ML20067D064
| ML20067D064 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 02/01/1991 |
| From: | Naslund C UNION ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| ULNRC-2362, NUDOCS 9102120313 | |
| Download: ML20067D064 (9) | |
Text
. _
[. INION
~
$LECTRIC 33 Calaway avat February 1, 1991 UIRRC 2362 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention:
Document Control Desk Mail Station Pl-137 Washington, D.C.
20555 Centlemen:
In complying wJth the Fitness For Duty Rule, 10CFR26.71(d), Recordkeeping Requirements, please find enclosed Union Electric's Callaway Nuclear Plant Fitness For Duty Program Performance Data for the six (6) month period be-ginning July 1,.1990 and ending on December 31, 1990.
Enclosures include.:
Attachment A - Fitness For Duty Program Performanco Data Personnel Subject to 10CFR26 Attaclunent B - Random Testing Program Results/ Confirmed Positive Tests for Specific Substances (Five Year Record)
Attachment C - Fitness For Duty Management Actions in regards to:
- Initiatives Taken
- Lessons Learned
- Reportable Fitness For Duty Events under 10CFR26.73 If you have any questions in regards to the Performance Data Reported, please contact me at (314)676-8500.
I i
Char es D. N slund Manager-Operat.Lon Support (Fitness For Duty Manager)
M 9102120313 910201 g [
l PDR ADOCK 05000483 R
PDR i
{
N O
Ab{ng Aahtm PO Box 620. Fdicn MO 652SI
.~
-r p
'e
~
- .1 i
i Ur. ion Electric Callaway Plant:
-February 1,_1991 Fitness ForLDuty. Pro 6 ram ULNRC-2362-Performance'Datas Page'2 of 3
.o ec:
-Corald Charnoff, Esq Shaw, Pittman, Fotts & Trowbridge 2300 N. Street,'N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037 Dr. J 13.- -Ce rmak '
CFA, Inc, 4 Professional Drive-(Suite 110)
Caithersburg, MD'20879
/R. W' DeFayette c:
Chief, Reactor _ Projects Section-3A
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission-Region III_
~'
- 799 Roosevelt Road'
.Clen Ellyn,;Illinoisf6-
^
R.JC. Knop-
' Chief, Reactor Project Branch 1 U.S,iNuclear: Regulatory Commission a
Region III' 799 Roosevelt-Road Clon-Ell'yn,1 Illinois 60137-
-Bruce Bartlett.
20 Callaway Resident Offico a :-
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory' Commission RR#11 Steedman, Missouri 65077'-
- S.1/, Athavale -
10ffice;of-Nuclear Reactor Regulation "U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1: White' Flint, North, Mail < Stop 13E21-11555 Rockville Pike.
Rockville, MD 20852 Manager, Electric Department Missouri Public Service Commission P.O.' Box 360-Jefferson City, MO 65102
]
-~
4.
A
/ -. /
-)
.' 4 i
o.
l
' Union Electric;Callaway Plant-February 1, 1991' Fitness For Duty Program ULNRC 2362-
~
Performance' Data Page-3 of 3-l i
i t
bec:
D.'Shafer/A160.761 1/QA Record (CA-758) l
~ Nuclear Date (Sandra Auston)
E210.0001' j
CDN Chrono.
1 D. P.;-Schnell J. V. Laux M. A..lStiller-l 1
G.L.:Randolph L
H. Wuertenbaccher
- A. C.,Passwater.
' D.; E.1;Sha fer ~
D.iJ.. _ Walke r O. Maynard'(UCNOC)-
T,fP,-Sharkey:
.NSRB (Sandra /Auston)
A270.0009 1
Io I
L i
Jj 1
V l
l
I, Fitness for Duty Program
-Performance Data Personnel Subject to 10CFR 26 1
._ Union Electric Company December 31, 1990.
CornpW 8 Monthe Ending Callaway Nuclear Plant Locanon Donna M. Knoepflein 314/676-8211 Contact Name Phone (Indude area codel
. Cutoff s: Screen / Confirmation (ng/ml)
O Appendix A to 10CFR 26 Marijuana 20 /
15 Amphetamines 1000 / 250 Barbiturates 300.f 250 Cocaine 300 / 150 Phencyclidine 25 / 25 Benzodiazepines 300'y 250 Oplates
.300 / 150 Alcohol (% BAC)
.04%
f Long Term Short Term I
Testing Result:
Contractor Contractor-Ucensee Employees Personnel Personnel Average Number with
}{ggglgg@sg Unescorted Access -
1043 273 161 Referred Access Categories.
Tested
. Positive
'to EAP Restored Tested Positive Tested PositWe Pre employment.
44 0
0 0
0
_0
'P$ bad 0 lng h
21 0
755 11 6
O
% M[ :s :fffI
-c
>, %x.g i
Periodic 0
0 O
O O
C ofCaus0 1
0 0
0 1
1 fIj f
- h
. Post accident 0
0 0
0 0
'O.
f
Random -
534 2
163 0.
~143 2
. ff ff?
Follow-up ;
O O
O O
1 0
iMlG;b"4 6W '<
Other 5
0
- "R yyh 4
Qgy;;g#
0 0
1 0
- e %y n
Total 590 2
1 2
184 0
901 14 ATTACHMENT A
Random Testing Program Results Individuals Tested 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
/
- Positive 0
4
[
- Tested
/
654 840
% Positive 0
47 I
Graph of 5
% Positive l
t 4
f I
3 1
l 2
l 1
1 4 i I
1 1I i
l 1
l Confirmed Positive Tests for Specific Substances l
Marijuana 0
11 Cocaine 0
4 l
Opiates O
C Amphetamines 0
0 Phencyclidine 0
1 Alcohol 0
1 0
3 Benzodiazepines 5
0 1
Q Barbiturates it m
2 l
.m
p 4
February 1, 1991 Page 1 of 4-i vitness For Duty Mananement Actions Initiatives-Taken
'In addition to' reporting Fitness For Duty Program statistics to Plant Per-sotmel on a quarterly basis via newsletter publications, Union Electric has implemented the following:
Included a 20 30 minute--segment in Continued Employee Observation Training 1.. which a Fitness For Duty Program Representative pro-videsireview of FFD Program statistics, progress of the FFD Program, and discusses potential-ch:mges that may -occur to-the program in the; futut e '. Time is also allocated for a question and answer session.
- The Medical Review Officer is also included in-this segment when he is~available to, explain his role in the. program and provides a ques-tion and: answer session-for Training Participants. -We strongly em-phasize to, Plant Supervisors during.these Training Sessions to utt-
=lizorthe MRO to clarify any questions they maylhave in regards to (ie:Jeffects_a specific drug may.have.on-their system, the effects of poppyseed, etc.).
--The Training Departmentchas: also : included additional-information in CEO Training-in an attempt to clarify Testing-for Causo Procedures.
Several-
-case studies are included for-Training Participants to review and discuss-if case: studies were. handled correctly and if not, provide critique on how these case studies-should have been handled to comply with Union Electric's 1 Fitness.ForLDuty procedures.
Feedback received from Training Participants = indicate this additional Train-
!ing/ Communication isLhaving a positive effect;by providing LPlsnt. Supervisors zwith: (1) the Supervisor's role and responsibility in the FFD Program,-(2) better understanding -of.FFD ' Program administration,: and (3) FFD Program requirements, To -improve short-term cold storage of urine specimens, Union Electric pur-chased a blood bank ~ type refrigerator for storage of specimens. This re-frigerator, 'by design, enhances the-capabilities of storing these specimens -
.in accordance with temperature requirements in 10CFR26. This refrigerator is also equipped with built-in temperature / monitor controls that will con-tinue to monitor and record the temperature of the cooling unit when elec-
- trical power in interrupted.
ATTACRMEFT C
n..
Page 2 of 4
=
4 Lessons Learned-
)
'We have learned _through'the first_ year of operation that_our random selec-tion program supports the projection that the 100% random testing rate re -
sults in approximately 2/3rds of the badged workforce bein'g subjected to random testing at least once during the year.
The following provides a pro.
jocted %- / actual %;the badged workforce_ vas subjected to random testing zero through six' times.
% of Individuals Projected
% of Individuals
,To Be Randomly Screened Per Actually Assessment Report AP89-024 Random 1v Screened l
SCREENED ZERO:
36.8 32.53 SCREENED-ONCE-36.8 44.11
-SCREENED TWICE-18.4 16.27 SCREENED T11REE TIMES.
6.1 5.49-SCREENED FOUR TIMES 1.5 1.20
-; SCREENED FIVE TIMES
.3
.33-SCREENED SIX TIMES
.0
.07 During _1990 Union Electric learned that.the positive rato associated with our FFD-Program is generally lower than the positive rate'throughoutLthe Nuclear Industry reported for the first six months of 1990. Union Electric.
~
pqrformed.a combined total (all_ testing categories) of'2,513 screenings on
' Licensee.suul Contractor Employees. A total.of sixteen (16) specimens were
. confirmed positive by the Medical Review 0fficer-;(15 for drugs and 1 for
~
alcohol). The positives were associated with three (3) tes ting ' cate gories :
(1) Pre-badging, (2) For cause, and (3) Random.
Union Electric's positive rate in these three-(3) categories for the first year impiceentation of 10CFR26 as compared to-the Nuclear Industries positive rate for the first six-(6) months of 1990 as reported in'the' NUMARC Workshop
. Proceedings Manual, is as follows:
ATTACHMENT C t
r
.--..y
4..
'l Page 3.of-4 i
1
~
NUCLEAR INDUSTRY POSlilVE RATE FOR UNION ELECTRIC POSITIVE RATE FOR JANUARY
- JUNE, 1930 JANUARY - DECEMBER, 1990 li lLicenseeEmployeesl Contractor (LT/STl'lLicenseeEmployeel Contractor.(LT/ST l
. l l (Averagefwith
-l Average f with ll (Averagef:with-l Average f with l
-l CATEGORT l Unescorted Access: 'l Unescorted Accessill Unescorted Accessil. Unescorted Access: l-l l
1184)-
l 959) ll 1043) l 434) l 1.....................l...................j..................ll...................l....................i l; Pre-Badging l l
l ll l
l
'l Number Tested lL 9268 l
'36,293 ll-41 l
906
-l.
- l Nusber Positive
.l
'118
-l 574 ll 0
l 11 l
~l Average %Positivel 1.27 l
1.58 ll-0.00 l
1.2 l
-1
-l I
Il i
I
- l For Cause
-l' l
. ll l
l 4
[.'NumberTested l
164 l
168 ll
.1 l
1
.l-l-
humber Positive' l.
.39 l
50 ll
'O l
1 l
ll Average.XPositivel-23.78 l
29.76 ll 0.00' l-100.0 l
- l--
.- I I
11 I
i l Random l
l ll l-l l: Number' Tested' l
50.395 l
23,175 ll 1,059'
'l 435
.l
.l' Number Positive l-152
~l 146 ll 2
-l 2
.l l! Average %Positivel 0.30 l=
0.63-
.l l.
0.19 l
0.46 l.
I I
I 11-1 I
t An additional' interesting.tesson learned is, of the sixteen. (16) positives, (ll)ftested positive -for marijuana under Union Electric's more stringent
)
-screening cutoff-level of (20ng/ml).
If Union Electric _were utilizing the.
screening cutoff level of.100 or 50 (ngml),.the confirmed positives for-marijuana would has been as follows:
'100 ngml O posit-ives for marijuana 50 ngml 7 positives for marijuana Union Electric Callaway Plant operates'an onsite testing: facility.
The on-site facility utilizes a Fluorescence' Polarization Immunoassay (FPIA) tech-nique. The DHilS certified laboratory uses an Enzyme Multiplied Immunoassay
' Technique'(EMIT),
As an internal'QC check, our procedures require the Medical Review Officer to track the number of ' specimens screening positive onsite versuses not con-
. firmed at the DHHS certified laboratory.
l ATTACHMENT C
,l
4
.u-i;*'
[,[.f Page 4 of 4
- Lessons learned'from this program are that
. _(1) Different assays utilized by the onsite testing facilities and the' i
DilHS laboratory do trigger differences in quantitative screening test results.
(2). Identified equipment problems as the source of ' testing differences.
.(3); Use of low cutoff levels may attribute to testing differences be-
- tween-the_two assays.
.(4).The MRO should-use absorbance values for negative controls to better pinpoint. testing discropancies,
. Events Reported In Accordance'With 100FR26,73 One event occurred during this reporting period requiring reporting,in ac-cordance with-10CFR26,73.
.Date/TimeLofcEvent:
October 17,1990 at 0203 Date/ Time Event" Reported:
October 17, 1990 at 0450 Brief-Summary of' Event: A bo a, of white' powder substance confirmed as am-phetamines was locatod iby a plant worker on the 2065 elevation.of the Turbine P
Deck, The substance'was located in the Men's~Restroom inside an access panel into the plumbing crawl-space.
There were no Test for Causes ; conducted as part.of the event whereas-this area-isiaccessable to a lar6e population of badged personnel.
A precautionary measure taken as a result of this event was, a11'like. areas in'the Protected Area in whichlthe substance was located were searched-to
=
ensure no other-substances were located in these areas. This investigation
- was completed without further' incidents, l.
ATTACHMENT C l
l
._.