ML062650077: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:.-!SITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL ''" FOLLOW UP ALLEGATION ACTION PLAN AMS No. RIII-01-A-0176 Licensee: | {{#Wiki_filter:.- !SITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL | ||
Kewuanee Docket/License No: 05000305 Assigned Division/Branch: | ''" FOLLOW UP ALLEGATION ACTION PLAN AMS No. RIII-01-A-0176 Licensee: Kewuanee Docket/License No: 05000305 Assigned Division/Branch: MEBlSecurity,DRS Alleaation Review Board MembershiD: Chairman Pederson! Grobe | ||
MEBlSecurity,DRS Alleaation Review Board MembershiD: | ý60_xk -'- I(Clayton Dapas/ Caniano/ Reynolds Paul/ Pgoroson/Heller)gokc JJacobson, DRS o,.dtreed, DRS. | ||
Chairman Pederson! | v4A AYbQ64-4 I ý GENERIC CONCERNS: IfYes Explain: | ||
DISCUSSION OF SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE: | |||
OIACCEPTANCE: YES NO (Priority: HIGH *ALOW) 01 Accept Concern(s) No(s). __._.__ - Signature of Accepting 01 Official: | |||
OIACCEPTANCE: | Basis for 01 Priority:. | ||
YES 01 Accept Concern(s) | - ,-. . , ,4 /74. | ||
No(s). | ARB MINUTES PROVIDED Dyer/Paul/ | ||
STATUS LETTER: PRINT IN FINAL REVISE N/A REFERRAL LETTER: A. Licensee YES NO_ | |||
B. State of YES NO C. DOE YES NO date received November 02, 2001 due date of 1 't ARB December 2, 2001 due date of ACK Ltr December 2, 2001 date -90 days old January 31, 2002 date -120 days old March 2, 2002 date -150 day old April 1, 2002 date -180 days old May 1, 2002 date -365 days old November 2, 2002 projected date for the 5 yr statue of limitation November 1, 2006 COMMENTS: | |||
STATUS LETTER: PRINT IN FINAL REVISE REFERRAL LETTER: A. Licensee B. State of C. DOE YES | C_ýi_ | ||
Regulatory Basis:Part 26, 50.5 Action Evaluation: | AIlegti e iew Board Chairman batev | ||
The following method of resolution is recommended (circle): | |||
A. Send to Licensee Requesting Response in Days. (Describe the general areas we expect the licensee to address.) | SENSITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL AMS No. RlII-01-A-0176 Each stated concern or NRC identified issue should be documented on a separate sheet. Each concern must be documented and written with enough detail to allow thorough follow up. | ||
B. Priority Rill Follow up and Closure Memo to OAC. C. Follow up During Routine Inspection Within __. Days and Closure Memo to OAC. XX D. Refer to 01. Recommended Priority: | Concern No. 2 The Cl is concerned about *contractor supervisors who turn their heads when certain individuals come in half blitzed. | ||
HIGH NORMAL LOW Recommended Basis: An individual performing a deliberate violation that without consideration of intent, the underlying violation would be categorized as a Severity Level IV. E. Outside NRC's Jurisdiction. | Regulatory Basis:Part 26, 50.5 Action Evaluation: The following method of resolution is recommended (circle): | ||
Describe Basis Below. F. Too General for Follow-up. | A. Send to Licensee Requesting Response in Days. (Describe the general areas we expect the licensee to address.) | ||
Describe Basis Below. G. Other (specify) | B. Priority Rill Follow up and Closure Memo to OAC. | ||
Four craft personnel indicated that they smelled alcohol on a foreman yet did not report it. One individual indicated that he feared reprisal for reporting such an incident. | C. Follow up During Routine Inspection Within __. Days and Closure Memo to OAC. | ||
The other individuals indicated that they thought the issue had already been reported or that other indications of alcohol use had to exist for the issue to be reportable. | XX D. Refer to 01. Recommended Priority: HIGH NORMAL LOW Recommended Basis: An individual performing a deliberate violation that without consideration of intent, the underlying violation would be categorized as a Severity Level IV. | ||
However, the licensee's training and testing program showed that they adequately described the actions to be taken when an individual detects the odor of alcohol. | E. Outside NRC's Jurisdiction. Describe Basis Below. | ||
EICS NOTE: ON 03/20102, the OAC and TMadeda discussed whether there was sufficient .indication of willfulness to warrant an 01 investigation. | F. Too General for Follow-up. Describe Basis Below. | ||
While the first individual implied that s/he knew the requirements yet did not report the issue for fear of reprisal, the other individuals provided explanations that indicated that they may have misunderstood the requirements rather than deliberately violated the requirements. | G. Other (specify) | ||
Terry agreed, yet indicated that 01 agreed to accept investigation in all four cases since the training and testing program clearly outlined the requirements and it would already be investigating the circumstances in the one case where the individual indicated s/he knew the requirements. | Four craft personnel indicated that they smelled alcohol on a foreman yet did not report it. One individual indicated that he feared reprisal for reporting such an incident. The other individuals indicated that they thought the issue had already been reported or that other indications of alcohol use had to exist for the issue to be reportable. However, the licensee's training and testing program showed that they adequately described the actions to be taken when an individual detects the odor of alcohol. | ||
