ML062700193
| ML062700193 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 01/09/2004 |
| From: | Jarriel J NRC/OE |
| To: | Barber B, Blough A, Farrar K, Marc Ferdas, Mel Gray, Brian Holian, Johnson G, Malone G, Meyer G, Miller H, Deborah Neff, Dan Orr, Passarelli A, Teator J, Vito D, Walker T, Wiggins E, Wiggins J, Ted Wingfield NRC Region 1 |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2005-0194, RI-2003-A-0110 | |
| Download: ML062700193 (7) | |
Text
Davidto - Re: Call to RI-2003-A-io 10SalemHCSCW- ,eger . Page 1 From: Lisamarie Jarriel To: A. Randolph Blough; Anne Passarelli; Brian Holian; Daniel Orr; David Vito; Eileen Neff; Ernest Wilson; George Malone; Gilbert Johnson; Glenn Meyer; Hubert J. Miller; James Wiggins; Jeffrey Teator; Karl Farrar; Marc Ferdas; Mel Gray; Scott Barber; Theodore Wingfield; Tracy Walker Date: 1/9/04 3:17PM
Subject:
Re: Call to RI-2003-A-0110 Salem/HC SCWE Alleger Thanks Dave. I will contact Mr. L.
>>> David Vito 01/08/04 04:19PM >>>
- SENSITIVE ALLEGATION INFORMATION -
- PROTECT APPROPRIATELY -
I called the alleger this afternoon to get her input on whether we could speak about her issues with Dave Lochbaum, based on his recent contacts with NRC which indicated that she is also interfacing with him on her concerns. I told her that we would never tell him anything more than we tell her. She said that she had no problem with the NRC providing responses to Dave L. about her concerns. However, she asked that we keep any such interfaces confidential (i.e., she stated that Dave L. promised her that he wouldn't transmit any of the information she gives him about her interactions with the NRC to others, and she asked that we do the same with any information either she or he provides us about their interactions). I told her that to the best of our ability, we would do so.
She also made some comments about about her discussion with Hub here in Region I a couple of weeks ago (12/22/03):
- 1. She indicated that Hub spent some time discussing recent management changes at the site (Anderson, Bakken) and she was a bit concerned that the NRC may see that as some kind of panacea to their problems. She indicated that no matter how many changes are made in management at the site, the real production pressure has come from Newark, and those folks are not changing. I told her that I felt our our review was comprehensive, and that we would render decisions based on the totality of the review, and not simply on the fact that some site managers have been replaced..
- 2. She indicated that Hub told her that it is possible that we may have to wait for the conclusion of her civil suit in NJ before rendering decisions on this matter. This was of considerable concern to her, because she indicated that she is not going to settle with the company, and they are just entering discovery, which could take a year or two. I told her that I didn't know what Hub said to her about this subject but that that she may have misread it. I told her that while I could not provide her with a projected end date, and while I felt that we need to continue to approach this matter deliberately, I was fairly confident that it would not' take us a year to provide feedback on what we are finding as a result of our review.
Additional comments during the phone call:
"If Roy Anderson was taking on safety culture as much as he has taken on cost-cutting (there have been a number of recent layoffs), they would be much better off."
"The reason why they have never had a good safety culture is that no one in PSEG has ever demanded a strong safety culture."
CC: Daniel Holody; Leanne Harrison; Sharon Johnson
avid Vito- Fwd: Call to RI-2003-A-0110 Salem/HC SCWEAIleger ........... Page il From: Mel Gray To: Glenn Meyer Date: 1/9/04 8:37AM
Subject:
Fwd: Call to RI-2003-A-01 10 Salem/HC SCWE Alleger Glenn, This morning I faxed you a "message from Jim Hutton" issued yesterday. The purpose is to provide some current context for safety culture at Hope Creek. In it the plant manager describes some instances of step improvements in safety performance and his expectations going forward.
His message and examples are contrary to the statement in the attached email that "no one in PSEG has ever demanded a strong safety culture."
CCO: David Vito; Scott Barber
David Vito - Re: Call to RI-2003-A-011.0 Salem/HC SCWE Alleger P..ag e 1 From: David Vito To: Hubert J. Miller Date: 1/9104 8:08AM
Subject:
Re: Call to RI-2003-A-0110 Salem/HC SCWE Alleger Hub, I believe I made those points with her on the phone, but I will call today to reaffirm.
>>> Hubert J. Miller 01/09/04 07:56AM >>>
I did not tell the alleger we would be awaiting the conclusion of the lawsuit. I did mention we were aware of her proceeding and may of told her we would follow what happened with it BUT we are doing what is called for in our process completely independent of any other proceeding.
