ML20236L547
| ML20236L547 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/23/1987 |
| From: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| FRN-52FR36215, RULE-PR-2 NUDOCS 8711100399 | |
| Download: ML20236L547 (68) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:- " DOCKET UUM3ER pL b Ph0eOSED RULE ._ g2 PA 34z tc).__ bO' [7590-01] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- 87 sto.23 P13 l 10 CFR Part 2 Policy and Procedure for Enforcement Actions; Policy Statement l
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Comission. i ACTION: Revised policy statement. 1
)
SUMMARY
- The NRC is publishing minor revisions to its Enforcement Policy l
to further e.xplain enforcement actions involving individuals, to describe the-criteria-to be used for reopening closed enforcement actions, to provide for the exercise of discretion to refrain from issuing a Notice of Violation or a proposed civil penalty under certain limited circumstances, and to make minor , 1 deletions and language changes. The policy statement is intended to inform i 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 september 28 , 1987 while coments on the changes are being received. Submu cenments on or before Nov. 27 , 1987. ADDRESSEES: Send coments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regalatory Comission, Washington, DC 20555. ATTN: Docketing and Service Branch. [gp ~p,4/n M/f sh
/ b v.
g 1
, ,,, m ees .
2 52FR36215 PDR
. , a o <
;l
,v-' ,
,\-
m , {
- . a r 4r '
+
-{
.HafidLdeliver comments to: . Room 1121,-1717 H Street, NW.,' Washington, DC l
- l 6etween:7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. '
i , l
'i:
j Copies of coments may 'be examined at the,NRC. Public Document Room, .1717 d. Street, NW. Washington, DC.
, i
'~
f, ; F0R FURTHER INFORMATION' CONTACT: James Lieberman, Director, Office of- 1 Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, DC. 20555. 'I (301-492-8214).
,. s
, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
r i B'ackground: d
.t
.]
f .The criteria used by the Comission to conduct its enforcement activities were first published on October 17,.1972 (37 FR 21962). .These criteria were' I l
' subsequently modified on. January 3, 1975 (40 FR 820) and on December 3, 1979' l 1
(44 FR 77135). .In late'1979, the Comission directed the staff to prepare a l i comprehensive statement of enforcement policy. This. staff effort was given J
;added urgency by the e m etment of Pub. L. 96-295 (signed June 30,1980),that, emcng other things, amended Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act to raise the maximum civil penalty tirc NRC can inpose from $5,000 to $100,000 per violation per day.and eliminated the provisior limiting the total civil penalties for any J 30-day period to $25,000. On September 4, 1980, the Commission approved a proposed. general statement of policy on enforcement. Coments were solicited i
on.the policy and a series of public meetings was held. On March 9, 1982, the Commission published a final version of the policy (47 FR 9987). After the policy had been in effect for about two years, the Commission determined that certain minor revisions should'be made. These revisions were published in the 2 i . ..
C Federal Register (49 FR 8583) and became effective on March 8, 1984. The criteria were further revised to describe how the NRC Enforcement Policy applies to vendors of products or services on November 20, 1985 (50 FR 47716). In conjunction with approving the March 1984 revision to the Enforcement Poli:y, the Commission decifed to establish a comittee of outside experts to review the Enforcement Policy and provide the Comission with recommendations on any changes it believed advisable. The comittee was established on August 31, 1984 and issued its report on November 22, 1985. The Comission subsequently decided that the Enforcement Policy should be revised to include some of the recommendations of the comittee and other changes. Accordingly, the Commission has approved the following revisions to the Enforcement Policy which explain enforcement actions involving individuals, add a section regarding the criteria to be used for reopening closed enforcement actions, provide for the exercise of discretion to refrain from issuing a Notice of Violation or a proposed civil penalty under certain limited conditions, and make language deletions and changes in other sections. Revisions to the Enforcement Policy Revisions to the policy now being made are described in the following paragraphs. Only the sections to which changes were made are discussed here. The numbering of the sections tracks the section numbers in the policy. I. Introduction and Purpose Profiting from Violation - The Commission is deleting the following sentence in the second paragraph under Section I of the Enforcement Policy. "It is the Comission's intent that sanctions should be 3 i l
~. . r i 1
, ' designed to ensure that a? licensee does.not deliberately profit from i
violations. of NRC requirements." The Comission believes that the. I o
^ : wording' is ambiguous 'and that, in fact, few violations. are the-result' of a calculated judgment.to profitLfrom noncompliance. Other wording in the i
policy clearly states that, sanctions and severity. levels may'be increased. l 4 for' deliberate violations. d i l V.. . Enforcement Actions s Notice of Violation for Certain Severity Level IV and V Violations -
- g i LSection V.A., Notice of Violation, previously discussed circumstances l l
under which the NRC will not generally issue a Notice of Violation j for Severity Level IV or.Y violations. Because this could be regarded as a type of ' discretionary d enforcement,-the discussiort has been moved'
.to the new Section V.F., Exercise of Discretion. !
V l Enforcement Actions Against Individuals - The NRC has taken actions
- l. against individual licensed operators in certain: instances where mis-L conduct occurred. Generally -the staff policy has been that the NRC ;
a should defer to the licensee in the supervision of operators but should i take action directly against licensed operators when their actions result in significant violations of NRC requirements involving incompetence or wi11 fulness or where it appears operators are not competent to safely.. perform their duties. Such an approach places primary responsibility for I operator errors where it belongs - with the facility licensee which is ! l responsible for operator training and for developing adequate procedures } k to govern facility operations. l I 4 l 1 e i
, -C <
n 'Despite this: philosophy,'the NRC does issue licenses to operators and has I many regulations that recognize that timely actions by NRC-licensed individuals are an important part of safety. Specifically, the regulations l
.. state that:
l Generally, only licensed operators are permitted to manipulate-the: controls that directly affect reactivity (10 CFR 50.54(1)); i
. Licensed operators must be present at the controls at all times during the operation of the facility (10 CFR 50.54(k));
Mechanisms and apparatus, other than controls, the operation of which may indirectly affect the power level or reactivity of a reactor, may be manipulated only with the knowledge and consent of an operator licensed in accordance with Part 55 (10 CFR.50.54(j)); Licensed senior operators must be present at the facility during i specified conditions, and available or on call at other times during g operation (10 CFR 50.54(m)); and An NRC licensed individual must observe all applicable rules, regulations and orders of the Commission, whether or not stated in the license I (10 CFR 55.31(d)). 1 Because of the importance the Commission places on high standards of performance by facility staff, the guidance on when enforcement action ! against an individual will be considered has been expanded in renumbered l Section V.E. 5 l
7 ,
- m. -
, , 7 )'
l i I Allowing Mitigation of Civil Penalties for Severity Level I Violations.- l
' The Commission believes that mitigation of a civil penalty for aLSeverity Level I' violation'should be available on'the same basis as for Severity j Level II and III' violations since the practical justifications for allowing l mitigation of these violations is the same; i.e., to encourage self- 1 i
identification and reporting, extensive' corrective actions, and good performance by a licensee. The second paragraph under V.B. of the i Enforcement Policy is modified as follows: j l
" Civil penalties are imposed absent mitigating circumstances for J Severity Level I and II violations, are considered for Severity
;l Level III violations, and may be imposed for Severity Level IV i l
violations that are similar to the previous violations for which j 1 the licensee did not take effective corrective action." l
)
Reopening Closed Enforcement Actions: - The agency's enforcement-program 1 does not address the criteria _for reopening closed enforcement actions. There have been rare instances where it was appropriate to reopen an i I enforcement action to correct an inappropriately applied action. A new R paragraph on Reopening Closed Enforcement Actions is added to Section V. I l The Comission believes that reopening a previously closed enforcement action may be appropriate under certain circumstances. If significant new information is received by the NRC which indicates that an enforcement l sanction was incorrectly applied, that action could be reopened to correct I the record. Reopening should occur enly (1) if remedial action, e.g., in the form of an order, is necessary to abate the continued harm of a violation to the public health and safety, the common defense and security, or the environment or (2) if new information shows that a viciation was 6
m;w , , , .
