ML20154M708
| ML20154M708 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/03/1988 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| SECY-88-226, NUDOCS 8809290066 | |
| Download: ML20154M708 (154) | |
Text
/,. 90 4
s O
b' i.
.1 k......*
RULEMAKING ISSOE (Affirmation) qu,t 3, ign stcy_u.m Fer:
The Comissioners From-Victor Stello, Jr.
Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
REV!$10N TO THE GENERAL STATEMENT OF POLICY AND PROCECL' PES FOR ENFORCEMENT ACTICN! (10 CFR PART 2. APPENDIX C)
Purpose:
To obtain Comission approval for publication of a revised General Staterent of Policy and Procedure for Enforcement Actiers l
Discussion:
As a result of further experience with applying the NRC Enforcement Policy, the staff is recomending that the l
policy be revised in a nu'rber of areas. The most 1,ignificant changes are intended to (1) place greater emphasis on licensee identification and correction of violations, (2) clarify the staff's authority to exercise discretion, and (3) revise the Safeguards supplement to the Policy to provide rcre flexibility in addressing the significance of safeguards issues. Other less sinnificant, changes address assessment factors for civil penalties, the Transportation and Fuel Cycle and Materials Operation supplerents, staff discretion,10 CFR 50.59 violations, Severity Level V violations, and fitness for duty ratters.
I Encicsure 1 to this paper is the proposed revision of the Policy with a Statement of Considerations.
contains a comparative text showing the existing and changed text of the Policy. Although the Statement of Considerations 8
describes the proposed changes to the Policy, the significant n84 changes are discussed belew, h
The most significant proposed cMnge is to provide increased incentive for licensees to idensify, report, and con'sct 44>
significant violations. A primary objective of the 89 Comission's Enforcement Policy is to encourage Itcensees 8
to identify and correct violations. There are inherent safety and operationil benefits in identifyirg and correcting o o 85$
violations prior to their disclosure by failure of systems M'O to perfom their intended safety functions.
Nevertheless, there are situations where a licensee should receive a civil penalty even though it identified, reported, and corrected a significant violatien. The existing Enforcement Policy collectively weighs the factors of identification and Centact: Jares Lieberran, CE (x20741) bws I
I J
Tre Comissioners reporting, corrective actions, past performance, srior notice, multiple occurrences, and duration to adjust the base civil penalty up or down.
It is the balance of these factors that deterinines the amount of a civil penalty.
The staff recognizes that imposing civil penalties for licunsees who identify. report, and correct violations may provide disincentives to licensees' employees who may not want to discredit their ccepanies. Therefore, to increase the incentive for a licensee to scrutini:e its operations witbcut the need for NRC involvement, the staff proposes, as described more fully in the enclosures, to provide thret additional cases in Section V.G. for which it would be appropriate not to propose a civil penalty for a Severity Level !!! violation.
In these additional cases, the staff proposes not to consider specifically all the adjustment factors of the Enforcement Policy.
The first case involves a licensee identified, reported and corrected 3
violation where the violation was not (1) reasenably preventable by the 11cersee's action in response to a previous regulatory concern or prior rotice of a problem withintwoyearsoftheinspection.(2) willful,and (3) representetive of a breakdem in management controls.
The second case involves relatively old violations
!dentified, reported, and corrected as a result of a licensee aggressively pursuing a voluntary formal program to address past errors such as those involving engineering, design, or installation problems.
T5 third case irvolves the licensee identifying, reporting, and correcting additional examples of a violation for which enforcement action has been taken. These addittoral cafes are examples of discretion that would be exercised where warranted by the circumstances.
The Enforcement Policy literally provides for the foregoing type of judgment.
In Section V.B., the Enforcement Policy prevides that civil penalties are considered for feverity Level !!! violations unitie Severity Level ! anc !!
violations for which civil penalties are imposed absent mitirating circumstances.
Ir addition. Section Y!!!.
Responsibilitits, provides that the staff has the discretion whether to impose a civil penalty after considering the principles in the Enforcement Policy, the technical significance of the violation and the circunstances surreunding the violation.
Thus, the policy as written provides discretion whether to propose a civil peralty for a violation at a Severity level !!!. However, the Comi Sion has directed the staff to seek Comission approval if the staff believes a civil penalty is rot appropriate for a Severity Level !!! violation for reasons other than the mitigating factors and percentages of the policy.
(Mercrandum frem S. Chilk SECY. to V. Stello. Jr.. ECO.
Selected Application of Enforcement Discretion by the
The Comissioners Director, Office of Inspec:fon and Enforcement, C0flTR-86 6, August 6, 1986.) By setting out in advance circumstances for exercising discretion in the three cases, the need ter Cemission consultation in these types of cases will be alleviated.
In addition, the staff believes it is apprcpriate to have I
the authority to refrain from issuirc a civil penalty based on the serits of the case where a peralty is clearly not warranted af ter considering the guidance in the policy. A sentence is proposed to be added to the end of Stctien V.G.
to provide t1is discretion. This is ccnststent with the policy as written in Section VII. This clarification is important because as stated in ne policy it is necessary
(
to exercise judgement and d e et(on in determining whether or rot to take enforcement c e s. In some cases enforce-ment actions are clearly not v ranted. Taking enforcement action in such cases by applying a rechanistic approach may not achieve a useful purpose and may be counterproductive.
The policy would provide some factors that might be considered l
before exercising this discretion. To provide a check on the use of this discretion in view of tie past concer-
- t. f l
the Cecnission, the staff wculd consult with the Corn-9,:
i for the first three cases and, thereaf ter, provide ady.<.
notice with an extended Enfercement Notice (EN) (5 deys rather than the normal 3 days) to the Comissien before exercising this discretion.
{
The staff also is proposing to ircrease a penalty where the NRC identifies a significant violation.
In corparing the resources of a 'icensee with the limited inspection resources of NRC, the licensee shculd identify significant l
violations before the NRC does so. Therefore, the staf f I
is proposing a 50% escalation factor to be applied when the NRC identifies a significant violation.
This should l
provide additiona? *-rentive for a licenset to identify the violation befor6 dC.
i The staff also is sroposinp to increase the escaletion f
percentage for lac L of a licensee's resperse to prior notice F
from 50% to 100t because the staff expects a licensee to avoid violattens where it has been given reasonable notice.
This shculd provide added incentive to licensees to follew up on potential problems. As part of the change to the section on prior notice, the staff progeses to include as prior notice inforation received at other facilities the i
licensee controls.
This addresses a lesse.' learred frem l
TVA and should encourage a licensee to consi.!er corporate-I wide corrective actien. Other changis to the assessrtnt l
process include increasing the percen'. age to be applied for multiple examples frem up to 50 to up to 100'..
It is appropriate to allow for a higher renal'.y to be able to j
better ref1cet the increased significan a of cultiple
{
f
(
i
The Cornissioners violations. Also an escalating percentage is provided for duration of the violation to give greater uniformity in the appifcation of this factor.
The prior performance factor is also proposed to be changed to provide more flexibility to consider overall past perforrance and to provide guidance on the appropriate period to consider for prior perfortnance.
These changes to the assessment process provide a balanced approach that appropriately considers who identifies the violatioq, current versus past performance, prior rotice, and significance of the violation as a result of its durativi er number of examples.
It should further public health and safety by encouraging good current licensee performance and, conversely, penalizing poor performance.
l l
In audition to the assessment process, changes are being proposed to revise the Safeguards supplement.
The SafeguarJs supplement, Supplement III, is being changed to provide more i
flexibility to better reflect the significance of safeguards i
I violations especially in the area of access controls, which is one of the more frequent areas of escalated enforccrmnt.
Current examples are too rigid in some creas to properly describe the safety significance of the violations.
The revised supplement considers the significance of an access control problem as a function of the ease of exploitation (predictability, identifiability, and ease of passage) te determine the severity level of a violation in this area.
Changes to the Policy also are also proposed for the Transportation supplement, Supplement V, to nake it more consistent with the ilealth Physics supplement, Supplement l
IV.
In addition, a change is also proposed to allow the l
staff the flexibility not to issue notices of violations for certain isolated Severity Level V violations that are l
dccumented in a report. This should save some resources l
for both the staff and licensees for these minor violations, i
The Policy and accompanying Statement of Considerations will I
also reemphasize that discretion is exercised in determining l
severity levels based on technical significance since the examples in the supplements are only guidance and are not I
}
controlling.
1 f
A charge to the Policy is proposed to reflect the charges to Tuel Cycle and Materials Operations supplement, Supplement VI, for violations involvine diagncstic misadministrations in accordance with SECY 80-154. A change is also proposed in Section V.E., inforcement Actions Against Individuals, to provide more 1 emphasis on fitness for duty.
Other minor changes are described in tha accompanying Statement of Considerations.
The Comissioners Cansistent with pas: revisions of the Enforcement Policy, J
tha revisions would be effective upon issuance.
Coments received would be appropriately considered.
l Coordination:
The Office of the General Counsel has no legal ob,iection to the policy revisions.
Recommendation:
The Revised Enforcement Policy be approved fer publication in the Fe_deral Register to be effective upon publication.
A
/
yf-W,
,pl.X. _ c d< y '
Victor Stello, Jr;
~
Executive Director for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
Revised Enforcement Policy 2.
Cornparative Text Commissioners' comments or consent should be provided directly to the Office of the Secretary by c.o.b. August 19, 1988, i
Commission Staf Office comments, if any, should be submitted to the Commissioners NLT August 12, 1988, with an information copy to the Office of the Secretary.
If the paper is of such a nature that it requires additional time for analytical review and comment, the Commissioners and the Secretariat should be apprised of when comments may be expected.
Affirmation of this paper will be scheduled following receipt of votes.
DISTRIBUTION:
Commissioners OGC OI OIA GPA REGIONAL OFFICES EDO ACRS ASLBP ASLAP SECY
,-e w
-...---,e, a-r
l 4 l
l' s
ENCLOSURE 1 REVISED ENFORCEMENT POLICY 4
c.
[7590-01]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COM11SSION 10 CFR Part 2 Policy and Procedure for Enforcement Actions; Policy Statement AGENCY:
,. Nuclear Regulatory.Comission..
s,
ACTION:
Revised policy statement.
l
SUMMARY
The NRC is publishing revisions to its Enforcement Policy to provide for greater discretion in detennining whether or not to issue a civil penalty for certain licensee identified and corrected violations; to provide for l
higher civil penalties for NRC identified violations, licensee's failures to take l
action in response to prior notice of concerns at any of its facilities, and l
multiple examples of significant violations; to clarify the assessment factors l
for corrective action, past performance and duration; to modify the severity l
level examples involving violations of 10 CFR 50.59 and medical misadministrations, l
l to revise the Transportation and Safeguards supplements; and to make minor deletions and language changes. The Enforcement Policy statement is intended to inform licensees, vendors, and the public of the bases for taking various enforcement actions. The policy is codified as Appendix C to 10 CFR Part' 2.
DATES: This revised statement of policy is effective 1988 While coments on the changes are being received.
Submit coments on or before
, 1988.
1
ADDRESSEES: Send coments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 1 omission, Washington, DC 20555.. ATTN: Docketing and Service Branch.
Hand deliver coments to: One White Flint North,11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD between 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.
l Coments tray also be delivered to the NRC Public Document Room,1717 H Street, NW between 7:45 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
4 Copies of comments may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, NW., Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Lieberman, Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, DC 20555 (301-492-0741).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background:
The Comission's Enforcement Policy was first issued on September 4,1980.
Since that time, the Enforcement Policy has been revised on a number of occasions, most recently on~ March 23,1988(53FR9429).
Based on additional experience, the Comission has detennined that it is appropriate to make additional changes in its Policy and Procedure for Enforcement Actions. The primary changes being made involve providing greater incentives for licensees to identify and correct violations by decreasing civil penalties for certain of those violations O
2
. _.. ~.
'-b 8
o and increasing civil penalties where the licensee fails to identify, prevent, or correct violations, and revising the Transportation and Safeguards supplements of the Enforcement Policy. The' Enforcement Policy is codified in 10 CFR part 2 Appendix C of the Commission's regulations to provide widespread dissemination of this policy.
However, the Enforcement Policy is a policy statement and not a regulation. The Commission may accordingly deviate from the Enforcement
.a -
c, Policy;.p is appropri. ate <under the.. circumstances.of.,a.particul.ar. case.. A y
similar statement is being added to the Enforcement Policy to avoid any implications that codification of the Policy in the Code of Federal Regulations indicates that the Commission intends that the Enfor:ement Policy is a binding regulation.
Revisions to the Enforcement Policy Revisions to the policy now being made are described in the following paragraphst Only the sections to which changes were made are discussed here.
The numberingiof the sections tracks the section numbers in the policy.
V.A. NOTICE OF VIOLATION This section has 'been changed to provide the staff with the flexibility not to issue a Notice of Violation for inspection findings which involve isolat9d violations at a Severity Level V.
Such violations are by definition of minor regulatory concern.
Documentation of the violation in an inspection report or official field notes is sufficient provided corrective action is underway before the inspection ends.
"Official field notes" are an l
alternative to inspection reports used in the materials program for smaller 3
V
/
licensees. Given the minor concern with such violations, a formal reply from a licensee -is not needed nor is expenditure of agency resources to prepare a Notice of Violation normally warranted. A Notice of Violation may be issued if the violation was willful, if past corrective actions have not been sufficient, or if the circumstances warrant increasing the severity of Level V violations to a higher severity level.
1
,.,.. t w.. : u v s..
.a i..r. 9 m. -
.s
. :.. n. u..
4 _,.
V.B CTVIL PENALTY 1.
EXERCISE OF DISCRETION (SECTION Y.G)
The current policy in Section V.B. provides that civil penalties are imposed, absent mitigating circumstances, for Severity Level I and II violations but are considered for Severity Level III violations.
Section VIII, Responsibilities, provides that the staff has the discretion as to whether or not it should propose a civil penalty after considering the principles in the Enforcement Policy, the technical significance of the violations, and the surrounding circumstances.
Thus, the policy as written provides the staff with discretion as to whether or not to propose a civil penalty for a violation at a Severity Level III. However, the NRC practice has been that civil penalties are issued for Severity Level III violations absent mitigating circum-stances. The staff may, under appropriate circumstances, classify a violation at a Severity Level IV even if the supplements provide a similar example at a Severity Level III based on the significance and circumstances of the violation because the examples in the supplements are by the policy, examples and not controlling. However, once the 4
detemination is made that a violation should be categorized at a Severity Level III, the violation is of significant regulatory concern, and a civil penalty is proposed absent mitigating circumstances unless the staff seeks Coornission approval not to issue a penalty.
There are three Severity Level III situations where it may not be approp<riate to is. sue civil penalties in the interest of encouraging
-y..
en,,
... c a e.,
. ;. r.
e,......,.
licensee identification, reporting, and correction of violations and minimizing the potential to provide disincentives for licensees to identify and correct violations. Accordingly, the policy has been changed in Sections V.B. and V.G. to provide three additional examples for exercising discretion in not proposing civil penalties. This should increase incentives for a licensee to scrutinize its operations without NRC involvement.
l The first example involves licensee identified and corrected violations where the violation was (1) not reasonably preventable by licensee action in response to a previous regulatory concern or prior notice of 1
l a problem within two years of the inspection or since the last two inspections (2) not willful, and (3) not representative of a breakdown in management controls. This change is intended to avoid penalizing a licensee whose current perfomance is consistent with the objectives of the policy, i.e., identifying, reporting, and correcting violations.
Under this provision the staff may exercise discretion and not propose a civil penalty for a Severity Level III violation even if the violation
~ l existed for an extended duration. This provision would not be used for I
Severity Level III violations involving release of radioactive material or overexposures in excess of regulatory limits because of the j
significance of such failures.
5 l
r.,.
4 3
4 The second example involves past violations tha0. are not likely to be identified during routine surveillance or QA activities of a licensee.
Many licensees have or are embarking on major voluntary efforts to review past activities.
From a safety perspective cle?rly there are benefits for both a licensee and the public to have past problems such as those involving engineering, design, or installation identified.
. reported and corrected before a system wi,th deficiencies is called s.
upon to operate.
In these cases discretion could be exercised regardless of prior notice, past performance, or duration to avoid disincentives for a licensee who is aggressively pursuing a formal program to identify and correct past problems.
If a licensee's program identifies Severity Level III violations, the staff would not intend to subsequently exercise further discretion for similar violations later identified unless the licensee's program is being accelerated to provide assurance that similar significant issues do not exist.
The third example involves additional occurrences of a violation for which enforcement action has been taken. This change is to encourage a licenses, as part of corrective actions, to locate additional violations with the same root cause without the concern that it may be penalized if it identifies additional violations, reports, and corrects them.
In applying this example, the staff will consider the reasonableness of the Ticensee's action, the timeliness of the action, and whether the later violations change the safety signifi-cance or character of the initial regulatory concern.
6
These examples are, as indicated, examples of where discretion may be exercised. Whether or not to exercise.the discretion is dependent on the circumstances of the particular case.
In addition to the three additional examples of discretion being provided, the Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations' authority to not. issue a civil penalty, as stated in Section VII
..e m.........
- ..~.,..... -
-of the Policy, based on the merits of the case is restated in this section.
This discretion is expected to be used only where application of the guidance in the policy is unwarranted and requires advance notice to the Commission.
2.
Mitigating and Escalating Factors a.
Identification and Reporting This factor is being retitled and changed to permit a penalty to be increased if NRC identifies a violation. This is designed to provide an additional incentive for licensees to identify violations.
Given the number of licensees' employees and the limited number of NRC inspectors, Severity Level I, II, or III violations should be identified first by licensees and, therefore, NRC should not be identifying significant violations. Thus, it is appropriate to increase a penalty if NRC identifies the violation. This factor has also been changed to delete the reference to the length of time the violation occurred because that is considered under the duration factor. The issue under this factor is whether a licensee should have reasonably identified the violation earlier.
7
b.
Corrective Action This factor is being changed to delete the term "unusually."
In the past, the policy has been applied to require corrective action to not only be prompt and extensive but to be unusually so before a full 50% mitigation is allowed for corrective action.
In some cases there is nothing unusual about the corrective action even though
-r
. e av it is clear that prompt and extensive corrt.ctive action was taken.
This clarification is intended to provide the discretion for 50%
mitigation when quality action is taken. Whether or not to grant 50% mitigation vill be based primarily on the three factors stated in the policy:
timeliness, initiative, and comprehensiveness.
The weight to be given to each of these elements is dependent on the circumstances of the particular case.
c.
Past Performarce In the past the time period for assessing prior perfomance for a Severity Level III or greater violation has not been specified.
The policy has been changed to state that the past two years or the period within the last two inspections, whichever is the longer period, should be the nomal interval for considering past performance.
This time period should allow sufficient time to determine a performance 1
i trend for applying this factor. This time period maybe longer (two past inspections rather than one past inspection) than the time period for considering civil penalties for repetitive Severity Level IV l
violations because some material licensees are inspected at a i
l l
8 i
l
. 1
frequency greater than one year and a longer time period, i.e., two past inspections, is needed to establish a perforwance trend for those licensees.
In addition, this factor has been changed to provide more flexibility in considering past performance in the assessment process. Currently, 4, past. perfoymance. focus,es on prior perfonnance.1,n the are of concern
.c-,..
though overall performance can be considered. The effect of deleting the reference to general area of concern is to permit greater consideration of overall performance. With the change both overall performance and performance in the area of concern may be considered.
d d.
Prior Notice This factor has been changed to permit a penalty to be increased up to 100% of the base penalty rather than 50%. This change is being made to provide incentives to respond to notices of safety concerns.
If a licensee is put on notice of a problem by its own actions, its responsible employees, indestry, cr NRC and fails to take action to prevent a Severity Level III violation, then a penalty should be substantially increased.
Another important change to this factor is to consider notice arising out of activities of a licensee at other facilities it controls whether or not under different licenses. This change comes out of the lessons learned from the Tennessee Valley Authority problems but is equally applicabio to other reactors and material Itcensees who 9
hold more than one license or have more than one facility or location.
If a licensee is aware of a significant issue at one of its facilities that 1eeds corrective action, NRC expects that the licensee will consider the application of corrective action at all other licensed operations it controls. The failure to act in such a responsible manner will now be the basis for increasing a penalty to provide additional incentives forthe,licenseetoidentifyandcorrectitsproblems.plicensee should not be. dependent on.the NRC.to identify a violation once the licensee has had reasonable notice of a potential problem. This does not mean every similar violation at another facility of the licensee will be cause for escalation.
But escalation may occur if it was reasonable to expect the licensee to consider the need for corrective action at its other facilities, e.
Multiple Examples This factor has been changed to permit a penalty to be increased up to 100f of the base penalty rather than 50%. This change is being made to be abla to better reflect the added significance of multiple violations.
f.
Duration The policy has been clarified by making duration a specific factor to consider in the assessment process and to assign a percentage to be applied to the base amount. This was done to provide greater assurance of uniform application of the duration factor. Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, provides that continuing 10
i i
violations may receive separate daily assessments. Whether to do so 1s a function of the circumstances of each case.
It is clearly appropriate to have daily assessments where there is willful conduct, i.e., a licensee permitted a violation to continue.
In other cases an increased assessment may be warranted based on significance.
It is appropriate, for those cases for which a penalty is not assessed
.. on a daily basis, o be able to increase a penalty up to 100% to address the significance of 'the violation.
It is recognized ti,at a number of factors consider duration.
Prior notice does so from the view that the licensee may havt had time to avoid a violation from occurring.
But that is different from the duration of a violation. When a penalty is not mitigated for licensee identification because of the age of the violation, NRC is focusing attention on the fact that a licensee performing as expected should have identified the violation earlier and not that the violation is more significant because of the length of time the vialation exis' Under the duration factor the issue is whether the violation is more significant because of its duration.
V.D. ESCALATION OF ENFORCEMENT SANCTIONS This section has..een changed to delete the reference to progression based on a single license.
This is an area where judgment and discretion are required.
The policy is changed to maximize the flexibility in this area. As described earlier, the pr'.,r notice section of the policy is also being changed to specifically consider the issue of the failure to take 11
corrective action for similar violations at other facilities controlled by a licensee.