Responsible for Action -01 Special Considerations/Instructions: | EICS NOTE: ON 03/20102, the OAC and TMadeda discussed whether there was sufficient | ||
-M,4CL | .indication of willfulness to warrant an 01 investigation. While the first individual implied that s/he knew the requirements yet did not report the issue for fear of reprisal, the other individuals provided explanations that indicated that they may have misunderstood the requirements rather than deliberately violated the requirements. Terry agreed, yet indicated that 01 agreed to accept investigation in all four cases since the training and testing program clearly outlined the requirements and it would already be investigating the circumstances in the one case where the individual indicated s/he knew the requirements. | ||
..-, .-'o-.-- | Responsible for Action - 01 Special Considerations/Instructions: | ||
- L M,4CL o6+.F v ty\y W,#\T3O.c | |||
..-, .- 'o-.- W/:ZUfJU -1 | |||
.: " | |||
- "" FA H.Ef . | |||
SENSITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL .f* | |||
FOLLOW UP ARB: RIII-01-A-0176 March 20, 2002' MEMORANDUM TO: James Creed, Chief, Security Branch, DRS FROM: A. Kock, Rill - OAC | |||
==SUBJECT:== | ==SUBJECT:== | ||
FOLLOW UP ARB: RIII-01-A-0176 (KEWAUNEE) | FOLLOW UP ARB: RIII-01-A-0176 (KEWAUNEE) | ||
On November 8, 2001, Rill received concerns regarding a contractor covering up issues such as welding without paperwork, reporting of injuries, tool theft, the lack of reporting of fitness for duty issues, and the qualifications of welders. These concerns were discussed at an 11/8/01 Allega tion Review Board and were referred to the licensee. | On November 8, 2001, Rill received concerns regarding a contractor covering up issues such as welding without paperwork, reporting of injuries, tool theft, the lack of reporting of fitness for duty issues, and the qualifications of welders. These concerns were discussed at an 11/8/01 Allega tion Review Board and were referred to the licensee. During its review of the licensee's investigation, the security branch identified a potential willful violation of the fitness for duty procedures, in that individuals did not report a fitness for duty issue. | ||
During its review of the licensee's investigation, the security branch identified a potential willful violation of the fitness for duty procedures, in that individuals did not report a fitness for duty issue. A Follow up ARB has been scheduled for March 25, 2002 to discuss this issue. Please review the attached information to prepare for the ARB. cc w/attachments: | A Follow up ARB has been scheduled for March 25, 2002 to discuss this issue. Please review the attached information to prepare for the ARB. | ||
cc w/attachments: | |||
ARB Copy | ARB Copy | ||
* RC DRP Br Chief For Rx Cases-Lanksbury DRS Division Director For Rx Cases-Grobe JJacobson, DRS SENSITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL AMS No. RIII-01-A-0176 Each stated concern or NRC identified issue should be documented on a separate sheet. Each concern must be documented and written with enough detail to allow thorough follow up. Concern No. 2 The Cl is concerned about contractor supervisors who turn their heads when certain individuals come in half blitzed. | * RC DRP Br Chief For Rx Cases-Lanksbury DRS Division Director For Rx Cases-Grobe JJacobson, DRS | ||
Regulatory Basis:Part 26, 50.5 Action Evaluation: | |||
The following method of resolution is recommended (circle): | SENSITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL AMS No. RIII-01-A-0176 Each stated concern or NRC identified issue should be documented on a separate sheet. Each concern must be documented and written with enough detail to allow thorough follow up. | ||
A. Send to Licensee Requesting Response in _ Days. (Describe the general areas we expect the licensee to address.) | Concern No. 2 The Cl is concerned about contractor supervisors who turn their heads when certain individuals come in half blitzed. | ||
B. Priority Rill Follow up and Closure Memo to OAC. C. Follow up During Routine Inspection Within _ Days and Closure Memo to OAC. XX D. Refer to 01. Recommended Priority: | Regulatory Basis:Part 26, 50.5 Action Evaluation: The following method of resolution is recommended (circle): | ||
HIGH NORMAL LOW Recommended Basis: An individual performing a deliberate violation that without consideration of intent, the underlying violation would be categorized as a Severity Level IV. E. Outside NRC's Jurisdiction. | A. Send to Licensee Requesting Response in _ Days. (Describe the general areas we expect the licensee to address.) | ||
