ML20198C567

Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-licensed Activities. Order Re Finding That Dt Rich Deliberately Falsified Radiological Survey Records at Plant on 960720 & 0915,by Recording Radiological Survey Results W/O Performing Survey

ML20198C567
Person / Time
Site:	Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date:	01/05/1998
From:	Knapp M NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:	AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
Shared Package
ML20198C564	List: ML20198C561 ML20198C567
References
IA-97-074, IA-97-74, NUDOCS 9801070342
Download: ML20198C567 (8)

Text

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ - _ _ - - - -

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION in the Matter of )

) IA 97-074 MR. - DARREL T. RICH )

)

ORDER PROHIBITING INVOLVEMENT IN NRC-LICENSED ACTIVITIES I

M.'. Darrel T. Rich (Mr. Rich) was formerly employed by Consumers Power Company (CPCo or Licensee) at the Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant (BRPNP) as a radiation protection technician. 4 CPCo is the holder of License No. DPR-6 issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC -

or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50. This license authorized CPCo to operate BRPNP in accordance with the conditions specified therein.

ll On October 18,1996, the BRPNP assistant plant manager received allegations that routine radiological surveys required by plant procedures were not being performed by radiation protection technicians. An hvestigation was conducted by the Licensee in which radiation survey records were compared with security access records (i.e., key card entries). The licensee concluded that in severalinstances the person recording radiation survey data, Mr. Darrel T. Rich, had either not entered the areas where the surveys were required to be 9001070342 900105 PDR ADOCK 05000155 P PDR

_y..__-

4

4 ;-- -. . } 3 e4 i 2-conducted or had not entered for a period of time long enough to conduct the survey.; The L survey records, when compared to the securitp access records, show that Mr. Rich ;

l

- documented that the following radiation surveys were inade and that he could not have - l performed these surveys: on July 21,1996, a required daily air sartple'on the 585' level of the BRPNPP; and the monthly survey for the Radweste Building dated September 15,1996. The -

i Commission's regulations, specifically 10 CFR 20.1501(a), ' Surveys and Monitoring," requires a licensee to perform surveyt to determine the radiological conditions at an NRC-licensed facility.

10 CFR 20.2103(a), " Records of Surveys," further requires that a licensee maintain records J l showing the results of the surveys. Furthermore, BRPNPP Technical Specification, Section 10,

' Administrative Controls," Paragraph 6.11, ' Radiation Protection Program," requires that -

l procedures for personnel radiation protection shall be prepared consistent with the

requirements of 10 CFR Part 20, and shall be approved, maintained and adhered to . ell i operations involving personnel radiation exposure. BRPNPP Procedure No. RP-29, i

" Radiological Surveys," is the plant procedure that implements Technical Specification

Section 10, Paragraph 6.11. Paragraphs 5.2.2 through 5.4.4 of Procedure RP-29 specify the l s

locations where radiological surveys are to be conducted and requires that the results of sach '

survey be recorded. _10 CFR 50.9(b), " Completeness and Accuracy of Information," requires

.that information required by NRC regulations be maintained by en NRC licensee and the 1

information shall be complete and accurate in all material respects.

e I. The Licensee, on the bas:s of its investigation, concluded that Mr. Rich had falsified records of

- various radiological surveys. Mr. Rich resigned from BRPNP, effective November 7,1996. As

. J of November 8,1996, Mr. Rich's unescorted' access was unfavorably terminated for falsification p -

s Y

,,,,.rn- ~e-, .n ,--, ,e. , , cn a m , , - .a m .. .--,.,,v-.e,-.a-- - , , , -.ne w , --. - . - -, am-, _ - - ,u. m e,n ,--r,- w E

of company records, The NRC Staff reviewed the investigative information furnished by the Licensee and concluded that Mr. Rich deliberately falsified radiological survey data at BRPNP.'