V.E. ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS INVOLVING INDIVIDUALS This section is being clarified to indicate that enforcement action may
,,be.,taken against. an,1,ndividual's. license, o.r,against a corporate license that may impact an individual where the person's conduct places into question NRC's reasonable assurance that licensed activities will be properly conducted. Actionable conduct includes matters that raise integrity, competence, fitness for duty, or other issues that may not necessarily be a violation of Commission requirements. Also added in this section is a provision to indicate that action would not be taken for a willful violation in an emergency provided the standards of 10 CFR 50.54(x)aremet.
V.G. DISCRETION In addition ta the changes already described, this section is being changed to clarify that where discretion is exercised to not issue a Notice of Violation, the violation will be described in an inspection report or official field notes. This will assist the agency in tracking repetitive concerns for purposes of past performance.
VIII. RESPONSIBILITIES The change in this section clarifies that judgment is exercised in issuing Notices of Violat'ans as well as civil penalties.
For example, while most 12 4
v..,-n~--,,
- - ~ -
,v
violations result in at least a Notice of Violation, discretion may be exercised in developing the particuiar citation to use including the number of examples of the violation to be included in the citation and the legal requirement violated.
In addition, discretion may be exercised in determining whether there is sufficient evidence to issue a citation.
Similarly, discretion ray be exercised in determining the appropriate
, severity 1.evel after,co,ns,idering,the guidance.,in the supplements which are examples and not controlling. For example, it may be appropriate to categorize an overexposure violation resulting from a "hot particle" at a lower severity level than described for the level of exposure because of the significance of the particular exposure.
The last sentence of footnote 5 has been deleted because it is not needed in the policy. Should there be additional delegation to Regional Offices, the policy can be changed at that time.
SUPPLEMENT I - REACTOR OPERATIONS Example C.6. involving violations of 10 CFR 50.59 has been changed to clearly indicate that a licensee who violates that requirement and operates in an unanalyzed condition may be subject to a Severity Level III citation even if, after the fact, it turns out that an unreviewed safety question or a conflict with a technical specification does not exist.
This is designed to capture the circumstances where a reasonable engineer would need to perform an evaluation before concluding that an unreviewed safety questien or a conflict with a technical specificatier. did not exist but did not do the evaluation.
13
- - -. _ _ = _ = _ _ _ - _
A SUPPLEMENT III - SAFEGUARDS This supplement has been extensively rewritten to provide more flexibility to address the significance of safeguards violations.
In addition, similar examples of different severity levels for types of violations have been added. The most significant change is to address the area of access control violations whi.ch is,one of the,most frequent is, sues. resulting in escalated enforcement action in the safeguards area. The significance of an access control problem is a function of the ease of exploitation. The policy has been changed to consider the predictability, identifiability, and ease of passage of the vulnerability demonstrated by the violation in determining the severity level of an access control violation. Predictability refers to a vulnerability that lasts for a long period of time (and is known to exist) or if it recurs with some predictable regularity or schedule, allowing the potential intruder to know when to attempt the penetration.
Identifiability refus to the ease with which an observer can (I) see the opening, and (2) know that it leads somewhere advantageous to a saboteur.
Ease of passage refers to the structure of the opening, whether the potential intruder can maneuver himself/herself along the interior of the pathway to gain access to the area, and includes the environment of the opening, i.e., whether there is c atinuous flushing or some other environmental factor that makes the pathway inhospitable to humans.
SUPPLEMENT V - TRANSPORTATION This supplement has been changed to make the radiation levels and contamination levels more consistent with the health rSysics examples 14
in Supplement IV.
In addition, flexibility has been added to address violations associated with shipping papers, labeling, and packaging.
Examples have been added for Severity LJvel IV violations to indicate that failure to register as an authorized user of NRC-Certified Transport packages or to assure that packages meet applicable requirements are more than a minor regulatory concern.
. a:-
- a :.,.
c.
SUPPLEMENT VI - FUEL CYCLE AND MATERIALS PROGRAM This supplement has been changed to provide that multiple errors that result in diagnostic misadministrations or a recurrent violation that results in a diagnostic misadministration may be categorized at a Severity level III.
This change is being made to emphasize the need to comply with req'Jirements in order to avoid unnecessary and unsuspected exposures to the public.
O 15
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 2 Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Byproduct material, Classified information, Environt ental protection. Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Penalty, Sex discrimination Source material.
Special nuclear material Waste treatment and disposal.
r
.....,,,......,....,,,.;,..p.v.~....
-;c For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 552, the NRC is adopting the following statement of policy as Appendix C to 10 CFR Part 2.
l Part 2 - Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings 4
L 1.
The authority citation for Part 2 is revised to read as follows:
l Authority: Secs. 161, 181, 68 Stat. 948, 953, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201, s
2231); sec. 191, as amended, Pub. L.87-615,76 Stat.409(42U.S.C.
i 1
2241); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); 5 U.S.C. 552.
Section 2.101 also issued under secs. 53, 62, 63, 81, 103, 104. 105, 68 i
Stat. 930, 932, 933, 935, 936, 937, 938, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2092, 2093, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2135); sec. 102, Pub. L.91-190, 83 Stat 853, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332); sec. 301, 88 Stat. 1248 (42 U.S.C. 5871).
Sections 2.102, 2.103, 2.104, 2.105, 2.721 also issued under sect. 102, 1
103, 104, 105, 183, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 937, 938, 954, 955, asamended(42 j
U.S.C. 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 2233, 2239).
Section 2.105 also issued under Pub. L.97-415, 96 Stat. 2073 (42 U.S.C. 2239).
Sections W
16 a
-._.__...._,.___,,.w,,,_.-_
...,m,--
,__c..-m,_...
-,._,__.,,,y,._.__.-..___.__,
_.-,,,,__-_m_.
t 2.200-2.206 also issued under secs. 186, 234, 68 Stat. 955, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2236, 2282); sec. 206, 88 Stat. 1246 (42 U.S.C.
5846).
Sections 2.600-2.606 also issued under sec. 102, Pub. L.91-190, 83 Stat. 853 as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332). Sections 2.700a, 2.719 also issued inder 5 U.S.C. 554 sect.'ons 2.754, 2.760, 2.770 also issued under 5 U.S.C. F"e7.
Sectic.12.790 also issued under sec.103, 68 Stat. 936, as amendeJ (42 U.S.C. 2133) ono ',U.S.C. TEl'. SeeUons 2.800 and 2.808 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553.
3ectnr 2.809 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553 and sec. 29 Pub. L.15-256, 71 Stat. 5 9, as atended (42 U.S.C. 2039).
Subpart K also isstad under sec.189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239);
sec. 134, Pub. L.97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10154). Appendix A i
I also issued under sec. 6, Pub. L.91-580, 84 Stat.1473 (42 U.S.C. 2135).
[
i Appendix B also issued under sec. 10, Pub. L.99-240, 99 Stat. 1842 l
(42U.S.C.2021betseq.).
J 2.
Appendix C to Part 2 is revised to read as follows:
APPENDIX C - GENERAL STATEMENT OF POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR NRC ENFORCENENT ACTIONS The following statement of general policy and procedure explains the enforcement policy and procedures of the V;S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission and its staff f
in initiating enforcement actions, and of presiding officers, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Boards, and the Comission in reviewing these actions.
This statement is applicable to enforcement in matters involving the public health and safety, the comon defense and security, and the environment 1/ This
~
statement of general policy and procedure is published in the Code of Federal 1/ ntitrust enforcement matters will be dealt with on a case-by-case A
basis.
i 17
^ ~; _. - _
~r ~ _.
Regulations to provide widespread dissemination of the Comissions Enforcement Policy. However, this is a policy statement and not a regulation. The Comission may deviate from this statement of policy and procedure as is appropriate under the circumstances of a particular case.
I.
INTPODUCTION AND PURPOSE
(.
3 The purpose of the NRC enforcement program is to promote and protect the radiological health and safety of the public, including employees' health and safety, the comon defense and security, and the environment by:
Ensuring compliance with NRC regulations and license conditions; Obtaining prcmpt correction of violations and adverse quality cotiditions which may affect safety; Deterring future violations and occurrences of conditions adverse to quality; and Encouraging improvement of licensee and vendor E erformance, and p
by example, that of industry, including the pronpt identification and I
reporting of potential safety problems.
f Consistent with the purpose of this program, prompt and vigorous enforce-l ment action will be taken when dealing with licensees or vendors who do not achieve the necessary meticulous attention to detail and the high standard of compliance which the NRC expects.
Each enforcement action is
[
-t j
dependent on the circumstances of the case and requires the exercise of I
la/ The term "vendor" means a supplier of products or services to be used in l
l l
an NRC-licensed facility or activity.
18
~ ~ -
m r - ---
discretion after consideration of these policies and procedures.
In no case, however, will licensees who cannot achieve and raintain adequate levels of protection be permitted to conduct licensed activitie;.
II. STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND PROCEDURAL FRAMEWORK A.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY The NRC's enforcement jurisdiction is drawn from the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Energy Reorganization Act (ERA) of 1974, as amended.
Section 161 of the Atomic Energy Act authorizes NRC to conduct inspections and investigations and to issue orders as may be necessary or desirable to promote the common defense and security or to protect health or to minimize danger to life or property.
Section 186 authorizes NRC to revoke licenses under certain circumstances (e.g., for material false statements, in response to conditions that would have warranted refusal of a license on an original application, for a licensee's failure to build or operate a facility in accordance with the terms of the permit or license, and for violation of an NRC regulation). Section 234 authorizes NRC to impose civil penalties not to exceed $100,000 per violation per day for the violation of certain specified licensing provisions of the Act, rules, orders, and if cense terms implementing these provisions, and for violations for which licenses can be revoked.
In addition to the enumerated provisions in section 234, sections 84 and 147 authorize the inposition of civil penalties for violations of regulations implementing 19
those provisions. Section 232 authorizes NRC to seek injunctive or other equitable relief for violation of regulatory requirements.
Section 206 of the Energy Reorganization Act authorizes NRC to impose civil penaltier, for knowing and conscious failures to provide certain safety information to the NRC.
c,.,., :...,..
...a
...,.,..>f.
Chapter 18 of the Atomic Energy Act provides for varying levels of criminal penalties (i.e., monetary fines and imprisonment) for willful violations of the Act and regulations or orders issued under Sections 65, 161(b),161(f),or161(o)oftheAct.
Section 223 provides that criminal penalties may be imposed on certain individuals employed by finns constracting or supplying basic components of any utilization facility if the individual knowingly and willfully violates hRC requirements such that a basic component could be significantly impaired.
Section 235 provides that criminal penalties may be imposed on persons who interfere with inspectors. Section 236 provides that criminal penalties may be imposed on persons who attempt to or cause sabotage at a nuclear facility or to nuclear fuel. Alleged or suspected criminal violations of the Atomic 4
Energy Act are referred to the Department of Justice for appropriate action.
I B.
PROCEDURAL FRAMEWORK t
Subpart B of 10 CFR Part 2 of NRC's regulations sets forth the procedures the NRC uses in exercising its enforcement authority.
10 CFR 2.201 sets forth the procedures for issuing notices of violation.
1 0
20
4 The procedure to be used in assessing civil penalties is set forth in
-10 CFR 2.205. This regulation provides that the appropriate NRC Office Director initiates the civil penalty process by ' issuing a notice oi violation and proposed imposition of a civil penalty. The licensee is I
provided an opportunity to contest in writing the proposed imposition of a civil penalty. After evaluation of the licensee's response, the Director
.may r;itigate.. remit, or impose the, civil, penalty., An opportunity is provided for a hearing if a civil penalty is imposed.
l The procedure for issuing an order to show cause why a license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked or why such other action should not be taken is set forth in 10 CFR 2.202. The mechanism for modifying a license by trder is 'et forth in 10 CFR 2.204. These sections of Part 2 provide an opportunh
?or a hearing to the affected licensee. However, the NRC is authorized to make orders imediately effective if the public health, safety or interest so requires or, in the case of an order to show cause, if the alleged violation is willful, t
!!!. SEVERITY OF VIOLATIONS Regulatory requirements S/ ave varying degrees of safety, safeguards, or h
environmental significance. Therefore, the relative importance of each violation must be identified as the first step in the enforcement process.
i
~ i II Theterm"requirement"asusedinthispolicymeansalegallybindin!al requirement such as a statute, regulation, license condition, techni specification, or order.
l I
i W
21
o 4
Consequently, violattens are categorizeo in terms of five levels of severity to show their relative importance within each of the following eight activity areas:
I.
Peactor Operations; s
, II...Fac..ilit.y Construction;
..s.
~.
.:,.... g
,... ~.,.
!!I. Safeguards; IV. Health Physics; V.
Transportation; VI.
Fuel Cycle and Materials Operations; i
VII. Miscellaneous Matters; and L
VI!!. Emergency Preparedness.
Licensed activities not directly covered by one of the above listed areas, e.g., export license activities, will be placed in the activity area most suitable in light of the particular violation involved. Within each l
activity area, Severity Level I has been assigned to violations that are t
the most significant and Severity Level V violations are the least significant.
Severity Level I and !! violations are of very significant regulatory concern.
In general, violations that are included in these 22
severity categories involve actual or high potential impact on the public.
Severity Level I.II violations are cause for significant concern. Severity Level IV violations are less serious but are of more than minor concern; i.e., if left uncorrected, they could lead to a more serious concern.
Severity Level V violations are of minor safety or environmental concern.
Comparisons of significa' ice between activity areas are inappropriate. For example, the imediacy of any hazard to the public associated with Severity Level I violations in Reactor Operati.)ns is not directly comparable to that associated with Severity Level I violations in Reactor ;onstruction.
While examples are provided in Supplements I through VI!! for determining the appropriate severity level for violations in each of the eight activity areas, the examples are neither exhaustive nor controlling.
These examples do not create new requirements.
Each is designed to illustrate the significance which the NRC places on a particular type of violation of NRC requirements.
Each of the examples in the supplements is predicated on a violation of a regulatory requirement.
In each case, the severity of a violation will be characterized at the level best suited to the significance of the partie"4r violation.
In some cases, violations may be evaluated in the aggregate and a single severity level assigned for a group of violations.
The severity level of a violation may be increased if the circumstances surrounding the matter involve careless disregard of requirements, deception, or other indications of willfulness. The te m "wi11 fulness" as used here 23
embraces a spectrum of violations ranging from deliberate intent to violate or falsify to and including careless disregard for requirements.
W111 fulness does not include acts which do not rise to the level of careless disregard, e.g., inadvertent clerical errors in a document submitted to the NRC.
In determining the specific severity level of a violation involving willfulness, consideration will be given to such factors as the position of the person involved in the violation (e.g.,
1 first-line supervisor or senior manager), the significance of any underlying violation, the intent of the violator (i.e., negligence not amounting to careless disregard, careless disregard, or deliberateness),
t and the economic advantage, if any, gained as a result of the violation.
The relative weight given to each of these factors in arriving " the appropriate severity level.will be dependent oa the circumstances of the violation.
The NRC expects licensees to provide full, complete, timely, and accurate
)
information and reports. Accordingly, unless otherwise categorized in the Supplements, the severity level of a violation involving the failure to make a required report to the NRC will be based upon the significance of and the circumstances surrounding the matter that should have been reported. A licensee will not normally be cited for a failure to report f
a condition or event unless the licensee was actually aware of the condition or event which it failed to report. However, the severity level of an untimely report, in contrast to no report, may be reduced depending on the f
circumstances surrounding the matter.
l 24 s
s.
IV.
ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCES Whenever the NRC has learnbd of the existence of a potential violation for which a civil penalty or other escalated enforcement action may be warranted, or recurring noncenformance on the part of a vendor, the NRC will normally hold an enforcement conference with the licensee or, vendor prior,to taking enforcement action. The NRC may also elect to hold an enforcement conference for other violations, e.g., Severity Level !Y violation which, if repeated, could lead to escalated enforcement action.
The purpose of the enforcement conference is to (1) discuss the violations or nonconformance, their significance and causes, and the licensee's or vendor's corrective actions, (2) determine whether there are any aggravating or mitigating circumstances, and (3) obtain other information which will help detennine the appropriate enforcement action.
In addition, during the enforcement conference, the licensee or vendor will be given an opportunity to explain to the NRC what corrective actions (if any) were taken or will be taken following discovery of the potential violation or aonconformance. Licensees or vendors will be told when a meeting is an enforcement conference.
Enforcement conferences will not normally be open to the public.
When needed to protect the public health and safety or cocunon defense and security, escalated enforcement acticn, such as the issuance of an imediately effective order modifying, suspending, or revoking a license, will be taken prior to the enforcement conference.
In such cases, an 25
enforcement conference may be held after the escalated enforcement action is taken.
V.
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS This section dascribes the enforcement sanctions available to NRC and specifies,the conditions under which each ma,y be,,used. The basic
.~.
v...., n -.,....... ;,,,
e.,.,.
sanctions are notices of violation, civil penalties, and orders of various types. Additionally, related administrative mechanisms such as bulletins and corfirmatory action letters, notices of nonconformance and notices of deviation are used to s:99 ement the enforcement program.
In selecting 1
I the enforcement sanctions to be applied, NRC will consider enforcement actions taken by other Federal or State regulatory bodies having con-current jurisdiction, such as in transportation matters. Urnlly whenever e violstion of NRC requirements is identified, enforcement action is taken. The nature and extent of the enforcement action is intended to reflect the seriousness of the violation involved. For the vast majority of violations, action by an NRC regional office is appro-priate in the form of a Notice of Violation requiring a form 31 response from the recipient describing its corrective actions.
In situations involving nonconforwence on the part of vendor, a Notice of Nonconfor-mance will be issued. The relatively small number of cases involving elevated ~ enforcement action receives substantial attention by the public, and may have significant impact on the licensee's operation. These elevated enforcement actions include civil penalties; orders modifying, suspending or revoking licenses; or orders to cease and desist from designated activities.
26
A.
NOTICE OF VIOLATION A 'totice of violation is a written notice setting forth one or more violations of a legally binding requirement. The notice normally requires the recipient to provide a written statement describing (1) corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved; (2) corrective steps which.will be taken.to. prevent recurrences. and.(3) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
NRC may require responses to notices of violation to be under oath. Nomally, responses under oath will be 4
required only in connection with civil penalties and orders.
NRC uses the notice of violation as the standard method for formalizing the existence of a violation. A notice of violation is normally the only enforcement action taken, except in cases where the criteria for civil I
penalties and orders, as set forth in Sections V.B and V.C. respectively, are met.
In such cases, the notice of violation will be issued in conjunction with the elevated actions.
l However, violation findings warranting the exercise of discretion under Section V.G 1 will generally not result in a Notice of Violation.
In addit,fon, for isolated Severity Level V violations, a notice of violation normally will not be issued regardless of who identifies the violation provided that the licensee has initiated appropriate corrective action before the inspection ends.
In these situations, a formal response from the licensee is not required and the inspection report or official field notes serves to document the violations and the corrective actions.
However, a notice of violation will nomally be issued for willful 27
violations, if past corrective actions for similar violations have not been sufficient to prevent recurrence, or if the circumstances warrant increasing the severity of Level V violations to a higher severity level.
Licensees are not ordinarily cited for violations resulting from matters not within their control, such as equipment failures that were not avoidable by reasonable licensee quality assurance measures or management controls. Generally, however, licensees are held responsible for the acts of their employees. Accordingly, this policy should not be construed to excuse personnel errors.
2 B.
CIVIL PENALTY A civil penalty is a monetary penalty that may be imposed for violation of 4
(a)certainspecifiedlicensingprovisionsoftheAtomicEnergyActor supplementary NRC rules or orders, (b) any requirement for which a license l
may be revoked, or (c) reporting requirements under Section 206 of the Energy Reorganization Act. Civil penalties are designed to emphasize the j
need for lasting remedial action and to deter future violations.
l Civil penalties are proposed absent mitigating circumstances for Severity Level I and !! violations, are considered for Severity Level I!! violations, l
and may be imposed for Severity Level !Y violations that are similar 2/
to previous violations for which the licensee did not take effective l
corrective action.
i 2/
The word "similar," as used in this policy, refers to those violations which could have been ressonably expected to have been prevented by the licensee's corrective action for the previous violation.
I i
28 i
i
In applying this guidance for Severity Level III violations, NRC may, notwithstanding the mitigating and escalating factors in this section, refrain from proposing a civil penalty for violations that warrant the exercise of discretion under Section V.G.
As to Severity Level IV violations, NRC normally considers civil penalties only for similar Severity Level IV violations that occur after the date of the last inspection or.within. two years, whichever period is greater.
g..
.s.
,c.
Civil penalties will normally be assessed for knowing and conscious violations of the reporting requirements of Section 206 of the Energy Reorganization Act, and for any willtul violation of any Commission requirement including those at any severity level.
j I
NRC imposes different levels of penalties for different severity level violations and different classes of licensees. Tables IA and IB show the base civil penalties for various reactor, fuel cycle, and materials programs. The structure of these tables generally takes into account the gravity of the violation as a primary consideration and the ability to pay as a se:r.4.ary consideration. Generally, operations involving greater nuclear material inventories and greater potential consequences to the public and licensee employees receive higher civil penalties.
Regarding the secondary factor of ability of various classes of licensees to pay the civil penalties, it is not the NRC's intention that the economic impact of a civil penalty be such that it puts a licensee out of business (orders, rather than civil penalties, are used when the intent is to terminate licensed activities) or adversely affects a licensee's ability to safely -
conduct licensed activities. The deterrent effect of civil penalties is 29
best served when the amounts of such penalties take into account a licensee's "ability to pay."
In determining the amounts of civil penalties for licensees for whom the tables do not reflect the ability to pay, NRC will consider as necessary an increase or decrease on a case-by-case basis.
