Information Notice 2005-18, Summary of Fitness-For-Duty Program Performance Reports for Calendar Years 2001, 2002 and 2003
ML051640539 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Issue date: | 07/15/2005 |
From: | Hiland P NRC/NRR/DIPM/IROB |
To: | |
McCune, Timothy DNS ,415-6474 | |
References | |
TAC MC7572 IN-05-018 | |
Download: ML051640539 (29) | |
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
WASHINGTON, DC 20555-0001 July 15, 2005 NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2005-18: SUMMARY OF FITNESS-FOR-DUTY PROGRAM
PERFORMANCE REPORTS FOR CALENDAR
YEARS 2001, 2002 AND 2003
ADDRESSEES
All holders of 10 CFR Part 50 operating licenses for nuclear power reactors, except those who
have permanently ceased operation and have certified that the fuel has been permanently
removed from the reactor vessel.
PURPOSE
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this information notice (IN) to report
on lessons learned by licensees from their fitness-for-duty (FFD) program performance reports
for calendar years 2001, 2002 and 2003. It is expected that recipients of this IN will review the
information for applicability to their reactor facilities and consider, as appropriate, the corrective
actions taken to improve the future performance of their FFD programs. However, this IN
should not be construed as representing NRC requirements, and therefore no specific actions
or written responses are required.
DESCRIPTION OF CIRCUMSTANCES
As required by 10 CFR 26.71(d), NRC licensees have submitted their FFD program
performance reports to the NRC within 60 days of the end of each 6-month reporting period
(January - June and July - December). In the past, the NRC summarized and analyzed this
performance data and published an annual volume, NUREG/CR-5758, Fitness for Duty in the
Nuclear Power IndustryAnnual Summary of Program Performance Reports. The IN in
Attachment 1, provides similar FFD program performance data information for the years 2001,
2002 and 2003.
DISCUSSION
Lessons learned, management initiatives and problems, and the associated corrective actions
taken reported by licensees for the years 2001, 2002, and 2003 are summarized below.
(1) Certified Laboratories
Some licensees continue to experience problems with laboratory performance of
equipment malfunctioning and have also identified potential weaknesses in human error.
For example:
For the year 2001:
- One laboratory, determined that blind performance specimens caused test
discrepancies.
- In accordance with 10 CFR 26 Appendix A, paragraph 2.8, one licensee
submitted a letter to the NRC detailing the unsatisfactory performance of a
certified testing laboratory.
For the year 2002:
- One licensee reported that on February 16, 2002, a certified testing laboratory
reported an unsatisfactory positive blind performance urine test sample
containing amphetamine and methamphetamine. This event was investigated by
the laboratory and corrective action was taken. The event was reported to the
NRC as required by 10 CFR Part 26, Appendix A, Subpart 2.8(e)(4).
- One licensee reported an inaccurate laboratory result for a blind specimen that
was reported as negative. The cause of the inaccuracy was due to the sample
being inadvertently diluted. The licensee entered the inconsistency into the
corrective action program for evaluation and statistical trending.
For the year 2003:
- Two licensees reported a discrepancy in recording blind sample test results
because of a laboratory technicians human error in not following procedures.
The problem was corrected by revising the procedures.
- One licensee reported that a laboratorys courier van carrying samples of
specimen to the lab was stolen and the FFD specimen was lost. All samples of
specimen were recollected within 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> of the notification and all samples
tested negative.
- One licensee reported a discrepancy with the blind sample specimens processed
because the laboratory equipment was not within quality control standards.
Corrective action was taken immediately.
- One licensee reported that a blind sample specimen for amphetamines that was
spiked was submitted to a certified laboratory, and the results reported were
negative. It was discovered that the age of the blind sample specimen caused
the level of the amphetamines to degrade below the required positive cutoff level. (2) Random Testing
Several licensees reported minor problems related to the random drug and alcohol
selection process.
For the year 2001:
- One licensee performed an audit and reported problems with the random drug
screening software in which several individuals were omitted from the drug
testing pool for three days. A root cause analysis revealed that the individuals
missing were not included in the file exported from the Security Database to the
random drug screening software from which individuals are selected for random
drug screening.
- One licensee reported that a contract employee tested positive for opiates
because that individual used a prescription drug prescribed to another person.
The employee was referred to the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) and was
denied access to the facility for 14 days. After reassessment, the case was
completed and it was determined the individual did not have a dependency issue.
The employee returned to work and was placed into the follow-up program.
- One licensee discovered deficiencies in the reporting software used to compile
the FFD report. The number of random tests reported for the period was found
to be in error.
- One licensee reported one false negative result for the blind performance
specimens. Notification was sent to the NRC of this unsatisfactory performance.
- One licensee reported that several workers had been improperly excluded from
the random drug testing pool for extended periods, because of software upgrade
interface problems.
For the year 2002:
- One licensee increased the random drug testing rate in order to enhance the
random drug sampling program. This was based on a study that was conducted
by a certified laboratory.
- One licensee identified a program weakness in its laboratory screening because
of an error concerning a low rate of For Cause tests. Corrective action was
taken to ensure that verification of the test results was properly completed prior
to a specimen being destroyed.