Prior to the 1996 events, the NRC Office of Investigations (01) conducted an investigation

(Ol No. 3-91-018)into allegations that during October 1991, Mr. Rich did not take smear samples for radioactive contamination, but recorded the results as though he had taken the -

samples. The Licensee took disciplinary action against Mr. Rich at that time. The NRC did not take enforcement action against Mr. Rich because he admitted the violation a'id in consideration of the employment action take" a .5e Licensee involving Mr. Rich (EA 92-235).

lli Based on the above, it appears that Darrel T. Rich, a former employee of the Licensee, has engaged in deliberate miscondu::t that has caused the Licensee to be in violation of 10 CFR 20.1501 and 10 CFR 50.9(a). It further appears that Mr. Rich deliberately provided to the Licensee information that he knew to be incomplete or inaccurate in some respect material

$ to the NRC,in violation of 10 CFR 50.5(a)(2), 'Deliberale Misconduct." The information is material to ine NRC because 10 CFR 20.1501 and 20.2103 and 10 CFR 50.9 require these radiation surveys to be performed and that accurate records of them be nnaintained. The NRC must be able to rely on the Licensee and its employees to comply with NRC requirements, L

i i

4.:

including the requirement to provide information and maintain records that are complete and accurato in all material respects. Mr. Rich's action in causing the Licensee to violate 10 CFR 20.1501,20.2103 and 10 CFR 50.9(s) have raised serious doubt as to whether he can be relied upon to comply with NRC requirements and to provide complete and accurate information to the NRC.

Consequently, I lack the requisite reasonable assurance that licensed activities can be conducted in compliance with the Commission's requirements and that the health and safety of the public will be protected if Mr. Rich were peimitted at this time to be involved in NRC-licensed activities. Therefore, the public health, safety and interest require that Mr. Rich be prohibhed from any involveme t in NRC-licensed activities for a period of three years from the effective date of this Order, and if he is currently involved with another licensee in NRC-licensed activities at that time, he must immediately cease such activities, and inform the NRC of the name, address and telephone number of the employer, and provide a copy of this Order to the employer. Additionally, Mr. Rich is required to notify the NRC of his first employment in NRC-licensed activities in the three years following the prohibition period.

IV Accordingly, pursuant to sections 103,161b,1611,161o,182 and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202,10 CFR 50.5, and 10 CFR 150.20, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

. _ . . . _ . _ . . , . . . - . . . - - . _ . . _ . _ . . _ . _ . . _ ~ _ _ _ . _ ._ _ _.

q

-l

"' 4. ; 'f 1..  ; Darrel T. Rich is prohibited for three. years from the effective date of this Order from i engaging in NRC-licensed activities. NRC-licensed activities are those activities that are i

. conducted pursuant to a spx,ific or general license issued by the NRC, including, but

~~not limited to, those activities of Agreement State licensees conducted pursuant to the  !

authority granted by 10 CFR 150.20. -

1

- 2. For a period of three years after the three year period of prohibition has expired,

. Mr. Rich shall, within 20 days of his accaptance of each employment offer involving ' -

p NRC-licensed activities or his becoming involved in NRC-licensed activities, as defined .

In Paragraph IV.1 above, provide notice to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U .S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, of the name, address,  ;

i and tolophone number of the employer or the entity where he is, or will be, involved in the NRC-licensed activities. - In the first notification, Mr. Rich shall include a statement of his commitment to compliance with regulatory requirements and the basis why the Commission should have confidence that he will now comply with applicable NRC requirements. .

The Director, OE, may, in writing, relax or rescind any of the above conditions upon

. demonstration by Mr. Rich of good cause.

V

' In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202,' Darrd T. Rich must, and any other person adversely

, affected by this Order may, submit an answer to this Order, and may requeqt a hearing on this k

,--- . _ . . - . , . , , ~ . . - - - - - . . , - , _ . - . . . . , , . .e _.-.w - . . , -- . ,. -

t j

l

. t k Order, within 20 days of the date of this Order. Where good cause is shown, consideration will L

be given to extending the time to request a hearing l A request for extension of time must be -

made in writing to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission p

Washington, D.C. 20555, and include a statement of good cause for the extenalon; The answer ~- t

. may consent to this Order. Unless the answer consents to this Order, the answer shall, in- [

writing and under oath or affirmation, specifically admit or deny each allegation or charge made in this Order and shall set forth the matters of fact and law on which Mr. Rich or other person I adversely affected relies and the reasons as to why the Order should not have been issued.

2

- Any answer or request for a hearing shall be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear.

Regulatory Commission, Attn: Chief, Docketing and Service Section, Washington, DC 20555.

- Copies also shall be sent to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory I - Commission, Washington, DC 20555, to the Assistant General Counsel for Hearings and I l

Enforcement at the same address, to the Regional Administrator, NRC Region lil, i 801 Warrenvi!Ie Road, Suite 255, Lisle, IL 60532-4351, and to Mr. Rich if the answer or hearing ,

request is by a person other than Mr. Rich. If a person other than Mr. Rich requests a hearing,

+

that person shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his interest is adversely

- affected by this Oroer and shall address the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.714(d).

t If a hearing is requested by Mr. Rich or a person whose interest is adversely affected, the Commission willissue an Order designating the time and place of any hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Order should be

. sustained. ,

'$ g

.. - L -, .L.-., - - ~ , - . - _ - .- . . . . - , . - - , . , , .- , - - ,

r

-e

}

. 7 - -'

in the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of an extension of time in which to t

request a hearing, the provisions specified in Section !V above shall be final 20 days from the .

date of this Order without turther order or proceedings; if an extension of time for requesting a -

' hearing has been approved, the provisions specified in Section IV shall be final when the '

i extension expires if a nearing request has not been received.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION fY k. / r -I Malcolm R. Knapp ,

Acting Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory Effectiveness  !

Dated t Rockville, Maryland -

.this ay of January 1998

?

r -+, ,wa * ,e-~ . - + , s ~ r- ,,, maw, -- , ~g -

lDec-zD-07 10:03 -

DiCLOSURE 21 , '

$ s. .

November - 19, ; 1997 -

f -!

1EA 97 239 '

1Mr. K. P,= Powers -

t

- Plant General Manager i Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant :

~o Consumers Energy CompanyL

- 10269 US 31 North Charlevoix, Ml"49720 c 9*

q

SUBJECT:

' NOTICE OF Vlot.ATION (NRC Inspection Repor1 No. 50-155/97014)'- l

Dear Mr. Powers:

- '  :- This refers to our investigation of the falsification of various radiation protection survey records

_ at your plant by a member of your Radiation Protection Department from July to September

_1996.-

c At this time, we have completed our review of these incidents, Based on the information that you provided in various documents _and correspondence (tnose listed in our June 12,19g7  :

letter to you, plus requested source documents), as well as the atmence nf any contradictory

information from the individual concemed, the NRC has determined that two violations of NRC requirements occurred. Specifically, radiation surveys requi,od by station procedures were not

' completed as indloated in station records on three separate occasions. On July 21,1996, a '

- required dally air sample on the 585' level of the Reactor Containment Building was not '

i completed; on July 20 and 21,1996, a required daily radiation survey for the exterior cable

' penetration room was not conducted; and on September 15,1996, both a required monthly survey and a required air sample for the Radweste Building were not completed, in all three Instances, the individual responsible for te surveys falsified the applicable survey records to ,

indicate that these tasks had been performed. These failures to comply with a Technical 4

-Specification required procedure goveming radiation surveys constituted a violation of Technical Specification 6.11. . In addition, the fact that plant records of these surveys contained falso information and were not accurate in all material respects was a violation of 10 CFR 50.9.

The NRC recognizes that the actual safety significance of the incident was low because the areas to be surveyed were not high radiation areas or airbome radioactivity areas and subsequent surveys did not Indicate any significant changes in radiological conditions.

