IR 05000321/2024090
| ML24080A415 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 05/15/2024 |
| From: | Ladonna Suggs Division of Reactor Safety II |
| To: | Coleman J Southern Nuclear Operating Co |
| References | |
| EA-23-139 IR 2024090 | |
| Download: ML24080A415 (11) | |
Text
SUBJECT:
EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 - NRC INSPECTION REPORT 05000321/2024090 AND 05000366/2024090, INVESTIGATION REPORT 2-2023-003; AND APPARENT VIOLATION
Dear Jamie M. Coleman:
This letter refers to the investigation completed on November 8, 2023, by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissions (NRCs) Office of Investigations (OI) at Southern Nuclear Operating Companys (SNCs) Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (Hatch). The purpose of the investigation was to determine whether a former senior radiation protection (RP) technician for SNC at Hatch falsified radiation and contamination surveys. The OI investigation focused on survey results that the senior RP technician submitted to SNC between January 2021 and December 2021, which SNC had determined to be duplicates of previously conducted surveys. A Factual Summary of the OI investigation is provided as Enclosure 2.
Based on the results of the investigation and NRC staff review, two apparent violations (AVs)
were identified and are being considered for escalated enforcement action in accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy. The current Enforcement Policy is included on the NRCs Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/enforce-pol.html. The AVs are more fully discussed in Enclosure 1.
The first AV being considered for escalated enforcement involves the failure to conduct surveys that are reasonable under the circumstances to evaluate the magnitude and extent of radiation levels and potential radiological hazards of the radiation levels, as required by Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 20.1501(a)(2). Specifically, on eight occasions between August 2021 and November 2021, the senior RP technician failed to physically enter radiologically controlled areas to obtain radiation survey readings on assigned dates, but instead submitted survey data copied from previous surveys. The failure to obtain current and accurate RP survey data effectively bypassed administrative controls implemented by the RP department to communicate information necessary to establish adequate protective measures related to radiological conditions and hazards to workers that exist throughout the plant.
The second AV being considered for escalated enforcement is the failure to maintain complete and accurate records of radiation surveys, as required by 10 CFR 50.9(a) and 10 CFR 20.2103(a). Specifically, for the surveys identified in the first AV, the records of survey data May 15, 2024 submitted by the senior RP technician were not complete and accurate because they were copied from previous survey records instead of being based on readings obtained from actual physical surveys on the assigned dates. Survey records are material to the NRC because survey results are used to convey information on conditions and potential hazards to licensee staff and contractors entering radiologically controlled areas and because survey records provide evidence of compliance with the regulatory requirements in 10 CFR Part 20, Standards for Protection against Radiation.
For both AVs, in eight instances, the NRC concluded that the actions of the senior RP technician appear to have been deliberate.
Before the NRC makes its enforcement decision, we are providing you an opportunity to:
(1) respond to the AVs addressed in this inspection report within 30 days of the date of this letter, (2) request a Pre-decisional Enforcement Conference (PEC), or (3) request Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). If a PEC is held, the NRC will issue a press release to announce the time and date of the conference; however, the PEC will be closed to public observation since information related to an OI report will be discussed and the report has not been made public. If you decide to participate in a PEC or pursue ADR, please contact Binoy Desai via phone at 404-997-4519 or via email at Binoy.Desai@nrc.gov within 10 days of the date of this letter. A PEC should be held within 30 days and an ADR session within 45 days of the date of this letter.
If you choose to provide a written response, it should be clearly marked as a Response to Apparent Violation in NRC Inspection Report 05000321,366/2024090; EA-23-139 and should include for each AV: (1) the reason for the AV or, if contested, the basis for disputing the AV; (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved; (3) the corrective steps that will be taken; and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Your response may reference or include previously docketed correspondence if the correspondence adequately addresses the required response. Additionally, your response should be sent to the NRCs Document Control Center, with a copy mailed to LaDonna Suggs, Director, Division of Reactor Safety, Region II, 245 Peachtree Center Avenue NE, Atlanta, GA 30303, within 30 days of the date of this letter. If a response is not received within the time specified or an extension of time has not been granted by the NRC, the NRC will proceed with its enforcement decision or schedule a PEC.