\; - -
f?? y , p , q h r4 i ,' ' Lless ser'ous i than originally. believed or'that'it'did not occur. Enforce-f ;F ment' action would normally not be reopened where the only change to the.- a L. -
.I L prior action would be to' increase _the severity level'of.a violation or to: c! i impose or' increase'a civil penalty. Reopening an enforcement: action is l-expectedto'occuronly.:rarelyandwouldrequireispecific'.apitlovalIofthe:
Deputy Executive Director for-Regional Operations. a Exercise'of Discretion - As-discussed in Section I above, the discussion 1
..of: circumstances under which the NRC will not generally issue a Notice of- *
. \
Violation for' Severity Level IV or V violations has been moved to new l Section'V.G., Exercise of Discretion. i j 1 Additionally, discussion of other circumstances under which a Notice of~ J
. Violation or proposed civil penalty might not be issued by;the NRC is
. 'added. Although strict application of the escalating.and mitigating-
. factors set forth in the enforcement policy.would suggest that iss.uance of -
l a civil penalty in a particular case would be appropriate, the benefits to y be gained from issuing a' civil penalty are doubtful for violations identified by a licensee during a forced shutdown where a licensee is i diligently and aggressively' addressing the causes of the violations. In , j particular,_it is questionable whether such an action would provide [ incentives to meet the objectives set forth in the enforcement policy: specifically, encouraging prompt correction of existing violations and
, t adverse conditions; deterring future violations and adverse conditions, l and encouraging improved performance by the licensee and, by example, that l of the industry; and, at the same time, not discouraging aggressive and comprehensive implementation of a structured program to identify and ,
correct problems. !
' 7 r _ -_ __ __ ----- _____ _ . - - - - - . - - - - - _ - - - - -
F
. 0:
+ -]
y .
-l s
t .) In view of this, the Commission has decided that discretion may be f fI L -exercised, provided there is prior staff consultation, to refrain from-l !, issuing a Notice-of Violation and a proposed civil penalty for violations' '" that meet all-of the following criteria which!are listed in a new paragraph in Section V: a i
- 1. (a) 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 shutdown or work i stoppage related to generally poor performance over a long period;-
(b) the licensee has developed and is aggressively implementing during the shutdown a comprehensive program for problem. identification and correction; and (c) NRC concurrence is needed by the licensee prior to restart;
- 2. Non-willful violations are identified by the. licensee (as opposed to the NRC) as the result of its comprehensive program, or the L a
violations are identified as a result of an employee allegation to ) the licensee. If the NRC identifies the violations, the NRC should determine whether enforcement action is necessary to achieve remedial action; ] 1
- 3. The violations are based upon activities of the licensee prior I l
to the events leading to the shutdown; and 8
r- , . y , l
- The non-willfullviolations.would normally not.be categorized as:
higher than Severity Level III violations under.the NRC's Enforcement TPolicy.: y j T
^\
\
k.. Notwithstanding the above,;a civiltpenalty may be proposed in'a case where m multiple Severity Level III violations are discovered. This; action would be q taken when judgment warrants it on the circumstances of the individual case. The reason ~for'the first condition is to limit the circumstances under which such discretion would be exercised to cases in which the incentives for problem identification and correction are the greatest and the' deterrent
. effects of civil penalty enforcement action are likely to be fewest--when the licensee _is.in an extended shutdown caused by a' major event =or period of poor performance so significant that the NRC.will not allow' restart until it.is sure that major problems have been satisfactorily resolved.
The reason for the second condition is to provide an incentive for licensee [ identification of violations. If the NRC firds the problem, and believes that the licensee's corrective action program is not working adequately, l 1 civil penalty enforcement action may be appropriate. ] , l 3
-]
l The reason for the third condition is that if violations are identified associated with work performed after the event or shutdown, this may also indicate that the incentives for conducting an adequate program are not sufficient and the deterrent effects of civil penalty enforcement may be
]
l necessary. l l 9 I-L
/
, "The reason for the fourth condition'is to distinguish less significant -)
! q L violations from more significant violations. Although the rationale for
]
.n .
refraining from civil l penalty enforcement action may be the same.for
'I Severity Level I~and II violations that meet the other three criteria, l
- '. - }
withviolationsatthislevel,itmaybeimportanttoconveyamessageLto j other licensees regarding the significance and consequences of such violations.- Supplement VII, The reference to'Section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act, which prohibits discrimination against employees for engaging in certain l protected activities, has been replaced with a reference to 10 CFR 50.7 and similar NRC regulations-prohibiting discriminations against-y employees. 'The requirements of 50.7 apply to'Part 50 licensees, but similar requirements appear in other parts of NRC regulations governing other types of licensed activity. Harassment and intimidation of' j quality assurance workers may constitute violations of.the independence criterion for quality assuranen programs, such as is required under , 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B. The replacement of the reference in Supplement VII to Section 210 with a reference to NRC regulations is , appropriate because NRC regulations, not Section 210, form the basis l for' violations and enforcement actions related to wrongful dis,crimination ! I or harassment. I l l l i 10 I l
. . 7 l
1 List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 2 1 1 Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Byproduct material, Classified information, Environmental protection, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Penalty, Sex discrimination, Source material, ) l Special nuclear material, Waste treatment and disposal. 1 For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the Atomic j Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as l l amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC is adopting the following statement of j policy as Appendix C to 10 CFR Part 2. l l Part 2 - Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings 1
- 1. The authority citation for Part 2 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 161, 181, 68 Stat. 948, 953, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2231); sec. 191, as amended, Pub. L. 87-615, 76 Stat. 409 (42 U.S.C. l 2241); sec. 201, 88 Stat.1242, as arrianded (42 U.S.C. 5841); 5 U.S.C. 552. l l Section 2.101 also issued under secs. 53, 62, 63, 81, 103, 104, 105, 68 Stat. 930, 932, 933, 935, 936, 937, 938, as amended (42 U.S.&, 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 secs. 102, ; 103, 104, 105, 183, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 937, 938, 954, 955, as amended (42 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 ' 2.200-2.206 also issued under secs. 186, 234, 68 Stat. 955, 83 Stat. 444, 11 w -_-
a . f as' amended (42 U.S.C. 2236, 2282);'sec. 206, 88 Stat. 1246 (42 U.S.C. , 5846).-Sections l2.600-2.'60'6 alsoissuedbndersec.102, Pub.L.91-190,-
'83. Stat.'853 as amended (42 U.S.C.-4332). Sections 2.700a, 2.719 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 554. Sections 2.754, 2.'760, 2.770 also issued under 1 i'
'5 U.S.C. 557.- Section 2.790 also issued under'sec. 103, 68 Stat. 936, as--
amended ~(42 U.S.C. 2133) sand 5.U.S.C. 552. Sections 2.800 and 2.808 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553. Section 2.809 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553 1 and sec. 29, Pub. L. 85-256, 71 Stat. 579, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2039).- , Subpart K also issued under sec. 189, 6'8 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239); 1
, sec. 134, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 ('2 4 U.S.C. 10154). Appendix'A' l also~ issued under sec. 6, Pub. L. 91-580, 84 Stat. 1473 (42 U.S.C. 2135).
