ML20077N919
| ML20077N919 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 08/09/1991 |
| From: | Sniezek J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20077N925 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-91-053, EA-91-53, NUDOCS 9108150159 | |
| Download: ML20077N919 (6) | |
Text
-
4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COhthilSSION In the hiatter of Docket No. 50 333 New York Power Authority License No. DPR-59 FitzPatrick EA 91-053 h10DIFICATION OF ORDER hiODIFYING 1.lCENSE (EFFECTIVE lhthiEDIATELY) i New York Power Authority (Licensee) is the holder of Facility Operating License No. DPR-59, issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10 C.F.R. Part 50. The License authorizes the operation of the Fit 7 Patrick facility in Scriba, New York, in accordance with the conditions specified therein.
11 On hiay 2,1991, an Order hiodifying License (Effective immediately) was issued to the Licensee to prohibit participation by a licensed Senior Reactor
- Operator, David hi. hianning, in Part 50 licensed activities without the prior written approval of the NRC Regional Administrator, Region 1.
The Licensee responded to this Order on hiay 31, 1991, by requesting that the NRC reconsider the matter and rescind this Order. To support this request, the Licensee asserted that the decision as to who is fit to work at the FitzPatrick plant is properly the management 9100150159 910809 PDR ADOCK 05000333 G
2 responsibility of the Licensee and that the facts and law do not support issuance of this Order.
Stating that the rehabilitation of the employee is one of the objectives of 10 C.F.R. Part 26, the Licensee asserted that reinstatement to duties is part of rehabilitation and that this Order had usurped the Licensee's authority in that decision. The Licensee further stated that decisions concerning reliability and trustworthiness have traditionally been the responsibility of inanagement and that the NRC has recognized a licensee's competence to rnake these determinations. Therefore, the Licensee argued that there is no basis for the NRC to overturn the Licensec's decision to reinstate Mr. Manning's grant of unescorted access.
The Licensee argued that Mr. Manning's untrustworthiness was symptomatic of the substance abuse problem for which he underwent treatment and concluded that "in the absence of a substance abuse ~ problem... there is no reason to assume that Mr. Manning would attempt to cheat in a random drug test, misrepresent a drug habit on a Certificate of Medical History, or otherwise attempt to deceive the NRC or fail to comply with NRC requirements", adding, "[t]he Authority (Licensee) believes that the successful rehabilitation of Mr. Manning... eradicated the substance abuse problem, including the deceit that accompanied it."
-w-
,r.
~..
c-m w--,
.e+,-,
-uPn--nm-ir--
---rvy--r-
--y.,
--+-m m-yi--s wt
+-ee
-- -- =--,
l 3
in conclusion, the Licensee stated that this Order defeats the entire purpose of an otherwise successful rehabilitation, sta;ing that there was ample basis to conclude that hir hianning was rehabilitated."
t til The Staff has carefully reviewed the Licensee's response and the arguments made in it and consulted a medical expert in the field of drug rehabilitation. The Staff agrees that denial,
. including attempts to conceal use of illegal drugs, may be a symptom of the drug use itself, and that reinstatement to productive work is an imponant step in the process of rehabilitation.
However, the Staff does not agree, based on expert medical advice, that hir. hianning's progress to date indicates that he is rehabilitated or that the symptoms that may be associated with drug use, including denial, have been completely eradicated. Rehabilitation requires long-term abstinence accompanied by counseling and participation in support groups, among other measures. Since hir, hianning's efforts to date, however successful, represent only detoxification and short term abstinence, the Staffis not prepared to conclude that he is rehabilitated and to permit his retum to Part 55 licensed duties. The Staff has determined, for the reasons set forth in the in:tial Order and in Licensee's answer that hir. hianning may perform Part 50 licensed activities only if he can provide continuing assurance that he has not returned to using drugs.
... __ _ _.....,_~.
.. ~.
4 IV Therefore, pursuant to Sections 103,161b,161i,1610,18?. and 186 of the Atemic Energy Act or 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 C.F.R. 2.204 and 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Tile ORDER OF h1 AY 2,1991 IS IlEREBY hiODIFIED TO REQUIRE TilAT:
1)
The provisions of the Order biodifying 1.icense (Effective immediately) issued on hiay 2, 1991, 56 Fed. Reg. 22022 (hiay 15,1991), directing that David M. hianning be removed from 10 C.F.R. Part 50 licensed activities, are modified to allow hir, hianning to be returned to Part 50 activities provided Licensee complies with the following provisions:
a) for three years from the date of hir. hianning's return to Part 50 licensed activities, the 1icensee will conduct random drug tests of David hi, hianning and observe the collection of urine samples provided by hir. hianning in accoidance with Section 2.4(f) of Appendix A,10 C.F.R. Part 26 and its established procedures. The period between each drug test must not exceed 90 days, with a new 90-day period beginning the day after a test is conducted; b) for three years from the date et hir. hianning's return to Part 50 licensed activities, the Licensee will conduct observed drug tests of hir. hianning on the first day back from any unexcused or I
. =...
. _ _ - - -. _ _ =
s 5
unanticipated absence of 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or more, or after any scheduled absence of more than three calendar days; c)
Licensee must notify the NRC Region i Regional Administrator of any positive result within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
The Regional Administrator, NRC Region I, may relax or terminate these conditions for goed cause shown.
V in its answer to the May 2,1991 Order Modifying License (Effective immediately), the Licensee requested a hearing, in response, an Atornic Safety and Licensing Ikurd was established and a proceeding is underway. Thus, in accordance with 10 C.F.R. 66 2.717(b) and 2.718, any further answers by the parties shall be as directed by the presiding Licensing Board.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Q a un 'l&
1 U w
[ames H. Sniezek speputy Executive Director for Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Regional Operations and Research Dated at Rockville, Maryland this f3 ay of August 1991 d
I w
y 4+,--
-r w-
,y m
--w--
+
4
l New York Power Authority
)
Distribution SECY CA JTaylor EDO JSaierek, DEDR TMartin, R1 JLieberman, OE RRosano, OE Regional Coordinators i
R1, RII, Rlli, RIV, RV JGoldberg, OGC JMoore. 000 BHayes, 01 TMurley, llRR JPartlow,11RR WRussell, NRR JRoe, NRR Fingram, GPA/PA DWilliams, 01G EJordan, AE0D EA file.
Day file Region 1 Docket File 7
i
'O C 1" lSI' I h ' DEfM
^
OE D:
RPR sano J ede,rman LChandlerJGP4r~ti.s.ow TTMartin dll9dezek 8/ /91 8//[/91 8/q/91 8//l/91 8/(/91 BM(/91