I told her of the many interviews we were doing ..... told her we were making this a priority, moving smartly on the case but we would not rush things to the point that we get it wrong.
I did talk some about new management but it was paradoxically for reasons opposite what she thinks she heard. New management is doing things that might improve the picture but it is the results -- not what managements intends or says -- that count with us. In other words, we know new management is on the scene but we never predict -- we inspect to see what they accomplish.
(By the way, she told me too that Roy Anderson should not have cut people as one of his first moves ..... she also, however, told me he brought more sanity to the organizational structure in changes he made.)
Dave, pls see me about a quick followup by you with the alleger to make certain she understands these points.
>>> David Vito/8/04 04:19PM >>>
- SENSITIVE ALLEGATION INFORMATION -
- PROTECT APPROPRIATELY -
I called the alleger this afternoon to get her input on whether we could speak about herlissues with Dave Lochbaum, based on his recent contacts with NRC which indicated that she is also interfacing with him on her concerns. I told her that we would never tell him anything more than we tell her. She said that she had no problem with the NRC providing responses to Dave L. about her concerns. However, she asked that we keep any such interfaces confidential (i.e., she stated that Dave L. promised her that he wouldn't transmit any of the information she gives him about her interactions with the NRC to others, and she asked that we do the same with any information either she or he provides us about their interactions). I told her that to the best of our ability, we would do so.
She also made some comments about about her discussion with Hub here in Region I a couple of weeks ago (12/22/03):
- 1. She indicated that Hub spent some time discussing recent management changes at the site (Anderson, Bakken) and she was a bit concerned that the NRC may see that as some kind of panacea to their problems. She indicated that no matter how many changes are made in management at the site, the real production pressure has come from Newark, and those folks are not changing. I told her that I felt our our review was comprehensive, and that we would render decisions based on the totality of the review, and not simply on the fact that some site managers have been replaced..
- 2. She indicated that Hub told her that it is possible that we may have to wait for the conclusion of her civil suit in NJ before rendering decisions on this matter. This was of considerable concern to her, because
Dav idVito - Re: Call to RI-2003-A-01 o10 Saem/HC SCW EAlleg r .. .......... age 2 P......
she indicated that she is not going to settle with the company, and they are just entering discovery, which could take a year or two. I told her that I didn't know what Hub said to her about this subject but that that she may have misread it. I told her that while I could not provide her with a projected end date, and while I felt that we need to continue to approach this matter deliberately, I was fairly confident that it would not take us a year to provide feedback on what we are finding as a result of our review.
Additional comments during the phone call:
"If Roy Anderson was taking on safety culture as much as he has taken on cost-cutting (there have been a number of recent layoffs), they would be much better off."
"The reason why they have never had a good safety culture is that no one in PSEG has ever demanded a strong safety culture."
bDavid Vio - Re: Call to RI-2003-A-0110 Salem/HC SCWE Alleger Page 1 From: Hubert J. Miller To: A. Randolph Blough; Anne Passarelli; Brian Holian; Daniel Orr; David Vito; Eileen Neff; Ernest Wilson; George Malone; Gilbert Johnson; Glenn Meyer; James Wiggins; Jeffrey Teator; Karl Farrar; Marc Ferdas; Mel Gray; Scott Barber; Theodore Wingfield; Tracy Walker Date: 1/9/04 7:56AM
Subject:
Re: Call to RI-2003-A-01 10 Salem/HC SCWE Alleger I did not tell the alleger we would be awaiting the conclusion of the lawsuit. I did mention we were aware of her proceeding and may of told her we would follow what happened with it BUT we are doing what is called for in our process completely independent of any other proceeding.
I told her of the many interviews we were doing ..... told her we were making this a priority, moving smartly on the case but we would not rush things to the point that we get it wrong.
I did talk some about new management but it was paradoxically for reasons opposite what she thinks she heard. New management is doing things that might improve the picture but it is the results - not what managements intends or says - that count with us. In other words, we know new management is on the scene but we never predict -- we inspect to see what they accomplish.
(By the way, she told me too that Roy Anderson should not have cut people as one of his first moves ..... she also, however, told me he brought more sanity to the organizational structure in changes he made.)
Dave, pls see me about a quick followup by you with the alleger to make certain she understands these points.