NRC attaches great importance to comprehensive licensee programs for
.s.
detection, correction, and reporting of problems that may constitute, or lead to, violation of regulatory requirements. This is emphasized by l
giving credit for effective licensee audit programs when licensees find, correct, and report problems expeditiously and effectively. To encourage i
licensee self-identification and correction of violations and to avoid potential concealment of problems of safety significance, application of the adjustment factors set forth below may result in no civil penalty being assessed for violations which are identified, reported (if i
required), and effectively corrected by the licerisee.
l On the other hand, ineffective licensee progra',is for problem identification or correction are unccceptable.
In cases i:,volving willfulness, flagrant NRC-identified violations, repeated poor performance J
j in an area of concern, or serious breakdown in management controls, NRC i
intends to apply its full enforcement authori',y where su:;h action is
]
w:rranted, including issuing appropriate orders and assessing civil penalties for continuing violations on a per day basis, up to the i
I g
statutory limit of $100,000 per violation, per day.
In this regard, while l
1 j
management involvement, direct or indirect, in a violation may lead to an 1
increase in the civil penalty, the lack of such involvement may not be f
1 l
used to mitigate a civil penalty.
l l
30 o
r.
~.._-,
Allowance of mitigation could encourage lack of management involvement in licensed activities and a decrease in protection of the public health and safety.
NRC reviews each proposed civil penalty case on its own merits and adjusts the base civil penalty values upward or downward appropriately. Tables 1A and IB, identify the base civil penalty values for different severity levels, activity areas, and classes of licensees. After considering all relevant circumstances, adjustments to these values may be made for the factors described below:
1.
Identification and Reporting Reduction of up to 50% of the base civil penalty shown in Table 1 may be given when a licensee identifies the violation and promptly reports the violation to the NRC.
In weighing this factor, consideration will be given to, among other things, the opportunity available to discover the violation, the ease of discovery and the promptness l
and completeness of any required report. No consideration will be
.J l
given to a reduction in penalty if the licensee does not take irrediate action to correct the problem upon discovery. On the other hand, the base penalty may be increased by as much as 50%
if the NRC identifies the violation.
2.
Corrective Action to Prevent Recurrence Recognizing that corrective action is always required to meet regulatory requirements, the promptness and extent to which the I
31
licensee takes corrective action, including actions to prevent recurrence, may result in up to a 50% increase or decrease in the base civil penalty shown in Table 1.
For example, very extensive corrective action may result in reducing the proposed civil penalty as much as 50% of the base value shown in Table 1.
On the other J
hand, the civil penalty may be increased as much as 50% of the base value if initiation of corrective action is not prompt or if the corrective action is only minimally acceptable.
In weighing this factor, consideration will be given to, among other things, the s
timeliness of the cor*ective action, degree of licensee in'tiative, and comprehensiveness of the corrective action--such as whether the action is focused narrowly to the specific violation or broadly to l
the general area of concern.
a
.l l
3.
Past Performance Reduction by as much as 100% of the base civil penalty shown in Table 1 may be given for prior good performance.
On the other hand, the base civil penalty may be increased as much as 100% for prior poor performance.
i In weighing this factor, consideration will be given to, among
)
other things, the effectiveness of previous corrective action f
I for similar problems, overall performance such as Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) evaluations for power i
]
reactors, and prior performance including Severity level IV and V l
l
?
32
9 violations in the area of concern.
For example, failure to implement previous corrective action for prior similar problems may result in an increase in the civil penalty.
For purposes of assessing past performance, violations within the past two years of the inspection at issue or the period within the last two inspections whichever is longer will be considered.
i.
4.
Prior Notice of Similar Events The base civil penalty may be increased as much as 100% for cases where the licensee had prior knowledge of a potential problem as a result of a licensee review, a specific NRC or industry notifications or other reasonable indication of a potential problem, and had failed to take effective preventive steps.
Prior notice may include findings of NRC, the licensee, or industry made at other facilities of the licensee where it is reasonable to expect the licensee to take action to prevent similar problems at the facility subject to the enforcement action at issue.
l S.
Multiple Occurrences The base civil penalty may be increased as much as 100% where multiple examples of a particular violation are identified during the inspection
- period, i
6.
Duration l
l The duration of a violation may also be considered in assessing a civil penalty. A greater civil penalty may be imposed if a violation continues for more than a day. For exemple:
L i
b 33
(1)Ifalicenseeisawareoftheexistenceofaconditionwhich results in an ongoing violation and fails to initiate corrective action, each day the condition existed may be considered as a separate violation and, as such, si;bject to a separate additional civil penalty.
,(2) If a l.icensee (a),is unaware of,a condi. tion resulting in a continuing violation, but clearly should have been aware of the conditionor(b)hadanopportunitytocorrecttheconditionbut failed to do so, a separate violation and attendant civil penalty may be considered for each day that the licensee clet'.y should have been aware of the condition or had an opportunity to correct the conJition, but failed to do so, (3) Alternatively, whether or not a licensee is aware or clearly should have been aware of a violation that continues for more than I
one day, the base civil penalty may be increased as much as 100%
to reflect the added significance resulting from the duration of the violation, I
i i-l The above factors are additive. However, in no instance will a civil penalty for any one violation exceed $100,000 per day, i
l i
i The Tables and the mitigating factors determine the civil penalties which may be assessed for each violation. However, to focus on the fundamental i
underlying causes of a problem for which enforcement action appears to be
[
warranted, the cumulative total for all violations which centributed to or i
34 1
i
were unavoidable consequences of that problem may be based on the amount shown in the table for a problem of that Severity Level, as adjusted.
If an evaluation of such multiple violations shows that more than one l
fundamental problem is involved, each of which, if viewed independently, could lead to civil penalty action by itself, then separate civil penalties may be assessed for each such fundamental problem.
In addition,
... t e fa11ure t,o make a required report of an event requiring such reporting h
is considered a separate problem and will normally be assessed a separate civil penalty, if the licenses is aware of the matter that should have been reported.
J I
l l
i i
l j
i O
I 35
- = :. - - -
TABLE 1A
, BASE CIVIL PENALTIES Plant 0)erations.
Type A Const, 4ealth Greater than Quantity Physics and EP Safeguards Type A Quantity 1/ or less 2/
- a. Power Reactors
$100,000
$100,000
$100,000
$5,000
- b. Test Reactors 10,000 10,000 10,000 2,000 F
- 1,000 c: Research Reactors & ~5,000'
" 5;000s 5,000 Critical Facilities
- d. Fuel Fabricators 25,000 100,000 4/
25,000 5,000 and Industrial Processors 3/
5,000 2,000
- e. Mills and Uranium 10,00')
Conversion Facilities 5,000 2,000
- f. Industrial Users 10,000 ofMaterialSj 5,000 2,000
- g. Waste Disposal 10,000 i
Licensees 2,500 1,000
- h. Academic or Medical 5,000 Institutions 6/
2,500 1,000
- i. Other Material 1,000 Licensees 1/ Includes irradiated fuel, high level waste, unirradiated fissile material, and any other quantities requiring Type B packaging.
2/ Includes low specific activity waste (LSA), low level waste, Type A packages, t
and encepted quantities and articles.
3/ Large firms engaged in manufacturing or distribution of byproduct, source, or special nuclear material.
l 4/ This amount refers to Category 1 licensees (as defined in 10 CFR 73.2 (bb)).
I Licensed fuel fabricators not authorized to possess Category 1 material have a base penalty amount of $50,000.
i 5/ Includes industrial radiographers, nuclear phamacies, and other industrial users.
6/ This applies to nonprofit institutions not otherwise categorized under sections
~
"a" through "g" in this table.
1 W
36 em,
.g...
e,
...-....e.
i j
TABLE IB i
BASE CIVIL PEhALTIES BASE CIVIL PENAL.TY AMOUNT b
SEVERITY LEVEL
(% of Amount Listed in Table 1A) i I
100%
II 80%
i III 505 y.,.
.r.,..
. n - 15%
IV 3 g; i
I L
l i
h I
f l
l t
l l
l I
i f
l 4
I l
I t
1 37
++e 3*+we==
+mw w.
we
..-e.
e m es e e
3-m m>g-,
a p.
- ,m-%--*e,
.,m,-
a g g -. w eg e,ep,.
-st m e m.-
w.-,.,ge==4===e=w-e
- ,em y*=g gue = 6.-
C.
ORDERS An order is a written NRC directive to modify, suspend, or revoke a license; to cease and desist from a given practice or activity; or to take such other action as may be proper (see10CFR2.202and2.204). Orders may be issued as set forth below. Orders may also be issued in lieu of, l
I or in addition to, civil penaltie.s, as appropriate.
.e
.s.
s 3
(1) License Modification Orders are issued when some change in licensee equipment, procedures, or management controls is necessary.
1 (2) Suspension Orders may be used:
(a) To remove a threat to the public health and safety, com wi i
defense and security, or the environment; (b) To stop facility construction when (1) further work could 1
preclude or significantly hinder the identific2 tion or correction of an improperly constructed safety-olhted system or component, or (ii) the ifcensee's quality assurance program impicmentation is not adequate to prw ide confidence that construction activities are being properly carried out; j
(c) When the licensee has not respondad adequately to other enforcement action; i
O 38
(d) When the licensee interferes with the conduct of an inspection or investigations or (e) For any reason not mentioned above for which license revocation is legally authorized.
. Suspensions may apply to.,all or, part of the licensed activity.
Ordinarily, a licensed activity is not suspended (nor is a suspension prolonged) for failure to comply with requirements where such failure i
l is not willful and adequate corrective action has been taken.
(3) Kevoc.= tion Orders may be used:
I (a) When a 1fcensee is unable or unwilling to comply with NRC l
requirements.
)
(b) When a licensee refuses to correct a violation.
(c) When a licensee does not respond to a notice of violation where a response was required, i
(d) When a licensee refuses to pay a fee required by 10 CFR l
Part 170, or (e) For any other reason for which revecation is authorized under Section 186 of the Atomic Energy Act (e.g., any condition which I
would warrant refusal of a license on an original application).
39
I (4) Cease and Desi.tt Orders are typically used to stop an unauthorized activity that has continued after notification by NRC that such activity is unauthorized.
Orders are r:ade effective imediately, without prior opportunity for hearing, whenever it is determined that the public health, interest, or j
safety so requires, or when the order is responding to a violation s
involving wt11 fulness. Otherwise, a prior opportunity for a hearing on the order is afforded. For cases in which the NRC believes a basis could reasonably exist for not taking the action as proposed, the licensee will ordinarily be afforded an opportunity to show cause why the order should not be issued in the proposed mannar.
D.
ESCALATION OF ENFORCEPENT SANCTIONS i
l NRC considers violations of Severity Level !. !!. or !!! to be serious.
If serious violations occur NRC will, where necessary, issue orders in conjunction with civil genalties to achieve imediate corrective actions and to deter further recurrence of serious violations. NRC carefully considers the circumstances of each case in selecting and applying the
[
sanction (s) appropriate to the case in accordance with the criteria described in Sections V.B and V.C. above.
Examples of enforcement actions that could be taken for sinilar Severity
~
level I. !!, or !!! violations are set forth in Table 2.
The actual progression to be used in a particular case will depend on the 40
circumstances. However, enforcement sanctions will nonnally escalate for recurring similar violations.
4
,a
.,.t W
,e
=
..s s,.
e,
,,.,o
..s 4
4 o
41
TABLE 2 EXAMPLES OF dOGRESSION OF ESCALATED ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS FOR SIMILAR VIOLATIONS IN THE SAME ACTIVITY AP.EA UNDER THE SAME LICENSE Number of similar violations from the date Severity of the last ins section or within the previous of two years (whiciever period is greater)
Violation 1st
,2nd 3rd I
a+b a+b+c d
l-y
>.. g.
,4g
,4g+c.
r.
III a
a+b a.
Civil penalty l
. b.
Suspension of affected operations until the Office Director is satis-fied that there is reasonable assurance that the licensee can operate in compliance with the applicable requirements; or modification of the license, as appropriate.
c.
Show cause for modification or revocation of the license, as appropriate.
I E
d.
Further action, as appropriate.
l l
l 4
~.
I e
i i
l i
42 i
~_
p
....-_.-_m....~-..,v._.,....
E.
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS INVOLVING INDIVIDUALS Enforcement actions involving individuals, including licensed operators,
^
are significant personnel actions, which will be closely controlled and l
judiciously applied. An enforcement action will normally be taken only when there is little doubt that the individual fully understood, or should have understood, his or her responsibility; knew, or should have 4
known, the required actions; and knowingly, or with careless disregard (i.e., with more than mere negligence) failed to take required actions which have actual or potential safety significance. Most transgressions j
of individuals at the level of Severity Level !!!, IV or V violations will be handled by citing only the facility licensee.
More serious violations, including those involving the integrity of an individual (e.g.,lyingtotheNRC)concerningmatterswithinthescope l
of the individual's responsibilities, will be considered for enforcement I
action against the individual. Action against the individual, however, i
will not be taken if the improper action by the individual was caused by management failures. The following examples of situations illustrate this concept:
l Inadvertent individual mistakes resulting from inadequate training or guidance provided by the facility licensee.
Inadvertently missiro 'n inv%nificant procedural requirement when the action is routine, fairly encerrplicated, and there is no unusual l
circumstance indicating that the procedures should be referred to and i
followed step-by-step.
i 43 l
. i Compliance with an express direction of management, such as the Shift Supervisor or Plant Manager, resulted in a violation unless the individual did not express his or her concern or objection to the direction.
Individual error directly resulting from following the technical
,, advice of an expert unless the advice was clearly unreasonable and the licensed individual should have recognized it as such.
Violations resulting from inadequate procedures unless the individual used a faulty procedure knowing it was faulty and had not attempted to get the procedure corrected.
i j
Examples of situations which could result in enforcement actions against l
individuals include, but are not limited to, violations which involve:
[
i f
i Recognizing a violation of procedural requirements and willfully i
j i
not taking corrective action.
f I
Willfully performing unauthorized bypassing of required reactor i
safety systems.
j i
Willfully defeating alarms which have safety significance.
[
1
~
Unauthorized abandoning of reactor controls.
Inattention to duty such as sleeping, being intoxicated while on i
duty, or otherwise not meeting requirements for fitness for duty.
4 44 2
i
,,,<g-~-,,.e p
y__ _ _ _. - - _ _, _ _ _ -, _, _ _, - _ -, _. -
,____.-_m__,
Willfully taking actions that violate TS Limiting Conditions for Operation (enforcement action for a willful violation of 10 CFR 50.54(x) will be taken only if the operator failed to meet the standards of that regulation, i.e., acted unreasonably considering all the relevant circumstances surrounding the emergency.)
, Falsifying records required for NRC regulations or by the facility licensee.
Willfully failing to take "innediate actions" of emergency procedures.
Willfully withholding safety significant information rather than making such information known to appropriate supervisory or technical persnnnel.
Any proposed enforcement action against individualv must be done with the concurrence of the Deputy Executive Dirictor for Regiocal Operations. The opportunity for an Enforcement Conference with the individual will usually be provided.
Examples of sanctions that may be appropriate against NRC-licensed operators are:
issuance of a letter of reprimand to be placed in the operator's license file.
issuance of a Notice of Violation, and 45
suspension for a specified period, modification, or revocation of the ifcense.
The sanctions are listed in escalating order of significance. Al The particular sanction to be used should be determined on a case-by-case basis.
, In addition.,NRC may take enforcenent acticn where.the conduct of the j
individual places in question the NRC's reasonable assurance that licensed
?
activities will be properly conducted. The NRC may take enforcement action for reasons that would warrant refusal to issue a license on an original application. Accordingly, enforcement action may be taken regarding matters that raise issues of integrity, competence, fitness for duty, or other matters that may not necessarily be a violation of specific Comission requirements.
[
In the case of an unlicensed individual, an Order modifying the facility
(
license to -aquire the removal of the individual from all nuclear-related f
activities for a specified period of time or indefinitely may be appropriate.
I F.
REOPENING CLOSED ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS l
If significant new information is received or obtained by NRC which
$/
Except for individuals subject to civil penalties under section 206 of the i
Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended. NRC will not nortnally impose However, section 234 of the Atomic i
a civil penalty)against an individual.gives the Comission authority to impose civil !
EnergyAct(AEA for violations on "any person." "Cerson" is broadly defined in Section 11s t
of the AEA to include individuals, a variety of organizations, and any representatives or agents. This gives the Comission authority to impose civil penalties on employees of licensees or on separate entities when a violation of a requirement directly imposed on them is comitted.
46 i
N
l i
indicates that an enforcement sanction w's incorrectly applied,
)
consideration may be given, dependent on the circumstances, to f
reopening a closed enforcement acticn to increase or decrease the severity of a sanction or to correct the record.
Reopening decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis, are expected to occur rarely, and require the specific approval of the Deputy. Executive Director j
for Regional Operations.
G.
EXERCISE OF D!$CRETION 1
i Because the NRC wants to encourage and support licensee initiative J
j for self-identification and correction of problems, NRC may exercise discretion as follows:
4 i
1.
NRC may refrain from issuing a notice of violation for a violation described in an inspection report or official field notes that nets all of the tolfowing criteria:
i l
a.
It wat ideni:ifie< by the licensee; J
b.
It is normally classified at a Severity Level !Y or V; I
i c.
It was reported, if required; 1
l d.
It was or will be corrected, including treasures to prevent 4
)
rer.urrence, within a reasonable time; and J
i i
47 I
I
e.
It was not a willful violation or a violation that could reasonably be expected to have been prevented by the licensee's corrective action for a previous violation.
2.
The NRC may refrain from issuing a notice of violation or a proposed civil penalty for violations described in an inspection report or offi, cia,1 f,1 eld notes that meet all of the. following criteria:
a.
(1) The NRC has taken significant enforcement action based upon a major safety event contributing to an extended shutdown of an operating reactor or a material licensee (or a work stoppage at a construction site), or the licensee is forced into an extended shutdcwn or work stoppage related to generally poor performance over a long period; (ii) the licensee has developed and is aggressively implementing during the shutdown a comprehensive program for problem identification and correction; and (iii) NRC concurrence is needed by the licensee prior to restart; b.
Non-willful violations are identified by the licensee as the result of its comprehensive program, or as a result of an employee allegation to the licensee.
If NRC identifies the violation, the NRC should detemine whether enforcement action is necessary to achieve remedial action; c.
The violations are based upon activities of the licensee prior to the events leading to the shutdown; and 48
t 6
d.
The violaticns would normally not be categorized as higher than Severity Level !!! violations under the NRC's Enforcement l
Policy.
i 3.
The NRC may refrain from proposing a civil penalty for a Severity l
Level !!! violation not involving an overexposure or release of i
-,ra,dioscti,ve mater,tal that meets all of the foi, lowing, criteria:
L
.s.., ;.
.s I
a.
It was identified by the licensee and reported; i
b.
Comprehensive corrective action has been taken or is well underway within a reasonable time following identification; j
i c.
It was not a violation that either (1) was reasonably presentable by the licensee's action in response to a previous regulatory concern identified within the past two years of the inspection I
i or since the last two inspections which ever is longer or (ii) reasonably should have been corrected prior to the I'
violation because the licensee had prior notice of the problem involved; and f
d.
It was not a willful violation or indicative of a breakdewn in management controls.
l l
4.
The NRC may refrain from proposing a civil penalty for a Severity i
I Level !!! violation involving a past problem such as in engineering, design, or installation, that reets the following criteria:
49 i
\\
I
i a.
It cas identified by a Ifeensee as a result of a licensee's l
t voluntary formal effort such as a Safety System Functional Inspection, Design Reconstitution Program, or other program T
that has a defined scope and timetable which is being aggressively implemented and reportedt i
b.
Comprehensive cor.rective. action has been taken or is well underway within a reasonable time following identification; and l
)
4 c.
It was not likely to be identified by routine licensee efforts j
such as normal surveillance or QA activities.
j 5.
If the NRC issues an enforcement action for a violation at a Severity Level I!! violation and as part of the corrective action for that i
violation, the licensee identiff ts other examples of the violation i
J with the same root cause, the N.\\C may rafrain from issuing an additional enforcement action.
In determining whether to exercise l
l this discretion, the NRC will consider whether the licensee acted j
1 reasonably and in a timely manner appropriate to the safety significance of the initial violation. the comprehensiveness of the corrective action, whether the matter was reported, and whether i
the additional violation (s) substantially change the safety t
significance or character of the regulatory concern arising cut of i
the initial violation, t
l l
Notwithstanding paragraphs 2, 3, 4. and 5 above, a rivil penalty may I
l be proposed when judgment warrants it on the basis of the circumstances i
o
?
i
)
50 i
I
- - + ~. -
of the individual case.
For example, civil penalties may be warranted where multiple Severity Level !!! violations are discovered or where the violation is willful.
In addition, as provided in Section VII, Responsibilities, the Deputy Executive Ofrector for Regional Operations may refrain from issuing a civil penalty for a Severity Level !!!
violation based on the merits of the case after considering the guidance
, in this statement of policy and,such factors as the age of the violation, the safety significance of the violation, the overall perforrance of the licensee, and circumstances. If any, that have changed since the violation provided prior notice has been given the Commission. This discretion is expected to be exercised only where application of the norwal guidance in the Policy is unwarranted.
H.
RELATED ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS In addition to the formal enforcement mechanisms of notices of violation, civil penalties, and orders, NRC also uses administrative mechanisms, such as bulletins, information notices, generic letters, notices of deviation, notices of nonconformance, and confirmatory action letters to supplement its enforcement program. NRC expects licensees and vendors to adhere to any obligations and connitments resulting from these processes and will not hesitate to issue appropriate orders to licensees to nake sure that such comitments are met.
(1) Bulletins. Information Notices, and Generic Letters are written notifications to groups of licensees identifying specific problems and recorrending specific actions.
51
(2) Fotices of Deviation are written notices describing a licensee's failure to satisfy a commitment where the commitment involved has not been made a legally binding requirement. A notice of deviation requests a licensee to provide a written explanation or statement describing corrective steps taken (or planned), the results achieved, and the date when corrective action will be completed.
(3) Confirmatory Action Letters are letters confirming a licensee's or a vendor's agreement to take certain actions to remove significant concerns about health and safety, safeguards, or the environment.