For the year 2003:
- One licensee reported that a software change affected the FFD tracking program
and caused several individuals to be excluded from the random drug test pool. (3) Policies and Procedures
Several licensees reported initiatives to improve their FFD program policies and
procedures.
For the year 2001:
- During a routine audit, one licensee found weaknesses in their FFD supervisor
training program. It was discovered that three supervisors did not requalify in
Supervisor FFD and Behavior Observation Programs as required within the
nominal 12 month period.
- One licensee implemented state-of-the-art equipment to enhance its FFD
process for measurement of specimen specific gravity. The results provided a
digital display versus a collectors visual determination of the specific gravity
reading.
- One licensee updated its FFD procedures to reflect revised wording in the chain- of-custody form.
- One licensee reported an event to the NRC in which there was a positive alcohol
test in the followup program due to refusal by a contractor supervisor to complete
the testing.
- One licensee reported that an employee, who tested positive for illegal drugs
during pre-employment testing was denied access to the protected area.
- One licensee reported that three confirmed positive results and two incidents of
adulterated samples were identified during pre-employment testing for the short- term contractor population. The licensee also reported in the For-Cause FFD
testing program for the long-term contractor population, one confirmed positive
sample was detected for two substances.
- One licensee tested three individuals For-Cause, after they reported a
substance abuse related arrest. Subsequently, they were referred to EAP for an
assessment.
- One licensee reported an adulterated sample for a contractor employee during
random testing, resulting in denial of unescorted access to the facility.
- One licensee eliminated its policy of administering a second breath alcohol test
when the first test is negative.
- One licensee reported two positive chemical test results. For the year 2002:
- One licensee reported that during a routine search for contraband via an x-ray
machine, Security personnel discovered a small-unopened bottle of alcohol in an
individuals computer case. Investigation revealed no intent to bring the alcohol
into the protected area. Security confiscated the item. The issue was placed into
the Corrective Action System.
- One licensee reported that a positive test result was not coded properly in the
database, causing the test result not to appear on the report of positives used to
compile statistics for the six-month performance summary report. The licensee
identified the error during the self-assessment period of the FFD program.
Corrective action was taken to revise the code in the database.
- One licensee reported that the contract FFD collector instructed a donor to
provide a smaller urine specimen than the 60 ml called for in 10 CFR Part 26.
However, the smaller specimen did not compromise the accuracy of the test
results.
- One licensee found a weakness in the FFD program, which gave an individual
unescorted access to the protected area without a drug and alcohol test being
completed. The licensee found that the access authorization staff did not
conduct a thorough review of the individuals access authorization file prior to
approval for unescorted access. Appropriate FFD personnel were given written
instruction as a reminder to thoroughly review all access files before granting
approval.
For the year 2003:
- One licensee reported the granting of unescorted access prior to receiving a
negative drug test screen result. This was the result of data entry human error.
The procedure was revised and corrective action was taken.
- One licensee reported a weakness in the notification process to employees
reporting for a FFD test. The procedures were revised and corrective action was
taken.
- One licensee reported that the blind specimens were not submitted in
accordance with 10 CFR Part 26 for two additional drugs. Corrective action was
taken to track the submission of blind samples to ensure that no drug is
excluded.
- One licensee reported nine incidents whereby contractors attempted to subvert
the random drug testing process through adulteration with a synthetic urine
product called Minuteman. These contractor personnel were denied
unescorted access to the protected area for failure to cooperate, falsification of
their chain-of-custody form, and in some cases falsification of their self-disclosure
questionnaire. * One licensee reported a deficiency in the FFD program meeting the reporting
requirements in 10 CFR 26.73 (a)(1) within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. The licensee revised and
added more detail to their procedures.
- One licensee reported that an individual was randomly tested for FFD and their
blood alcohol content was found to be above the limit. The Medical Review
Officer (MRO) suggested that the individual be relieved of work duty and referred
to the EAP. The substance abuse professional in EAP did not find this
individuals alcohol consumption to be problematic. The individual returned to
work after the pre-access test was completed, and the results were negative.
(4) Program and System Management
In general, most licensees continue to report improvements in their overall FFD program
management.
For the year 2001:
- One licensee planned FFD supervisory training for incoming contractor personnel
during refueling and outage, and development of a common FFD program for its
nuclear sites.
- One licensees canine program continues to remind plant personnel of the
licensees commitment to maintain a drug-free work environment. The canine
unit provides anti-drug presentations to local schools and other community
organizations. The canine unit is also made available upon request to local law
enforcement agencies.
- One licensee re-emphasized during general employee training, the significance
of the sanctions associated with ingestion of hemp products and the
requirements. The instructor accentuates importance of FFD prior to entering the
workplace and not just in the protected area.
- One licensee planned to create an electronic link between the Access
Authorization, FFD, and Emergency Response Organization to improve
coordination and eliminate the potential communication errors.