However, the potential safety significance of falf.ng to survey plant areas and then denoting  ;

' -false results on survey documents is relatively high for: 1) plant workers entering areas where radiological conditions may have changed or 2) from an operations standpoint, where changingi

- radiological conditions could indicate a problem witn plant systems or operation. These actions

. are of particular concem because of the reliance of plant personnel, as well as the public and E.the NRC.- on the accuracy of plant records, especially radiation survey records. In addition, ,

L deliberate violations are of special concem because the NRC's regulatory programs are based

on licensees and thalt employees acting with integrity. The falsification of records is a willful act

?

g' :

&gggy;

~ g

= -- - -

Dec-23-07 10:23

• K. Powers 2 November 19, 1997 which will net be tolerated.'It is essential that the NRC be able to maintain the highest trust in individuals working in a nuclear power plant and that licensees appropriately mane e their programs to ensure that personnel fully understand the importance of complying e a regulatory requirements. As the licensed entlty, Consumers Energy is ultimately responsible nor the acts of its employees.

The violations are cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation (Notice). These violations categorized in accordance with the

• General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions"(Enforcement Policy). NUREG 1600 as Severity Level IV violations. The NRC considered citing these as Non-Cited Violations because they were identified, investigated and promptly corrected by your staff. However, the NRC chose to issue the violations as Seventy LevelIV because of their repetitiveness and potential safety significance. We note that the same individual was involved in records falsificaOn at Big Rock Point in October 1991 (EA 02 235), and individual enforcement action against him is being considered for the current violations.

You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response, in your response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional actions you plan to prevent recurrence. After reviewing your response to this Notice, including your proposed corrective actions and the results of future inspections, the NRC will determine whether further NRC enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements.

' in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's

• Rules of Practice " a copy of this let,er and its enclosure will be placed in tha NRC Public Document Room (POR).

Sincerely, Original Signed bv John A Grobe John A. Grobe, Director Division of Reactor Safety Docket No. 50-155 License No. OPR-6

Enclosure:

Notice of Violation cc w/enet R. A. Fenech, Senior Vice President, Nuclear, Fossil, and Hydro Operations James R. Padgett, Michigan Public Service Commission Michigan Department of Public Health Department of Attorney General (MI)

See Attache,d Distribution

Dec-23-07 los20 P.03 1

K.' Powers 3 November 19,1997

- DjskibuliGD:

Docket File w/end SRis, BRP, Palis w/enci ' CAA1 w/enci PUBLIC IE-01 w/enci . LPM, NRR w/enci J. Ueberman, OE w/enci OC/LFDCB w/enct ' A. B. Beach, Rill w/enci J. Goldberg, OGC w/enci DRP w/end J. L. Caldwell, Rlli w/enci R. Zimmerman, NRR w/enci

-DRSwlend Rill Enf. Coordinator w/enci Rlli PRR w/enci TSS w/enci O

a -

Dec,23-07 10: 23 P.OO NOTICE OF VIOLATION Consumets Energy Company Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant Docket No. 50-155 1.lcense No. DPR-06 EA 97-239 During an NRC investigation conducted from December to,1996, through April 10,1997, with continuing NRC leview through November 7,1997, two violatiens of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Proceciure for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG 1600, the violations are listed below:

1.

Technical Specification 6.11 (Radiation Protection Programs) requires that procedures for personnel radiation protection shall be prepared consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20 and shall be approved, maintained, and adhered to for all operations Involving personnel radiation exposure.

Station procedure RP-29, " Radiological Surveys *, contains requirements to menitor radiological conditions (routine and nonroutine) and provide a routine check of some of the equipment used to monitor these conditions.

Contrary to the above, certain radiation surveys required by station procedure RP-29 were not completed. Specifically, on July 21,1996, a required daily air sample on the 585' level of the Reactor Containment Building was not completed; on July 20 and 21, 1993, a required dally radiation survey for the exterior cable penetration room was not conducted; the monthly survey required for the Radwaste Building was not completed in September 1996: and a required alt sample was not completed in the Radwaste Building on September 15,1996. (50-155/97014-01)

This is a Severity 1.evel IV violation (Supplement IV).