Appendix B also issued under sec. 10, Pub. L. 99-240, 99 Stat. 342 j (42 U.S.C. 2021b et seq.). ; l
- 2. Appendix C to Part 2 is revised to read as follows:
'l I
APPENDIX C - GENERAL STATEMENT OF POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR NRC ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS The following statement of general policy and procedure explains the enforcement , policy and procedures of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and its staff j in. initiating enforcement actions, and of presiding officers, the Atomic Safety l and Licensing Appeal Boards, and the Comission in reviewing these actions. .j This statement is applicable to enforcement in matters involving the public ,
-healthandsafety,thecommondefenseandsecurity,andtheenvironment.J/ l l
2/ Antitrust enforcement matters will.be dealt with on a case-by-case f basis. ! l ; L 12 ; l L . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ . -
L u i l '. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE i The purpose of the NRC enforcement program is to promote and protect the i 1 radiological health and safety of the public, including employees' health and safety, the common defense and security, and the environment by: i Ensuring compliance with NRC regulations and license conditions;
)
. Obtaining prompt correction of violations and adverse quality I
conditions which may affect safety; 1
. Deterring future violations and occurrences of conditions adverse to quality; and
. Encouraging improvement of licensee and vendor E erformance, p and by example, that of industry, including the prompt identification and reporting of potential safety problems.
Consistent with the purpose of this program, prompt and vigorous enforce-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 dependent on the circumstances of the case and requires the exercise of discretion after consideration of these policies and procedures. In no case, however, will licensees who cannot achieve and maintain adequate levels of protection be permitted to conduct licensed activities, b The tern " vendor" means a supplier of products or services to be used in an NRC-licensed facility or activity. 13
- p. , ,
~~
l l t II. STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND PROCEDURAL FRAMEWORK A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY l l The NRC's enforcement jurisdiction is drawn from the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as ameaded, and the Energy Reorganization Act (ERA) of 1974, as ; i amended. 1 Section l'61 of the Atomic Energy Act authorizes NRC to conduct inspections 1 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 4 licenses under certain circumstances (e.g., for material false statements, ' in response to conditions that would have warranted refusal of a license j 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 license 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 l imposition of civil penalties for violations of regulations implementing 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 penalties for knowing and conscious failures to provide certain safety information to the NRC. 14
. . .s.,
3 { l
- l 1
l Chapter-18 of the Atomic Energy Act provides for varying. levels of. . icriminal penalties (i.e., monetary fines and imprisonment) for willful violations of the Act and regulations or orders issued under Sections 65, 161(b), 161(1), or 161(o) of the Act. Section 223 provides that criminal- )i penalties may be-imposed on certain individuals employed by firms constructing or . supplying basic components of'any utilization facility if the individual knowingly'and willfully violates NRC 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 i nuclear fuel. A1leged or suspected criminal violations of the Atomic Energy Act are referred to the Department of Justice for appropriate action. B. PROCEDURAL FRAMEWORK 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 l forth the procedures for issuing notices of violation. The procedure to be used in assessing civil pen.alties 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 of violation and proposed imposition of a civil penalty. The licensee is provided an opportunity to contest in writing the proposed imposition of a !j i civil penalty. After evaluation of the licensee's response, the Director l may mitigate, remit, or impose the civil penalty. An opportunity is provided for a hearing if a civil penalty is imposed. 15
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 l taken is set forth in 10 CFR 2.202. The mechanism for modifying a license l by order is set forth in 10 CFR 2.204. These sections of Part 2 provide an opportunity for a hearing to the affected licensee. However, the NRC is authorized to make orders immediately effective if tne public health. I safety or interest so requires or, in the case of an order to show cause, j if the alleged violation is willful. III. SEVERITY OF VIOLATIONS , Regulatory requirements 2/ have varying degrees of safety, safeguards, or environmental significance. Therefore, the relative importance of each violation must be identified as the first step in the enforcement process. Consequently, violations are categorized in terms of five levels of severity to show their relative importance within each of the following eight activity areas: I I. Reactor Operations; II. Facility Construction; I I. Safeguards; l 2/ The term " requirement" as used in this policy means a legally binding requirement such as a statute, regulation, license condition, technical specification, or crder. 16
s .+ 7 , . 4 o,, q< - , c , i
, s. s-m :w.
i~ , .. . IV. : Health Physics;l ih,
.V" Transportation;. ;
,' ,VI'. Fuel) Cycle and Materials Operations;- .
VII.' Miscellaneous Matters;.and w 'VIII. Emergency Preparedness. gj LLicensed'activitiesLnot directly covered by-one.of the above listed areas,' e.g.,: export license l activities 4will,be placed in the activity area"most? suitable inflight ofithe particular violation involved.. Within each
, activity, area, Severity Level'I has'been assigned to violations that are the most s_1gnificant and. Severity Level V. violations are-the.'least' significant. < Severity' Level I and IILviolations are of very significant. q regulatory concern In general, violations that are included in these severity categorie's involve' actual.or high potential impact on the public.
L Severity Level:III violations are cause for significant concern. . Severity Level IVfviolations 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. ; ComparisonsLofsignificancebetweenactivityareasareinappropriate. For
. example, the immediacy of any hazard to the public associated with Severity i Level.I violations in Reactor 0perations is not directly comparable to that a ' associated with Severity Level I violations in Reactor Construction.
17
, 1
^
l While examples are provided in Supplements I through VIII,for determining l 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 particular violation. In some cases, violations may,be evaluated _in the aggregate and a single <, ' severity level assigned for a group of violations, b I 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 wi11 fulness. The term "wi11 fulness" as used here embraces a spectrum of violations ranging from deliberate intent to violate or falsify to and including careless disregard for requirements. Wi11 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 i violation involving wi11 fulness, consideration will be given to such 1 factors as the position of the person involved in the violation (e.g.,
~, 1 first-line supervisor or senior manager), the significance of any I underlying violation, the intent of the violator (i.e., negligence not amounting to careless disregard, careless disregard, or deliberateness),
and the economic advantage, if any, gained as a result of the violation. The relative weight given to each of these factors in arriving at the 18
l
, z I
appropriate severity level will.be dependent on the circumstances'of the violation. 1heNRCexpecthlicenseestoprovidefull, T complete, timely,and' accurate
~
information'and reports. .Accordingly, unless.otherwise categorized in the Supplements, th'e 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 ,
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 i
' untimely report, in contrast to no report, may be reduced depending on the circumstances surrounding the matter.