- One licensee planned FFD supervisory training due to several supervisors
exceeding the site requalification requirement. Corrective actions were taken
(1) to develop a common FFD program for its nuclear sites, (2) increasing
efficiencies in the data gathering process and (3) provide clearer delineation of
short-term, long-term and licensee employees were made.
- One licensee reported administration of For-Cause testing resulting from a
security officer discovering an open container of alcohol in an employees
vehicle. The test results were negative. * To enhance the overall FFD program at the site, one licensee met with the
laboratory, collection site, MROs, EAP staff and psychological assessment
personnel to assure consistent and effective implementation of the FFD program.
The licensees canine program continues to remind plant personnel of the
licensees commitment to maintain a drug-free work environment.
For the year 2002:
- One licensee planned to merge two FFD programs and implement new
programmatic changes at their site.
- One licensee discovered during a self-assessment of the FFD program that the
blind submittal rate did not meet the 10 CFR Part 26 requirements. Corrective
actions were taken to evaluate the appropriate number of blind samples to be
submitted.
- One licensee reported that it initiated communications to re-emphasize the FFD
program requirements for overtime, in order to ensure fitness for duty suitability
prior to authorizing overtime hours.
- Two licensees made FFD program modifications to their procedures in order to
eliminate procedural inefficiencies and to maximize the efficiency of the FFD
program.
- One licensee updated its internal website to enhance the FFD program with user- friendly forms and guidance for supervisors.
- One licensee sent written notification regarding an operating experience of there
being gift baskets containing prohibited substance delivered to site. The licensee
provided FFD awareness information prohibiting alcohol on company property for
all site personnel.
- One licensee found that its employees were not familiar with the For-Cause
testing protocol and requirements. The licensee implemented corrective actions
by supplying additional information to the employees.
For the year 2003:
concerning the use of adulteration products such as synthetic urine.
- One licensee received notification from a pharmacy concerning a medication
called Protonix, that can cause a false positive urine screen test for marijuana
on a FFD test. All medical personnel reviewed the notification from the
pharmacy for future reference.
CONTACT
This information notice requires no specific action or written response. Please direct any
questions about this matter to the technical contact listed below.
/Mary Jane Ross-Lee for/
Patrick L. Hiland, Chief
Reactor Operations Branch
Division of Inspection Program Management
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Technical Contact:
Timothy McCune, NSIR
301-415-6474 E-mail: fitnessforduty@nrc.gov
Attachment: Fitness-for-Duty Statistics
Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections.
ML051640539 OFFICE NSIR/DNS/LPSS NSIR/DNS/LPSS NSIR/DNS/LPSS NSIR/DNS/NSPP NSIR/DNS
NAME CCollins TMcCune GWest VOrdaz DDorman
DATE 06/23/2005 06/24/2005 07/07/2005 07/11/2005 07/12/2005 OFFICE NRR/DIPM/IROB SC:OES:IROB:DIPM C:IROB:DIPM
NAME EBenner MJRoss-Lee PLHiland (MJRoss-Lee for)
DATE 07/13/2005 07/15/2005 07/15/2005
Attachment Table 1A
2001 Test Results For Each Test Category
2001 TEST CATEGORY NUMBER OF POSITIVE TESTS PERCENT POSITIVE
TESTS
Pre-Access 63,744 720 1.13%
Random 50,080 148 0.30%
For-Cause 730 101 13.84%
Followup 2,649 35 1.32%
Other 1,527 32 2.10%
TOTAL * 118,730 1,036 0.87%
TOTAL without 117,203 1,004 0.86%
OTHER Category
Table 1B
2002 Test Results For Each Test Category
2002 TEST CATEGORY NUMBER OF POSITIVE TESTS PERCENT POSITIVE