(4) Notices of Nenconformance are written notices describing non-licensees' failures to meet commitments which have not been made legally binding requirements by NRC. An example is a ecmmitment made in a procurement contract with a licensee as required by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B.
t Notices of Nonconformances request non-licensees to provide written explanations or statements describing corrective steps (taken or planned), the results achieved, the dates when corrective actions will be completed, and measures taken to preclude recurrence.
l REFERRALS TO DEPARTNENT OF JUSTICE i
Alleged or suspected criminal violations of the Atomic Energy Act (and of other relevant Federal laws) are referred to the Department of Justice for investigation.
Referral to the Department of Justice does not preclude the NRC from taking other enforcement action under this General Statement i
of Policy. However, such actions will be coordinated with the Department of Justice to the extent practicable, 52
....~
)
I i
VI.
!NACCt) RATE AND INCOMPLETE INFORMATION l
1 i
A violation of the regulations on submitting complete and accurate infomation whether or not considered a material false statement, can i
result in the full range of enforcement sanctions. Tha labeling of a j
cosuunication failure as a material false statement wil, he made on a f'
case-by-cace basis and.wil.1 be, reserved for egregious violations.
j j
l Violations involving inaccurate or incomplete information or the failure l
=
to provide significant information identified by a Itcensee normally will j
be categorized based on the guidance herein, in Section !!! "Severity of i
Violations " and in Supplement V!!.
[
i The Connission recognizes that oral information may in some situations be 4
1 inherently less reliable than written submittals because of the absence
[
i j
of an opportunity for reflection and management review. However, the l
1
\\
l Conmission must be able to rely on oral coneunications from licensee j
officials concerning significant information. A Itcensee official for h
T l
rurposes of cpplication of the Enforcement Policy means a first line
[
1 supervisor or above as well as a licensed individual, radiation safety a
officer, or a person listed on a license as an authorized user of
[
t licensed material. Therefom, in determining whether to take enforcement t
j action for an oral statement, consideration may be given to such factors j
as (1) the degree of knowledge that the ccemunicator should have had.
[
regarding the matter, in view of his or her position, training, and i
experience. (2) the opportunity and time available prior to the I
(
j consunication to assure the accuracy or completeness of the information, l
[
(3) the degree of intent or negligence, if any, involved. (4) the l
l l
53
!w
formality of the conrunication, (5) the reasonableness of NRC reliance on the information, (6) the importance of the information which was wrong or not provided, and (7) the reasonableness of the explanation for not providing complete and accurate infomation.
Absent at least careless disregard, an incomplete or inaccurate unsworn oral statement normally will.not be subject to enforcement actiori unless it involves significant information provided by a licensee official.
However, enforcement action may be taken for an unintentionally incomplete or inaccurate oral statement provided to the NRC by a licensee official or others ein behalf of a licensee, if a record was made of the oral information and provided to the licensee thereby
'mitting an opportunity to correct the oral information, such as if a transcript of the conrunication or meeting sumary containing tne error was made available to the licensee and was not subsequently corrected in a timely manner.
When a licensee has currected irAccurate or incomplete infomation, the 6
dacision tn issue a citation for the initial inaccurate or incomplete f
informatior, normally will be dependent on the circumstances, including the ease of detection of the error, the timeliness of the correction, whether the NRC or the licensee identified the problem with the comunication, and whether the NRC relied on the informat5on prior to the correction.
Generally, if the matter was prmptly identified and corrected by the licenseo prior to reliance by the NRC, or before the NRC raised a question about the information, no enforcement action will be taken for the initial inaccurate or incomplete information. On the other hand, if the misinformation is identified after the NRC relies on 54
it, or after some question is raised regarding the accuracy of the information, then some enforcement action normally will be taken even if it is in fact corrected. However, if the initial submittal was accurate when made but later turns out to be erroneous because cf newly discovered information or advance in technology, a citation normally would not be appropriate if, when the new information became available. the initial submittal was corrected.
The failure to correct inaccurate or incomplete information which the licensee does not identify as significant normally will not constitute a separate violation. However, the circumstances currounding the failure to correct may be considered relevant to the determination of enforcement action for the initial inaccurate or incomplete statement.
For example, an unintentionally inaccurate or incomplete submission may be treated as a more severe matter if the licensee later Jetermines that the initial submittal was in error and does not correct it or if there were clear opportunities to identify the error.
If information not corrected was recognized hy a licensee as significant, separat6 citation may be made for the fallbet te provide significant information.
In ar./ event, in serious cares where the licensce's actions in not cor/?cting or providing information raise questions about f ts comunitment to safety or its i
fundamental trustworthiness, the Commission may exercise its authority to issue orders modifying, suspending, or revoking the license. The Commission recognizes that enforcement determinations must be made on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the issues described above.
55
VII. PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS 4
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790, all enforcement actions and licensees' responses are publicly available for inspection.
In addition, press releases are generally issued for civil penalties and orders.
In the case of orders and civil penalties related to violations at Severity Level I, II, or III, press releases are issued at the time of the order or the proposed imposition of the civil penalty.
Press releases are not normally issued for Notices of Violation.
VIII. RESPONSIBILITIES The Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations (DEDRO), as the principal enforcement officer of the NRC, has been delegated the authority to issue notices of violations, civil penalties, and orders. El Regional Administrators may also issue notices of violation for Severity Level IV and V violations and may sign notices of violation for Severity Level III violations with no proposed civil penalty and proposed civil penalty actions with the concurrence of the DEDRO.
In recognition that the regulation of nuclear activitio3 in many cases does not lend itself to,1 mechanistic treatment, th6 DEDRO or the Regional Administrator must El The Director, Office of Enforcement, acts for the Deputy Executive Director for Regional Orarations in the latter's absence or os directed.
The Directors of the Offices of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, and Special Projects have also been delegated authority to issue orders, but it is expected that normal use of this authority by NRR, NMSS, and OSP will be confined to actions necessary in the interest of sublic health and safety. The Director, Office of Administration and Resources Management, has been delegated the authority to issue orders where licensees violate Comnission regulations by nonpayment of license fees.
l 56 l
~
m 3 3
~ _ _,
exercise judgment and discretion in determining the severity levels of the violations and the appropriate enforcement sanctions, including the decision to issue a Notice of Violation, or to propose or impose a civil penalty and the amount of such penalty, after considering the general principles of this statement of policy and the technical significance of the violations and the surrounding circumstances.
The Commission will be provided written notification of all enforcement actions involving civil penalties or orders. The Commission will be consulted prior to taking action in the following situations (unless the urgency of the situation dictates innediate action):
(1) An action affecting a licensee's operation that requires balancing the public health and safety or common defense and security implications of not operating with the potential radiological or other hazards associated with continued operation; (2) Proposais to impose civil penalties f a amounts greater than 3 times the Severity Level I values showr, in .'able IA; (3) Any proposed enfo7 cement action that involves a Severity Level I violation; (4) Any enforcement action that involves a finding of a material false statement; (5) Refraining from taking enforcement action for matters meeting the criteria of Section V.G 2.
57 m
(6) Any action the Office Director believes warrants Commission involve-ment; or (7) Ary proposed enforcement action on which the Commission asks to be coasulted.
,13. _ VENDOR.ENFORCENENT,,,
The Cor.wission's enforcement policy is also applicable to non-licensees (vendors).
Vendors of products or services provided for use in nuclear acti ities are subject to certain requirements designed to ensure'that the products or services supplied that could affect safety are of high quality. Through procurement contracts with reactor licensees, vendors are required to have quality assurance programs that meet applicable requirements including 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, and 10 CFR Part 71, 1
Subpart H.
Vendors of reactor and materials licensees and Part 71 licensess are subject to the requirements of 10 CFR Part 2' regarding reporting of defects in basic components.
1 The NRC conducts inspections of reactor licensees to determine whether they are ensuring that vendors are meeting their centractual obligatior.s wi^h regard to quelity of products or services that could have an adverse effect on safety. As part of the effort of ensuring that licensees fulfill their obligations in this regard, the NRC inspects rebetor vendors to determine if they are meeting their obligations.
These inspections include examination of the quality assurance programs and their implementation by the vendors through examination of product quality.
58
The NRC may also inspect vendors, including suppliers of Part 71 and materials licensees, to determine whether they are complying with Part 21.
When inspections determine that violations of NRC requirements have occurred, or that vendors have failed to fulfill contractual commitments that could adversely affect the quality o# a safety significant product or service, enforcement action will be taken.
.% tices of Violation and civil penalties I
..,..be use.d, as appropriate, for license failures to ensure that tlair will
,.....c,
,t,..
..,g s,,
vendors.have programs that meet applicable requirements including Pirt 21.
Notices of Violation will be issued for vendors which violate Parc 21.
Civil penalties will only be imposed against individual director <, or j
responsible officers of a vendor organization who knowingly and consciously fail to provide the notice required by 10 CFR 21.21(b)(1).
Notices of Nonconformance will be used for vendors which fail to meet comitments related to NRC activities.
SUPPLEMENT I - SEVERITY CATEGORIES l
PIACTOR OPERATIONS A.
Severity I - Violations involving for example:
1.
A Safety Limit. M, defined in 10 CFR 50.36 and the Technical Specifi-cations, being exceeded; A system 5/ esigned to prevent er mitigate a serious safety event not 2.
d t
5/"System"asusedinthesesupplements,includesadministrativeand managerial control systems, as well as physical systems.
59
being able to perform its intended safety function 1/ when'actually called upon to work; 3.
An accidental criticality; or 4.
Release of radioactivi.ty offsite greater than ten (10) times the
..Technjca1 Specifications. limit.8/
B.
Severity II - Violations involving for example:
1.
A system designed to prevent or mitigate serious safety events not being able to perform its intended safety function; or 2.
Release c' radioactivity offsite greater than five (5) times the Technical Specifications limit.
C.
Severity III - Vinlations involving for example:
1.
A significant violation of a Technical Specification Limiting Condition for Operation where the appropriate Action Statement was not satisfied within the time allotted by the Action Statement, such as:
II "Intended safety function" means the total safety function, and is not directed toward a loss of redundancy.
For example, considering a BWR's high presstre ECCS capability, the violation must result in complete invalidation
- of both HPCI and ADS subsystems. A loss of one subsystem does not defeat the intended safety function as long as the other subsystem is operable.
8/ The Technical Specification limit as used in this Supplement (Items A.4, B.2 and C.5) does not apply to the instantaneous release limit.
60
- a. In a pressurized water reactor, in the applicable modes, having one high-pressure safety injection pump inoperable for a period in excess of that allowed by the action statement; or
- b. In a boiling water reactor, one primary containment isolation valve inoperable for a period in excess of that allowed by the action statement.
2.
A system designed to prevent or mitigate a serious refety event not being able to perform its intended function under certain conditions (e.g., safety system not operable unless offsite power in available; materials or components not environmentally qualified);
3.
Dereliction of duty on the part of personnel involved in licensed activities; 4.
Changes in reactor parameters which cause unanticipated reductions in margins of safety; 5.
Releas2 of radioactivity offsite greater than the Technical Specifications limit; 6.
A significant failure to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59, including a failure such that a required license amendment was not sought; or i
i 61
7.
Licensee failure to conduct adequate oversight of vendors resulting in the use of products or services which are of defective or indeterminate quality and which have safety significance.
D.
Severity IV - Violations involving for example:
- 1. A less.significant. violation of a Technical Specification Limiting Condition for Operation where the appropriate Action Statement was not satisfied within the time allotted by the Action Statement, such as:
- a. In a pressurized water reactor, a 5% deficiency in the required volume of the condensate storage tank; or
- b. In a boiling water reactor, one subsystem of the two independent MSIY leakage control subsystems inoperable.
- 2. Failure to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59 that does not result in a Severity Level I, II, er III violation;
- 3. Failure to meet regulatory requirements that have more than mir.or 1
i l
safety or environme:ntal significance; cr l
- 4. Failure to make a required Licensea Esant Report.
E.
Severity Level V - Violations that have minor safety or environmental significance.
a 62
SUPPLEMENT II - SEVERITY CATEGORIES PART 50 FACILITY CONSTRUCTION A.
Severity I - Violations involving a structure or system that is completed El in such a manner that it would not have satisfied its intended. safety related purpose.
/..
l l
B.
Severity II - Violations involving for example:
l 1.
A breakdown in the quality assurance program as exemplified by deficiencies in construction QA related to more than or.e work l
activity (e.g., structural, piping, electrical, foundations). Such l
l deficiencies normally involve the licensee's failure to conduct l
adequate audits or to take prompt corrective action on the basis of such audits and normally involve multiple examples of deficient l
construction or construction of unknown quality due to inadequate program implementation; or l
2.
A structure or system that is completed in such a manner that it could have an adverse effect on the safety of operations.
l l
l C.
Severity III - Violations involving for example:
l E/"Completed" means completion of construction including review and acceptance by tne construction QA organization.
63
1.
A deficiency in a licensee quality assurance program for construction related to a single work activity (e.g., structural, piping, elec-trical or foundations). Such significant deficiency normally involves the licensee's failure to conduct adequate audits or to take prempt corrective action on the basis of such audits, and normally involves multiple examples of deficient construction or construction
.of unknown quality due to inadequate program implementation; 2.
Failure to confirm the design safety requirements of a structure or system as a result of inadequate preoperational test program implementation; or 3.
Failure to make a required 10 CFR 50.55(e) report.
D.
Severity IV - Violations involving failure to meet regulatory requirements including one or more Quality Assurance Criterion not amounting to Severity movel I, II, or III violations that have more than minor safety or environmental significance.
C.
Severity V - Violations that have minor safety or environmental l
significance.
SUPPLEMENT III - SEVERITY CATEGORIES SAFEGUARDS i
A.
Severity I - Violations involving for example:
64 w
1.
An act of radiological sabotage or actual theft, loss, or diversion E/ n which the of a formula quantity of special nuclear material i
security system did not function as required; or E/ nto a 2.
Actual undetected entry of an unauthorized individual i
vital area N/ rom outside the protected area who represents a f
i l..
. threat.
B.
Severity II - Violations involving for example:
1.
Actual theft, loss nr diversion of special nuclear material of moderate strategic significance El in which the security system did not function as required; 2.
Failure or inability to control access such that an unauthori:ed individual could easily gain undetected access El into a vital area from outside the protected area; or El See 10 CFR 73.2(bb).
El An unauthortred individual is someona who was not authorized for entrance into the area in question, or not authoritec' w entar in the manner entered.
El The phrase "vital area" includes vital areas, rnaterial access areas, and controlled access areas.
j El See 10 CFR 73.2(x).
El In detemining whether access can be easily gained factors such as predictability, identifiability, and ease of passage should be considered.
1 l
65
3.
Failure to have a security system designed or used to prevent the theft, loss, or diversion of SNM of moderate strategic significance l
or greater amounts or acts of radiological sabotage.
C.
Severity III - Violations involving for example:
1.
Failure to conduct an adequat.e search at the access control point that results in the introduction to the prote;ted area of items that Day be useful in radiological sabotage or theft of SNM; 2.
Failure or inability to control access such that an unauthorized individual could easily gain undetected access into a vital area from inside the protected area or to the protected area from outside the protected area; 3.
Significant failure of the safeguards systems designed or used to prevent or detect the theft, loss, or diversion of SNM or radiological sabotage; 4.
Failure tu properly secure er protect classified or other sensitive safeguards information which would significantly assist an individual in an act of radiological sabotage or theft of special nuclear material; 5.
Significant failure to take compensatory measures for a known security situation that could easily allow unauthorized and undetected access to a protected or vital area; 66
6.
Significant failure to respond to a suspected event in either a tinely manner or with an adequate response force; or 7.
Breakdown in the security system involving a number of violations that are related or, if isolated, that are recurring violations (e.g., relating to poor management, inadequate maintenance practices,
...or. training).
D.
Severity IV - Violations involving f r exampirs:
1.
Failure of a safeguards system designed or used to prevent or detect the theft, loss, or diversion of SNM or radiological sabotage; l
2.
A failure to respond to a suspected event in either a timely manner or with an adequate response force; 3.
Failure to implement 10 CFR Parts 25 and 95 and information addressed under Section 142 of the Act, and the NRC approved 1
security plan relevant to those parts; 4.
Failure to make, maintain, or provide log entries in accordance with l
10CFR73.71(c)and(d);
1 i
S.
Failure to conduct a proper search at the access control point; l
67 e
6.
Failure to properly secure or protect classified or other sensitive safeguards information which would not significantly assist an individual in an act of radiological sabotage or theft of special nuclear naterial; 7.
Failure to control access such that an opportunity exists that could allow unauthorized and undetected access into the protected area or from the protected area into a vital area but which was not easily t
exploitable; I
8.
Inadequate compensatory measures for a known security situation that j
could allow unauthorized and undetected access; t
9.
Failure to properly test a security system; or
- 10. Other violations that have more than minor safeguards significance.
E.
Severity V - Violations that have minor safeguards significance such as:
1 1.
Isolated failure to log a security event in accordance with 4
10CFR73.71(c);or I
i 2.
Other violations that have minor safeguards significance.
]
I t
I j
68 Y
~'
~
1 SUPPLEMENT IV - SEVERITY CATEGORIES HEALTH PHYSICS 10 CFR PART 20 15/
4 A.
Severity 1 - Violations involving for example:
1.
Single exposure of a worker in excess of 25 ' rems of radiation to the 1
whole body,150 rems to the skin of the whole body, or 375 rems to the feet, ankles, hands, or forearms; i
2.
Annual whole body exposure of a member of the public in excess of 2.5 rems of radiation; l
i i
3.
Release of radioactive material to an unrestricted area in excess of j
ten times the limits of 10 CFR 20.106; 4.
Disposal of licensed material in quantities or concentrations in excess of ten times the limits of 10 CFR 20.303; or i
1 5.
Exposure of a worker in restricted areas of ten times the limits of r
i t
4 B.
Severity !! - Violations involving for example:
15/ Personnel overexposures and associated violations, incurred during a lifesaving effort, will be treated on a case-by-case basis.
69
1.
Single exposure of a worker in excess of 5 rems of radiation to the whole body, 30 rems to the skin of the whole body, or 75 rems to the feet, ankles, hands or forearms; 2.
Annual whole body exposure of a member of the public in excess of 0.5 rems of radiation; 3.
Release of radioactive material to an unrestricted area in excess of five times the limits of 10 CFR 20.106; 4.
Failure to make an immediate notification as required by 10 CFR 20.403(a)(1)and10CFR20.403(a)(2);
5.
Disposal of licensed material in quantities or concentrations in excess of five times the limits of 10 CFR 20.303; or 6.
Exposure of e. worker in restricted areas in excess of five times the limits of 10 CFR 20.103.
C.
Severity III - Violations involving for example:
1.
Single exposure of a worker in excess of 3 rems of radiation to the whole body, 7.5 rems to the skin of the whole body, or 18.75 rems to the feet, ankles, hands or forearms; E
70
1
.e 2.
A radiation level in an unrestricted area such that an individual could receive greater than 100 millirem in a one hour period or 500 millirem in any seven consecutive days; 3.
Failure to make a 24-hour notification as required by 10 CFR 20.403(b) or an immediate notification required by 10 CFR 20.402(a);
4.
Substantial potential for an exposure or release in excess of 10 CFR 20 whether or not such exposure or release occurs (e.g., entry into high radiation areas, such as under reactor vessels or in the vicinity of exposed radiographic sources, without having performed an adequate survey, operation of a radiation facility with a nonfunctioninginterlocksystem);
5.
Release of radioactive material to an unrestricted area in excess of the limits of 10 CFR 20.106; 6.
Improper disposal of licensed material not covered in Severity l
Levels I or II; 7.
Exposure of a worker in restricted areas in excess of the limits of 10 CFR 20.103; l
8.
Release for unrestricted use of contaminated or radioactive material or equipment which poses a realistic potential for significant exposure to members of the public, or which reflects a programmatic (rather than isolated) weakness in the radiation control program; 71
9.
Cumulative worker exposure above regulatory limits when such cumu-lative exposure reflects a programmatic, rather than an isolated weakness in radiation protection;
- 10. Conduct of licensee activities by a technically unqualified person; or
- 11. Significant failure to control licensed material.
D.
Severity IV - Violations involving for example:
1.
Exposures in excess of the limits of 10 CFR 20.101 not constituting Severity Level I, II, or III violations; 2.
A radiation level in an unrestricted area such that an individual could receive greater than 2 millirem in a one-hour period or 100 millirem in any seven consecutive days; 3.
Failure to make a 30-day notification required by 10 CFR 20.405; 4.
Failure to make a followup written report ss required by 10 CFR I
20.402(b),20.408,and20.409;or f
5.
Any other matter that has more than minor safety or environmental significance.
E.
Severity V - Violations that have minor safety or environmental 4
significance.
i l
l 72
I SUPPLEMENT V - SEVERITY CATEGORIES 1
l TRANSPORTATION El q
j A.
Severity I - Violations of NRC transportation requirements involving for example:
.t 1.
Annual whole body radiation exposure of a member of the public in excess of 2.5 rems of radiation; 1
2.
Surface contamination in excess of 50 times the NRC limit; or 3.
External radiation levels in excess of 10 times the NRC limit.
B.
Severity II - Violations of NRC transportation requirements involving for example:
1.
Annual whole bcdy exposure of a member of the public in excess of l
0.5 rems of radiation; 2.
Surface contamination in excess of 10, but not more than 40 times the NRC limit; I
EI Some transportation requirements are applied to more than one licensee involved in the same activity such as a shipper and a carrier.
When a violation of such a requirement occurs, enforcement action will be directed against the responsible licensee which, under the circumstances of the case, may be one or more of the licensees involved.
73
i 3.
External radiation levels in excess of five, but not more than 10 times the NRC limit; or 4.
Failure to make required initial notifications associated with Severity Level I or II violations.
C.
Sev,erity III. Violations of NRC. transportation requirements involving for example:
1.
Surface contamination in excess of five but not more than 10 times the NRC limit; or 2.
External radiation in excess of one but not more than five tir.es the NRC limit; or 3.
Any noncompliance with labelling, placarding, shipping paper, packaging, loading, or other requirements that could reascnably result in the following:
a.
Significant failure to identify the type, quantity, or form of material; b.
Failure of the carrier or recipient to exercise adequate controls; or c.
Substantial potentie) for personnel exposure or contamination, or improper transfer of material; or 74
4.
Failure to make required initial notification associated with Severity Level III violations.
D.
Severity IV - Violations of NRC transportation requirement: involving for example:
1.
Breach of package integrity without external radiation levels I
exceeding the NRC limit or without contamination levels exceeding five times the NRC limits; 2.
Surface contamination in excess of but not more than five times the NRC limit; 3.
Failure to register as an authorized user of an NRC-Certified Transport packages; 4.
Noncompliance with shipping papers, marking, labeling, placarding packaging or loading not amounting to a Severity Lovel I, II, or III violation; I
5.
Failure to demonstrate that packages for special fonn radioactive material meets applicable regulatory requirements; 6.
Failure to demonstrate that packages meet DOT Specifications for 7A Type A packages; or 7.
Other violations that have more than minor safety or environmental significance.
75
,r,
_______ - -____ = __
E.
Severity V - Violations that have minor safety or environmental significance.
SUPPLEMENT VI - SEVERITY CATEGORIES FUEL CYCLE AND HATERIALS OPERATIONS A.
Severity 1 - Violations involving for example:
1.
Radiation levels, contamination levels, or releases that exceed 10 times the limits specified in the license; 2.
A system designed to prevent or mitigate a serious safety event not being cperable when actually required to perform its design function; or 3.
A nuclear criticality accident.
B.
Severity II - Violations involving for example:
I 1.
Radiation levels, contamination levels, or releases that exceed five times the limits specified in the license; or 2.
A system designed to prevent or mitigate a serious safety event being i
C.
Severity !!! - Violations involving for example:
i l
l e
76
j-i 1.
Failure to control access to licensed materials for radiation purposes as specified by NRC requirements; J
2.
Possession or use of unauthorized equipment or materials in the i
j conduct of licensee activities which degrades safety; l
l I
, 3.,,. Use of, radioactive material on humans where such use is.not authorized;.
t 4.
Conduct of licensed activities by a technically unqualified person; 5.
Radiation levels, contamination levels, or releases that exceed the i
limits specified in the license; t
1
)
j 6.
Medical therapeutic misadministration or the failure to report such j
c l
a misadministration; or l
l I
7.
Multiple errors of the same or similar root cause that results in diagnostic misadministrations over the inspection period, or a l
i 1-re *urrent violatior from the previous inspection period that
{
l results in a diagnostic misadministration.
r 4
}
D.
Severity IV - Violations involving for exa;nple:
1.
Failure to maintain patients hospitalized who have cobalt-60, cesium-137, or iridium-192 implants or to conduct required leakage or contamination tests, or to use properly calibrated equipment; 77
2.
Other violations that have more than minor safety or environmental significance; or l
3.
Medical diagnostic misadministration or a failure to report such a misadministration.
l 1
E.., Severity V - Violationt 9t have minor safety or ettvirorimental I
significance.
- SEVERITY CATEGORIES I
J MISCELLANEOUS MATTE,,.
l I
4 i
1 A.
Severity 1 - Violations involving for example:
i I
1.
Inaccurate or incomplete information E/ which is provided te
[
l l
the NRC (a) celiberately with the knowledge of a licensee official
[
I that the informatinn is incomplete or inaccurate, or (b) if the l
2 infomation had it been complete and accurate at the time provided.
likely would have resulted in regulatory action such as ao irmediate l
l order required by the public health and safety.
i E/ In applying the eramples in this supplement regarding inaccurate or incomplete information and records, reference also should be made to l
the guidance in Section VI.
f q
I 78 l
i I
i
2.
Incomplete or inaccurrte information which the NRC requires be kept by a licensee which is (a) incomplete or inaccurate because of falsification by or with the knowledge of a licensee official, or (b) if the information had it been complete and accurate when reviewed by the NRC likely would have resulted in regulatory action such as an immediate order required by public health and safety considerations; 3.
Information which the licensee has identified as having significant implications for public health and safety or the common defense and l
security ("significant information identified by a licensee") and l
i which is deliberately withheld from the Commission; i
1 I
4.
Action by senior corporate management in violation of 10 CFR 50.7 3
or similar regulations against an emp?oyee; or 1
5.
A knowing and intentional fatture to provide the notice required by Part 21, i
B.
Severity fl - Violations involving for example:
~
4 1.
InaccurateorincompleteinformationwhichisprovidedtotheNRC(a) l by a licensee official because of careless disregard for the complete-l ness or accuracy of the information, or (b) if the information, had it l
been complete and accurate at the time provided, likely would have resulted in regulatory action such as a show cause orde.r or a different i
regulatory positioni f
L I
79 i
l 2.
Incomplete or inaccurate information which the NRC requires be kept by a licensee which is (a) incomplete or inaccurate because of careless l
l disregard for the accuracy of the information on the part of a licensee 1
official, or (b) if the information, had it been complete and accurate when reviewed by the NRC, likely would have resulted in regulatory action such as a show cause order or a different regulatory position; 3.
"Significant information identified by a licensee" and not provided to l
the Comission because of careless disregard on the part of a licensee official; 4.
Action by plant management above first-line supervision in violation of 10 CFR 50.7 or similar regulations against an employee; or 5.
A failure to provide the notice required by Part 21.
l l
l C.
Severity III. Violatinns involving for example:
1.
Incomplete or inaccurate information which is provided to the NRC (a) because of inadequate actions on the part of licensee officials but not amounting to a Severity Level I or !! violation, or (b) if the infomation, had it t een compfere and accurate at the time provided, likely would have resulted in a reconsideration of a regulatory position or substintial further inquiry such as an additd t'1 inspection of a formal request for infomation; 8C
4 2.
Incomplete or inaccurate information which the NRC requires be kept by a licensee which is (a) incomplete or inaccurate because of i
~
inadequate actions on the part of licensee officials but not amounting I
to a Severity Level I or II violation, or (b) if the information, had it been complete and accurate when reviewed by the NRC, likely I
would have resulted in a reconsideration of a regulatory position or substantial further, inquiry such as an additional inspection or a formal request for information; i
t 3.
Failure to provide "significant information identified by a licensee"
]
to the Commission and not amounting to a Severity Level I or II i
violation; 4.
Action by first-line supervision in violation of 10 CFR 50.7 or similar i
regulations against an employee; or i
j 5.
Inadequate review or failure to review such that, if an appropriate i
l review had been made as required, a Part 21 report would have been i
4 made.
1 i
t fi.
Sevarity IV - Violations involving for example:
1.
Incomplete or inaccurate information of more than minor significance which is provided to the NRC but not amounting to a Severity Level !.
!!, or !!! violation; 81
2.
Information which the NRC requires be kept by a licensee and which is incomplete or inaccurate and of more than minor significance but not amounting to a Severity Level I, II, or III violation; or 3.
Inadequate -esiew or failure to review under Part 21 or other procedural violations associated with Part 21 with more than minor safety significance.
j E.
Severity V - Violacions of minor proccdural requirements of Part 21, 1.
Incomplete or inaccurate information which is provided to the Commission and the incompleteness or inaccuracy is of mino significance; 2.
b c.rmation which the NRC requires be kept by a licensee which is incomplete or inaccurate and the incompleteness or inaccuracy is of miror significance; or f
3.
Minor procedural requirements of Fart 21.
i EUPPLEMENT VIII - SEVERITY CATEGORIES l
EMERGENCY 'REPAREDNESS i
A.
Severity I - Violations involving for example:
in a general emergency, licensee failure to promptly (1) correctly l
classify the event, (2) mak, required notifications to responsible I
t i
82
~.
1 Federal, State,andlocalagencies,or(3)respondtotheevent(e.g.,
assess actual or potential offsite consequences, activate emergency response facilities, and augment shift staff).
B.
Severity II - Violations involving for example:
4 1.
In a. site, area emergency, licensee failure to promptly (1) correctly classify the event, (2) make required notifications to responsible Federal, State,andlocalagencies,or(3)respondtotheevent j
(e.g., assess actual or potential offsite consequences, activate emergency response facilities, and augment shift staff); or i
2.
Licensee failure to meet or implement more than one emergency
{
planning standard involving assessment or notification.
C.
Severity III - Violations involving for example:
1.
In an alert, licensee failure to promptly (1) correctly classify the event (2) make required notifications to responsible Federal, State, and local agencies, or (3) respond to the event (e.g., assess actual 1
or potential offs'te consequences, activate emergency response faci-11 ties,andaugmentshiftstaff);or i
2.
Licensee failure to meet or implement one emergency planning standard involving assessment ur notification.
l i
o i
83
i D.
Severity IV - Violations involving for example:
Licensee failure to meet or implement any emergency planning standard or requirement not directly related to assessment and notification.
E.
Severity V - Violations that have minor safety or environmental significar,se.
Dated at Rockville. MD. this day of 1988.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, i
i I
Samuel J. Chilk, t
Secretary of the Commission.
i I
i i
4 r
l l
i 4
I I
l t
t 84 i
ENCLOSURE 2 10 CFR PART 2, APPENDIX C COMPARATIVE TEXT l
l l
i l
l l
l l
l l
l l
APPENDIX C - GENERAL STATEMEh10F POLICY AND PROCEDURE FLR NRC ENFCPCEMENT ACT10NS The following statement of general policy and procedure explains the enforcement policy ano procedures of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cenmission ced its staff in initiating anforcerent actions, and of presiding of ficers, the Atcraic Safety ard Licensing Appeal Loerds, and the Commissicn in reviewirig these actions.
This statettnt is applicable to enforcement in matters involving the public tealth ano safety, the conson defense and security, and the crvironrent.1/ This statement of general policy en<t procedure is publishod in the Loce of Federal Reculations to provide widespread dissemination of the Commissions Enforcenent Policy. However. this is a policy staterent and not a regulaticn. The Commission may devicte trom thit statement cf policy end procedure as is appropriate under the circumstances of a particular case.
I.
INTRODLCTION AND PURPOSE The purpose of the NRC enforcenent prograr is to pror.ute and protr.ct the radiological health ar.d safety of the public, incluoina employees' health and safety, the common defense and security, ar.c the envirorrent by:
1 1
Ensuring compliance with NRC regulations and license condi'ict.?;
Obtcining prorpt correcticn of violatirns and adverse qualit) j ccr.ditions which may affect safety:
1 Deterrino future violations and occurrences of conditions adverst to etulity; and II Antitrust enf orcement retters will Le dealt with en a case-t,y-case basis.
1
Enceura. jing improvement of licensee and vendor M/ perfennance, and by ex6::ple, that cf industry, including the prompt ictr.tificatien and rcpurting of potential safety prcblerrs.
Consistent with the purpose of this program, prcirpt and vigorous enforce-ment action will be taken when dealing with licenstes or vendors who do not achiese the necessary meticcious attention to detail ano the hich ster. card of con.pliance which the NRC expects. Each cnforcement cction is dependent on the circumstances of the caso ard requires the exercite of 1
discretion af ter consideration of thest policies and procedures.
In no case, however, will licensees who cannot achiave and maintain acecuate levels of protection be permitted to cceduct licen w d activities.
II. STATU10RY AUTHORITY AND PROLEDURAL FRANEWORK A.
STATUTORY AUTh0RITY The hRC's enforcerent jurisdiction is crawn from the. Ato611c Encrey Act of 1954, as amendec, and the Energy Reorganization Act (ERA) of 1974, as amended.
Section 161 of the Atcmic Energy Act authorites NRC to cceduct inspcctions and investigations and to issue orders as may be necessary or desirable to premote the ccunon defense and security or to prctect health or to minin;i:e danger to life or prcperty. Section 186 authorizes NRC to revoe.e l
l NI The term "vendor" teans a supplier of proeucts or services to be used in l
an NRC-licensed facility or activity.
l l
2
i' licenses unoer certain circumstcnces (e.g., for material f alse statements.
i in response to conditions that would have warranted refusal of a license On an origiticl tpplication, for a liCCOste's failbre to build er operate o i
i facility in accordance with the terras of the perrnit or license, ano for f
j violation of an NRC regulation).
Section 234 authorizes NRC to impose l
civil penalties not to exceed $100.000 per violation per day for the violation of certain specifico licensino provisions of the Act, rules, i
4 orders, and license terms implementing these provisions, and for l
violations for which licenses can be revoked.
In addition to the j
anumerated provisiens in section 234, sections 84 and 147 authorire the
)
impesition of civil penalties for violations of requiations implenientino i
I J
those provisions.
Section 232 authorizes NRC to seek injunctive or other equitable relief fer violatien of regulatory requirements.
)
Section 206 of the Energy Reorganizatien Act authorizes NRC to impose j
civil penalties for knowing and conscious failures to provide certain
(
i i
j safety information to the NRC.
i 1
Chapter 18 of the Atomic Energy Act provides for varying Icvels of f
l l
criminal penalties (i.e., monetary fines and imprisontrent) for willful i
+
violations of the Act and regulations or orde.s issued under Se:tions 65, l
t j
161(b), 161(1), or 161(c) of the Act.
Section 223 provides that criminal
{
penalties may be imposed on certain individuals employed by finns I
1 constructing or supplytrig ba' sic components of any utilization facility if the individual knowingly and willfully violates NRC reqvirements such that f
l a basic cor.ponent cculd be significantly irtpaired.
Section 235 provides 4
i 4
l
?
that criminal penalties may imposed on persons who interfere with inspectors. Section 236 provides that criminal penalties may be impcsed cr. persons whn ettempt to cr cause sabotact at a nuclear facilit.y or to nuclear fuel. Alleged or suspected criminal violaticns of the Atomic Energy Act are referred to the Lepartment of Justice for appropriate action.
B.
PROCEDUpAL FRAMEW0kK Subpart 8 of 10 CFR Part */ of NRC's rcquiations sets forth the procedures the NRC uses in exercising its enforcerrent authority.
10 CFP 2.201 sets forth the procedures for issuing notices of viulation.
The procedure to be used in asstssino civil Mnalties is set forth ir.
10 CFR 2.205. This regulation provides that the appropriate NRC Office Director initiates the civil penalty process by issuing a notice of violatien and proposeo impositinn of a civil penalty.
The licensee is provided an oppertunity to centest in writing the prcposed imposition of a civil penalty. After evaluatien of the licensee's re ponse, the Cirector may mitigate, recit, or impose the civil ptnalty. An cpportunity is provided for a hearing if a civil penalty is imposed.
The procedure for issuing an orcer to show caust why a licenso should ont te podified, suspended, or revoked or why such other action shculo not be taken is set forth in 10 CFR 2.202.
The rechanism for modifyir.g a license by crder is set forth in 10 CFR 2.204 These sections of Part 2 provide an opportunity for a hearing to the affected licensee, bewever, the ARC is authnrized tc make orders imediately effective if the public health, safety or interest se requires cr, in the case of en orcer to show cause, if the allegec viulation is willful.
4
)
i 3
i 411. SEVERITY OF VIOLATIONS Regulatory r(quirements S/ eve varying cegrees of sefety, reftguaros, or b
.t l
environmental significar.ce.
Theretcre, the relative importance of eact:
f l
violaticn riust be idertified as the first step in the enforcement precess.
l Consegently, violations are categorized in tern of five levels of j
severity to show their relative importance within each of the folirwing j
i t
{
eight activity creas:
[
r i
l 1.
Reacter Operations; j
i i
4 i
II.
Facility Construction;
}
3 l
l
!!!. Safeguards; l
l IV. Health Fhysics; l
l 1
l V.
Transportation; l
1 l
V!. Fuel Cycle and haterials Operations; i
d l
Vll Miscellaneous Matters; ano I
1 l
Y!!!. Emergency Preparedness.
1 l
SI The term "requirement" as used in this policfconse conot! ally binoin!al i
means a le requirement such as a statute, regulation, I ien, techri l
specification, or order.
5 i
l I
Licensed activities ret directly covered by cre of thJ abcse listed areas, e.g., export license activities, will be placed in the activity area most suitable in light of the particular violation involved. Witbir each activity area Severity Level I has been assigned to violations that are the rr.ost significent and Severity Level V violations are the leest significant. Severity Level 1 and 11 violations are of very significant regulatory concern.
In general, violations that are tricluded in there severity categories involve actual or high potential irrpact on the public.
Severity Level !!! violations are cause for significant concerr.
Severity Level IV violations are Ir/.s serious but are of more than mirer concern; i.e., if left uncorrected, they cculd lead to a rcore serious concern.
Severity Level Y violations are of miner safety or environtrental concern.
Comparisons of significance betvleen activity areas are frappropriate.
For example, the irunediacy of any hazard to the public associated with Severity Level I violations in Reactor Operations is not directly con. parable to that associated with Severity level I violatit.ns in Reactor Construction.
While eaarrples are provided in Supplements I through Vill for determining the appropriate reverity lesel for violations in each of the eight activity areas, the examples are neither exhaustive r.or controllirp.
I These exanples do not create new requirements.
Each is designed to illustrate the significance which the hRC place! on a particular type of violation of SPC requiretrents.
Each of the exartples tri the suppler ents is predicatto or. a violation of a regulatory requirerrent.
l l
C
In each case, the severity of a violation will be characterited at the level best suited to the significance of the particular violation.
~ In sc:re cases, violations tray be evaluated in the aggregate and a tingle severity lesel assigned for a grcup of violaticns.
The severity level of a violation may be increased if the circurtstances surrounding the mattor involve careless disregard of requirements, deception, ur other indications of willfulness.
The term '*w111 fulness" as used here embraces a spectrum of violations ranging from deliberate intent in violate or falsity to and including careless disrecard for requirements.
Willfulness does not include acts which de not rise to the level of careless disregard, e.g., inadvertent clerical errors in a docunent sulnitted to the NRC.
In determinino the specific severity lesti of a violaticr involving willfulness, consideration will be given to such factors as the position of the person involved in the violation (e.g.,
first-line supervisor or senior r,anager), the significt.ree of any underlying violation, the intent of the violator (i.e., rtgligence not anounting to careless disregard, careless disregard, or dtliberatentss),
ano the economic advantage, if any, gaired as a result of the violation.
The relative weight given to each of these factors in arriving at the apprcpriate severity level will be dercndent on the circumsterces of the violatien.
The NRC expects liarseet to provide full, cortplete, tin,ely, and accurate information and reports..%ccordingly, unless otherwise categorizeo in the Supplements, the severity level of a violation involving the failure to uoke a required report to the NRC will t'e baseo upon the significance of and the circumstances surroundire the matter that should have been
reported. A licensee wili not normally be cited for a failtre to report a condition or event unless the licensee was actually aware of the condition or event thich it faileo to report. However, the severity level of en untimely report, in contrast to no report, may be reduced dercnoing on the circumstances.surrouncing the matter.
IV.
ENFORCENENT CONFEhENCES Whenever the NRC has learned of the existence of a potential violation for which a civil penalty or other escalated enforcement action may be warranted, or recurring ncnconfornarce on the part of a ver.ccr.
the hRC will normally hold an enforcenent conference with the licensee or vendor prior to tahing enforcenent action.
The NRC ray also elect to hold an enforcement ecnference for other violations, e.g., Severity Level IV violation which, if repeated, could lead to escalcted enforcement action. The purpose of the enforcentnt conference is to (1) discuss the violttions or nonconformance, their significance ano causes, and the licensee's or vendor's corrective actions, (2) determine whether there are any aggraveting or mitigating circumstances, ar.o (3) obtain other information which will help determine the appropriate enforcerent action.
In additico, during the enforcetert conference, the licersee or vendor will be chen an opportunity to e> plain to the NRC what corrective actions (if any) were talcn or will be taken followir.g discovery of the potential violation or r.onconforn.ance.
Licenttes or vendcrr will be told when a meetine is an enforcement conference.
Fnforcement cenferences will not normtlly be open to the public.
8
1 l
l i
When neecto to protect the public health and safety or ccnson defente 9
j and security, escaleted cnforcement action, such as the issuance of an l
immediateiy effecthe order nodifying, suspending, or revoking a license.
l will be taken prtur to the enforcement conference.
In such cases, an j
enforcen.ent conference may be hela after the escalated enforcerxnt action
]
is taken, i
l i
Y.
Ehf0RCEMENT ACTIONS t
i This section describes the enforcement sanctions available to t.RC and i
I specifies the conditicns under which each may be used. The tasic j
i sanctions are noth:es of violation, civil penalties, and orders of various t
types. Aadhionally, related acn.inistrative r.:vchanibn.s such as bulletins and confirmatory action letters, notices of noncenfomance and notices cf i
i deviation are used to suppittent the enforcement program, in selecting
[
y l
the enforcement hanctions to be applied, hPC will consloer enforttrant 4
r l
actions taken by other Federal or State regulatory t.coies having con-(
f current jurisdiction, such as in transportation ratters.
[Withvery
)
h i
i limited exceptions.] Usually whenever a violation of NRC requirenents is i
f 1
identified, enforcen'ent action is taken. The nature and extent of the
\\
T enforcerent acticn is intenced to reflect the sericusress of the siolation involved.
For the vast majority of violations, action by an NRC regional 1
otilce is apprerriate in the fem of a hotice of Violatien recuiring a
+
t
{
formal response frut the recipient describing its corrective actions.
In l
situations involving nonconformance on the part of ver.dcr. a Notice of I
1 j
bcrconfornance will be issued.
The relatively small number of cases j
t i
i involving tievated enforcement action receives substantial attentien by i
l the public, ar.c may have significer;t impact on tre licensee's operation.
i l
9 l
l u
These elevated enforcement actions incluce civil per.alties; orders modifying, suspending or revoking 11cer.ses; or orders to cease ard desist from designated 6ctivities.
A.
NOTICF OF V10LAT10h
- r.otice of violation is a written notice setting forth one or r. ore violaticns of a legally binding requirement. The notice r.cmally rtc,uires the recipient te provide a written statement describing (1) (crrective steps which teve been taken and the results achieved; (2) corrective steps which will te taken to prevent recurrence; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
NRC may require responses to notices of violation to be under oath. Ncrmally, responses under oath will te required only in ccnnection with civil U n61 ties and orders, hRC uses the notice of violation as the standard method for femalizing the existence of a violation. A notice of violation is riernally the cnly
{
enforcement acticn taken, except in cases where the criteria fer civil penalties and orders, as set forth in Sections V.B and V.C respectively, dre Ret.