Describe Basis Below. F. Too General for Follow-up. | B. Priority Rill Follow up and Closure Memo to OAC. | ||
Describe Basis Below. G. Other (specify) | C. Follow up During Routine Inspection Within _ Days and Closure Memo to OAC. | ||
Four craft personnel indicated that they smelled alcohol on a foreman yet did not report it. One individual indicated that he feared reprisal for reporting such an incident. | XX D. Refer to 01. Recommended Priority: HIGH NORMAL LOW Recommended Basis: An individual performing a deliberate violation that without consideration of intent, the underlying violation would be categorized as a Severity Level IV. | ||
The other individuals indicated that they thought the issue had already been reported or that other indications of alcohol use had to exist for the issue to be reportable. | E. Outside NRC's Jurisdiction. Describe Basis Below. | ||
However, the licensee's training and testing program showed that they adequately described the actions to be taken when an individual detects the odor of alcohol. | F. Too General for Follow-up. Describe Basis Below. | ||
EICS NOTE: ON 03120102, the OAC and TMadeda discussed whether there was sufficient indication of willfulness to warrant an 01 investigation. | G. Other (specify) | ||
While the first individual implied that s/he knew the requirements yet did not report the issue for fear of reprisal, the other individuals provided explanations that indicated that they may have misunderstood the requirements rather than deliberately violated the requirements. | Four craft personnel indicated that they smelled alcohol on a foreman yet did not report it. One individual indicated that he feared reprisal for reporting such an incident. The other individuals indicated that they thought the issue had already been reported or that other indications of alcohol use had to exist for the issue to be reportable. However, the licensee's training and testing program showed that they adequately described the actions to be taken when an individual detects the odor of alcohol. | ||
Terry agreed, yet indicated that 01 agreed to accept investigation in all four cases since the training and testing program clearly outlined the requirements and it would already be investigating the circumstances in the one case where the individual indicated slhe knew the requirements. | EICS NOTE: ON 03120102, the OAC and TMadeda discussed whether there was sufficient indication of willfulness to warrant an 01 investigation. While the first individual implied that s/he knew the requirements yet did not report the issue for fear of reprisal, the other individuals provided explanations that indicated that they may have misunderstood the requirements rather than deliberately violated the requirements. Terry agreed, yet indicated that 01 agreed to accept investigation in all four cases since the training and testing program clearly outlined the requirements and it would already be investigating the circumstances in the one case where the individual indicated slhe knew the requirements. | ||
Responsible for Action -01 II. Special Considerations/Instructions:}} | Responsible for Action - 01 II. Special Considerations/Instructions:}} | ||
Revision as of 14:55, 23 November 2019
| ML062650077 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Kewaunee  |
| Issue date: | 03/25/2002 |
| From: | NRC/RGN-III |
| To: | |
| References | |
| 3-2001-A-0176, 3-2002-004, FOIA/PA-2006-0113 | |
| Download: ML062650077 (4) | |
Text
.- !SITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL
" FOLLOW UP ALLEGATION ACTION PLAN AMS No. RIII-01-A-0176 Licensee: Kewuanee Docket/License No: 05000305 Assigned Division/Branch: MEBlSecurity,DRS Alleaation Review Board MembershiD: Chairman Pederson! Grobe
ý60_xk -'- I(Clayton Dapas/ Caniano/ Reynolds Paul/ Pgoroson/Heller)gokc JJacobson, DRS o,.dtreed, DRS.
v4A AYbQ64-4 I ý GENERIC CONCERNS: IfYes Explain:
DISCUSSION OF SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE:
OIACCEPTANCE: YES NO (Priority: HIGH *ALOW) 01 Accept Concern(s) No(s). __._.__ - Signature of Accepting 01 Official:
Basis for 01 Priority:.
- ,-. . , ,4 /74.
ARB MINUTES PROVIDED Dyer/Paul/
STATUS LETTER: PRINT IN FINAL REVISE N/A REFERRAL LETTER: A. Licensee YES NO_
B. State of YES NO C. DOE YES NO date received November 02, 2001 due date of 1 't ARB December 2, 2001 due date of ACK Ltr December 2, 2001 date -90 days old January 31, 2002 date -120 days old March 2, 2002 date -150 day old April 1, 2002 date -180 days old May 1, 2002 date -365 days old November 2, 2002 projected date for the 5 yr statue of limitation November 1, 2006 COMMENTS:
C_ýi_
AIlegti e iew Board Chairman batev
SENSITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL AMS No. RlII-01-A-0176 Each stated concern or NRC identified issue should be documented on a separate sheet. Each concern must be documented and written with enough detail to allow thorough follow up.
Concern No. 2 The Cl is concerned about *contractor supervisors who turn their heads when certain individuals come in half blitzed.