TESTS
Pre-Access 73,188 805 1.10%
Random 49,848 114 0.23%
For-Cause 1,072 112 10.45%
Followup 2,892 21 0.73%
Other 1,462 39 2.67%
TOTAL * 128,462 1,091 0.85%
TOTAL without 127,000 1,052 0.83%
OTHER Category
- These totals were calculated using the Other test category. This category includes results
from the periodic testing done by some reporting units during annual physicals or similar
periodic activities. Although some reporting units specified the nature of the Other tests (e.g.,
return to work), most reporting units did not give this information. Table 1C
2003 Test Results For Each Test Category
2003 TEST CATEGORY NUMBER OF POSITIVE TESTS PERCENT POSITIVE
TESTS
Pre-Access 72,988 757 1.04%
Random 49,402 132 0.27%
For-Cause 1,052 126 11.98%
Followup 3,142 42 1.34%
Other 1,201 37 3.08%
TOTAL * 127,785 1,094 0.86%
TOTAL without 126,584 1,057 0.84%
OTHER Category
- These totals were calculated using the Other test category. This category includes results
from the periodic testing done by some reporting units during annual physicals or similar
periodic activities. Although some reporting units specified the nature of the Other tests (e.g.,
return to work), most reporting units did not give this information. Table 2A
2001 Test Results For Each Test Category And Work Category
Test Category Licensee Long-Term Short-Term Total
Employees Contractors Contractors
Pre-Access
Number Tested 8,442 1,641 53,661 63,744 Number Positive 44 16 660 720
Percent Positive 0.52% 0.98% 1.23% 1.13%
Random
Number Tested 36,048 1,697 12,335 50,080
Number Positive 64 4 80 148 Percent Positive 0.18% 0.24% 0.65% 0.30%
For-Cause
Number Tested 326 33 371 730
Number Positive 20 2 79 101 Percent Positive 6.13% 6.06% 21.29% 13.84%
Followup
Number Tested 1,650 70 931 2,649 Number Positive 19 0 16 35 Percent Positive 1.15% 0.00% 1.72% 1.32%
Other
Number Tested 586 305 636 1,527 Number Positive 4 1 27 32 Percent Positive 0.68% 0.33% 4.25% 2.10%
TOTAL
Number Tested 47,052 3,744 67,298 118,730
Number Positive 151 23 835 1,036 Percent Positive 0.32% 0.61% 1.27% 0.87%
TOTAL without
OTHER Category
Number Tested 46,466 3,439 67,298 117,203 Number Positive 147 22 835 1,004 Percent Positive 0.32% 0.64% 1.24% 0.86% Table 2B
2002 Test Results For Each Test Category And Work Category
Test Category Licensee Long-Term Short-Term Total
Employees Contractors Contractors
Pre-Access
Number Tested 8,050 1,257 63,881 73,188 Number Positive 28 10 767 805 Percent Positive 0.35% 0.80% 1.20% 1.10%
Random
Number Tested 35,608 1,298 12,942 49,848 Number Positive 55 1 58 114 Percent Positive 0.15% 0.08% 0.45% 0.23%
For-Cause
Number Tested 458 22 592 1,072 Number Positive 23 1 88 112 Percent Positive 5.02% 4.55% 14.86% 10.45%
Followup
Number Tested 1,789 33 1,070 2,892 Number Positive 11 0 10 21 Percent Positive 0.61% 0.00% 0.93% 0.73%
Other
Number Tested 618 137 706 1,462 Number Positive 6 0 33 39 Percent Positive 0.97% 0.00% 4.67% 2.67%
TOTAL
Number Tested 46,524 2,747 79,191 128,462 Number Positive 123 12 956 1,091 Percent Positive 0.26% 0.44% 1.21% 0.85%
TOTAL without
OTHER Category
Number Tested 45,905 2,610 78,485 127,000
Number Positive 117 12 923 1,052 Percent Positive 0.26% 0.46% 1.18% 0.83% Table 2C
2003 Test Results For Each Test Category And Work Category
Test Category Licensee Long-Term Short-Term Total
Employees Contractors Contractors
Pre-Access
Number Tested 8,309 779 63,900 72,988 Number Positive 41 8 708 757 Percent Positive 0.49% 1.03% 1.11% 1.04%
Random
Number Tested 34,202 1,133 14,067 49,402 Number Positive 61 3 68 132 Percent Positive 0.18% 0.26% 0.48% 0.27%
For-Cause
Number Tested 439 29 584 1,052 Number Positive 23 0 103 126 Percent Positive 5.24% 0.00% 17.64% 11.98%
Followup
Number Tested 1,942 26 1,174 3,142 Number Positive 21 1 20 42 Percent Positive 1.08% 3.85% 1.70% 1.34%
Other
Number Tested 545 59 597 1,201 Number Positive 1 0 36 37 Percent Positive 0.18% 0.00% 6.03% 3.08%
TOTAL
Number Tested 45,437 2,026 80,322 127,785 Number Positive 147 12 935 1,094 Percent Positive 0.32% 0.59% 1.16% 0.86%
TOTAL without
OTHER Category
Number Tested 44,892 1,967 79,725 126,584 Number Positive 146 12 899 1,057 Percent Positive 0.33% 0.61% 1.13% 0.84% Table 3A
2001 Test Results By Test Category
TEST CATEGORY FIRST SECOND YEAR
SIX MONTHS SIX MONTHS
Pre-Access
Number Tested 33,857 29,887 63,744 Number Positive 407 313 720
Percent Positive 1.20% 1.05% 1.13%
Random
Number Tested 25,703 24,377 50,080
Number Positive 80 68 148 Percent Positive 0.31% 0.28% 0.30%
For-Cause
Observed Behavior
Number Tested 226 280 506 Number Positive 53 46 99 Percent Positive 23.45% 16.43% 19.57%
Post-Accident
Number Tested 116 108 224 Number Positive 2 0 2 Percent Positive 1.72% 0.00% 0.89%
Follow-Up
Number Tested 1,381 1,268 2,649 Number Positive 22 13 35 Percent Positive 1.59% 1.03% 1.32%
Other
Number Tested 823 705 1,527 Number Positive 22 10 32 Percent Positive 2.67% 1.42% 2.10%
TOTAL
Number Tested 62,106 56,624 118,730
Number Positive 586 450 1,036 Percent Positive 0.94% 0.79% 0.87%
TOTAL without
OTHER Category
Number Tested 61,283 55,920 117,203 Number Positive 564 440 1,004 Percent Positive 0.92% 0.79% 0.86% Table 3B
2002 Test Results By Test Category
TEST CATEGORY FIRST SECOND YEAR
SIX MONTHS SIX MONTHS
Pre-Access
Number Tested 39,277 33,911 73,188 Number Positive 484 321 805 Percent Positive 1.23% 0.95% 1.10%
Random
Number Tested 25,407 24,441 49,848 Number Positive 66 48 114 Percent Positive 0.26% 0.20% 0.23%
For-Cause
Observed Behavior
Number Tested 336 281 617 Number Positive 68 42 110
Percent Positive 20.24% 14.95% 17.83%
Post-Accident
Number Tested 191 264 455 Number Positive 2 0 2 Percent Positive 1.05% 0.00% 0.44%
Follow-Up
Number Tested 1,485 1,407 2,892 Number Positive 12 9 21 Percent Positive 0.81% 0.64% 0.73%
Other
Number Tested 835 627 1,462 Number Positive 23 16 39 Percent Positive 2.75% 2.55% 2.67%
TOTAL
Number Tested 67,531 60,931 128,462 Number Positive 655 436 1,091 Percent Positive 0.97% 0.72% 0.85%
TOTAL without
OTHER Category
Number Tested 66,696 60,304 127,000
Number Positive 632 420 1,052 Percent Positive 0.95% 0.70% 0.83% Table 3C
2003 Test Results By Test Category
TEST CATEGORY FIRST SECOND YEAR
SIX MONTHS SIX MONTHS
Pre-Access
Number Tested 37,996 34,992 72,988 Number Positive 433 324 757 Percent Positive 1.14% 0.93% 1.04%
Random
Number Tested 25,060 24,342 49,402 Number Positive 75 57 132 Percent Positive 0.03% 0.23% 0.27%
For-Cause
Observed Behavior
Number Tested 359 278 637 Number Positive 68 55 123 Percent Positive 18.94% 19.78% 19.31%
Post-Accident
Number Tested 227 188 415 Number Positive 3 0 3 Percent Positive 1.32% 0.00% 0.72%
Follow-Up
Number Tested 1,577 1,565 3,142 Number Positive 24 18 42 Percent Positive 1.32% 1.15% 1.34%
Other
Number Tested 680 521 1,201 Number Positive 18 19 37 Percent Positive 2.65% 3.65% 3.08%
TOTAL
Number Tested 65,899 61,886 127,785 Number Positive 621 473 1,094 Percent Positive 0.94% 0.76% 0.86%
TOTAL without
OTHER Category
Number Tested 65,219 61,365 126,584 Number Positive 603 454 1,057 Percent Positive 0.92% 0.74% 0.84% Table 4A
2001 Test Results For Licensee Employees And Contractor Personnel
LICENSEE LONG-TERM SHORT-TERM
EMPLOYEES CONTRACTORS CONTRACTORS
TEST FIRST SECOND FIRST SECOND FIRST SECOND
CATEGORY SIX SIX YEAR SIX SIX YEAR SIX SIX YEAR
MONTHS MONTHS MONTHS MONTHS MONTHS MONTHS
Pre-Access
Number Tested 4,453 3,989 8,422 941 700 1,641 28,463 25,198 53,661 Number Positive 24 20 44 13 3 16 370 290 660
Percent Positive 0.54% 0.50% 0.52% 1.08% 0.43% 0.98% 1.30% 1.15% 1.23%
Random
Number Tested 18,441 17,607 36,048 991 706 1,697 6,271 6,064 12,335 Number Positive 38 26 64 3 1 4 39 41 80
Percent Positive 0.21% 0.15% 0.18% 0.30% 0.14% 0.24% 0.62% 0.68% 0.65%
For-Cause
Observed Behavior
Number Tested 96 123 219 9 11 20 121 146 267 Number Positive 11 9 20 1 1 2 41 36 77 Percent Positive 11.46% 7.32% 9.13% 11.11% 9.09% 10.00% 33.88% 24.66% 28.84%
Post-Accident
Number Tested 59 48 107 7 6 13 50 54 104 Number Positive 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Percent Positive 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.00% 0.00% 1.92%
Followup
Number Tested 790 860 1,650 34 34 68 557 374 931 Number Positive 10 9 19 0 0 0 12 4 16 Percent Positive 1.27% 1.05% 1.15% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.15% 1.07% 1.72%
Other
Number Tested 296 290 586 171 134 305 356 280 636 Number Positive 3 1 4 1 0 1 18 9 27 Percent Positive 1.01% 0.34% 0.68% 0.58% 0.00% 0.33% 5.06% 3.21% 4.25%
TOTAL
Number Tested 24,135 22,917 47,052 2,153 1,591 3,744 35,818 32,116 67,934 Number Positive 86 65 151 18 5 23 482 380 862 Percent Positive 0.36% 0.28% 0.32% 0.84% 0.31% 0.61% 1.35% 1.18% 1.27%
TOTAL without
OTHER Category
Number Tested 23,839 22,627 46,466 1,982 1,457 3,439 35,462 31,836 67,298 Number Positive 83 64 147 17 5 22 464 371 835 Percent Positive 0.35% 0.28% 0.32% 0.86% 0.34% 0.83% 1.31% 1.17% 1.24% Table 4B
2002 Test Results For Licensee Employees And Contractor Personnel
LICENSEE LONG-TERM SHORT-TERM
EMPLOYEES CONTRACTORS CONTRACTORS
TEST FIRST SECOND FIRST SECOND FIRST SECOND
CATEGORY SIX SIX YEAR SIX SIX YEAR SIX SIX YEAR
MONTHS MONTHS MONTHS MONTHS MONTHS MONTHS
Pre-Access
Number Tested 4,633 3,417 8,050 774 483 1,257 33,870 30,011 63,881 Number Positive 19 9 28 6 4 10 459 308 767 Percent Positive 0.41% 0.26% 0.35% 0.78% 0.83% 0.80% 1.36% 1.03% 1.20%
Random
Number Tested 18,106 17,502 35,608 681 617 1,298 6,620 6,322 12,942 Number Positive 28 27 55 1 0 1 37 21 58 Percent Positive 0.15% 0.15% 0.15% 0.15% 0.00% 0.08% 0.56% 0.33% 0.45%
For-Cause
Observed Behavior
Number Tested 138 105 243 6 2 8 192 174 366 Number Positive 12 11 23 1 0 1 55 31 86 Percent Positive 8.70% 10.48% 9.47% 16.67% 0.00% 12.56% 28.65% 17.82% 23.50%
Post-Accident
Number Tested 79 136 215 7 7 14 105 121 226 Number Positive 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Percent Positive 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.90% 0.00% 0.88%
Followup
Number Tested 869 920 1,789 10 23 33 606 464 1,070
Number Positive 6 5 11 0 0 0 6 4 10
Percent Positive 0.69% 0.54% 0.61% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.99% 0.86% 0.93%
Other
Number Tested 328 291 619 110 27 137 397 309 706 Number Positive 3 3 6 0 0 0 20 13 33 Percent Positive 0.91% 1.03% 0.97% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5.04% 4021% 4.67%
TOTAL
Number Tested 24,153 22,371 46,524 1,588 1,159 2,747 41,790 37,401 79,191 Number Positive 68 55 123 8 4 12 579 377 956 Percent Positive 0.28% 0.25% 0.26% 0.50% 0.35% 0.44% 1.39% 1.01% 1.21%
TOTAL without
OTHER Category
Number Tested 23,825 22,080 45,905 1,478 1,132 2,610 41,393 37,092 78,485 Number Positive 65 52 117 8 4 12 559 364 923 Percent Positive 0.27% 0.24% 0.25% 0.54% 0.35% 0.46% 1.35% 0.98% 1.18% Table 4C
2003 Test Results For Licensee Employees And Contractor Personnel
LICENSEE LONG-TERM SHORT-TERM
EMPLOYEES CONTRACTORS CONTRACTORS
TEST FIRST SECOND FIRST SECOND FIRST SECOND
CATEGORY SIX SIX YEAR SIX SIX YEAR SIX SIX YEAR
MONTHS MONTHS MONTHS MONTHS MONTHS MONTHS
Pre-Access
Number Tested 4,477 3,832 8,309 410 369 779 33,109 30,791 63,900
Number Positive 27 14 41 6 2 8 400 308 708 Percent Positive 0.60% 0.37% 0.49% 1.46% 0.54% 1.03% 1.21% 1.00% 1.11%
Random
Number Tested 17,236 16,966 34,202 592 541 1,133 7,232 6,835 14,067 Number Positive 35 26 61 1 2 3 39 29 68 Percent Positive 0.20% 0.15% 0.18% 0.17% 0.37% 0.26% 0.54% 0.42% 0.48%
For-Cause
Observed Behavior
Number Tested 124 108 232 6 6 12 229 164 393 Number Positive 13 9 22 0 0 0 55 46 101 Percent Positive 10.48% 8.33% 9.48% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 24.02% 28.05% 25.70%
Post-Accident