If you choose to request a PEC, the conference will afford you the opportunity to provide your perspective on these matters and any other information that you believe the NRC should take into consideration before making an enforcement decision. The decision to hold a PEC does not mean that the NRC has determined that a violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be taken. This conference would be conducted to obtain information to assist the NRC in making an enforcement decision. The topics discussed during the conference may include information to determine whether a violation occurred, information to determine the significance of a violation, information related to the identification of a violation, and information related to any corrective actions taken or planned.
In lieu of a PEC, you may also request ADR with the NRC in an attempt to resolve this issue.
ADR is a general term encompassing various techniques for resolving conflicts using a neutral third party. The technique that the NRC has decided to employ is mediation. Mediation is a voluntary, informal process in which a trained neutral (the mediator) works with parties to help them reach resolution. If the parties agree to use ADR, they select a mutually agreeable neutral mediator who has no stake in the outcome and no power to make decisions. Mediation gives parties an opportunity to discuss issues, clear up misunderstandings, be creative, find areas of agreement, and reach a final resolution of the issues. Additional information concerning NRCs program can be obtained at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/adr.html. The Institute on Conflict Resolution (ICR) at Cornell University has agreed to facilitate the NRC's program as a neutral third party. Please contact ICR at 877-733-9415 within 10 days of the date of this letter if you are interested in pursuing resolution of this issue through ADR.
In addition, please be advised that the number and characterization of AVs described in the enclosed inspection report may change as a result of further NRC review. You will be advised by separate correspondence of the results of our deliberations on this matter. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRCs Rules of Practice and Procedure, a copy of this letter, its enclosures, and your response, if you choose to provide one, will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To the extent possible, your response should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be made available to the Public without redaction.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Binoy Desai via email at Binoy.Desai@nrc.gov via phone at 404-997-4519.
Sincerely, LaDonna B. Suggs, Director Division of Reactor Safety Docket Nos. 05000321 and 05000366 License Nos. DPR-57 and NPF-5
Enclosures:
1. Inspection Report 05000321/2024090 and 05000366/2024090 2. Factual Summary
Inspection Report
Docket Numbers:
05000321 and 05000366 License Numbers:
DPR-57 and NPF-5 Report Numbers:
05000321/2024090 and 05000366/2024090 Enterprise Identifier:
I-2024-090-0003 Licensee:
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.
Facility:
Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 Location:
Baxley, GA Approved By:
LaDonna B. Suggs, Director Division of Reactor Safety
SUMMARY The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) continued monitoring the licensees performance by conducting an NRC inspection at Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, in accordance with the Reactor Oversight Process. The Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) is the NRCs program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors. Refer to https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/oversight.html for more information.
List of Findings and Violations Failure to Conduct Radiation Surveys Cornerstone Severity Cross-Cutting Aspect Report Section Not Applicable Apparent Violation AV 05000321,05000366/2024090-01 Open EA-23-139 Not Applicable 71152A An Apparent Violation (AV) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 20.1501, Surveys and Monitoring, was identified for the licensees failure to conduct, on multiple occasions, surveys that were reasonable under the circumstances to evaluate the magnitude and extent of radiation levels, concentrations of residual radioactivity, and potential hazards of the detected radiation levels or residual radioactivity in various radiologically controlled areas (RCAs) within the plant, including within the reactor building.
Incomplete and Inaccurate Radiation Surveys Cornerstone Severity Cross-Cutting Aspect Report Section Not Applicable Apparent Violation AV 05000321,05000366/2024090-02 Open EA-23-139 Not Applicable 71152A An AV of 10 CFR 50.9 Complete and Accuracy of Information, was identified for the licensees failure to maintain complete and accurate records of radiation surveys, which the licensee is required to maintain under 10 CFR 20.2103 Records of Surveys.
Additional Tracking Items None.
INSPECTION SCOPES Inspections were conducted using the appropriate portions of the inspection procedures (IPs) in effect at the beginning of the inspection unless otherwise noted. Currently approved IPs with their attached revision histories are located on the public website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/insp-manual/inspection-procedure/index.html. Samples were declared complete when the IP requirements most appropriate to the inspection activity were met consistent with Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 2515, Light-Water Reactor Inspection Program - Operations Phase. The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel to assess licensee performance and compliance with Commission rules and regulations, license conditions, site procedures, and standards.
INSPECTION RESULTS Failure to Conduct Radiation Surveys Cornerstone Severity Cross-Cutting Aspect Report Section Not Applicable Apparent Violation AV 05000321,05000366/2024090-01 Open EA-23-139 Not Applicable 71152A An Apparent Violation (AV) of 10 CFR 20.1501, Surveys and Monitoring, was identified for the licensees failure to conduct, on multiple occasions, surveys that were reasonable under the circumstances to evaluate the magnitude and extent of radiation levels, concentrations of residual radioactivity, and potential hazards of the detected radiation levels or residual radioactivity in various radiologically controlled areas (RCAs) within the plant, including within the reactor building.
Description: In August 2022, the licensee completed an internal investigation (documented in Investigative Report - Case No. 202203110005) that evaluated radiation protection (RP)
survey data (18-months: September 2020 through April 2022) across the Hatch Nuclear Plant RP department to identify irregularities and/or outliers that could indicate whether any RP technician(s) was not properly conducting or documenting radiological surveys. The investigation was prompted by concerns within the RP department that a senior RP technician had been copying information from previous surveys rather than performing new surveys in accordance with site procedure, NMP-HP-300, Radiation and Contamination Surveys, which requires that the technician physically enter an area to obtain survey readings. In its investigation, the licensee identified multiple survey records submitted by the senior RP technician that appeared to have been copied from previous surveys. Specifically, the survey results submitted by the senior RP technician contained information, such as dose rates, contamination levels, survey points, and contamination boundaries, that was identical to the information in the previous surveys. The licensee considered the senior RP technicians survey results suspect because, due to the nature of the surveys, it would be highly improbable to gather identical information from two separate surveys conducted at different times. The licensees investigation further determined, based on comparisons of dosimetry records, that for a subset of the duplicate surveys, the technician did not physically enter and directly conduct surveys in various RCAs within the plant, including within the reactor building, over the reviewed period.
The NRC conducted its own investigation into this matter, including a review and evaluation of the licensees internal investigation. The NRC determined that for at least eight of the
duplicate surveys, recorded between August 2021 and November 2021, the senior RP technician did not physically enter the areas to conduct the surveys in question. For four (4)
of these surveys, the technician admitted in a written and signed statement that he did not enter the areas in question to conduct the survey. For three (3) other surveys, radiation data from the technicians electronic dosimeter (ED) was compared to that of other technicians who conducted the same survey, with similar instrumentation and survey results. The ED data from the technician in question was substantially lower than expected, indicating that the technician did not physically enter the areas in question to conduct the survey. For one (1)
other survey, in addition to having lower-than-expected ED readings, the technician did not reflect a contaminated area boundary that was present in surveys conducted both directly before and after the survey in question. This survey was identical to a previous survey that was apparently conducted before the contaminated area boundary was established.
Based on the review and evaluation of the above information, the NRC determined that the senior RP technician repeatedly failed to physically enter RCAs within the plant on assigned dates to directly obtain survey readings. Instead, the technician falsified surveys by copying data from previous surveys and submitting the data as his own without performing the surveys. The RP technicians actions were contrary to licensee procedures and did not constitute surveys that were reasonable under the circumstances to evaluate the radiation levels and concentrations of residual radioactivity within the assigned RCAs in the plant, as required per 10 CFR 20.1501(a)(2).
Corrective Actions: The licensee completed an internal investigation into the matter and took disciplinary corrective action against the senior RP technician, including termination of employment.
Corrective Action Reference(s): Condition report (CR) 11018617 Performance Assessment: The NRC determined this violation was not reasonably foreseeable and preventable by the licensee and therefore is not a performance deficiency.
Enforcement: The ROPs significance determination process does not specifically consider willfulness in its assessment of licensee performance. Therefore, it is necessary to address this violation which involves willfulness using traditional enforcement to adequately deter non-compliance.