1
.'IV. ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCES
~Whenever the NRC has learned of the existence of a potential violation q for which a civil penalty or other escalated enforcement action may be warranted, or recurring-nonconformance on the part of a vendor, j i
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 IV 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 l causes, and the licensee's or vendor's corrective actions, (2) determine ;
1 whether there are any aggravating or mitigating circumstances, and ! l i 19 I
m. s c w ,- . 3-( l ,
- 7. -
!(3) obtain other information whir:h will. help determine the appropriate f
s enforcement. action.. i E, , , In. addition,'during the enforcement conference..the licensee or vendor-twill be given an opportunity to explain to'the NRC what corrective
-actions.(if any) were taken or will be taken.followingLdiscovery of.
the potential. violation or nonconformance. Licensees.or' vendors will' be told when'a meeting is an enfor n mnt conference. ' Enforcement
~
conferences will not normally be open to the public. When.neededtoprotectthepublichealthand.safetyorcommon' defense x and security, escalated enforcement' action,'such as the issuance of an immediately. effective order nodifying, suspending, or revoking'a license, s will be taken prior to the enforcement conference. 'In such: cases, an enforcement conference may be held.after the escalated enforcement action
.is taken, l
V. ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS This section describes the enforcement sanctions available to NRC and specifies the conditions under which each may be used. The basic sanctions are notices of violation, civil penalties, and orders of various i types. Additionally, related administrative mechanisms such as bulletins -' and' confirmatory action 1stters, notices of nonconformance and notices of deviation are used to supplement the enforcement program. In selecting 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. With very 20 f i i _z____ o _ _ _ _ _ _ __ d
u - - - ,- - - - - - -- - - ~ o 57 ' ' M . 'l ,
+}
1U -
, )
i r
-1 limited exceptions, whenever a viol'ation of NRC requirements is i;fentified, 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 appropriate in the form of a Notice of Violation requiring a formal : t,' response from the recipient describing i_ts corrective actions;..In situations involving nonconformance on the part of vendor, a Notice > of.Nonconformance will be issued. The relatively small number of cases
-j
', involving elevated enforcement action receives substantial _ attention by a
the'public, and may have significant impact on the licensee's' operation. ! These elevated enforcement actions include civil l penalties; orders modifying,' suspending or_ revoking licenses; or orders to cease and desist' from designated activities. A. NOTICE OF VIOLATION A notice of violation is a written notice setting forth one or more i 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 recurrence; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved. NRC may require responses to notices of a violation to be under oath. Normally, responses under oath will be
- i 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 21
.. ~. _ _ __
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 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. 1 B. CIVIL PENALTY A civil penalty is a monetary penalty that may be imposed for violation of (a) certain specified licensing provisions of the Atomic Energy Act or supplementary NRC rules or orders, (b) any requirement 4 r which a license may be revoked, or (c) reporting requirements under Section 206 of the Energy Reorganization Act. Civil penalties are designed to emphasize the need for lasting remedial action and to deter future violations. Civil penalties are imposed absent mitigating circumstances for Severity Level I and II violations, are considered for Severity Level III violations, and may be imposed for Severity Level IV violations that are similar E to previous violations for which the licensee did not take effective ! corrective action, i i E Th e word "similar," as used in this policy, refers to those violations which could have been reasonably expected to have been prevented by the licensee's corrective action for the previous violation. 22 - _ . _ _ h
I
'y .f, v
[ d -Inapplying'thisguidancefor-SeverityLevelIVviolations,NRCnorma11yf 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.
'l y Civil penalties will'normally be assessed _for. knowing and conscious violations of the reporting requirements of.Section'206 of the Energy.
1 Reorganization Act, and for any willful violation of any Commission: requirement including those atLany severity level. NRC imposes.different' levels of; penalties for different severity level' 4 violations and different classes of licensees. TablesJ1A and 1B'show the' base civil penalties for.various reactor, fuel cycle, and mat'erials programs. -The structure of these tables generally takes into account the j gravity of'the violation as'a primary consideration and the: ability to pay as a secondary consideration. Generally, operations involving greater j inuclear material inventories and. greater' potential consequences to the public and licensee employees _ receive higher civil penalties.- Regarding 1 the secondary factor of ability of various classes of licensees to pay the i civil penalties, it is not the NRC's intention that the economic impact of j a civil penalty be such that it puts a licensee out of business (orders, -l rather than civil penalties, are used when the intent is to terminate ?a- licensed activities) er adversely affects a licensee's ability to safely i
- conduct licensed activities. The deterrent effect of civil penalties is best served when the amounts of such penalties take into account a licensee's " ability to pay." In determining the amounts of civil l
penalties-for licensees for whom the tables do not reflect the ability to j j I i 1 23 i L _ -_-.--_._--__o
>.m -
i 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-
' detection,' correction, and reporting of problems- that may. constitute or lead to, violation of regulatory requirements. -This is emphasized by-
.giving credit for effective licensee audit programs'when licensees find,.
. a
. correct, and report problems expeditiously and effectively. .To~ encourage {
licensee,self-identification and correction of violations and to av'oid- ]j
, potential concealment of problems of safety significance, application of?
I the adjustment factors set forth below'may result in no civil penalty being assessed for violations which are identified, eported-(if. 3 l required), and effectively corrected by the licensee. 1 On the other hand, ineffective licensee programs for problem 1 identification or correction are unacceptable. In cases involving willfulness, flagrant NRC-identified violations, repeated. poor performance in an area of concern, or serious breakdown in management controls, NRC-intends to apply it~s full enforcement authority where such action is' q warranted, including issuing appropriate orders and assessing civil penalties for continuing violations on a per day basis, up to the statutory limit of $100,000 per violation, per day. In this regard,.while management involvement, direct or indirect, in a violation may lead to an increase in the civil penalty, the lack of such involvement may not be used to mitigate e civil penalty. 1 24
. .v ; ,
W , .y m
> ~
.s , ,
y ; {i J. I ,.. f ; , .. f H , r_,. LA110wance'of'mitigationcouldencouragelackofmana'gementinvolvementin- ,,
, a licensed.activitiesandaiecreaseinprotectionofthepublichealthand-safety.- '
j x l 3 .- 1 NRCreviews.eachproposedcivilpenaltycaseonitsownmeritsandl adjusts, the base ciYi1 penaltysvalues upward or downward appropriately. .TablesL1A-and 1B' 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. Prompt'. Identification and Reporting l Reduction of.up to 50% of the base civil' penalty 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 length of time the violation existed prior to discovery, the opportunity available to discover the violation, the eate of discovery and the promptness and completeness of any rea" ired report. No consideration will be given to this factor if the licensee does not take immediate action to correct the problem upon discovery,
- 2. Corrective Action to Prevent Recurrence -
j Recognizing that corrective action is always required to meet regulatory requirements, the promptness and extent to which the licensee takes corrective action, including actions to prevent recurrence, may be considered in modifying the civil penalty to 25 t-
- .a-_s-.=-_---_---------- u- . - ----.-
j . .. , c ,
,.t',
be assessed. Unusually prompt and extensive corrective action may result in reducing the proposed civil penalty as much as'50% of the. c base value shown in' Table 1. On the other 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 ninimally acceptable. In weighing this factor, consideration will be- l 2 given to, among other things, the timeliness of the corrective-action, degree of licensee initiative, and comprehensiveness of the corrective action--such as whether thd action is focused narrowly to the specific violation or. broadly to the general area of concern. 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 in the general area of concern. On the other hand, the base civil penalty may be-increased as much as 100% for prior poor performance in th.e general area of concern. In weighing this factor, consideration will be given to, among other things, the effectiveness of previous corrective action for similar problems, overall performance such as Systematic Assessment I of Licensee Performance (SALP) evaluations for power reactors, j and prior enforcement history i.,cluding Severity Level IV and V violations in the area of concern. For example, failure to implement ; previous corrective action for prior similar prcblems may result in an increase in the civil penalty. l 26 t L. _ . ___- l
. . _ ~ _ _ .- .
, p; 1 i
...- i
' 4. Prior Notice of Similar Events The base civil penalty may be: increased as much as 50% for cases:
where-the' licensee had prior knowledge of a problem as a resu2t.
.of a licensee ' audit, or specific NRC'or: industry notification,
'and had failed to take effective preventive steps.
- 5. Multiple Occurrences 1
The~ base civil penalty may be increased as much as 50% where multiple. examples of'a particular' violation _are identified during. , the inspection period. The above factors are additive. However, in no instance will a {: " civil penalty for any one violation exceed $100,000 per day. 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 example: (1).If a licensee is aware of the existence of a condition which 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, subject to a separate i i additional civil penalty. 1 (2) If a licensee is unaware of a condition resulting in a continuing violation, but clearly should have been aware of the condition or had an opportunity to correct the condition but failed to do so, a separate violation and attendant civil penalty may be considered for each day that the licensee clearly 27 i
.___ 9 L , --
r should have'been aware of the condition or had an opportunity to - correct the condition, but failed to do so. I l (3) Alternatively, whether or not a licensee is aware or should have been aware of a violation'that continues for more than one- l day, the civil penalty imposed for one violation may be increased to reflect the added significance resulting from the duration of j the violation. The Tables and the mitigating factors determine the civil penalties which may be assessed for'each violation. However, to focus on the fundamental underlying causes of a problem for which enforcement action appears to be '!
. 1 warranted, the cumulative total for all violations which contributed to or 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 wnich, if viewed independently, , could. lead to civil penalty action by itself, then separate civil j penalties may be assessed for each such fundamental problem. In' addition, the failure to make a required report of an event requiring such reporting i is considered a separate problem and will normally be assessed a separate ; i civil penalty, if the licensee is aware of the matter that should have been reported. l f f I l l 28 s l l
- y- .-
x 1 s i
<a P
I TABLE 1A, i BASE CIVIL PENALTIES
.c Transportation l
_ Plant 10perations'. Type A i
- Const. Health: Greater'than Quantity :
Physics and'EP- . Safeguards Type A' Quantity 1/ or less 2/ .l l
- a. Power Reactors $100,000 $100,000. $100,000_- $5,000 .
j: -b. Test Reactors- ~10,000 10,000 10,000 2,000:
- c. Research Reactors _& 5,000 5,000 5,000' 1,000 g
. Critical Facilities j
'd. Fuel Fabricators 25,000- 100,000 4/
~
25,000 5,000 'j and' Industrial. i Processors 3/ ~ 1 l
- e. Mills and Uranium 10,000 -- 5,000 2,000 l Conversion Facilities f..Industria1' Users 10,000 -- 5,000 2,000 of Material 5/
- g. Waste Disposal- 10,000 -- 5,000 2,000 Licensees
- h. Academic or Medical 5,000 -- 2,500 1,000. !
Institutions 6/ i 1..Other Naterial 1,000 -- 2,500 1,000 Licensees J/ Includes irhadiated 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, and excepted quantities and articles. ; 3/ Large firms engaged in manufacturing or distribution of byproduct, source, or special nuclear material. 4/ This~ amount refers to Category 1 licensees (as defined in 10 CFR 73.2 (bb)). l Licensed fuel fabricators not authorized to possess Category 1 material have l a base penalty amount of $50,000.
- 5/ Includes industrial radiographer, nuclear pharmacies, and other industrial users.
6/ This applies to nonprofit institutions not otherwise categorized under sections "a" through "g" in this table. 29 L _ _ _ _ -_ _ __ _
y.. . . !, d ' , F _'g ; ~.L. ..) . .
.i N 1 g
i' I!O t
-TA.BLE'1B I? >
. BASE CIVIL PENALTIES .
-)
1 BASE CIVIL. PENALTY. AMOUNT. .,. j1 SEVERITY LEVEL (% of Amount Listed in Table 1A) : I' l'00%
'II- 80%'
'III 50% .. f IV 15%~
J V 5%' I s 1 1 I
'.i ib
! f i
30
1 C. ORDERS j l 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 i such other action as may be proper (see 10 CFR 2.202'and 2.204). Orders L may be issued as set forth below. Orders may also be issued in lieu of, 1 or in addition to, civil penalties, as appropr.iate, i
.- t (1)' License Modification Orders are issued when some change in licensee equipment, procedures, or management controls is necessary. j i
(2) Suspension Orders may be used: (a) .To remove.a threat to the public health and safety, common l
. defense and security, or the environment; (b) To stop facility construction when (1) further work could i preclude or significantly hinder the identification or correction of an improperly constructed safety-related system or i component, or.(ii) the licensee's quality assurance program implementation is not adequate to provide confidence that construction activities are being properly carried out; (c) When the licensee has not responded adequately to other l
)
enforcement action; } 4 l 31 j
r. j y V I q l (0 .(d) 'When the licensee interferes with the conduct of an inspection i J or investigation; or~ (e) For any reason not mentioned above for which license revocation 1 is legally authorized. J i la 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 . 1 is not willful.and adequate corrective action has been taken. .i d (3) Revocation Orders may be used: ) (a) When a licensee is unable or unwilling to comply with NRC j l requirements, j
-1 (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, (d) When a licensee refuses to pay a fee required by 10 CFR )
Part 170, or l (e) For any other reason for which revocation is authorized under i Section 186 of the Atomic Energy Act (e.g., any condition which l would warrant refusal of a license on an original application). 1 32
4 i (4)=' Cease'and; Desist Orders are typically used to stop an unauthor.ized j
. activity that has. continued after_ notification by NRC that such- !