Number Tested 111 96 207 9 8 17 107 84 191 Number Positive 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 2 Percent Positive 0.90% 0.00% 0.48% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.87% 0.00% 1.05%
Followup
Number Tested 948 994 1,942 8 18 26 621 553 1,174 Number Positive 9 12 21 1 0 1 14 6 20
Percent Positive 0.95% 1.21% 1.08% 12.50% 0.00% 3.85% 2.25% 1.08% 1.70%
Other
Number Tested 273 272 545 30 29 59 377 220 597 Number Positive 0 1 1 0 0 0 18 18 36 Percent Positive 0.00% 0.37% 0.18% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.77% 8.18% 6.03%
TOTAL
Number Tested 23,169 22,268 45,437 1,055 971 2,026 41,675 38,647 80,322 Number Positive 85 62 147 8 4 12 528 407 935 Percent Positive 0.37% 0.28% 0.32% 0.76% 0.41% 0.59% 1.27% 1.05% 1.16%
TOTAL without
OTHER Category
Number Tested 22,896 21,996 44,892 1,025 942 1,967 41,298 38,427 79,725 Number Positive 85 61 146 8 4 12 510 389 899 Percent Positive 0.37% 0.28% 0.33% 0.78% 0.42% 0.61% 1.23% 1.01% 1.13% Table 5A
2001 Number Of Confirmed Positives By Substance
FIRST SECOND
SIX MONTHS SIX MONTHS TOTAL
TYPE OF
SUBSTANCE Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Marijuana 300 50.85% 219 50.85% 519 50.73%
Cocaine 121 20.51% 102 23.56% 223 21.80%
Opiates 7 1.19% 10 2.31% 17 1.66%
Amphetamines 35 5.93% 15 3.46% 50 4.89%
Phencyclidine 1 0.17% 1 0.23% 2 0.20%
Alcohol 126 21.36% 86 19.86% 212 20.72%
TOTAL 590 433 1,023 Table 5B
2002 Number Of Confirmed Positives By Substance
FIRST SECOND
SIX MONTHS SIX MONTHS TOTAL
TYPE OF
SUBSTANCE Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Marijuana 334 53.27% 228 51.01% 562 52.33%
Cocaine 126 20.10% 102 22.82% 228 21.23%
Opiates 14 2.23% 7 1.57% 21 1.96%
Amphetamines 29 4.63% 17 3.80% 46 4.28%
Phencyclidine 3 0.48% 0 0.00% 3 0.28%
Alcohol 121 19.30% 93 20.81% 214 19.93%
TOTAL 627 447 1,074 Table 5C
2003 Number Of Confirmed Positives By Substance
FIRST SECOND
SIX MONTHS SIX MONTHS TOTAL
TYPE OF
SUBSTANCE Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Marijuana 291 50.35% 231 50.22% 522 50.29%
Cocaine 130 22.49% 103 22.39% 233 22.45%
Opiates 10 1.73% 7 1.52% 17 1.64%
Amphetamines 32 5.54% 32 6.96% 64 6.17%
Phencyclidine 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Alcohol 115 19.90% 87 18.91% 202 19.46%
TOTAL 578 460 1,038 Table 6A
2001 Confirmed Positive Test Results By Substance And Work Category
LICENSEE CONTRACTORS
EMPLOYEES (Long-Term/Short-Term)
TYPE OF Number Percent Number Percent
SUBSTANCE
Marijuana 56 38.10% 463 52.85%
Cocaine 24 16.33% 199 22.72%
Opiates 0 0.00% 17 1.94%
Amphetamines 12 8.16% 38 4.34%
Phencyclidine 0 0.00% 2 0.23%
Alcohol 55 37.41% 157 17.92%
TOTAL 147 876 Table 6B
2002 Confirmed Positive Test Results By Substance And Work Category
LICENSEE CONTRACTORS
EMPLOYEES (Long-Term/Short-Term)
TYPE OF Number Percent Number Percent
SUBSTANCE
Marijuana 47 38.52% 515 54.10%
Cocaine 16 13.11% 212 22.27%
Opiates 1 0.82% 20 2.10%
Amphetamines 1 0.82% 45 4.73%
Phencyclidine 0 0.00% 3 0.32%
Alcohol 57 46.72% 157 16.49%
TOTAL 122 952 Table 6C
2003 Confirmed Positive Test Results By Substance And Work Category
LICENSEE CONTRACTORS
EMPLOYEES (Long-Term/Short-Term)
TYPE OF Number Percent Number Percent
SUBSTANCE
Marijuana 50 35.97% 472 52.50%
Cocaine 25 17.99% 208 23.14%
Opiates 5 3.60% 12 1.33%
Amphetamines 11 7.91% 53 5.90%
Phencyclidine 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Alcohol 48 34.53% 154 17.13%
TOTAL 139 899 Table 7A
2001 Confirmed Positives Test Results By Substance For Each Worker Category
Licensee Employees Contractors
(Long-Term/Short-Term)
TYPE OF Number Percent Number Percent
SUBSTANCE
Marijuana 55 37.93% 468 52.94%
Cocaine 24 16.55% 201 22.74%
Opiates 0 0.00% 17 1.92%
Amphetamines 12 8.28% 38 4.30%
Phencyclidine 0 0.00% 2 0.23%
Alcohol 54 37.24% 158 17.87%
TOTAL* 145 884
- These numbers include tests results for the Other test category.
