ML052590294

E-mail from R. Barkley of Usnrc to S. Johnson of Usnrc, Regarding Review of Pseg Response to Allegation 2001-0126 at Hope Creek

ML052590294
Person / Time
Site:	Hope Creek
Issue date:	01/17/2002
From:	Barkley R S NRC Region 1
To:	Johnson S L NRC Region 1
References
-RFPFR, 2001-0126, FOIA/PA-2004-0314
Download: ML052590294 (3)

Text

• I-Slar-on Johnson --F- l o:ReV--wo-s eG-Rso to Allegation 2001*~126 At Hope Cree-- Pagel IJohnson -

ofPSEG to Allegation 20010126 At Hope Creek From: Richard Barkley I C<To: Sharon Johnson Date: 1/17/02 5:28PM

Subject:

Fwd: Re: Review of PSEG Response to Allegation 2001-0126 At Hope Creek I Slrvn Johnson -Re: Review of PSEG Response to Allegation 2001-0126 At Hope Creek~Page I1 From: Richard Barkley 4t4 To: David Vito; Jose/fh Futa Date: 1/17/02 12:18PM

Subject:

Re: Review of PSEG Response to Allegation 2001-0126 At Hope Creek Thanks Joe -I am checking with their ECP investigator on this point.I would like to avoid sending the alleger his WBC record since it could have some subtle legal Implication and thus greatly slow the time it takes me to get back to him, particularly if providing this record would be setting a precedent Rich>>> Joseph Furia 01/17/02 12:00PM >>>Rich -It was my understanding based on talking with Kevin O'Hare (Acting RPM) that they (PSEG) had no problem sitting down with any individual and explaining whole body count results. I DO NOT KNOW if they have done so with this alleger, however.JoeF. $>>> Richard Barkley 01/17/02 10:33AM >>>Dave, Joe Furia and I looked over the January 3, 2002, response provided by PSEG to the NRC in this matter.The allegation involved inadequate air sampling, control point procedures and a questionable whole body count. PSEG adequately explained the events surrounding the incidents in question, specifically that PSEG conducted two separate sampling programs in the steam tunnel -one for radiation and one for industrial health (due to airborne calcium silicate dust generated during insulation removal).

This two part sampling program explains much of the reason why the alleger would have become confused regarding the handling of air sampling in his work area.Based on the materials provided by PSEG and Joe's review of the individual's whole body count information while at the site last month on an HP inspection, there is no evidence of any violation of NRC radiological requirements nor any significant concern with HP practices.

Our next step is to pursue closure of this allegation.

However, I will need to resolve with Joe Furia whether we can and should provide the individual with the copy of the whole body count results that PSEG provided as an attachment to this letter. I see no harm in doing so (in an effort to be responsive to the individual), but the individual will clearly need to be "walked through" the terminology in the report over the phone so that he can understand it Please note that PSEG requested that the information be withheld from public disclosure per 10 CFR 2.790(a)(6) (i.e., medical records), but that should not prohibit the release of this information to the alleger. The material provided had the name and social security number of the individual/alleger redacted.Joe -Your Thoughts?Rich iSzaron Johnson -Re:-Reieof Response to Al ation200l-0126At Hope Creek rage 2 I CC: Christopher Cahill; Glenn Meyer, Joseph Schoppy; Steve Shaffer