ML17191A880
| ML17191A880 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 09/18/1998 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17191A878 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-96-493, NUDOCS 9809240056 | |
| Download: ML17191A880 (5) | |
Text
- .
NOTICE OF VIOLATION Commonwealth Edison Company
_.Dresden Nuclear Station Units 2 and 3 Docket Nos. 50~237; 50-249 License Nos. DPR-19; DPR-25 EA 96-493 During an NRC investigation, completed on March 30, 1998, a violation of NRC requirements was identified. In accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and P.r<;>cedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG-1600, the violation is listed below:
1 O CFR 55.49 provides that applicants, licensees, and facility licensees shall not engage in any activity that compromises the integrity of any application, test, or examination required by 10 CFR Part 55, "Operators' Licenses."
Contrary to the above, on June 29, 1996, two applicants for NRC operator licenses at the Dresden Station (one was an applicant for a reactor operator (RO) license and the other was an applicant for a senior reactor operator (SRO) license) engaged in activities that compromised the integrity of an NRC examination required by 1 O CFR. Part 55. This examination was scheduled to be administered by the NRC beginning on July 8, 1996. Specifically, on June 29, 1996,*the applicants, both employed by the facility licensee, found keys to desks and cabinets in which instructional materials for licensing operators were stored. Using those keys, they unlocked a desk, found the NRC examination, and copied the exam for their use. (01013)
This is a Severity Level Ill violation (Supplement I).
Pursuant to the provisions of 1 O CFR 2.201, Commonwealth Edison Company (Com Ed or licensee), is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATIN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555-~001, with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region Ill, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the Dresden Station, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation.
(Notice). This reply should be clearly marked as a "Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should indude for each violation: (1) the reason for the violation, or, if contested, the basis for
- disputing the violation, (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, (3) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Your response may reference or include previous docketed correspondence, if the correspondence adequately addresses the required response. If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice; an order or a Demand for Information may be issued as to why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked, or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. Where good cause is shown,* consideration will be given to extending the response time.
If you contest this enforcement action, you should also provide a copy of your response to the Director, Office of Enforcement, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
9809240056 980918 PDR ADOCK 05000237 V
Notice of Violation Under the authority of Section 182 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2232, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation.
Because your response will be placed in the NRG Public Document Room (PDR), 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 redactiori. If personal privacy or proprietary information
- is necessary to provide an acceptable response, then please provide a bracketed copy of your response that identifies the information that should be protected and a redacted copy of your response that deletes such information. If you request withh~lding of such material, you must specifically identify the portions of your response that you seek to have withheld and provide in detail the bases for your claim of withholding (e.g., explain why the disc.losure of information will create an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy or provide the information required by 10 CFR 2.790(b) to support a request for withholding confidential commercial or financial information). If safeguards information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, please provide the level of protection described in 1 O CFR 73.21.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 18th day of September 1998
3 identified the violation and immediately notified the NRC. While assessing the Identification factor, the NRC noted the high level of personal integrity demonstrated by the ComEd licensing instructor who identified the violation and reported it to station management. His actions demonstrated that a high level of personal integrity does exist among employees at the Dresden Station. His actions were commendable, in contrast to the lack of personal integrity demonstrated by the two license applicants. Credit was also warranted for the Corrective*
Action factor because of the timely and comprehensive corrective measures instituted by ComEd. A significant corrective action was the creation of a controlled office for developing, processing, and storing examination materials (e.g., limited personnel access, stringent key control, access to computers was controlled through password protection, and no physi~I connection to computers outside of that room). Other corrective actions included requirements that NRC examination materials always be in the physical possession of authorized personnel when not in locked storage, and simulator alarm printouts are maintained by authorized examiners. Also noteworthy were the special audits that have been conducted to confirm the adequacy of the above measures and the extension of upgraded examination security requirements at all of the ComEd nuclear stations. The NRC also recognizes that this violation is not indicative of current activities associated with the administration of NRC license examinations at the Dresden Station.
Therefore, to encourage prompt identification and comprehensive correetion of violations, I am not proposing a civil penalty in this case. However, significant violations in the future could result in a civil penalty.
During the enforcement conference, the significance of the printout the SRO license applicant allegedly found in a trash receptacle was discussed. This printout recorded alarm signals produced while the NRC examination was validated using the reactor simulator. At the enforcement conference, the ComEd representatives noted that this printout would not be useful to an applicant preparing for the simulator examination. However, the NRC believes that by studying the printout an examination candidate could deduce information concerning the problem scenarios that were to be presented during the reactor simulator portion of the NRC examination.
With respect to the license applicants, the 01 investigation was presented to the U.S. Attorney, Chicago, IL. Both individuals subsequently pleaded guilty in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois to criminal charges related to the compromise of the NRC.
examination. Today, the NRC issued a separate enforcement action to each of the individuals.
An Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC Licensed Activities for a period of five years was issued to the RO applicant. A letter was sent to the SRO applicant confirming the NRC's understanding that in his plea agreement, accepted by the sentencing court, the SRO applicant agreed to never seek employment at any facility licensed by the NRC. A copy of each enforcement action is being provided to you.
4 You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response. The NRC will use your response, in part, to determine whether further enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
Docket Nos. 50-237; 50-249 License Nos. DPR-19; DPR 25
Enclosure:
Notice of Violation Sincerely,
~~1~
William D. Travers Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory Effectiveness cc w/NOV:
M. Wallace, Senior Vice President D. Helwig, Senior Vice President G. Stanley, PWR Vice President J. Perry, BWR Vice President D. Farrar, Regulatory Services Manager I. Johnson, Licensing Director DCD - Licensing M. Heffley, Site Vice President P. Swafford, Station Manager F. Spangenberg, Regulatory Assurance Manager R. Hubbard N. Schloss, Economist Office of the Attorney General State Liaison Officer Chairman, Illinois Commerce Commission
DISTRIBUTION:
PUBLIC IE-01 SECY CA LCallan, EDO WTravers, DEDE LChandler, OGC JGoldberg, OGC SCollins, NRA RZimmerman, NRA BBoger, NRA Enforcement Coordinators RI, All and RIV Resident Inspector, Dresden JStang, NRA JGilliland, OPA HBell, OIG GCaputo, 01 RPaul, Ol:Rlll TMartin, AEOD OE:ES OE:EA (2)
RAO:Rlll SLO:Rlll PAO:Rlll OCFO/LFARB w/o encl.
DRP Docket File
- RGallo, NRR Mleach, Rlll:DRS Riii Office Allegation Coordinator OE VBeaston 9/~/98 g :\\oecases\\96493rev. wpd 5
NRR D:OE JCaldwell BBoger Jlieberman 913 /98 9/ 1198 9/t( /98