Violation: Paragraph10 CFR 20.1501(a)(2) requires, in part, that each licensee shall make or cause to be made surveys of areas that are reasonable under the circumstances to evaluate the magnitude and extent of radiation levels, concentrations or quantities of residual radioactivity, and potential radiological hazard of the radiation levels and residual radioactivity detected. Per 10 CFR 20.1003, Definitions, Survey means, in part, an evaluation of the radiological conditions and potential hazards incident to the use or presence of radioactive material or other sources of radiation. When appropriate, such an evaluation includes a physical survey of the location of radioactive material and measurements or calculations of levels of radiation, or concentrations or quantities of radioactive material.
Contrary to the above, on eight occasions between August 2021 and November 2021, the licensee did not make or cause to be made surveys of RCAs at Hatch that were reasonable under the circumstances to evaluate radiation levels, concentrations or quantities of residual radioactivity, and the potential hazards associated with radiation levels or residual radioactivity. Specifically, a senior RP technician at Hatch did not conduct and document
routine radiation dose rate and contamination surveys as prescribed by licensee procedure NMP-HP-300, which requires the technician to physically enter an area to obtain survey readings. Instead of physically entering areas on assigned dates to obtain required measurements, directly, the technician copied data from previously completed surveys of the same areas and submitted the data as his own without performing the surveys.
Enforcement Action: This violation is being treated as an AV pending a final significance (enforcement) determination.
Incomplete and Inaccurate Radiation Surveys Cornerstone Severity Cross-Cutting Aspect Report Section Not Applicable Apparent Violation AV 05000321,05000366/2024090-02 Open EA-23-139 Not Applicable 71152A An AV of 10 CFR 50.9, Complete and Accuracy of Information, was identified for a failure to maintain complete and accurate records of radiation surveys, which the licensee is required to maintain under 10 CFR 20.2103, Records of Surveys.
Description: In August 2022, the licensee completed an internal investigation (documented in Investigative Report - Case No. 202203110005) that evaluated RP surveys data (September 2020 through April 2022) across the Hatch Nuclear Plant RP department to identify irregularities and/or outliers that could indicate whether any RP technician(s) was not properly conducting or documenting radiological surveys. The investigation was prompted by concerns within the RP department that a senior RP technician had been copying information from previous surveys rather than performing new surveys in accordance with site procedure, NMP-HP-300, Radiation and Contamination Surveys, which requires that the technician physically enter an area to obtain survey readings. In its investigation, the licensee identified multiple survey records submitted by the senior RP technician that appeared to have been copied from previous surveys. Specifically, survey results submitted by the senior RP technician contained information, such as dose rates, contamination levels, survey points, and contamination boundaries, that was identical to the information in the previous surveys.
The licensee considered the senior RP technicians survey results suspect because, due to the nature of the surveys, it would be highly improbable to gather identical information from two separate surveys conducted at different times. The licensees investigation further determined, based on comparisons of electronic dosimetry (ED) records, that for a subset of the duplicate surveys, the technician did not physically enter and directly conduct surveys in various RCAs within the plant, including within the reactor building, over the reviewed period.
The NRC conducted its own investigation into this matter, including a review and evaluation of the licensees internal investigation. The NRC determined that for at least eight of the duplicate surveys, recorded between August 2021 and November 2021, the senior RP technician did not physically enter the areas to conduct the surveys in question. For four (4)
of these surveys, the technician admitted in a written and signed statement that he did not enter the areas in question to conduct the survey. For three (3) other surveys, radiation data from the technicians ED was compared to that of other technicians who conducted the same survey, with similar instrumentation and survey results. The ED data from the technician in question was substantially lower than expected, indicating that the technician did not physically enter the areas in question to conduct the survey. For one (1) other survey in addition to having lower-than-expected ED readings, the technician did not reflect a
contaminated area boundary that was present in surveys conducted both directly before and after the survey in question. This survey was identical to a previous survey that was apparently conducted before the contaminated area boundary was established.
Based on the review and evaluation of the above information, the NRC determined that, on multiple occasions, the senior RP technician failed to physically enter RCAs within the plant on assigned dates to directly obtain survey readings. Instead, the technician falsified surveys by copying data from previous surveys and submitting the data as his own without performing the surveys. Because the records of these surveys did not accurately reflect the radiological conditions in those areas on the assigned dates, the license failed to maintain complete and accurate survey records, as required by 10 CFR 50.9(a) and 10 CFR 20.2103(a).
Corrective Actions: The licensee completed an internal investigation into the matter and took disciplinary corrective action against the senior RP technician, including termination of employment.
Corrective Action Reference(s): Condition report (CR) 11018617 Performance Assessment: The NRC determined this violation was not reasonably foreseeable and preventable by the licensee and therefore is not a performance deficiency.
Enforcement: The ROPs significance determination process does not specifically consider willfulness in its assessment of licensee performance. Therefore, it is necessary to address this violation which involves willfulness using traditional enforcement to adequately deter non-compliance.
Violation: Paragraph 10 CFR 50.9(a) requires, in part, that information required by the Commissions regulations to be maintained by the licensee shall be complete and accurate in all material respects. Paragraph 10 CFR 20.2103(a) requires, in part, that the licensee maintain records showing the results of surveys required by 10 CFR 20.1501, Surveys and Monitoring.
Contrary to the above, on eight instances between August 2021 and November 2021, the licensee failed to maintain records of radiation and contamination surveys that were complete and accurate in all material aspects. Specifically, a senior RP technician at Hatch copied data such as dose rates, contamination levels, survey points, and contamination boundaries from previous surveys of plant areas without physically entering the areas to obtain actual survey readings on the assigned dates. As a result, the records of these surveys did not accurately reflect radiological conditions in those areas on the assigned dates. These survey records are material to the NRC because survey results are used to convey information on conditions and potential hazards to licensee staff and contractors entering radiologically controlled areas and because survey records provide evidence of compliance with regulatory requirements.
Enforcement Action: This violation is being treated as an AV pending a final significance (enforcement) determination.
Enclosure 2 FACTUAL SUMMARY OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS REPORT NO. 2-2023-003 On November 8, 2023, the NRCs Office of Investigations (OI) completed an investigation to determine whether a former senior radiation protection (RP) technician employed by Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC) at the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (Hatch), falsified radiation and contamination surveys. The licensee had identified multiple instances between January 2021 and December 2021 where the survey readings submitted by the senior RP technician for assigned locations were identical to previous survey results of the same locations.
The senior RP technician had worked as an RP technician at Hatch for approximately four years at the time of the investigation. During an interview with the licensees independent investigator on April 12, 2022, the senior RP technician provided a written statement in which he admitted to submitting results for four surveys without actually walking down the assigned areas and performing the required radiation and contamination surveys. The records from these surveys show that the results the senior RP technician entered were identical to previous survey results of the same locations. During the April 12 interview and in the written statement, the senior RP technician gave several reasons for not performing the surveys, including not feeling well and being busy. In the written statement and in his subsequent OI interview, the individual stated that he would use previous survey results if the numbers were close to what he obtained, and that this was a common practice.
In an SNC Corporate Security report dated August 2022, the senior RP technician acknowledged that he copied previous survey data and again claimed that, in doing so, he was following his training to utilize the most conversative data. However, the licensee reported that no other RP personnel verified this practice. OI interviews of other personnel also failed to confirm this practice. In the August 2022 report, the licensee identified four additional instances where the senior RP technician submitted survey results without physically entering the areas and conducting surveys. In these cases, the licensee determined, based on dosimetry records, that the senior RP technician did not receive the exposure expected from physically surveying the locations. Other RP technicians who surveyed the same locations at other times and were in a similar dose field as the senior RP technician would have been, did receive the expected exposure.
Based on the evidence gathered during the NRC OI investigation, including the results of the licensees internal investigation, it appears that the senior RP technician violated Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 50.5(a)(2) when he deliberately submitted information to the licensee that he knew was inaccurate on eight occasions between August 2021 and November 2021. Specifically, it appears that the senior RP technician submitted survey data to the licensee, representing that he had obtained the data from his own physical surveys of the assigned areas, when in fact he had actually copied the data from previously completed surveys.