Regulatory Basis:Part 26, 50.5 Action Evaluation: The following method of resolution is recommended (circle):
A. Send to Licensee Requesting Response in Days. (Describe the general areas we expect the licensee to address.)
B. Priority Rill Follow up and Closure Memo to OAC.
C. Follow up During Routine Inspection Within __. Days and Closure Memo to OAC.
XX D. Refer to 01. Recommended Priority: HIGH NORMAL LOW Recommended Basis: An individual performing a deliberate violation that without consideration of intent, the underlying violation would be categorized as a Severity Level IV.
E. Outside NRC's Jurisdiction. Describe Basis Below.
F. Too General for Follow-up. Describe Basis Below.
G. Other (specify)
Four craft personnel indicated that they smelled alcohol on a foreman yet did not report it. One individual indicated that he feared reprisal for reporting such an incident. The other individuals indicated that they thought the issue had already been reported or that other indications of alcohol use had to exist for the issue to be reportable. However, the licensee's training and testing program showed that they adequately described the actions to be taken when an individual detects the odor of alcohol.
EICS NOTE: ON 03/20102, the OAC and TMadeda discussed whether there was sufficient
.indication of willfulness to warrant an 01 investigation. While the first individual implied that s/he knew the requirements yet did not report the issue for fear of reprisal, the other individuals provided explanations that indicated that they may have misunderstood the requirements rather than deliberately violated the requirements. Terry agreed, yet indicated that 01 agreed to accept investigation in all four cases since the training and testing program clearly outlined the requirements and it would already be investigating the circumstances in the one case where the individual indicated s/he knew the requirements.
Responsible for Action - 01 Special Considerations/Instructions:
- L M,4CL o6+.F v ty\y W,#\T3O.c
..-, .- 'o-.- W/:ZUfJU -1
.: "
- "" FA H.Ef .
SENSITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL .f*
FOLLOW UP ARB: RIII-01-A-0176 March 20, 2002' MEMORANDUM TO: James Creed, Chief, Security Branch, DRS FROM: A. Kock, Rill - OAC
SUBJECT:
FOLLOW UP ARB: RIII-01-A-0176 (KEWAUNEE)
On November 8, 2001, Rill received concerns regarding a contractor covering up issues such as welding without paperwork, reporting of injuries, tool theft, the lack of reporting of fitness for duty issues, and the qualifications of welders. These concerns were discussed at an 11/8/01 Allega tion Review Board and were referred to the licensee. During its review of the licensee's investigation, the security branch identified a potential willful violation of the fitness for duty procedures, in that individuals did not report a fitness for duty issue.
A Follow up ARB has been scheduled for March 25, 2002 to discuss this issue. Please review the attached information to prepare for the ARB.
cc w/attachments:
ARB Copy
SENSITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL AMS No. RIII-01-A-0176 Each stated concern or NRC identified issue should be documented on a separate sheet. Each concern must be documented and written with enough detail to allow thorough follow up.
Concern No. 2 The Cl is concerned about contractor supervisors who turn their heads when certain individuals come in half blitzed.
Regulatory Basis:Part 26, 50.5 Action Evaluation: The following method of resolution is recommended (circle):
A. Send to Licensee Requesting Response in _ Days. (Describe the general areas we expect the licensee to address.)
B. Priority Rill Follow up and Closure Memo to OAC.
C. Follow up During Routine Inspection Within _ Days and Closure Memo to OAC.
XX D. Refer to 01. Recommended Priority: HIGH NORMAL LOW Recommended Basis: An individual performing a deliberate violation that without consideration of intent, the underlying violation would be categorized as a Severity Level IV.
E. Outside NRC's Jurisdiction. Describe Basis Below.
F. Too General for Follow-up. Describe Basis Below.
G. Other (specify)
Four craft personnel indicated that they smelled alcohol on a foreman yet did not report it. One individual indicated that he feared reprisal for reporting such an incident. The other individuals indicated that they thought the issue had already been reported or that other indications of alcohol use had to exist for the issue to be reportable. However, the licensee's training and testing program showed that they adequately described the actions to be taken when an individual detects the odor of alcohol.
EICS NOTE: ON 03120102, the OAC and TMadeda discussed whether there was sufficient indication of willfulness to warrant an 01 investigation. While the first individual implied that s/he knew the requirements yet did not report the issue for fear of reprisal, the other individuals provided explanations that indicated that they may have misunderstood the requirements rather than deliberately violated the requirements. Terry agreed, yet indicated that 01 agreed to accept investigation in all four cases since the training and testing program clearly outlined the requirements and it would already be investigating the circumstances in the one case where the individual indicated slhe knew the requirements.
Responsible for Action - 01 II. Special Considerations/Instructions: