ML20211B943
| ML20211B943 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 08/17/1999 |
| From: | Dennis Morey SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| NEL-99-0295, NUDOCS 9908250126 | |
| Download: ML20211B943 (5) | |
Text
Dave Morey Southern Nuclear Vice President Operating Company Farley Project R0, Bcx 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201.
Tel 205.992.5131 SOUTHERN August 17, 1999 COMPANY Energy to Serve YourWorld" Docket Nos. 50-348 NEL-99-0295 50-364 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington,DC 20555 Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant Fitness For Duty Performance Data Ladies and Gentlemen:
Southern Nuclear Operating Company (Southern Nuclear) hereby submits Fitness For Duty Performance Data for the six-month reporting period, January 1999 through June 1999, as required by 10 CFR 26.71(d). The data reflected in this report covers employees at the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant and the Southern Nuclear Corporate Headquarters. The data is sununarized in the attached enclosures.
Should you have any questions, please advise.
Respectfully submitted, fl l At't D. N. Morey DNM/JMG OPI : FFD Performance Data Sheets
- Farley and Corporate FFD Program Summary cc: (See next page) 9908250126 990017 DR ADOCK 05 y8
P ) l t U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2 t-cc: Southern Nuclear O erating Company f Mr. L. M. Stinson, General Manager - Plant Farley U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. L. A. Reyes, Regional Administrator Mr. L. M. Padovan, Licensing Project Manager - Farley Mr. T. P. Johnson, Senior Resident Inspector - Farley NEL-99-0295
Page 1 of 2 Fitness for Duty Program Performance Data Personnel Subject to 10CFR 26 Southern Nuclear Operating Company 6/30/99 Company e Monte Eneng Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant & Corporate HQ tomeon Elizabeth McDougal 205/992-5707 Contact Name Phone (incune area coce) Cutoff s: ScreerVConfirmation (ng'ml) XU Appendix A to 10CFR 26 Marijuana 50 / 15 /daphetamines / / Cocaine / Phencyclidine / / Opiates / Alcohol (% BAC) / ] Long-Term Short-Term Testing Results Licensee Employees Contractor Personnel Contractor Personnel Average Number witt Unescorted Access 1254 202 172 Categories Tested Positive Tested Positive Tested Positive Pre Access 79 0 37 0 336 3 Post accident 9 0 o o o o Observed behavior 6 0 0 0 1 0 Random 320 0 51 0 37 1 Follow up 28 1 2 0 1 0 Return to Work, Other retest, Safety & Health 27 0 0 0 2 1 Total 469 1 90 0 377 5 REV.1/92
[ [ Page 2 of 2 1 \\ s s l to l v f4 N v- ~ en h h M ea f ~ e 0 y jg, e o o o e g 4i g }E C ~ Cl). 45 b b g e o o o 4 1 0 0 8 o a., o o m n 8 g E v s R 3 N p E 1 O O b ei e e .I k 5 l' ,h a n w
C Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant and Southern Nuclear Operating Company Corporate Headquarters Fitness For Duty Program Summary The data generated under the Fitness For Duty (FFD) program from January 1999 through June 1999 has been reviewed and analyzed. The data reflected in this report covers workers, including contract personnel, at the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant and at the Southern Nuclear Operating Company Corporate Headquarters in Birmingham, Alabema. The random pool contains not only those badged for unescorted access, but also those employees who may, in an emergency condition, be called upon to work at the site and may require unescorted access. Contractors without approved programs are included in the testing pool while on site. Testing during this time period was performed on a nominal weekly basis to include swing shifts, weekends, and holidays. During this testing period, the rate of testing was equal to 50% yearly of the total population. In summarizing management actions associa.cd with the FFD program, it should be emphasized that the incidents of confirming positive tests were very low. Consequently, management actions relative to determination of FFD have been limited. Contractor employees screened as positive are denied access and no further action is taken. Five short.u:rm contractors at Plant Farley tested positive and were denied access. Management actions taken on licensee employees during this six-month period included one Corporate Headquarters employee who tested positive for alcohol on a follow up test { and was terminated from employment. 4 Weekly quality control checks of the Fitness for Duty random pool revealed no inajor discrepancies. One employee who had been on loan to INPO was rebadged upon his return but was not placed back into the random FFD pool as he had been "hardcoded" out of the random process system due to his lengthy assignment. This individual was unaware that his name would not be available for random selection. He continued to be subject to the Continual Behavioral Observation Program for the 4 weeks that he was out of the pool. A return to work fitness for duty test was performed on him on the next regularly scheduled work day after day 30 subsequent to his retum to work. The process of"hardcoding" individuals out of the pool during lengthy assignments was reviewed and i will be modified to prevent recurrence. Since 1996, employees who report a substance abuse related arrest submit to for-cause fitness for duty testing and are referred for Employee Assistance evaluation by a mental health professional to determine if there is a substance abuse or other problem. For this reporting period, there were no employees refened for evaluation. e}}