In such Cases, the notice of violation will be issued in conjtnction with the elevated actions.
However. %iolation findinos worrentino tPe exercise of discretien under Section V.G.1 will cenerally not result in a Notier cf Violation.
In addition, for isolated Severity level V vielations, a r.otice of vinlation nomally will not be issued reaardless of who icentifies tre siolatien grovided that the licer.see has initiated apernpriate corrective acticn before the inspretion ends.
- n these sitt't.tions, a torral resperse frem 10 1
the licensee is rct required and the inspection rer.crt or official fielo notes serves to dccument the violatient end the corrective actions.
However, a notice of violation will nonrally be issued for willful violaticris, if past corrective actions for similar vic16tions have not been sufficitrt to prevent recurrence, or if the circumstaricc5 warrant increasing the severity of Lcvel V violations to a hicher severi*y level.
Licensees are not croinarily cited for violations resulting from r.:atters riot within their control, such as equirnent failures that were not avoidable by reasoncble licensee cuality assurance measures or renagement controls.
Cenerally, however, licensees are held respcnsible for tre acts of their ercployees. Accordingly, this policy should not be construed to excuse persor. riel errors.
B.
CIVIL PENALTY A civil penalty is a monetary penalty that may be irposed for violation of (a) certain specified licensing provisions o' the Atomic Energy Act or supplementary hRC rules er orders, (b) any requirement for which a licer.re may be revokte, or (c) rercrting requirerents ureer Section EC6 of the Energy Pcciganizaticr Act. Civil penalties are designed to emphasire the need for lasting remediti action ard to deter future violations.
Civil penalties are [irTosed) propcsed absent nit) gating circumstances f or Severity Level I and 11 violatters, are censidereo for !cverity Lcsel 111 vioi tions, and tay be iniposee for Severity Level ;V siolatiors that are t
11
sin.ilardi to prt.1ous violations for which the licorsee did net take offective corrective action.
In applying this guicarce for Severity Level I!! violatiers, NRC may, notwithstar. ding the n.iticatino are escalatir,o factors in this section, refrain frorn proposing a civil per,alty for violations that 5: arrant the exercise of ciscretion unter Section V.G.
As to Severity Level IV violaticns, NRC norrally considers civil pralties cr:ly for strailer Severity Level IV violations that occur af ter the date of the last inspection or within two years, whichever period is creater.
Civil perialties will nomally be assessed for knowing and conscicus violations of the reporting requirer.cnts of Secticri 206 of the Energy Reorganizattor Act, and for ar.y willful violation of any Comission requirstrent including those at any severity level.
I NRC 1rnpost!, different levels of rtr.alties for different sescrity lesc1 l
violations and different classes of licensees.
Tables 1A ar.t IB show tht base civil penaltie:, for various reactor, fuel cycle, erd r..aterials programs.
The structure of these tablet generally takes into account the grtvity of the violation es a primary cc.nsideraticn and the etility to p )
I as a seconcary consideration. Ger.erally, crtr4tions invciving greater 1
nuclecr rnaterial ir.ventorie.s and greater potential censequences *.o the j
i public and licer.ste employces receive higter civil feralties.
Fegaroing j
the secondary factor of (tility of varicus classts of licer.sces to pay the 2/
The woro "similar," as used it. this policy, refers to those violations which cculd have Leen reasentbly expected to have been preventse by the licensee's corrective actien for the previous violation, 12
i i
3 l
j civil penalties, it is not the hRC's intention that the economic impact of a civil penalty be such that it puts 4 licensee out of business (orout, rather than civil penaltics, are used v. Fen the intent is to terminate 1
t 4
)
j licensee activities) or adversely effects a licensee's ability to safely q
i l
concoct Itccr. sed activities.
The deterrent effect of civil peralties is i
\\
j best served when the amounts of such penalties take into account a l
licensee's "ability to pay."
!r. cetermining the amounts of civil j
pualties for licensees for uhom thc tables do not reflect the ability tc r
pay, NRC wfil consider as necessary an increase er decrease on a j
cese-by-case t' asis.
i hRC attaches great iruportance to comprehensive licensee programs for detection, correction, and reportino of problems that may constitute, or j
lead tc, violation of regulatory requirements.
This it emphasi:eo by giving credit for effective licensee audit programs when licenstes fino, i
correct, and report problems expeditiuusly and effectively. To encourage licensee self identification and correction of violations and to avoid i
4
]
potential concealnent of problems of safety significance, application of l
f the adjustment factors set forth below may result in no civil penalty
{
l I
be.ing assessed for violations which are it'entified, reported (if l
?
j recuired), and effectively corrected by the licensee.
i l
f On the other hand, ineffective licenste prograns for problen i
t l
icentification or ccriection are unacceptable.
In cases involvirt I
willfulness, flagrant NRC-identifico violations, repeated poor perfurance I
in an ena of concern, or sericus breakocwn in manaaeracnt controls. NRC intenes to apply its full enforcement euthority where such action is
[
t warranted, including issuing appropriate orders ard assessing civil j
t
{
penalties for contiruing violations on a per day basis, Up to the
)
i
,_,,,,___n.__,-,.,.,---,
c l
statutory limit of $100.000 per vio;ation, per day.
In this regaro, while l
[
management involvement, direct or inoirect, in a violation may lead to an
[
increase in the civil penalty, the lack of such invo'ivtcent may nct he f
t used to mitigate a civil penalty.
l Allowance of mitigation could encourage lack cf managen.ent involvement in l
licensed activities and a decrtase in protection of the public herith and i
saftty.
L NRC reviews each proposed civil renalty case en its own carits and adjusts
[
l the base civil penalty values urvard or dowr. ward apprcpriately, lables IA L
L and IB identify the base civil penalty values for ditierent severity levels. activity artas, and classes of licensees. After considerir.g all l
relevant ciretastances, aojustroents to these values may be rade for the I
l I
factors described belcw:
l l
1.
(Prompt)IdentificationandReporting Reducticn of up to 50% of the base civil penalty shown in Table 1 nay be given when a 11cersee idtetifies the violation and prompt!) reports the violatica to the hRC.
In weighing this factor, consiceration will l
t begivento,amegotherthines.[thelengthoftinetheviolation i
existedpriortodiscovery.)theoppertunityavailabletodiscoverthe
[
violatitr. the ease ct discovery er.d the proeptness one cerpleteness of any required repurt, ho consideration will be given to [tbis factor) f f
a reductice in penait) if the licensee does t.ct take ictediate acticn r
to correct the prctiem uport discovery.
On the other hand, the base l
penalty rav be in:reased by as ruch as 50s if the MC identifies tbt l
t violation.
t 4
i l
I
2.
Corrective Action to Frevent Recurrence Recognizing that corrective action is always required to meet regulatory requirerents, the promptness and cytent to which the licensee tites correctivo action, including actions to prevent recurrertcc, may (be considered in ectifying the civil per.alty to be assessed. Unusuallypromptand]resultinuptoa50% increase or decrease ir the base civil penalty shown in Table 1.
For exemple, very extensive corrective action may result in reducing the proposed civil penalty as much as 50% of the base value shown ir Table 1.
On the other hand, the civil peralty may be increased as ruch as 50% of the base value if initiation of corrective action is not prompt or if the corrective action is only minimally acceptable.
In weighing this factor, consideratien will be given to, among other things, the tireliress of the corrective action, degree of licensee initiative, and coeprehensiveness of the cerrective action--such as whether the action is focused narrowly to the specific violation or broadly to the general area of concern.
1.
Past Performance Reduction by as much as 100% of the base civil penalty shown in Table 1 may be given fer prior good perforrarce [in the general area ofcencern]. On the other herd, the base civil penalty ray be increased as much as 100% for prior poor performance [in the general areaofconcern].
In weighing this f actor, consideration will be siven to, arong other things, the effectiveness of previous corrective actien for similar prchlems, overall perfomarce such as Qstematic /,55essment 15
of Licensee Perforrance (SALP) evaluations for power roartors, and prior [ enforcement history] performance including Severity Level IV and V violations in the area of concern.
For tacrple,
'ailure to inplement previous corrective actien for prior similar problems may result ir. tr increase in the civil renalty.
For purposes of assessiro past performance, violations within the past tito years of the inspection at issue or the period neithin the last tw inspections whichevtr is longer will be considered.
4 Prior tiotice of Sintlar Events The base civil penalty ray be increased as much as [50%) 100,*. for 0
cases where tbc licensee had prior knowledge of a potential problem asaresultofalicensee[ audit: review,[or]a,specificP3Cor industry notificetions or other reasonable indication of a potential problem, and had failed to take effective preventive steps. Prior notice ray include findings of fiRC, the Itcensee, or ircustry made at other facilities of the licensee where it is reascnable to excect the licensee to take action tn prevent dudar problent at the facility subject to the enforcement actien at issue.
5.
Fultiple Occurrences The base civil penalty ray be increased as r.uch as [50010Ci where nultiple exarples of a particular violatien are identified during the inspection period.
[The above factors are ad('itive. Mcwever, in no irstance will a civil penalty for any one vie'ation exceed $100,000 perday.)
16 1
6.
Duration The duration cf a violation may also be considered in assessing a civil penalty. A greater civil pere.lty may be irpcsed if a violaticr continues for more than e day.
For cracple:
(1) If a licensee is aware of the existence of a ccrdition which rtsults in an ongoing violation and fails to initiate corrective acticn, each day the condition existed ray be considered as a separate violaticn and, as such, subject to a separate edditional civil penalty.
(2) If e licensee (6) is unaware of a conditier resultir.9 in a continuing violation, but clearly shoulo have been awere of the ccncition or (b) had an opportunity to cerrect the condition tut failed to de so, a separate violatier, and attencant civil genalty may te considereo for each day that the licensee clearly should I. ave been aware of the ccr.cition or be.d an opportbnity to correct the condition, but failed to do so.
(3) Alternatively, whether cr not a lieer:see is aware or clearly should have been aware of a violation that continues for Fore than cne day. [tte civil pertity imposed 'or one virlation may te irereased) tte base civil renalty ray te increased as much at ;tti to rtflect the acced significance resulting from the duratico of the violation.
The above facters are additive. However, in no insterce will a civil penalty for any ont violation exceed $100.000 per cay.
17
The Tables and the riitigating factors deterrine the cisil penalt'tr which may be assessed for each violation. However, to focus on the fundamental uncerlyinc, causes of a problem for which enforcercrit action arrears to be warrated, the cumulative total for all si sns which cortributeo to cr were unevoidable consequences of that problem may be based on the act,unt shcwn in the table for a problem of that Sestrity Level, as adjustto.
If an evaluation of such multiple violations shows that rtre than one f undamental problem is involved, each of which, if viewed independently, could lead to civil perialty action by itself, then separ;te civil genalties ray be assesstd for each such fundamer.tal problem.
In additien, the tailt rc to make a required report of an event requiring such reportir g is considered a separate problem and will r.ormally be assossed e separate civil rtralty, if the licensee is aware of the matter that should have been reported.
le
TALLE 1A f4SE CIVIL pet.ALTIES Transportetton Plant Cperacions, Type A Const. Pealth Grcater than r,tantity rhysics and EP Safecuards Type A Cuanti_ty 1/ orless[/
- a. Power Reactors
$100.000
$100.000 1100.000
$5,000
- b. Test Reactors 10.000 10.000 10.000 2,000
- c. Research Reactors 1.
5.000 5.000 5.000 1.000 Critical Facilities
- c. Fuel Fabricators 25.000 100.000 4/
25.000 5.000
~
anc Incustrial Frccessors 3/
5.000 2.000
- e. Eills ano Uranium 10.0C0 Consorsion Facilities 5.000 2,000
- f. Industrial Users 10.000 of Fatorial 1/
I 5.000 2.000
- g. Waste Disposal 10.CCO Licensees
?.500 1.000
- h. Acadcric or Pedical 5.000 Institutions 1/
2.000 1.000
- 1. Otter katerial 1,000 Licensees
~/ Includes irradiated fuel, high level waste, unirradiated fissile mattrial.
1 and any other quantities requirir.g Type B packaging, j
E/ Includes low specific activit) waste (LSA). low level weste. Type A packages, arc exceptec Stentitiet ard articles.
J/ Large fires engaged in manufacturing or aistributier, of byproduct, source, or special nuclear cateriai.
4/ 1his enount refers to Categery 1 licersees (as defired in 10 CFR 73,2 (bb)'.
~
Licerste fuel fabricators not authorizec te possess Category 1 n:aterial have a test penalty eneunt of $50.000.
l 1/
Includes industrial racicgraphers, ruclear pharracies, arc cther indtstrial users.
1/ This arplies to ner. profit institutions rct otherwist-categori:ta under sections "a" through "g" in thts teble.
19
_ TABLE IB BASE CIVIL PENALTIES BASE CIVIL PENALTY /POVNT
$l\\fP!TY LEVEL (f of Artcunt listed in Table 1A) 1 100%
80%
50%
IV
!!T V
5%
6 20
C.
ORDERS i
4 An ordtr is a written NRC directive to modify, susperd, or revoto a
,i i
license; to cease and der 1Lt from a given practice er activit); or to take f
such otter action as Day be proper Me10CFR2.202and2.204). Orctrs
{
may be issued as set forth below. Orders may also be issued in lieu of.
1 j
cr in additicn to, civil renalties, as appropriate.
4 i
(1) License.Mootfication Orcers are issued when soec change in Itcensee i
equipent, procecures, or management controls is necessary.
(2) Suspension Orcers may be used:
1 l
(a) To remove a threat to tre public health and safety, comon l
defense and security, or the environe rt; i
j (b) To step facility constructien when (i) further work could I
l preclude or sienificantly hinder the trentificaticn or l
correction of an improperly corstructed safety-related system or cmponent, or (ii) the lictnsee's quality assurer.co prograni impler.entation is oct adequate to provide ccnfidence that renstructicr, activities are being properly carried out; (c) When tile licensee has not responced adequately to othir enforcerrent action; i'l
t i
r l
i (c) When the licensee interferus tith the cerebet of an intrection or inytstigaticn; or (a) For any reason not mentict.ec above for v,hich license revocatien it loyally authorized.
I I
Suspensions may apply to all or part of the licensed activity.
I
[
Ordinarily, a licensed activity is not suspendeo (r.or is a susrcosion prolonged) for failure to comply with requirements where such fatiure is not willful anc adequate corrective action has been taken, j
(3) Favocation Orders may be used:
l r
{
l (a) When 'a licensee is unable or unwillirg to comply with NRC f
requircrents, (b) When a licensee refuses to correct a violation, (c) hhtn a licensee coes rot respond to a retice of violation where l
f a respense was reuuired, l
(d) Kren a licenste refuses te pay a fee required by 10 CFR I
Part 170, or
[
(e) For any other reason for whice revocaticr. is authorited under
?cction 186 of the Atomic Energy Act (e.g., any cere;ition which j
would warrant refusal ef a license on an origirti application),
t 22 l
l
(4) Cease ano Desist Orcers are typically used to stop an uncuthorized activity that het continued after notification by hPC that such activity is unauthorized.
Orders are nade ef fective irrediately, without prier opportunity for hearing, whenever it is determined that the public health, interest, or safety so requires, or when the order is respondino to a violation involving willfulness. Otherwise, a prior opportunity for a bet. ring on the order is afforded.
For cases in which the hRC believes a basis cculd reasorably exist for not taking the action as proposed, the licerree will ordirerily be afforded an cppertunity to show cause schy the order should not be issued in the proposed marner.
D.
ESCALAT!0h 0F ENFORCEl'ENT SANCT!0f3 NRC considers violatiens of Severity Level I, !!, or !!! to be serious.
If serious violations cecur, NRC will, where necessary, itcue orders 'r i
conjer.ction with civil penalties to achieve irrediate correctise actions and to deter further recurrerce of serious vinlatter,s. NRC carefully cerfiders the circumstanets of each case in selecting ar.d applying the sanction (s) appropriate to the case in acrerdance with the critt:ria described in Sectiers V.B and V.C. above.
Ertrples of enforcement actions that cculd be taken for similar Severity Level I, !!, or !!! violattors are set forth in Table E.
The actut i progressien to be used in a particular case will depend er the 1
l 23
circuc.s tances.
Hov.ever, enforcement sanctions wil' normally (TC Alate for recurrirg similar violatioits.
[liorrvily the progression of enforcerent actions fer similar violations will be Lased on violations unocr a single license. khen tore than ene facility is covered by a single license, the normel progressicr. will be baseo ch similar violations at ar. individual f acility ar.d not on similar violations under the sarte ifcense. However, it stc'J1d be noted that ur.cus Kore circumstances, e.g., there there is coreon centrol over scre facet of facility operatiunt, similar violations ray be charged even though the seccnd violatten occurred it a different facility er under a different license.
For example, a physical security violation at Unit 2 of a cual unit plant that rcreats an earlier violation at Unit 1 might be ccr.cidered siniltr.)
24
TABLE 2 EXAMPLES OF PROGRESSION OF ESCALATED ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS FOR SIMILAR VIOLS,TIONS IN 7HE SAME ACTIVITY AREA UNDER THE SAME LICEllSE h' umber of similar violations frca the date Severity of the last inspection or within the previt.us of two years (whichever period is areater)
~~
Violation lst 2nd 3rd I
a+b a+b+c d
II a
a+b a4b+c i
a a+b c.
Civil ptnalty b.
Suspension of affected operations until the Office Director is satis-fieo that there is reasonable assurance that the licensee can operate in compliance with the applicable requirements; or mcdificaticn of the licensc, as appropriate.
A c.
Show cause for modification or revocation of the lice.9se, as appropriate.
d.
Further action, as appropriate.
r 4
9 6
25 i
3
,--_-._m,.
E.
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS INVOLVING INDIVIOUALS Enforcerrent actions involving individuals, including licensed operatort, are significant personnel actions, which will be closely contiolled and judiciously applied. An enforcenent action will norvally be taken only wheti there is little doubt that the individual fully uncerstcod, or should have understnod, his or her responsibility; krev., or should have known, the required actions; and knowingly, or with careless dicregard (i.e., with more than trere negligence) failed to take requireo actions which have actual or potential safety significance. Most transgressions of individuals at the level of Severity level III, IV cr V violattens will be handled by citing only the facility licensee, l' ore seriouc violatio,ns, including those involving the intecrity of an individual (e.g., lyins to the NRCl concerning rcutters withir :he scopc of the individual's responsibilities, will be considered for enforcenent action 6 gainst the individual. Action actinst the inoividual, bewever, will not be taken if the imprcper action by the individual was causeo by melagen:ent failures.
The following exarrples of situations illustrate this cencept:
Inaovertent individual mistakes reeulting frcm inadequate training er guidance provided by the facility licensee.
inadvertently missirg an insignificant procccural requirerrent wher; the action is routine, fairly uncen.plicatec, and there is no unusual circumstance indicating that the procedures shculo be referred to and followed step-by-step.
d L6
O Compliance with an express direction of management, such as the Shift Supervisor or Plant Marager, resulted in a violation unless the individual did r,ct expresr. his or her concern or objection to the direction.
Individual error directly resulting from following the tcchnical advice of an expert unless the advice was clearly unreasonable cr.d the licensed individual should have recognized it as such.
Violations resulting from inadequate procedures unless the individual used a faulty procedure knowing it was faulty and had rot attempted to get the procedure corrected.
Examples of situations which could result in enforcement actions agairrt indivicuals include, but are not limited to, violations which involve:
Recognizing a violation of procedural rec,virements sno willfully not takirg corrective action.
Willfully performing uncuthorized typassing of required reactor safety systems.
Villfully cefeating 61erms which have safety sionificar.ce.
Unauthorized abandoning of reactor centrols.
Inattention to duty such as sleeping [or) 2 being intoxicated while i
en duty, or otherwise r,ct meetino recuirements for fitness for duty.
27 i
O k'illfully taking actions that violate TS Limiting Conditions for Operat'on (enforcement action for a willful violation of 10 CFR 50.54(x) will be taken crly if the operator failed to meet the standards of that reculation, i.e., acted unreasonably censidering all the relevant circurstances surrcunding the r.rergency.)
Falsifying records required for NRC regulations or by the f acility licensee.
Willfully failing to take "irrediate actions" of emergency procedures.
Willfully withholding safety significant information rather than making such information known to appropriate supervisory or technical personnel.
Any proposed crforcement action against individuals must be done with the concurrence of the Deputy Executive director for Regional Operations.
The opportunity for an Enforcencnt Conference with the irdividual will usually be provided.
Examples of sanctions that may be appropriate against NRC-licensed orcrators are:
issuance of a letter of reprimand to be placed in the operator's license file, issuance of t. Notice of Violation, and 29
t suspension for a spicificci period, modification, er revocation of the license.
1 1
The sanctions are listed in escalating order of sier.ificance. "/ The particular sanction to be used chould be determined on a case-by-case basis.
In aooition, NRC may take enforcement action where the conduct of the
_i_ndividual places in question the NRC's reasonable assurance that licensGd cctivities will be prorcrly conducted.
The NRC may take enforcement action for reasons that would warrant refusal to issue a license on ar; original, application. Accordingly, enforcement action may be taken regardina matters that raise issues of integrity, conpetence, fitness for duty, or other matters that may not necessarily be a violction of specific Commission rec,iirementc.
In the case of an unlicensed individual, an Grder modifying the facility license to require the removal of the individual from all r.uclear-related activities for a specified period of time or indefinitely may be appropriete, F.
REOPEhiNG CLOSED ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS If significant new information is received or obtained by NRL which Al Except for individuals subject to civil penalties Lnder section 206 of the Energy Reorcenization Act of 1974, as amended, HEC will not rertially impose However, section 234 of the Atcmic a civil renalty)against an individual.gives the Commission authority to impose civi Energy Act (AEA for violations on "any person." "Person" is broadly defined in Section 11s of the A2A to include individuals, a variety of crganizaticr.s. and any representatives or agents.