activity is unauthorized. : 1 Orders are'made effective immediately, without prior opportunity for
, hearing. whenever it is determined that-the public health, interest, or q
- safety so requires, or when the order is' responding to a 'violatioi) i i
involving willfulness. Otherwise, a prior opportunity for a hearing'on' j the order is afforded. For cases in which the NRC believes a basis could' 'j reasonably exist for not-taking the action as proposed, the licensee will :l ordinarily be afforded an opportunity to show cause why'the order should I 1 not be issued in the proposed manner. D. ESCALATION OF ENFORCEMENT SANCTIONS ; NRC considers violations of Severity Levels I, II, or III to.be serious. ; 1 If serious violations occur, NRC will, where necessary, issue orders in j conjunction with civil penalties to achieve immediate 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 similar Severity level I, II, or III violations are set forth in Table 2. The actual ! progression to be used in a particular case will depend on the j However, enforcement sanctions will normally escalate for I circumstances. recurring similar violations, f' l 33 ,
)
L_- - ._ __ __ __ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _________ _ _ _ ___ _ _j
Normally the progression of enforcement actions for similar violations will be based on violations under a single license. When more than one facility is covered by a single license, the normal progression will be based on similar violations at an individual facility and not on similar violations under the same license. However, it should be noted that under some circumstances, e.g., where there is comon control over some facet of facility operations, similar violations may be charged even though the second violation occurred at a different facility or under a different license. For example, a physical security violation at Unit 2 of a dual unit plant that repeats an earlier violation at Unit 1 might be considered similar. 34
= ,. - ,, , ,
+
a
. 1 +
l * ,
- n. ' ;< <
, 1 t- TABLE 2
- f EXAMPLES OF PROGRESSION OF ESCALATED ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS FOR SIMILAR- 1 VIOLATIONS-IN THE-SAME ACTIVITY AREA UNDER THE-SAME LICENSE j ,
Number of similar violations from the date. 1
> Severity of the last. inspection-or.within.the previous- 1 of two years (whichever period is greater)
-Violation 1st 2nd -3rd '
-I a+b a+b+c- d II ~a .a+b .a+b+c ;
- e. '
III' 'a. a+b
- a. Civil penalty.
- 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. '
g c. Show cause for modification or revocation of the license, as appropriate.
- d. Further action, as appropriate.
i e l l 4 35
n, w , [L q 1
- W i
'E. ' ENFORCEMENT' ACTIONS' INVOLVING INDIVIDUALS' l m l Enforcement actions involving individuals, including licensed operators, !
-are significant personnel actions,.which will be closely controlled and judiciously applied. :An enforcement action will normally be taken only !
l when there is little doubt that the individual fully understood, or i l should have understood, his or her responsibility; knew, or should have j
'i known,'the required actions; and knowingly, or with careless disregard
'l (i.e., with more than mere negligence) failed to take required. actions j which have actual ~or potential safety significance. Most transgressions -
of individuals at the level.of Severity Level III, IV or V. violations !
.will be handled by citing only the facility licensee.
More serious violations, including those involving the. integrity of,an j individual (e.'g., lying to the NRC) concerning matters within.the scope ! of the individual's responsibilities, will be considered for. enforcement action against the' individual. Action against tho individual, however, will not be taken if.the improper action by the individual was caused l by management failures. The following examples of situations illustrate this concept:
*. Inadvertent individual mistakes resulting from inadequate training ,
'I' or guidance provided by the facility licensee.
l Inadvertently missing an insignificant procedural requirement when the action is routine, fairly uncomplicated, and there is no unusual I i 36 f
; y - ; > .( ,
4 1
- 1 ,' 'g
.[ A .
. circumstance. indicating that the. procedures should be. referred to and- 'i
'followed step-by-step.
1 c
*~ LCompliance with an express direction of management, such as.the Shift Supervisor or Plant Manager,'resulted in a violation unless'the
.4 individual-did not express his or her concern or objection to the direction.
L , l Individual error directly resulting from following the technical
. advice'of.an expert unless the advice was clearly unreasonable and
' @ ;i, __ 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. Examples of situations which could result in enforcement actions against individuals include, but are not limited to, violations which involve: n j i; *- Recognizing a violation of procedural requirements and willfully ' l
)
not taking corrective action. -i ). Willfully performino unauthorized bypassing of required reactor l safety systems. 1 Willfully defeating alarms which have safety significance. Unauthorized abandoning of reactor controls. 37
-i . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _
g- ,
.s . . :
']
Inattention to duty such as sleeping or being' intoxicated while on
't duty. 1 1
l l Willfully taking actions that violate TS 1.imiting Conditions for' , j
.s q
Operation. i 1
, /
Falsifying records required for NRC regulations'or by.the facility licensee. ! d
. Willfully failing to take "imediate actions" of emergency procedures.
l Willfully withholding safety'significant information rather than making such information known to appropriate supervisory or technical personnel. Any proposed enforcement action against individuals must be done with the ,
-concurrence of the Deputy Executive Director for Regional' Operations. The opportunity for an Enforcement Conference with the individual will usually-be provided, j Examples of sanctions that may be appropriate against NRC-licensed operators.are:
1 issuance of a letter of reprimand to be placed in the operator's license file, issuance of a Notice of Violation, and 1 E 38 L' i Q ___ _-
. o ,
j
-a suspension for a specified period, modification, or revocation of I
the license. .l 1 l The sanctions are' listed in escalating order of significance. M The I l particular sanction to be used should be determined on a case-by-case basis, q e < j In the case of an unlicensed individual, an Order modifying the facility y license to require the removal of the individual from all nuclear-related
- activities for a specified period of time or indefinitely may be appropriate. j i
F. REOPENING' CLOSED ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS- 1
- i I
If significant new information is received by the NRC which indicates ) that an enforcement sanction was incorrectly applied, that action could be reopened to correct the record. This should occur only (1) if remedial i I action, e.g., in the form of an Order, is necessary to abate the continued { i harm of a violation to the public health and safety, the common defense i and security, or the environment, or (2) if new information shows that a i violation was less serious than originally believed or that it did not i occur. Enforcement actions would not normally be reopened where the only l change to the prior action would be to increase the severity level of a violation or to impose or increase a civil penalty. Reopening an i Y Except for individuals subject to civil penalties under section 206 of the 1 Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, NRC will not normally impose a civil penalty against an individual. However, section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) gives the Commission authority to impose civil penalties for violations'on "any person." " Person" is broadly defined in Section 11s of the AEA to include individuals, a variety of organizations, and any l representatives er agents. This gives the Commission authority to impose civil pere' ties on employees of licensees or on separate entities when a violation of a requirement directly imposed on them is committed. 39 1
t b ,, , t
- enforcement action is; expected to occur only rarely.and would require- j specific approval of ths Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations. j l
i G. EXERCIS')0FDISCRETIONE l l
- 1. Because.the NRC wants to encourage and-support licensee initiative for self-identification.and correction of problems,iNRC will not generally. issue a' notice of violation'for a violation that meets all )
of the following criteria:.
, jh
- a. It was identified by.the licensee; !
'I i
i
- b. It fits in Severity Level IV or V;
- c. It was reported,.if required; 1
d .- It was or will be corrected, including measures'to pr. event l recurrence, within a reasonable time;-and d i
- e. It was not a violation that=could reasonably be expected to have been prevented by the licensee's corrective action for a ;
previous violation. 1
- 2. The NRC.may also refrain from issuing a Notice of Violation or a j proposed civil penalty for violations that meet all of the i 1
following criteria; q
- a. 1) NRC has taken significant enforcement action based upon a major safety event contributing to an extendeo shutdown i of an operating reactor or a material licensee (or a work j 40 l
= = _ _-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ __ _ i
- n. :: , r - 7g; y ,p
. n w ,
t u stoppage at a construction site), or the licensee is forced into an extended shutdown or work stoppage related. i- , to generally poor performance over a long period;~ii) the i L ,
=licenseehusdeveloped:andisaggressivelyimplementlng-during the shutdown a comprehensive. program for problem i L .
, e . .
s
. identification and correction;.and iii) NRC concurrence is-
-a needed by the. licensee prior to restart.
- b. 'Non-willful violations.are identified by the licensee (asy opposed to the NRC) as the result of its comprehensive program,.
- or the violations are identified as a result of an employee'-
allegation to the licensee. If NRC identifies the. violation, the NRC should. determine whether enforcement action.is necessary to achieve remedial action. i' .
- c. The violations are based upon activities of the licensee prior to the events leading to the shutdown, and d.. The non-willful violations would normally not'b'e categorized as ,
higher than Severity Level III violations under the NRC's Enforcement Policy. i No' withstanding the above, a civil penalty may be proposed in a case where multiple Severity Level III violations are discovered. This action would ; be taken when judgment warrants it on the circumstances of the individual case. 41 = _ = _ - _ _ - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ -
)
iiijg % m.- , H. RELATED ADMINISTRATIVE' ACTIONS
.i
? 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'1etters to supplement its' enforcement _ program. NRC expects licensees and vendors to adhere to any obligations and commitments resulting:from these processes and will
~
not hesitate to issue. appropriate orders to licensees to make sure that E such commitments are' met. (1). Bulletins, Information Notices and Generic Letters are written
'I notifications to groups of licensees identifying specific problems i ^
and recommending specific actions. (2) Notices 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. I 4
)
(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 Nonconformance are written notices describing non-licensees' failures to meet commitments which have not been made legally binding requirements by NRC. An example is a commitment made in a procurement
~
42
'4 fi-(by3
[g" .j
, contract'with allicensee as: required by 10 CFR.Part 50,' Appendix.B.
[' Notices cof Nonconformances request non-licensees to. provide' written-explanations.or statements describing correctiveisteps'(taken or , u . ..
. . .\
planned), the results: achieved.-the-dates whenfcorrect1ve actions' y7 w - O will be completed, and measures taken to preclude recurrence. t I. REFERRALS:TO DEPARTMENT 0F JUSTICE
~
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 ldoes'not' preclude ~ b
- th' NRC from taking other enforcement act under this General. Statement' of Policy.. However, such actions will-be. coordinated with'the. Department; .
d of. Justice to the extent practicable.
~
g D . l , j VI.- PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF ENFORCEMENT-ACTIONS 4 L fin accordance' with 10 CFR 2.790,.all enforcement actions and licensees'
~ a responses are publicly available for inspection. 'In-addition,. press.' l releases'are generally issued for civilpenaities'and or ers. 'InLthe' case' -{
j., of orders and civil penalties related to violations,at Sey'erity I Levels I',- II, or III, press releases are issued at the time of the order or 1ih'e _, ij i proposed imposition of the civil penalty. Press releases are not normally 1 i issued for Notices of Violation. 4 l r ,- g VII. RESPONSIBILITIES J' The Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations (DEDRO), as the , principal enforcement officer of the NRC, has been delegated the authority l' 43 J l' / 1 L . - - . . _ _ _ _ i .dcJ
W ,m1"
~
e, h[ , y toissuenoticesof? violations,civilpnalties,andorders.E' Regional i ." Administrators'may also issue notices of violation for' Severity Level IYc and V_ violations and may sign. notices of violation'for Severity Level?III-1 m , violations with.no. proposed civil penalty and proposed civil. penalty b ,
- actions with the concurrence of,the DEDRO. In.re ognition that the-regulation of nuclear activities in many cases does not-lend itself to a mechanistic treatment,.the'DEDRO or the. Regional Administrator must exercise judgment'and discretion in determining the severity levels:of the.
d violations and the appropriate enforcement sanctions, including the ') decision to impose a civil' penalty and the amount of.such penalty, i
-after.considering the. general'princililes of this statement of policy "
e and the technical significance of the violations and the surrounding ! circumstances. i 1 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 immediate action): J,
-(1) An' action affecting a licensee's operation that requires balancing L the public health and safety or common defense and security The Director, Office of Enforcernent, acts for the Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations in the latter's absence or as 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 ncrmal use of this authority by NRR, NMSS, and OSP will be confined to actions necessary in the interest of public health and safety. The Director, Office of Administration and-Resources Management, has been delegated the authority to issue orders where licensees violate Commission regulations by nonpayment of license fees. (It is planned to consider redelegation of some or all of l these authorities to the Administrators of the NRC Regional Offices over i the next several years.) 44 L-____r_-_______-_
v w ~ n - - - - ~ --- -~ ~~---- - - -
~ - - - -
,o 1 .. 1 ?w ,
m
^'% n ,.
' \ ' 's, '
? , f.- ..
.9 Ik ., s,
+g
. . \:
limpiicatir$kofinot'opiratiASwith"thepothntialradiologicalor-
+ ,
2 other hazards' 'I associated with continued operation.. l
'I
.(2) Proposals to impose civil penaltie'sLin amounts greater than 3 times-the Severity Level:I values'shown in Table 1A;
)
\'
(b M proposed. enforcement action that involves a. Severity Level I. d t
-violations' -
1 L 7 (4)y,ngenforcementactionthatinvolvesafinding'ofamaterialfalse
. .w
, ktatement;. .i j i
y (5) Refraining.from taking enforcement action for matters meeting the .
- m. a criteria of $ect, e ion V.F.2 i
(6)q Any action the Office 'Director believes warrants-Comission involve-
; b ;; .
N 1
, ment; or'
... g q
, , j- n, 1 j7) An~pr,oposed'enfqrct$entactiononwhichtheCommissionaskstobe l a
3 j
. L .
1' consuited. , ; (, a I 4 l l
' VIII. VENDOR ENFORCEEN" j q
y The Ccmis'sion's enforcement pollcy is also applicable to non-licensees 5
.(' (vanders). Vendors of products or services provided for use in nuclear
,n s ,
N activities are subject to cErtaih Acquirements designed to ensure that j n , w kha the products or services sdspiied that could affect safety are of high 4 J r j , y quality. Thr.ough -
.s procurement ^ contracts with reactor licensees, vendors
, 44 ' , 3
' w ', are requirehjo have cha11ty assurance programs that meet applicable !
1 a
, w q z, ") . ,
A% h
'3 2 ,
. , g. h [ (, I .i
*( O -s g s
*Nh@Q_ _ _ _ _ .. _ _ " .l
~ -
L-p requirements including 10 CFR Part.50, Appendix B, and 10 CFR Part.71, Subpart H. Vendors of reactor and materials licensees and Part 71 licensees are subject to'the requirements of 10 CFR-Part 21 regarding reporting of defects in basic components, i The NRC conducts inspections of reactor-licensees to determine whether they are ensuring that vendors are meeting their contractual obligations with regard .I to quality 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 reactor vendors to determine if,they are meeting their obligations. These inspections include examination of the quality assurance programs and their j implementation by the vendors through examination of product quality. l The NRC may also inspect vendors, including suppliers of Part 71 and j materials licensees, to determine whether they are complying with Part 21. I 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 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 failures to ensure that their i i vendors have programs that meet applicable requirements including Part 21. Notices of Violation will be issued for vendors which violate Part 21. Civil penalties will only be imposed against individual directors or 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 commitments related to NRC activities. 46
f y y y.2 , m ) li- j ., ,
-:i. ,
m hj ll5 l ,
- SUPPLEMENT I. .. SEVERITY CATEGORIES 4 , ,' .