Table 7B
2002 Confirmed Positives Test Results By Substance For Each Worker Category
Licensee Employees Contractors
(Long-Term/Short-Term)
TYPE OF Number Percent Number Percent
SUBSTANCE
Marijuana 47 38.22% 515 54.10%
Cocaine 16 13.11% 212 22.27%
Opiates 1 0.82% 20 2.10%
Amphetamines 1 0.82% 45 4.73%
Phencyclidine 0 0.00% 3 0.32%
Alcohol 57 46.72% 157 16.49%
TOTAL* 122 952
- These numbers include tests results for the Other test category. Table 7C
2003 Confirmed Positives Test Results By Substance For Each Worker Category
Licensee Employees Contractors
(Long-Term/Short-Term)
TYPE OF Number Percent Number Percent
SUBSTANCE
Marijuana 50 36.97% 468 52.76%
Cocaine 25 17.99% 203 22.89%
Opiates 5 3.60% 12 1.35%
Amphetamines 11 7.91% 53 5.98%
Phencyclidine 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Alcohol 48 34.53% 151 17.02%
TOTAL* 139 887
- These numbers include tests results for the Other test category. Table 8 - Significant Fitness-For-Duty Events (1990-2003)
Type of Event 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Total
Reactor Operators 19 16 18 8 7 8 8 9 5 5 5 4 3 6 121 Licensee Supervisors 26 18 22 25 11 16 19 16 10 2 11 9 3 3 191 Contract Supervisors 12 24 28 16 11 10 8 10 10 12 8 12 12 8 181 FFD Program 1 5 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 2 0 0 3 0 17 Personnel
Substances Found 6 8 6 2 0 5 5 4 0 2 3 0 1 2 44 Adulterated 9 9 Specimen
Total 64 69 74 51 30 39 42 39 28 23 27 25 22 28 563
- Reactor Operators- this category refers to licensee reactor operators and to any person licensed under 10 CFR Part 55. Table 9 - Trends in testing by test type (1990 - 2003)
Type of Test 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Total
Pre-Access
Number Tested 122,491 104,508 104,842 91,471 80,217 79,305 81,041 84,320 69,146 69,139 68,333 63,744 73,188 72,988 1,164,7
00
Number Positive 1,548 983 1,110 952 977 1,122 1,132 1,096 822 934 965 720 805 757 13,923 Percent Positive 1.26% 0.94% 1.06% 1.04% 1.22% 1.41% 1.40% 1.30% 1.19% 1.35% 1.41% 1.13% 1.10% 1.04% 1.20%
Random
Number Tested 148,743 153,818 156,730 146,605 78,391 66,791 62,307 60,829 56,969 54,457 51,955 50,080 49,848 49,402 1,186,8
18 Number Positive 550 510 461 341 223 180 202 172 157 140 204 148 114 132 3,534 Percent Positive 0.37% 0.33% 0.29% 0.23% 0.28% 0.27% 0.32% 0.28% 0.28% 0.26% 0.39% 0.30% 0.23% 0.27% 0.30%
For-Cause
Number Tested 732 727 696 751 758 763 848 722 720 736 883 730 1,072 1,052 11,190
Number Positive 214 167 178 163 122 139 138 149 100 120 138 101 112 126 1,967 Percent Positive 29.23% 22.97% 25.27% 21.70% 16.09% 18.22% 16.27% 20.64% 13.89% 16.30% 15.67% 13.84% 10.45% 11.98% 17.58%
Followup
Number Tested 2,633 3,544 4,283 4,139 3,875 3,262 3,262 3,296 2,863 3,008 2,861 2,649 2,892 3,142 45,709 Number Positive 65 62 69 56 50 35 40 31 43 30 49 35 21 42 628 Percent Positive 2.47% 1.75% 1.61% 1.35% 1.29% 1.07% 1.23% 0.94% 1.50% 1.00% 1.71% 1.32% 0.73% 1.34% 1.37%
TOTAL*
Number Tested 274,599 262,597 266,551 242,966 163,241 150,12 147,458 149,167 129,698 127,340 124,032 117,203 127,000 126,584 2,439,5
37 Number Positive 2,377 1,722 1,818 1,512 1,372 1,476 1,512 1,448 1,122 1,224 1,356 1,004 1,052 1,057 20,530
Percent Positive 0.87% 0.66% 0.68% 0.62% 0.84% 0.98% 1.03% 0.97% 0.87% 0.96% 1.09% 0.86% 0.83% 0.84% 0.82%
- Does not include test results from the Other test category. Table 10 - Trends in substances identified (1990-2003)
Substance 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Marijuana 1,153 746 953 781 739 819 868 842 606 672 620 523 562 518 Cocaine 706 549 470 369 344 374 352 336 269 273 251 225 228 228 Alcohol 452 401 427 357 251 265 281 262 212 230 211 212 214 199 Amphetamines 69 31 31 51 54 61 53 49 46 40 50 50 46 64 Opiates 45 24 8 13 11 17 14 39 19 16 32 17 21 17 Phencyclidine 8 11 4 5 1 7 2 0 1 2 1 2 3 0
Total* 2,433 1,762 1,893 1,576 1,400 1,543 1,570 1,528 1,153 1,233 1,168 1,029 1,074 1,026
- These totals do not equal the total number of positives for each year because some positives were for multiple substances and for other
substances than those listed above. Table 11 Trends In Positive Test Rates For Workers With Unescorted Access (1990 - 2003)
Year Positive Test Rate
1990 0.54%
1991 0.47%
1992 0.44%
1993 0.37%
1994 0.48%
1995 0.50%
1996 0.57%
1997 0.54%
1998 0.50%
1999 0.50%
2000 0.70%
2001 0.53%
2002 0.46%
2003 0.56%
- Includes random, for-cause, and follow-up testing results. The reduction in
random test rate from 100% to 50% has been in effect since 1994.