This oives the Commission authority to irapese civil penalties on employcts of licensees or on sept, rate entities when a violation of a requirement dircctly imposed on them 15 cenmitted.
TC 4
I
._ ~
e 4
indicates that an enfcrcement sanction was incorrectly applied, ccnsideration may be givcn, dependent on the circumstances to reopening a closed enforcement action to increase or decrease the severity of a sanction or to ccrrect the record. Reopening decisicos will be made on a cr.se-by-case basis, are expected to cccur rarely.
and require the specific approval of the Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations.
L G.
EXERCISE OF DISCRETION L
[1]. Because the NRr. wants to enccurage and support licensee initiative for self-identification and correction of problems, NRC may exercjse discretion as follows:
1.
NRC may refrain from issuing a notice of violatien for a violatico described in an insrection report or official fielo notes that meets all of the following critoria:
a.
It was identified by the licensee; b.
It is normally classified at a [ fits in] Severity Level IV or V; c.
It was reportcd, if reavired; d.
It was cr will be ccrrected, including measures to provent recurrence, within a reasonable time; and a
JO I
e.
It was not a willful violation or a violation that could reasonably be expected to have been prevented by the licensee's corrective action for a previous violation.
t 2.
The NRC rray [also] refrain from issuing a notice of violation or a i
i proposed civil penalty for violatiers described in an inspection report
)
or official field no_tes that meet all of the following criteria:
a.
(i) The NRC has taken significant enforcement action based upon a 4
major safety event contributing to an extended shutdown of an operating reactor or a material licensee (or c work stoppcce at a construction site), or the licensee is forced into an extended shutdoun or work stoppage related to generally peer performance over a long period; (ii) the licensee has developed and is
(
aggressively implementing during the shutdevn a comprehensive program for problem identification and correction; and (iii) NRC l
concurrence 1: needed by the licensee pritr to restart; i
b.
Non-willful violations are identified by the licensee [(as opposed to the NRC)] as the result of its comprt:hensive program, or [the violations are identified] as a result uf an employce l
allegation to the licensee.
If NRC identifies the violation, f
the NRC should detemine whether enforcerent action is j
necessary to achieve remedial action; 4
c.
The violations are based upon activities of the licensee prior to the events leadirt to the shutdown; and f
31
d.
The [nen-willful) violations would normally not be categorized as higher _than Severity Lesel III violations under the NRC's Erforcement Policy.
3.
The NRC may refrain _fron proposing a civil 7enalty for a Severity Level !!! violation not involving an overexposure or release of radioactive material that meets all of the follcwing criteria:
a.
It was identified by the licensco and reported b.
Comprehensive corrective action has been taken or is well underway within a reasonable time follcuing identification; c.
It was not a violation that eitFer (i) was reasonably preventable j
by the licensee's action in response to a previous regulatory r
concern identified within the past two years of the inspection 4
or since the lest two inspections which ever is longer or (ii) reasonably should have been corrected prior to the violation because the licensee bed prior notice of the problem i
involved; and j
It was not a willful violatier or indicative of a braakdown in d.
management controls.
1
(
l 4.
The NRC may refrain f rom proposing a civil penalty for a Severity Level III violation involvino o past problem, such as ir engineering, d; sign, or installation, that meets the following criteria:
[
L I
i 2
32
,n
.,-w,,-,,-,,-e m,, w,
,a,-
-mw
,nyenw.
4
- - -ww-
,r----
4 a.
It was identified by a licensee as a result of a licensee's voluntary formal effort such as a Safety System Functional Inspection, Design Recor.stitution Program, or other program that has a defined scope and timetable which is being angressively implemented and reported; b.
Cenprehensive corrective action has been taken or is well underway within a reasonable time following identification; and c.
It was not likely to be identified by routine licensee efforts such as normal surveillance or OA activities.
F 5.
If the NRC issues an enforcement action for a violation at a Severity Level III violation and as part of the corrective action for that violation, the licensee identifies other examples of the violation with the same root cause,' the NRC may refrain from issuing an additinnal enforcement action.
In determining whether to exercise this discretion, the NPC will consider whether the licensee acted l
reasonably and in a tinely manner appropriate to the safety significance of the initial violation, the comprehensiveness of the corrective action, whether the matter was reported, trd whether the additional violation (s) substantially channe the safety significance or character of the regulatory concern arising out of the initial violation.
Notwithstar. ding [the) paragraphs 2, 3, 4, and 5 above, a civil penalty may j
be proposed when judgment warrants it on the basis of the circunstances i
33
of the individual case.
[in a case] For example, civil per.alties may be warranted where multiple Severity Level III violations are discovered or rhere the violation is willful.
[This action would be taken when judsvent l
warrents it on the circumstances of the individual case.]
In addition, as provided in Secticn VII, Pesponsibilities, the Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations may refrain from issuing a civil penalty l
for a Severity Level III violation based on the merits of the case after l
ccrsidering the guidance in this statement of policy and such factors
_as the age of the violation, the safety significance of the violation, the overall performance of the licensee, and circumstances, if any, that have changed since the violation provided prior notice has been given the Commission.
This discretion is expected to be exercised only where app 1,1 cation of the normal cuidance in the Policy is ur. warranted.
H.
RELATED ACMit:ISTRATIVE ACTIONS In addition to the formal enforcement mechanisms of notices of violation, civil penalties, and orders, NRC also uses admiristrative mechanisms, such as bulletins, information notices, generic letters, notices of devistion, 4
notices of renconformance, and confirmatory action letters to supplement i
its enforcement program, hRC expects licensees and vendors to adhere to j
any obligations and commitnients resulting from these processes and will i
not hesitate to issue appropriate orders to licensees to make sure that such corritments are met.
)
l (1) Eclietins, Informatfor. Potices, and Generic Letters are written notifications to groups of licensees identifying specific problems and recereending specific actions.
l 34 i
(2) Notices of Deviation are written rntices de:cribing a licensee's failure to satisfy a cormitment where the corrritment ir.volved has not been made a legally binding requirement. A notice of deviation requests a licensee to provide a written explanation or statement describing corrective steps taken (or planned), the results achieved, and the date when corrective action will be completed.
(3) Confirmatory Action Letters are letters confirming a licensec's or a vendor's agreement to take certain actions to remove significant concerns about health ard safety, safeguards, or the environment.
(4) Nntices of Nonconformance are written notices describing non-licensees' failures to meet corraitments which have not been made legally binding I
requirements by NRC. An exartple is a conrtitment trade in a procurerrent contract with a licensee as required by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B.
Notices of Nonconformances request non-licensees to provide written expTanations or statements describing corrective steps (taken or planned), the results achieved, the dates when corrective actions will be cortpleted, and measures taken to preclude recurrorce.
I.
REFERRALS TO DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Alleged or suspected criminel violations of the Atorric Energy Act (and of other relevant Federal Itws) are referred to the Department of Justice for investigation.
Referral to the Department of 1ustien deos not preclude the NPC from taking other enfercement action under this General Statement of Policy. However, such actions will be coordinated with the Departtrent of Justice to the extent practicabic, 35
VI.
INACCURATE AND Itl COMPLETE INFORMATION A violation cf the regulations on submitting complete and accurate information whether or not considered a raterial false statement, can result in the full range of enforcement sanctions.
The labeling of a comunication failure as a material false statement will be nade on a case-by-case basis and will be reserved for egregious vic'ations.
Violations involving inaccurate or incomplete information or the failure to provide significant information identified by a licer.see normally will be categorized based on the guidance herein, in Section III "Severity of Violetions," and in Supplement VII, i
l The Cemission recognizes that oral information may in some situations be inherently less reliable than writte? submittals because of the absence of an opportunity for reflection and managerc.ent review. Fewever, tte Comission must be able to rely or oral comunications fren licensee officials concerning significant information. A licensoc official for purposes of application of the Enforcement Policy means a first line supervisor er above as well as a licensed individual, radiation safety officer, or a person listed on a license as an authorized user of licensed material.
Therefore, in determinine whether to take enfortement l
action for an oral statement, corsideration may be given to such factors as (1) the degree ef knowledge that the cc municator should have bad, i
regarding the matter, in view of his or her position, training, and experience (2) the opportunity and time available prior to the corrsnunication to asrure the accuracy or completeness of the inforntion, (31 the degree of intent or negligence, if any, involved, (4) the l
fermelity of the corzunication, (5) the reasonableness of NPC reliance 36 I
i
on the inforration, (6) the importance of the infomation which was wrong or not provided, and (7) the reasonableness of the explanation for not providine ecmplete and accurate information.
Absent at least careless disregard, an incomplete er inaccurate unsworn oral staten,ent normally will not be sub*ect to enforcement action unless t
it involves significant infomation provided by a licensee official.
However, enforcement actier nay be taken for an unintentionally incomplete l,
or inaccurate oral statement provided to the NRC by a licensee official or others on behalf of a licensee, if a record was made of the oral information and provided to the licensee thereby permitting an opportur.ity to correct the oral informatinn, such as if a transcript o' the consnunication or meeting sumary containing the error was made available to the licensee and was not subseouently corrected in a timely manner.
l 1
Uhen a licensee has corrected inaccurate or incomplete information, the I
decision to issue a citation for the initial inaccurate or incompletc infomation normally will be dependent on the circumstances, including i
the ease of detectier of the error, the timeliress of the correction, t
whether the NRC or the lice.rsee identified the prehlem with the 7
comunication, and whether the NPC relied on the information prior to r
the correction. Generally, if the ratter was promptly ider.tified ard i
corrected by the licensee prior to reliance by the NRC, er before the l
1 NRC raised a question about the information, no enforcement action will j
be taken for the initial inaccurate or inconplete infomation. On the other hand *, it the risinformation is identified after the NRC relies on it, or after sore questien is raiseo regarding tbc accuracy of the l
infomaticn, then sore enforcerent action rcreally will be taken even 37
\\
if it is in fact corrected. However, if the initial submittal was accurate when made but later turns out to be erronecus because of newly discovered infornation or advance in technology, c citation normally would nct be appropriate if, vben the new information became available, the initial submittal was corrected, l
The failure to correct inaccurate or ircomplete informaticr which the i
licensee decs not identify as significant normally will nct constitute a separate violation. However, the circumstances surrounding the failure i
i to correct may be certidered relevant to the determination of enforcement action for the initial inaccurate or incomplete statement.
For example, er unintentionally inaccurate or incomplete submission may be treated as a more severe matter if the licensee later determines that the initici 4
I submittal was in errnr and does not correct it or if there were clear l
opportunities to identify the error.
If information not corrected was r
recognized by a licersee as significant, a separate citation may be made 4
for the failure to provide significant information.
In any event, in serious cases where the licensee's actions ir not correcting or providing i
information raise questions about its comitmort to safety or its fundamental trustwerthiness, the Comissien may exercise its authority to issue orders modifying, suspending, or revoking the license.
The 3
1 Comission recognites that enforcement determinations rust be made en a I
case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the issues described abcVe.
I i
l VII. PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF ENFORCENENT ACTIONS i
(
i l
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790, all enforcement actions ano licensees' I
l a
rerpenses are publicly available for inspection.
In addition, press 1
38 J
]
releases are generally issued for civil peralties anci orders.
In the case of orders and civil penalties related to violations at Severity level I, II, or III, press releases are issued at the time of the order or the proposed imposition of the civil penalty.
Press releeses are not nc.rmally 1
issueo for Notices of Violation.
VIII.RESPONSIPILITIES The Cecuty Executive Directcr for Regional Operatters (DEDRO), as the principal enforcement officer of the NRC, has been delegated the authority to issue notices of violations, civil penalties, and orders. El Regional Administrators may also issue notices of violation for Severity Level IV and Y violations and may sign rotices of violation fer !cverity Level III violations with ne proposed civil penalty and proposed civil peralty actions with the concurrence of the DEDRO.
In reccgnition that the regulation of nuclear activities in many cases does not lend itself to a mechanistic treatment, the DEDR0 or the Regicnal Administrator must exercise judgrr.ent and discretion in determining the severity levels of the violations and the appropriate enforcernent sanctions, including the decision to issue a Nntice of Violation, or to propose or impose a civil E
The Director, Office of Enforcement, acts for the Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operaticns in the latter's absence or as directed.
The Cirectors of the Offices of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Nuclear Paterial Safety and Safecuards, and Special Proftets have also been delegatcd authority to issue orders, but it it expected that normal use of this authority by NRR, NMSS, and OSP will be confined te actions necessary in the interest of public health and safety.
The Director, Office cf Nninistretion ano Resources Managerrent, has been delepeted the authority to issue orders where licensees violcte Comission regulations by nonpo>nent of license fees.
[It is planned to consider redelecction of sorre er all of these authorities to the Administrators of the NRC Pcgional Offices over the rext severalyears.]
39
O penalty and the ancunt of such renalty, after considering the general principles of this statement of policy and the technical significance of the violat' ions and the surrcunding circumstancer.
The Comission will be provided written notificetion of all enforcenent actions involving civil penalties or orders.
The Comission will tie censulted prior to taking action in thc following situations (unless the urgency of the situation dictates imediate action):
)
i l
t (1) An action affecting a licensee's operation thc; reavires balancing the public health and safety or comr.on defense and security t
implications ef not operating with the potential radiclogical er other hazards associated with continued cperation; (2) Proposals to impose civil penalties in amounts greater than 3 time!
the Severity Level I values shown in Table 1A; (3) Any proposed enforcement action that involves a Severity Level I violation;
[
i i
(4) /sny enforevert action that involves a findirg of a material felse sta terrent; t
(5) Refraining from taking enforcement action for raatters meeting the criteria of Section [V.F.2.] V.G.2.
f I
i 40 i
(6) Any action the Office Director believes warrants Comicsion involve-ment; or (7) Any propost.c enforcerent action cn which the Comission asks to be consulted.
i IX. VENDOR EliFCFCENENT I
The (.onmission's enforcement policy is also applicable to non-licensees (vendors).
Vendors of prcducts or services provided for use in nuclear i
activities are subject to certain reoutrements designed te ensure thut i
the products or service: supplied that could affect safety are of high l
i quality.
Through procurement contracts with reactor licersees, verdors are required to have quality assurance programs that meet applicable requirements including 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, and 10 CFR Part 7;,
Subpart H.
Vendors of reactor and materials licensees and Part M licensees are subject to the requirements of 10 CFR Part 21 regarding I
reporting of defects in basic components.
The NRC conducts inspections of reactor licensees to determine whether they are ensuring that vendurs are n.ceting their contractual obligaticns with regrd to quality of products or services that could have an adverse effect on l
safety. As part of the effort of ensuring that licensees fulfill their obligations in this regard, the f,FC inspect: reactor verders to deterrnine if they are meeting their obligations.
These inspecticns
{
i include examindtion of the quality assurance programs ano the.r irrplement& tion by the vendors thrcugh examirttion of procuct cuality.
r d{
l
^
- -... -. =
The NRC ray also inspect vendors, it.cluding suppliers of Part 71 and tratorials licensees, to determine whether they are complyir.g with Part 21.
When inspections determine that violations cf NRC requirements have occurred.
or that vendors Fave faileo to fulfill centractual ccnnitments that could adverscly affect the quality of a safety significant product or service, enforcement action will be taken.
Notices of Violation and civil penalties will be used, as appropriate, for licensee failt res to ensure that their venders have programs that rrtet applicable requirercnts incluaing Part 21.
Notices of Violation will bc issued for vendors which violate Part 21.
Civil penalties wil1 only be imposeo against individual directors or responsible officers of a vendor organi::ttion who knowingly and consciously fail to provide the notice recuired by 10 CFR 21.21(b)(1).
Notices of Nerconformance will be useo for vendors which faii to meet connitments related to hRC activities.
SUPPLEMENT I - SEVERITY CATEGORIES REACTOR CPERATIONS A.
Severity I - Violations involving for example:
1.
A Safety Limit, as defined in 10 CFR 50.36 ard the Technical Specifi-cations, beir,9 exceeced; A systens 5/ esigned to prevent or ritigate a serious safety event not 2.
d 5/"Systen"asusedinthesesupplerents,includesadministrativeand manageriti control systems, as well es physical systems.
I th i
j
being able to perform its intended safety function 1/ when actuc11y called upon to work; 0.
An accidental critict.lity; or 4
Release of radioactivity offsite greater than ten (10) times the Technical Specifications limit. El B.
Severity II - Violations involving for example:
1.
A systen designed to prevent or riitigate serious safety events nct beinn able to perform its irtended safety function; or 2.
Release of radioactivity offsite greater than five (5) tires the Technical Specifications limit.
C.
Severity III - Violations involving 'or example:
1.
A significant violation of a Technical Specificatier Limiting Conditicn for Operation where the appropriate Action Statement was not satisfied within the time allotted by the Action Statentent, such as:
II "Intended safety function" reans the total safety fonction, and is not directed toward a loss o' redundancy.
For example, considering a BWR't Figh pressure ECCS capability, the violation must result in ccmplete invalidation of both HPCI and ACS subsystert. A loss of one subsyster does not defeat the intended sa'ety function as long as the other subsysten is c.rcrable.
S/ The Technicel Specification linit et used in this Suppletcrt (Itemt A 4, B.O and C.5) does not apply to the irstantaneous release linit.
43
r 4
l l
- a. In a pressurized v;oter reactor, in the applicable modes, having l
one high-pressure safety injection pwp inoperable for a period I
in excess of that allowed by the action statorent; or l
- b. In a boiling water reactor, ore primary cor.tainment isolatior, valve inoperable for a period in excess of that allowed by the actior, statement.
2.
A system designed to prevent or r.iittaate a sericus safety event not being ab!u to perform its intended function under certain conditicns (o.g., safety system not opcrable unicss effsite fewer is available; materials or cofrponents not environmentally qualified);
3.
Dereliction cf duty on the part of personnel invcised in licensed i
activities; l
4 Changes in reactor parameters which cause unanticipated reductions in margins of safety; 5.
Release of radioactivity offsite greater than the Technical Spec 11ications linit; 6.
A sionificer:t failure to meet the requirements of 10 CFR SC.59, includirig t failure such that a required license anendment was not scught; or a t,
7.
Licensce failure to conduct adequate oversicht of venciers resultir.g in the use of products or services which are of defective or indeteminate quality and which have safety sianificarce.
D.
Sevt.rity IV - Violations insolving for example:
- 1. A less significant violatic.n of a Technical Specification Lir.:lting (cr.dition for Operation where the appropriate Action Statement was not satisfied within the time allotted by the Action Staterrent, such as:
- a. In a pressurizeo water reactor, a 5'. deficitr.cy in the required volume of the condensate storage tank; or
- b. In a boiling water reactor, one stbsystem of the two independent HSTV leakage control sLbsystems incperable.
- 2. Failure to meet the requirenents of 10 CFR 50.59 that cces not result in a Severity Level I, !!, or !!! violation;
- 3. Failure to rect regulatory requircrrents that I. ave more than rainor safety or environmental significence; or
- 4. Feilure tn rate a required Licensee Event Report.
L.
Severity Level V - Violations that have mincr safety or environtrental significance.
45
SLFFLEMENT 11 - !EVERITY CATEGORIES PART SC FACILITY CCNSTRUCTION A.
Severity 1 - Violations involving a structure'or systcai that is E/ n such a nanner that it would not have satisfice its completcG i
intended safety related purpose.
B.
Severity II - Vielations involving for example:
1.
A breakdown in the cuality assurance program as exemplified by deficiencies in construction QA related to nere than one work dctiVity (e.o.. Structurhl piping, elletrical, fcundatiCr.s).
Such deficiercies nontelly involve the licensee's failure to conduct adequate audits or to take prerpt corrective action er the basis of such auolts and normally involve multiple examples et oeficier.t construction or construction of unknown ovality due to inadequate prcgram impicn:entation; cr 2.
A structure or system that is ccapleted in such a manner that it ceuld have an aoverse effect cn the safety of operations.
C.
Severity III - Violations involving for example:
2/"Completeu" neans completion of construction including review and acceptance by the censtruction QA organitetion.
46
1.
A ceficier.cy in a lictr.see quality assurance program for ccostruction related tc a single work activity (e.g., structural, piping, elec-trical or fourdations).
Such significant deficiency norrrt.11y involves the licensee's failure to conduct adecuate audits cr to take
[
prorrpt ccitective, action on the b6 sis of such audits, er( r.ormally involves n.ultiple exan:ples of deficient construction or constructicr.
cf unknown quality due to inadequate program irnplerrentatier.;
t 2.
Failure to confirm the design safety requiren.ents of a structure or l
system as a result of inacequate preoperational test program implementation; or 3.
Failure to make a required 10 CFR 50.55(e) rescrt.
j U.
Severity IV - Violations involving failure to reet regulatury requirements including one or more Qut.lity Assurance Criterion not amourting to i
i Severity Level 1,11, or III violctions that have more than rainor safety or environmental significance.
L.
Severity V - Violations that have trinor safety or environnntal I
significcree.
i I
SUPPLEMENT !!! - SEVERITY CATEGORIES SAFEGl'ARDS A.-
Severity 1 - \\iclations involving fer example:
m
4 1.
An act of radiological sabotage'or actual theft, loss, or diversion of a formula quantity of [svategic] special nuclear materialE/
[(SSfiti)? in which the security system did r.ot function es required; SI 2.
Actual undetected entry of an unauthorized individual El into a vital area EI [or material access arca] from outside the protreted area [(i.e., penetratien of bdth barriers) [that was not detected at the time of entry] who represents a threat (cr].
l l
l
[3. Failure to promptly report knowledge of an actual er attempted theft er diversion of SSF:M or an act of rat'iological sabotage.]
[
B.
Severity II - Violations involving for example:
l i
i 1.
Actual theft, loss or diversion of special nuclear material [(SNM)]
l nf moderate strategic significance [; E/] El in which the security systen did not function /
required
- f i
t El See 10 CFR 73.E(bb).
f N/ An unauthorized individual is sccenne who was not authorized for entrance into the area in question, or not autterized to enter in the rnarner gered.
N/ The_ phrase "vital arta" includes vital areas, material cecess areas, and controlled access areas.
[
[I
] E! See 10 CFR 73.2(x).
