack. Letter for RI-2003-A-01 10 SENSITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL PROTECT APPROPRIATELY
- Lisa, Attached
From:
A. Randolph Blough To:
David Vito; Glenn Meyer; Tracy Walker Date:
10/16/03 8:00AM
Subject:
Re: Allegation writeup Scott, pis handle if glenn is out
>>> David Vito 10l115/03 03:58PM >>
- Glenn, Please arrange a time to talk this through with Hub, tomorrow preferably (the letter is due out on Friday). I will make the other tweaks to the remainder of the document per Hub's comments, and bring that to the meeting, so that we can assure that all of his comments are addressed.
>>> Glenn Meyer 10/15/03 03:49PM >>>>
Tracy,The a 'ttached file has my writeup of the response to allegation concern 1 (SCWE), as we discussed earlier today. I'm sorry I didn't get it to you sooner.
CC:
Scott Barber
D-civid Vito -Re: Allegation writeup
~...
Pali From:
Scott Barber To:
A. Randolph Blough Date:
10/16/03 12:32PM
Subject:
Re: Allegation writeup We completed the rewrite and plan to meet with Hub today at 1:00 p.m. I will try look you up separately to personally invite you to the meeting.
>>> Glenn Meyer 10/15/03 03:49PM >>>>
v Tracy - The attached file has my writeup of the response to allegation concern 1 (SOW.E), as we discussed earlier today. I'm sorry I didn't get it to you sooner.
CC:
CC:
David Vito; Glenn Meyer, Tracy Walker
David Vito - Re: Salem/Hp.Ck. Assist to Staff Paqe 1 1 From:
A. Randolph Blough To:
Ernest Wilson Date:
10/16/03 3:52PM
Subject:
Re: SalemlHp.Ck. Assist to Staff we will do what is needed to support. we have lots of options for Artificial island, probably moreso than any site.
If several inspectors are needed at once we would call on the resident inspectors, plus scott. if some of the residents need to be watching the plant, we would likely see if some DRS inspectors with island experience are available, e.g., bower, schoppy, pindale, and lorson. We could also tab other inspectors in DRP, such as passarelli, schroeder, welling, herrera, but they won't have first-hand knowledge of the specific issues.
bottom-line is that we will support; scott and glenn can coordinate and i can free up resources outside their branch.
I want 01lto be able to pursue in the manner you see best.
randy
>>> Ernest WilsonMO0/16/03 12:48PM>>>>
- Randy, I came to see you but you were behind closed doors. Anyway, just a heads up on resources for the subject. I met with Eileen and Jeff this AM on game planning and we came up with the following: In accordance with the ARB of 10/2, 0f ahd the staff have already interviewed 3 of the 4 senior mgt: official. s on SOWE and some of the *events that were -indicative of a 'poor SCWE (according to the alleger). We haven't interviewedI 1 since we made the investigative determination *that it would be more prudent to Wait on that interview since he will need to be examined on all of the SCWE issue as well as the 50.7 allegation as the primary target (Hub bought into this)..
I've asked Eileen to create a list of names provided by the alleger as persons that confided in her regarding the poor work environment, atEileen deems necessary to interview before we go to the 12 shift managers (6 each), SROs, n Once we have the list we will know better the numbers of folks we (the NRC) shou inerview. After the -list is compiled, I would suggest taking a couple of days in the near term and have 01 agents teamed up with an inspector and try to knock out as many of the interviews on SCWE as we can (of course the outage might mess things up somewhat as far as scheduling is concerned). If technical issues like "grassing," the NA'd step, etc. come up our tech staff support would be able to review those issues with the witness. I could see making 4 or 5 agents available on short notice for this effort which would mean 4 or 5 inspectors would be needed to team up with us.
We would likely tape the interviews for later transcription. This would -meet the ARB disposition actions from the SCWE perspective. The pure technical issues provided by the alleger, as I understand it, need to be reviewed by the staff, and then if warranted, brought back to ARB for disposition. Does this sound like its feasible? Any differing views?
Ernie CC:
David Vito; Eileen Neff: Glenn Meyer; Jeffrey Teator; Richard Crlenjak; Scott Barber; Wayne Lanning