L. 10 CFR 20.1501 requires, in part, that each licensee shall make or cause to be made surveys that may be necessary for the licensee to comply with the regulations in this part.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 20.1003, survey means an evaluation of the radiological conditions an;l potential hazards incident to the production, use, transfer, release, disposal, or presence of radioactive material or other sources of radiation.

10 CFR 20.1201(a)(1)(1) requires, with exceptions not applicable here, that the licensee control the occupational dose to indMdual adults to an annual dose limit of 5 iems total effectivo dose equivalent.

10 CFR 20.2103 requires, in part, that each licensee maintain records showing the results of surveys required by 10 CFR 20.1501 for 3 years after the record is made.

10 CFR 50.9 requires, in part, that information required by the Commission's regulations to be maintained by the licensee 3 hall be comp'ete and accurate in all material respects.

( ~

. - .- - -_ . - . . - - - = - -

Dec 23-C7.10 t 2'3 'P.05 Notice of Violation - 2-Contrary to the above, certain radiation survey records required to be maintained by the Commission's regulations were not accurate in all material respects. Specifically, these records indicated results for surveys which had never been performed. These surveys consisted of the following: a July 21,1996, da!!y air sample on the 585' level of the Reactor Contaiornent Building: July 20 and 21,1996, daily rad;ation surveys of the exterior cable penetration room; a September 16,1996, air sample of the Radweste e

Building; and a September,1996, mon'bly survey of the Radweste Building.

This in a Severity Level IV vid? tion (Supplement IV).-

7

~

Pursuant te the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Big Ro* Point Nuclear Plant is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN.

Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555, with a copy to the Regional Administratori Region lit, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation (Notice).

This reply should be clearly marked as a Reply to a Notica of Violation" and should include for each violation: (1) the reason for the violation, or, if contested, the basis for disputing the vio!alion, (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results aclieved, (3) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved, if an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order or a Demand for Information may be issued to show cause why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked, or why such other action as may be proper 1

should not be taken, Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time. Under the authority of Section 182 of the Act,42 U.S.C. 2232, this response

,. ; shall be Submitted under oath of affirmation.

Dated at Lisle, ll!inois this 19th day of Ncvember 1997 4

l- ) .

y ~ . , -

c',,"

= - .. .

,e , m , ,

~

av '

~

thx. p

, 1 4 n

1,-

. v g: a ,

[g ), ,

3-1 > '_:k u y - k.. Lg 3s ' qr a~ 4

. , <_ M' .

%1

,+ s DarrelThRich - , T,-

r

.- '~ A. ,

- _1 g 3

, 4. - 5 y

. Df -

w+ -p DISTRIBUTION.

'i' f  ;

- PUBLIC IE-01 + --

,;SECY( z <

~

CAi 1 ' 1.

Callan,' EDO?;;- .

^

w[- "

iAThadani, DEDEC -

-A

^'

$ w. i LChandler, OGC

~

JGoldberg, OGC -

o. ,

m SCollins, NRR -

' ; i RZimmerman, NRR -

- :SWeiss, NRR

, PHarris, NRR; Enforcement Coordinators ' "

RI,Riland RIV-V Resident inspector,' Big Rock Point

~ !JGilliland, OPA -

' 2 HBell, OlG

? GCaputo, Ol' RPaul, OI: Rill (Ol No. 3-96-055)- '

TMartin, AEOD iOE:ES :

(OE:EA (2) 1RAO: Rill SLO: Rill PAO: Rill Rlli Allegatibn Coordinator (AMS No. Rill-1996-A-0163)

OC/LFDCB'

'DRP.l Docket File; 1

-- -i i

V.,

dl 0 '

Ok RA: Rill' ~ OGCh2%I# D:O % - DEDE?

~

kekk ABBeach ': UGoldberg JLieberman" MKnapp 12/ /97-12/73 /97L 12/ . ? /97 / . ~ 12/ /97? '12/2$7 J dos Name: G:\OECASE8\S7074REV.TR w <

[- g

+

_i .

I *

/'3

.. s

• s

+

~1 ,

. % 's W' r k \,

_ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ - _ _ - >