ML14181A913
| ML14181A913 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris, Brunswick, Robinson  |
| Issue date: | 04/24/1997 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML14181A910 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-261-97-02, 50-261-97-2, 50-324-97-01, 50-324-97-1, 50-325-97-01, 50-325-97-1, 50-400-97-02, 50-400-97-2, EA-97-056, EA-97-057, EA-97-56, EA-97-57, NUDOCS 9705080244 | |
| Download: ML14181A913 (5) | |
Text
NOTICE OF VIOLATION Carolina Power and Light Company Docket Nos. 50-325, 50-324, Brunswick Nuclear Plant and 50-400 Harris Nuclear Plant License Nos. DPR-71, DPR-62, and NPF-63 EA 97-056 and EA 97-057 During an NRC inspection conducted on January 13 through February 6, 1997, violations of NRC requirements were identified.
In accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG-1600, the violations are listed below:
A.
10 CFR 73.56(b) requires the licensee to establish and maintain an Access Authorization Program granting individuals unescorted access to protected and vital areas with the objective of providing high assurance that individuals granted unescorted access are trustworthy and reliable, and do not constitute an unreasonable risk to the health and safety of the public including a potential to, commit radiological sabotage.
- 1.
10 CFR 73.56(b)(3) requires that the licensee base its decision to grant, deny, revoke, or continue an unescorted access authorization on review and evaluatio'n of all rertinent information developed.
10 CFR 73.57(b) requires the licensee to fingerprint each individual who is permitted unescorted access to the nuclear facility. Based on the results of the criminal history check on the individual's fingerprint results, the licensee is to determine either to continue, to grant, or to deny further unescorted access to the facility.
Desk Top Instruction PA-DI-05, "In-Processing/Out Processing," Revision 5, dated April 26, 1996, requires, in part, that employees who have lost access for over 365 days but less than five years shall complete fingerprinting prior to being granted unescorted access authorization.
Contrary to the above, the licensee failed to implement an Access Authorization Program to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 73.56, 10 CFR 73.57, and the requirements of Desk Top Instruction AA-DI-03 as evidenced by the following examples:
- a.
From March 31 through May 7, 1994, and July 1 through July 7, 1994, an individual was permitted 9705060244 970424 PDR ADOCK 05000261 3
P DR
final unescorted access to the Brunswick Nuclear Plant without the completion.of the criminal history check based on the fingerprints; and
- b.
On March 28, 1990, an individual was granted unescorted access to the Brunswick Nuclear Plant; however, fingerprints results were not filed for the individual.
- c.
From August 1991 to August 1996, an individual was granted unescorted access to the Brunswick Nuclear Plant for whom more than 365 days but less than five years had elapsed since being initially fingerprinted and being approved for unescorted access.
(01013)
- 2.
Paragraph 1.0, of Procedure SEC-NGGC-2101, Nuclear Worker Screening Program for Unescorted Access, Revision 0, dated March 20, 1995. recuires the licensee to implement an Unescorted Access Authorization Program which satisfies the requirements of 10 CFR 73.56.
Paragraph 5.1.1, of Procedure SEC-NGGC-2101, Nuclear Worker Screening Program for Unescorted Access, requires, in part, that employment history must be obtained for the past five y-ars through contacts with previous employers by obtaining the following.
information: (1) verification of claimed periods of employment of 30 days or more; (2) reason for termination and eligibility for rehire; and (3) any other information that would adversely reflect upon the reliability and trustworthiness of the worker as it relates to the worker being permitted unescorted access.
Contrary to the above, from January 22 through March 1, 1996, an individual for whom the licensee had not verified prior employment was granted temporary, unescorted access to the Brunswick Nuclear Plant.
Subsequently, the individual was determined to have been terminated from a previous employer for record falsification.
(01023)
- 3.
License Condition No. 2.E of Carolina Power and Light Company Operating License No. NPF-63 requires, in part, that the licensee fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission-approved physical security plan.
Paragraph 6.2.1 of the Harris Nuclear Plant's Physical Security Plan (PSP), Revision 0, dated April 29, 1996, and Paragraph 1.6 of Revision 7, dated May 26, 1994,
require that a current access list for vital areas must be upgraded and re-approved by the cognizant licensee manager or supervisor at least every 31 days.
The PSP further requires that the names of personnel whose employment is terminated, for whatever reason, are purged from the access authorization list.
Contrary to the above, during the periods March 3 through April 24,,1995, and December 31, 1996 through January 17, 1997, the licensee's 31-day review of the access list for vital areas was inadequate in that it failed to identify and have purged from the access authorization list, two individuals whose employment had been terminated, resulting in their continued capability to gain unescorted access to the Harris Nuclear Plant.
(01033)
- 4.
10 CFR 73.56(b)(3) requires that the licensee base its decision to grant, deny, revoke, or continue an unescorted access authorization on review and evaluation of all pertinent information developed.
Contrary to the above, the licensee failed to accurately document or note that documentation was missing upon which it had based its decision to grant unescorted access authorization as evidenced by the following examples:
- a.
On January 22, 1996, an individual was granted unescorted access to the Brunswick Nuclear Plant although adjudication of derogatory credit information was not documented.
- b.
On March 26, 1996, a contractor had been granted final clearance to the Brunswick Nuclear Plant without adjudication of the failure to provide a best effort to contact two developed references.
(01043)
C.
10 CFR 26.24(a)(2) requires the licensee to implement unannounced drug and alcohol tests imposed in a statistically random and unpredictable manner so that all persons in the population subject to testing have an equal probability of being selected and tested.
Contrary to the above, the licensee failed to implement unannounced drug and alcohol tests for all persons in the population subject to testing. Specifically, from May 9, 1994, through February 2, 1995; April 26, 1994, through February 21, 1995; and January 24 through March 21, 1996, three individuals who were granted unescorted access to
Brunswick Nuclear Plant were not included in the random drug/alcohol testing program.
(01053)
D.
10 CFR 26.20(c) requires the licensee to develop procedures to be utilized in testing for drugs and alcohol, including procedures for protecting the employee and the integrity of the specimen, and the quality controls used to ensure the test results are valid and attributable to the correct individual.
Procedure SEG-NGGC-2143, Fitness for Duty Drug Testing Specimen Collection, Revision 0, dated September 13, 1996, Section 9.2 requires the licensee, if the specimen is of insufficient volume, to measure temperature and to record the information in the Permanent Record Book and in the Chain of Custody collector's notes section.
Urine Drug Testing Specimen Collection Instruction, dated May 12, 1995, requires, in part, the following:
(1) that the collector print the name of the donor and have the donor sign their name on the Chain of Custody form; (2) that the collector enter the date on the Chain of Custody form; and (3) that the Permanent Record Book Form be completed (including a donor certification signature) and that the donor verify that the name, social security number, specimen number, dates signatures, etc... on all fitness for duty paperwork.
Desk Top Instruction-51, Blind Proficiency Sample Processing, Revision 2, dated October 11, 1995, requires the collector to print and sign the blind sample name on the Chain of Custody prior to submission.
Contrary to the above, the licensee failed to complete signature or other personal identification information on fitness for duty documentation at all three sites as evidenced by the following examples:
- a.
On August 2, 1995, the Brunswick Nuclear Plant fitness for duty staff failed to have the donor sign the Chain of Custody form.
- b.
On September 3, 11, and 19, 1996, the General Office fitness for duty staff on four separate occasions failed to ensure that the donor verified their name and signature on various fitness for duty forms.
- c.
On October 1, 1996, the Brunswick Nuclear Plant fitness for duty staff misspelled the donor's name on the Chain of Custody form.
- d.
On October 1, 1996, the Brunswick Nuclear Plant staff recorded the wrong social security number on the Chain of Custody form.
- e.
On October 7, 1996, the Brunswick Nuclear Plant fitness for duty staff failed to record that a specimen was of insufficient volume, in the specified box on the Chain of Custody form.
- f.
On November 11, 1996, a Harris fitness for duty staff member failed to date a donor's Chain of Custody.
- g.
On December 11, 1996, the General Office fitness for duty staff forwarded a blind sample to.the testing laboratory without printing and signing the donor's name on the Chain of Custody form.
(01063)
This is a Severity Level III problem (St plements III and VII) and is applicable to Brunswick Units 1 and 2 and Harris Unit 1.
The NRC has concluded that information regarding the reason for the violations, the corrective actions taken and planned to correct the violations and prevent recurrence, and the date when full compliance will be achieved are already adequately addressed on the docket in your letters to the NRC dated March 31 and April 4, 1997.
However, you are required to submit a written statement or explanation pursuant to 10 CFR 2.201 if the description therein does not accurately reflect your corrective actions or your position. In that case, or if you choose to respond, clearly mark your response as a "Reply to Notice of Violation," and send it to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN:
Document Control Desk, Washington, D. C. 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region II, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspectors at the Brunswick, Harris, and Robinson's plants within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation (Notice).
Under the authority of Section 182 of the Act, 42 U. S. C. 2232, any response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation.
If you choose to provide a response, it will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), and to the extent possible, it should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the PDR without redaction.
Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this 24th day of April 1997