A tý'Jy
>>> David Vito 01/08/04 04:19PM >>>
- SENSITIVE ALLEGATION INFORMATION -
- PROTECT APPROPRIATELY -
I called the alleger this afternoon to get her input on whether we could speak about her issues with Dave Lochbaum, based on his recent contacts with NRC which indicated that she is also interfacing with him on her concerns. I told her that we would never tell him anything more than we tell her. She said that she had no problem with the NRC providing responses to Dave L. about her concerns. However, she asked that we keep any such interfaces confidential (i.e., she stated that Dave L. promised her that he wouldn't transmit any of the information she gives him about her interactions with the NRC to others, and she asked that we do the same with any information either she or he provides us about their interactions). I told her that to the best of our ability, we would do so.
She also made some comments about about her discussion with Hub here in Region I a couple of weeks ago (12/22/03):
- 1. She indicated that Hub spent some time discussing recent management changes at the site (Anderson, Bakken) and she was a bit concerned that the NRC may see that as some kind of panacea to their problems. She indicated that no matter how many changes are made in management at the site, the real production pressure has come from Newark, and those folks are not changing. I told her that I felt our our review was comprehensive, and that we would render decisions based on the totality of the review, and not simply on the fact that some site managers have been replaced..
- 2. She indicated that Hub told her that it is possible that we may have to wait for the conclusion of her civil suit in NJ before rendering decisions on this matter. This was of considerable concern to her, because she indicated that she is not going to settle with the company, and they are just entering discovery, which could take a year or two. I told her that I didn't know what Hub said to her about this subject but that that she may have misread it. I told her that while I could not provide her with a projected end date, and while I
ma~vid iLo- Re: Call to RI-2003-A-0110.Salem/HC SCWEAIe*ger Page 2' felt that we need to continue to approach this matter deliberately, I was fairly confident that it would not take us a year to provide feedback on what we are finding as a result of our review.
Additional comments during the phone call:
"If Roy Anderson was taking on safety culture as much as he has taken on cost-cutting (there have been a number of recent layoffs), they would be much better off."
"The reason why they have never had a good safety culture is that no one in PSEG has ever demanded a strong safety culture."
CC: Beh; Daniel Holody; jtwl; Leanne Harrison; Lisamarie Jarriel; Sharon Johnson; W Lanning
[*vid Vito -Callto RI-2003-A-0110 Salem/HC SCWE Alleger Page From: David Vito To: A. Randolph Blough; Anne Passarelli Brian Holian; Daniel Orr; Eileen Neff; Ernest Wilson; George Malone; Gilbert Johnson; Glenn Meyer; Hubert J. Miller; James Wiggins; Jeffrey Teator; Karl Farrar; Marc Ferdas; Mel Gray; Scott Barber; Theodore Wingfield; Tracy Walker Date: 1/8/04 4:19PM
Subject:
Call to RI-2003-A-01 10 Salem/HC SCWE Alleger
- SENSITIVE ALLEGATION INFORMATION -
- PROTECT APPROPRIATELY -
I called the alleger this afternoon to get her input on whether we could speak about her issues with Dave Lochbaum, based on his recent contacts with NRC which indicated that she is also interfacing with him on her concerns. I told her that we would never tell him anything more than we tell her. She said that she had no problem with the NRC providing responses to Dave L. about her concerns. However, she asked that we keep any such interfaces confidential (i.e., she stated that Dave L. promised her that he wouldn't transmit any of the information she gives him about her interactions with the NRC to others, and she asked that we do the same with any information either she or he provides us about their interactions). I told her that to the best of our ability, we would do so.
She also made some comments about about her discussion with Hub here in Region I a couple of weeks ago (12/22/03):
- 1. She indicated that Hub spent some time discussing recent management changes at the site (Anderson, Bakken) and she was a bit concerned that the NRC may see that as some kind of panacea to their problems. She indicated that no matter how many changes are made in management at the site, the real production pressure has come from Newark, and those folks are not changing. I told her that I felt our our review was comprehensive, and that we would render decisions based on the totality of the review, and not simply on the fact that some site managers have been replaced..
- 2. She indicated that Hub told her that it is possible that we may have to wait for the conclusion of her civil suit in NJ before rendering decisions on this matter. This was of considerable concern to her, because she indicated that she is not going to settle with the company, and they are just entering discovery, which could take a year or two. I told her that I didn't know what Hub said to her about this subject but that that she may have misread it. I told her that while I could not provide her with a projected end date, and while I felt that we need to continue to approach this matter deliberately, I was fairly confident that it would not take us a year to provide feedback on what we are finding as a result of our review.
Additional comments during the phone call:
"If Roy Anderson was taking on safety culture as much as he has taken on cost-cutting (there have been a number of recent layoffs), they would be much better off."
"The reason why they have never had a good safety culture is that no one in PSEG has ever demanded a strong safety culture."
CC: Daniel Holody; Leanne Harrison; Lisamarie Jarriel; Sharon Johnson