48 h
,, - - - -,. - =,
1 J
2.
Feilure or inability to centrol access such that [all three elements of access control (barrier, monitoring, and response) e.t the protecte:d arca or vital crea are inedcquate or two of three elements are inadequate in both the protectec and vitcl crea;]
an unauthorized incisidual could usily gair. undetected access El into a vit61 area from outside the protected area; or
[3.
Failure to implenient approved compensatory treasures >, hen the central ar,o secondary elam stations are inoperable;]
i
[4.
Failure to establish cr maintain safeguares '.ystems der.igned or us(c to prevent or detect the unauthori:ed removal of a fomula cuantity cf SNM from creas of authorized use or storage; cr]
i
[5.] 3. Failure to [use established transportatior.] have a security system [s] designed or used to prevent the theft, Icss, or dive.rsion of (a formula quantity ot] SNM of nederate strategic sionificance l
or orcater amounts or acts of radiological sabotage.
C.
Severity !!! - Violations involving for example:
[1.
ft.ilure to ccntrol access such that two of the tbrco eiertents V access control at the vital ersa or protucted area barrier dreinadeCuate;)
j E/
In deteminir.g whether access can be easily gained factors such as prectic tabil i ty, f eentif tetiiity, anc tase of par.aoe shoulo te censidered.
49
1 Failure to conduct an adecutte search at the accesc contrui poirt that results in the introduction to the protected area of items that t
rosy be useful in radiological sabotacc or theft of SNM;
[2.
Failure to certrol access to a transport vehicle or the SNM being transported that does not constitute a Severity 1 or II violatict.;)
2.
Failure or inability to control access such that an unauthorized irdividual could easily cain undetected access into a vitel area from inside the protected arca or to the protected area from outride the protected area; 3.
Significer.t failure [to establich or maintair.) of the safeguaros systems designeo or Lsed to prevcnt or detec. the [unautrcrized removal) thef t, loss, or diversion of SNM [of raoderate strategic sicreificance from areas of authorized use or stor:ge) or radiolegical sabotage;
[4.
Failure to implemer.t approved ccnpensatory measures when the central (or secondary) alarm station is inoperable;]
[5.
Failure to conduct a proper :eurch 4t the recess control point thtt retults in intrctuction to thu site of tiroarms, explosives, incendiary devices, or other items which coulo be used for industri61 sabotogc; or) 50 4
f.6) h Failure to properly secure or protect classified er other sensitive safeguards information which would significantly assist an individual i
in on act of radiological sabotage or theft of special nuclear l
material [.)i I
l 5.
Significant failure to take cenpensatory measures for e known security situation that could easily allow unautherfred and undetected access i
,to a protected or vital area; i
l 6.
Significant failure to respond te a supected event in either a tirsely manner or with an adequate response force; or 7.
Breakdown in the security system irvolving a number of violations that are related or, if isolated, that are recurring violations (e.g., relating to poor management, inadequate mairtenance practices, or training).
D.
Severity IV - Violations involving for example:
1.
Failure (to establish or maintain) of,a safeguards system [s] designed or used to prevent or detect the thef t, loss, or diversion
[ unauthorized removal] of SNM [of Icw strategic significance NI f rom areas of authorized use or storaget] or radiological schotage;
[NI See 10 CFR 73.2(y).)
51
l E.
A failure to respond to a suspected event in either a tinely manner or with an adequate response force;
[2] L Failure to implement 10 CFR Parto 2E and 95 and informaticn addressed under Section 142 of the Act, and the NRC approved security plan relevant to those parts; 4
Failure to make, naintain, or provide log entries in accordance with 10 CFR 73.71(c) and (d);
[3.
Failure to control tecess to a vital area or raterial access are6 frcm inside the protected area or failure to control accers to the protected area in that one of the three elements of access centrol isinadequate;)
5.
Failure to conduct a proper search at the access control point;
[4.3 h Failure to prorcely secute er protect classified or other sensitive safeguards information which would net significantly assist an irdividual in an act of radiological sabotage or tF(#t of special ruelear raterial; [or) 7 Failure to centrol access such that en cpportunity exists that could allow ureuthorized and undetected access into the protected area er from the protected aret into a vital area hut whi_ch was not easily exrloitable; 52
( '
[5. Other violaticrr, such as failure to follow an approved security plan, that have Bore than minor safect'ards significance.]
8.
Inadecuate compensatory measures for a kr.own security rituation that could allow unauthoriz?] and undetected access; 9.
Failure to properly test a security system; or
- 10. Other violations that h, ave more than minor safeguards significance.
E.
Severity V - Violations that have minor saferuaros significance tech as:
1.
Isolated failure to log a security event in accordance with 10 CFR 73.71(c); or 2.
Other violatiers that have minor safecuards significance.
SUPPLEMENT IV - SEVERITY CATEGORIES HEALTP MlYSICS 10 CFR PART 20[12/] 1EI l
A.
Severity 1 - Violations involving for example:
i
[$2/ 1EI Fersonnel overexposures and associated violatters, incurred during l
a lifesavirg effort, will be treated en a case-by-case basir.
53
1.
Single exposure of a worker in excess of 25 rems of radiation to the whole body,150 ren;s to the skin of the whole body, or 375 rems to the feet, ankles, hands, or foreanns; 2.
Anr.ual whole body exposure of a member of the public in excess of 2.5 rems of radiation; i
3.
Release of radioactive material to an unrestricted area in excess ct I
ten times the limits of 10 CFR 20.106; l
1 4.
Disposal of licer. sed material in quantities or concentrations ir.
excess of ten tines the limits of 10 CFR 20.303; or 5.
Exposure of a worker in restricteo areas of ten times tte limits of r
D.
Severity II - Violations involving for exarple:
s i
l 1.
Single exposure of a worker in excess of 5 rems of radiation to the whole bod, 30 rems to the skin of the whole body, or 75 rems to the f
feet, ankles, hands or forearms; i.
Annual whole body exposure of a r;taber of the public in excess of 0.5 rees of radiation; i
l i
3.
Release of radioective raterial to an unrestrictcc area in exctts of j
five tin.cs the limits of 10 CFR 20.106; t
54 f
1 H
4.
Failure te rcake an irrtdiate notification as rr.cuired by 10 CfR 20.403(a)(1) and 10 CFR 20.403(a)(2);
e 5.
Disposal of licensed material in quantities or concentratiers in 2
excess of five times the limitt of 10 CFR 20.003; or a
l 6.
Exposure of t worker in restricted areas in excess cf five tires the r
j i
limits of 10 CFR EC.103.
i j
C.
Severity 111 - Violations involving fcr example:
1.
Single exposure of a worker in excess of 3 rems of retiation to the I
]
whole body, 7.5 ren.s to the skin tsf the whole bcdy, or 18.70 rems tt, t
I the feet, ankles, hands or forearvs; t
j L
[
[
2.
A radiatico level in ar, unrestricted area such that an individual l
l coulo receive greater than 100 r.iillirem in a one hour pericd f
or 500 millirem in any seven censecutive oays; i
3.
Failure to make a 24-hour notification as rcquired by 10 CFF t
20.403(b) or an immediate notificatien required by 10 CFR 20.402(a);
l l
4.
Substantiel potentiel for an exposure or relrase in excess of
(
1 L
10 CFR 20 whether or not such exposure or release eccurs (e.t,.. entry
[
)
trico high radit. tion areas, such as under reactor vtssels or in the l
vicinity cf exposed raciographic sources, without havino perforred an i
adequate survty, operatien of a radiation facility with a l
3 t
nonfunctioning inttrlock Syst(fu);
{
l 4
i i
55 l
i e-- - - - -,, -- a v-,-~,-----.,,-c-,,,-
-_,nnnm.r-----,,,ma,.-m---
-,_w,-,-
,,~ - - - - -. - -
5.
Release of radicactive n.6terial to an unrestrictcd area in excess of the limits of 10 CFR 20.106; 6.
Improper disposal of licensed material not covered in Severity Levels I or 11; 7
E::posure of a verker in restricted artes in excess of the limitt of 10 CFR 20.103; 8.
Relcase for unrestricted use of contaminated or radioactive naterial cr equipment which poses a realistic potential for signifietrit exposure to members of the public, er which reflects a prcgrammatic (rathcr than isolated) weakrcss in the raciation centrol prograr..;
9.
Cun41ative werker exposure above regulatory linaits when such cumu-P lative exposure reflects a progrannatic, rather than an isolated weakness its radiaticr. protecticr.;
i
- 10. Ccnduct of licer.see activities by a technically urctalifieo person; or 11, Significant failure to centrol licer. sed materir.l.
D.
Severity IV - Violations involving for example:
l 1.
Exposures in excess of the limits of 10 CFR 20.101 nct constituting severity Level I, !!, cr III violations; SC
O 2.
A radiaticr. level in an unrestricted area such that an indivioual I
cculo receive greater than 2 millirera in a one-hcur period or 100 i
r.1111ren, in any seven consecutivo deys;
\\
I 3.
Failure tu rc.ake a 30-day notification requirt.o by 10 CFR 20.405; 4
Failure to make a followup written report ut, required by 10 CFR l
20.402(b),20.408,and20.a09;or
[
4 ll S.
Any other matter that has more than minor refety or environmental l
sigt.ificance.
4 E.
Severity V - Violations thut heve minor soiety or environmental i
j sigriificance.
t
?
SUPPLEllEN1 V - SEVERITY CATEGORIES
(
f I
i TRANSP0kTATION[EI] b 1
A.
Severity I - \\1olations of NRC transportatier. recuiretrents involving
[
icr example:
i l
b ome tran:pcrtatich rcouirements are applit:d to more than ene
[E ] licensee involved in the sant activity such as a shipper [(10 CFF M.
S l
ano a carrier [(10 CFR 70.20a).) When a vio;ation of such a requirercent j
1 occurs, enforcecent acticn will be directed agair.st the resrcrsible licensee which, under the circur stances of the case, rnay be one or nure of the licensees involved.
[
1 i
i
[
57 e
l s
V i
1.
Anrual whole bccy radiatien exposure of a member of the public in I
excess of [0.5) M rems of radiation; [or)
[2.
Breach of package integrity resulting in surface contaminaticr. cr j
external radiation levels in excess of ten tines the NRC limits.]
i 2.
Surf ace contamination in excess of 50 tirres the liRC liniit; or 3.
External radiation levels in excess of 10 tirnes the NPC limit.
I B.
Scverity li - Violations of NRC transportation requiremente involving for i
exaniple:
i
[1. Breach of package integrity resulting in surface conten,ination er external radiation 'ievels in excess of liRC requirceents;)
t
[2. Surface contamination or external radiation levels in excess of five tires hRC limits that did not result f rcn a breach of package l
integrity;or) a i
1.
Anrual whole body exposure of a member ci the public in excess et 0.5 rems of radiation; 1
3 2.
Surface t.ontaminttion in excess of 10, but not more thun 50 times f
i Il the hPC limit; l
F 3.
External radiation levels in excess of five, but not rore than 10 3
tires the hF<C linit; or l
1 l
f8 I
[3.] h Failure, te rake requireo initial retificeticns associated with Severity Level I or II violations.
i C.
Severity !!!
Violations of NRC tran:,pcrtation rceutrements involving for example:
I
[1. Creachcfpackageintegrity;)
L[2.]
Surface contanination [or extrrnal radiation levels) in excess of [,] five but [less than a factor of five above hRC requirements, that did r,ct result frcr a breach of package intrerity) net trore than 10 tiraes the NRC limit; or 2.
External ractation ir, cycess of one but not inore than five tines the
'hRC limit; of 3.
Any noncompliance with labelling, placcroing, shipping paper, packaging, loadir4, or other requirements that could reasonably result in the following:
a.
Significar.t failure to identify [Irproper idtrtificaticn of]
the type, cuantity, or form of matcrial; b.
Failure of the carrier or recipient to exercise acequate controls; or c.
Substantiel potentiL1 tor persor.rel exposure or contardration, or improper transfer of rot.erial; cr 59
4.
Failure to make required initial notification associated witt Severity Level 111 violations.
D.
Severity IV - Violations of NFC transportation rectiirements involving for example:
[1. Package selection or preparation requircuents which do oct result ir, d breach Of package ir.tegrity Or surface contamination or exter0PI radiationlevcisinexcessofNRCrequitements;or) 1.
Preach of package intecrity without external raciation levels exceeding the NRC limit or withcut contaminttion levolt exceeding f1se times the ARC limits:
2.
Surface contaninttion in excess of but net n. ore than five times tre NPC limit; Failure to regi,ter as an authorized user of an NRC-Certified 3.
l Transport packaces's 4.
Nonenepliarce with rhippino papers, markinc. leholi:c, placarding packacir;g or loacine not amourting to a Sevtrity Level !. II, or II: violation; 5.
Failure to demonstrate that reckaoes for special fore radioactise raterial recet applictble requittory reouirerents; (0
6.
Failure to demonstrate that packages meet 007 Specifications for 7A Type A packages; or
[2] 1. Other violatier.s that have r:cre than minor safety or environrental significance.
E.
Severity V - Violations that have mirer safety or environmental significance.
S'PPLEMENT '!! - SEVERITY CATECORIES v
FUEL CYCLE AND MATFRIALS OPERATI0fl$
A.
Severity 1 - Violations involving for example:
1.
Radiation levels, contamination levels, or releases that exceed [ter.'
10 times the limits specified in the licente; 1
2.
A system designed to prevent or mitigate a serious safety event not being operable when actually required to perform its design function: er i
3.
A ruclear criticality accident.
i B.
Severity !! - Violations involving for example:
1.
Radiation levels, contamination levels, cr releases that exceed 'ive tiers the limits specified ir the license; or 61
2.
A systeci designed to prevent or nitiaate a serious safety event being inoperable.
C.
Severit) ill - Violations invohit.g for exterle:
1.
Failure to control access to licensed materiLis for raoiation purposes as specified b) NRC requircntnts; 2.
Fessession er use of unauthorized equipment or ruterials in the conduct of licensee cctivities which degrades safety; 1
2.
Use of radicactive matcrial on humens where such use is not authorized; i
l l
4 Conduct of licensed activities by a techr.ically urcualified persen; l
5.
Raciation levels, conterination lesels, or releases that exceed the linits specifiec ir the license; [or) l
[
6.
f'edicai therapeutic risadministration[s..' or the f ailure to report 1
such a mitacoinistratient or l
l 7.
Multiple errors et the same cr similar rect cause thtt results ir.
diacnostic misaaministrations over the inspection period, or_a recurrent violation f rom the previous inspection period that results in a diaor.ostic misacci1ntstration.
D.
Seserity !Y - Violations involving for example:
62
1.
Failure to raintain patients hospitalized v.ho have cobolt-60 l
cesium-137, or iridium-192 in: plants or to conduct requireo leakaae l
I or contaminatiori tests, or to use properly celibrated equipn4nt; 2.
Other violations that have more than minor safety or environmente'
(
significance; or i
3.
[ Failure to report) P.edical diagnostic misadministration [s] cr a r
failure to report such a misedmiriittration.
f C.
Severity V Violations that have r.irior safety or environmental
)
significance.
i J
i SUFFLEMENT VII - !EVERITY CA1EG0 RIES i
i l
j HISCELLAt4E005 MATTERS j
j A.
Severity I - \\iolations involving for example:
l l
1.
Ireccurate or incomplete information [E/] N/ which 15 proviosd to
{
the fiPC (a) deliberately with the knowledee of a licer.see official f
the the inforr& tion is inccrt:plete or ir.cccurate, cr (b) if the
{
I a
[E/] E/ n applyi 9 the enuples in this supplenent regarding inaccurate I
or inectrp ete infonnation and records, reference also should be l
made to the guidance in Sectiori VI.
I I
i i
l a
j 63 I
1 I
l t
a
l f
information hac it been cumplete and accurate at the time provideo, likely would have resulted in regulatory actior, such as an irrediate l
order required by the public health and safety.
i 2.
Inccmplete or inaccurate information which the NRC reovire: be kept t
i by a licensee which is (a) incomplete or inaccurate because of falsific6 tion by or with the knowledge of a licensee official, or (b) if the information had it been corplete and accurate when I
I t
reviewed by the MC likely would have resulted in regulatory action such as an irre,ediate order required by public health and safety j
consicerations; i
j 3.
Information which the licorsae has identified as having significant j
trop 1(cations for public health and safety or the cormon deferse and i
l security ("significant infomation identified by 4 licorsee") and
[
which is deliberately withheld from the Cercission,
[
l t
}
4.
Action by senior corporate management in violatice of 10 CFR 50.7 i
or sinilar regulations against an employee; or i
i i
i I
5.
A knowing and intentional failure to provice the notice required by l
Part 21.
I 1
i i
E.
Severity II - Violations involving for exarnple:
I f
1.
f r. accurate or incomplete information which is provided to the hRC (a) by a liter.see official because of careless cisrecard for the complete-4 1
j ress or accuracy of the informaticn, er (b) if the informaticr. had it I
h 5
f4
been complete and accurate at thw time provided, likely would have resulted in regulatory action such as a show cause order or a different regulatory position; 2.
Incomplete or inaccurate informaticn which thc LPC requires Le kept by a licensee which is (a) incomplete or ireccurate because of care 1 css disrecard for the accuracy of the inferration on the part of a lictnsee official, or (b) if the information, had it been cenpicte and 4cecrate when reviewed by the hRC, likely would have resulted in regulatory action such as a show cause order er a different regulatory position; 2.
"Significtet information identified by a licensee" and net provided to the Commissicn becaust of careless disregaro on the part of a licensee official; 4.
Action by plant managerent above first-itnt supervisich in violatico of 10 CFR 50.7 cr timilar regulations against an enployee; or 5.
A failtre to provide the notice required by Part 21.
C.
Severity III - Violations involving for example:
1.
Incomplete or inaccurate information which is provideo to the NRC (a) because of inadequate acticns on the part of licensee officielt but r.ot amounting to a Severity Level I or 11 violaticr. or (b) if trt informaticn. had it bcen complete and accuretc 6t the time 65
provided, likely would have resulted in a reconsideration of a regulatory position or substantiel further inquiry such as an i
additional inspection of a fomal rcouest for infomation; 2.
Incomplete or inaccurate inforntion which the NRC requires be kept k
by a licenste which is (a) incomplete or inaccurate because of inadequate actions on the part of licensee officials but not munting e
to a Severity Level I or II violation, or (b) if the infurr:ation, j
1 t
had it been ccc:plete and accurata when reviewed by the NRC, likely
[
vould have resulted in a reconsideration of a regulatory position j
f or substantial further inquiry such as ar. aeditions1 inspecticn or l
a fomal request for infomation; i
.I i
3.
Failure to provice "significant inforn:ation identified by a itcensee" I
i to the Connission and not arnounting to a Severity leul I or 11 l
t violation; t
}
1 P
l 4.
Action by first-line supervision in violation cf 10 CFR 50.7 or rimiler j
regulatfor.s against en etcployee; or r
I i
i t
5.
Inadecuate review or failure to review such that, if an oppropriat,t I
l review had been rade as required, a Part 01 report wculd have tect, l
I I
1 made.
}
D.
Severity IV - tiolations involving for example:
l L
1.
IGComplete Or inaCCurPtt informatiCn of more thch minor siQnificance 66 1
l 1
I-
e i
1 which is provided te the NRC but i:ot amountirg to a Severity Level I,
{
!!, or 111 violation:
C.
Information which the f.PC requires Le kept by 6 licensee ali which is incomplete or inaccurate and of nore than c'inor sign 11'icance but not j
amounting to a Severity Level 1. !!, or III violation; or t
e 3.
Iratcquate revi u or failure to review under Part ?1 or other proci! dural
]
violations associated with Fart 21 with irore than minor safety significance.
i E.
Severity V - Violations of minct procedural requirements of Part 21, i
j 1.
Inccaplete or ireccurate information which'is provided to the Cemission l
and tre incompleteness or inaccuracy is of minor significance; i
I I
2.
Infernation which the NRC retuires be kept by a licersee which is incenplete or inaccurate and the incompleteness cr inaccuracy is of i'
minor significance; or
)
l
)
3.
Nincr procedural requirerents of Part Pl.
l SUPPLEFENT VIII - SE)ERITY CATEGORIES d4ER6Lt.CY PREPARFLhESS i
i a
i a
l 2
n..
o e
s-I A.
Severity I - Violations involving for example:
In a general emergency, licensee failure to premptly (1) ccrrectly classify the event, (2) make required notifications to responsible Feceral State, ano local agencies, or (3) respond to the event (e.g.,
I assess actual or potential offsite consequences, activate emergency resper.se facilities, and aucrent shift staff).
i B.
Severity !! - Violations involving for example:
1.
In a site area emergency. licensee failure to prneptly (1) correcti) classify the event, (2) make required notifications 1.o responsible Federal State, and local actreies, er (3) respond to the event (e.g.,assessactualorpotentialoffsiteconsequences, activate emergency response facilities, ano aucment shift staf t); or I
f 2.
Licensee feilure= to rr.eet or implerrent more than cne emergency planning standard involving assessment or notificatien.
C.
Severity 111 - Violations involving for example:
1.
In an 41ert, licensee failure to prcr4tly (1) cerrectly classify the r
event, (?) r.ake required notifications to reponsible Feceral, Stute.
l and local a g reies, or (3) respond to the event (e.g., assess cetual or potential off site conseatiences, activate emercericy respor.st. faci-j lities, and augrent shift statt); or t
I r
68
]
e i
2.
Licensee f611ure to n:cet or implenut one emergency planning standard i
involving assessnwnt or notification.
D.
Severity IV - Violations involving for c ample:
i Licensew tailure to meet or impletnt any einergency planning standard or 1
requirerrent not directly related to assessment end notification.
i E.
Severity V - Violations that have minor safety or environmental significance.
l Dated at Rockv111e, MD. this day of 1980.
l For the Nuclear Rtgulatory Comission, j
Sar.ut l V. Ch11k.
t Secretary of the Cc4imission.
I i
L t
I f
I l
i (9
{
ev----~-
- -- w -+ -
-~.-w,,-
r,w
--