IREACTOROPERATIONS, , i
+
- v s ,
t; _ ;, ;
-A.. SeverityI-!Violationsinvo1vingforexample: U
,?
r.
. s. ,
-I
~
- 1. A Safety Limit, as defined in 10'CFR 50.36 and'the Technica1'Specifi-'-
cations, being exceeded; 4 or L .2.- disystem5/ designed,to preventior mitigate'a' serious *s'afety event not , being able.to perform'its intended safety function E when actually.
~
o called upon to work;' .l
< 3.. 'An accidental'cr'iticality; or 4.- Release of. radioactivity offsite greater than ten (10) times the q TechnicalSpecificationslimit.S/
LI 5/" System"asusedinthesesupplemenis,includesadministrativeand managerial control systems, 'as well as physical systems. 2/ ntended I safety function"-means the total safety function,:and is not directed toward a loss of redundancy. For example, considering a BWR's high pressure 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. 1 El 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.
l 47 l
.w .
s. yl
;. B. SeverityLII.--Violationsinvolvingforexample:
)
- l. A system designed to prevent or mitigate serious safety events not !
j being able to perform its intended safety function; or i 2.. . Release of' radioactivity offsite greater _than five (5) times the Technical Specifications limit. l l C. Severity III - Violations involving for example: I [
- 1. A'significa6t violation of a Technical Specification Limiting i Condition for Operation where the appropriate Action Statement was ,
n'ot satisfied within the time allotted by the Action Statement, )
'such as: I 1
- a. In a pressurized water reactor, in the applicable modes, having 1 l
one high-pressure safety injection pump inoperable for a period j l in excess of that allowed by the action statement; or {
- b. In a boiling water reactor, one primary containment isolation valve j 1
inoperable for a period in excess of that allowed by the action -{ l statement. '
- 2. A system designed to prevent or mitigate a serious safety event not being able to perform its intended function under certain conditions (e.g., safety system not operable unless offsite power is available; L materials or components not environmentally qualified); )
i 48
s -
, {
aq I l / .
- 3. Dereliction of duty on the part of personnel: involved in licensed activities; ;
.l
'?
I
- 4. Changes in reactor parameters which cause unanticipated reductions in_
. margins of safety;.
1 5e Release of radioactivity offsite greater than the Technical i Specifications limit;
- 6. Failure to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59 such that.a required license amendment was not sought; or !
l a 7. Licensee failure to conduct adequate oversight of vendors resulting 1 in the use of products or services which are of defective or indeterminate quality and which have safety significance. l D. Severity IV - Violations involving for example: a l i
- 1. A less.significant violation of a Technical Specification Limiting j l
Condition for Operation where the appropriate Action Statement was I not satisfied within the time allotted by the Action Statement, such as: l
- a. In a pressurized water reactor, a 5% deficiency in the r.equired volume of the condensate storage tank; or I
- b. In a boiling water reactor, one subsystem of the two independent fiSIV leakage control subsystems inoperable. l l
l 49
y;, 7 -- . -- x -- y e,_ :; x '; 7 : 1 g- +_ 4 q
.2. Failure'to meet the requirements _of.10 CFR 60.69 that'does not: result: i
- -in a Severity Level I,-II, or'III violation;; 'l
- 3. Failure to meet regulatory requirements that~have more than' minor i.
safety or environmental significance;.or 7
- 4. Failure'to make a required Licensee Event Report.-
'f E.- Severity. Level V,- Violations that'have minor safety or environmental 1
significance. SUPPLEMENT II - SEVERITY CATEGORIES
.f PART 50 FACILITY. CONSTRUCTION 1 A .- . Severity I - Violations involving a structure or system that is- d completedE/ ni such a manner that it would not have satisfied its intended safety related purpose.
] 1 1
B. Severity II - Violations involving for example:
- 1. A: breakdown in the quality assurance program as exemplified by deficiencies in construction QA related to more than ore work ;
1 activity (e.g., structural, piping, electrical, foundations). Such E" Completed"meanscompletionofconstructionincludingreviewandacceptance by the construction QA organization. 50
Deficiencies normally involve the licensee's failure to conduct , . adequate audits or to take prompt corrective action on the basis of such audits and normally involve multiple examples of deficient.
~'
. construction or construction of unknown quality due to inadequate program implementation; or
- 2. A. structure or system tha't is completed in such a manner that it could have an adverse effect on the safety of operations. l
)
C. Severity III - Violations involving for example: j
~
- 1. 'A deficiency in a' licensee quality assurance _ program for construction 1 related to a single work activity (e.g., structural, piping, elec - -l trical or' foundations). Such significant deficiency normally I involves the licensee's failure to conduct adequate audits or.to take prompt corrective action on the basis of such audits, and normt11y 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. SeveHty IV - Violations involving failure to meet regulatory requirements including one or more Ouality Assurance Criterion not amounting tc 51 _ _ _ --=-- I
97 , , y, 3- t
-a q
3
;r .. 1
. Severity. Level.I, II,'or III violations that-have more than minor safety a
l or environmental significance.. ,
]-q
'E.- Severity V - Violations that have minor safety or environmental significance. j i
SUPPLEMENT III - SEVERITY CATEGORIES SAFEGUARDS l q A. . Severity I Violations involving for example: l I
- 1. -An act of radiological sabotage or actual theft, loss, or diversion j.
of aLformula quantity of strategic special nuclear materia 1Eb l (SSNM); l 2 .~ - Actual entry of an unauthorized individual into a vital area or 'i material access area from outside the protected area (i.e., penetration of both barriers) that was not detected at the time of entry; or !
- 3. Failure to promptly report knowledge of an actual or attempted theft or diversion of SSNM or ar act of radiological sabotage.
EbSee10CFR73.2(bb). l
- l. 52 ,
1
- e l
~ Severity II - Violations involving-for example:
B.
- 1. Actual theft, loss or. diversion of special nuclear material (SilM) of moderate.strategicsignificance;E!
- 2. Failure to control access such that all three elements of access control'(barrier, monitoring, and response) at the protected area or vital area are inadequate or two of three elements are inadequate in both the protected and vital area;
.i
- 3. Fail're u to implement approved compensatory measures when the central and secondary alarm stations are inoperable; 1
'4. Failure to establish ~or maintain safeguards systems designed or used to prevent or detect the unauthorized removal of a formula quantity of SNM from areas of authorized use or storage; or
- 5. Failure to use established transportation security systems designed -l or used to prevent the theft, loss, or diversion of a formula I
quantity of SNM or acts of radiological sabotage, j C. Severity III - Violations involving for example: l
- 1. Failure to control access such that two of the three elements of access control at the vital area or protected area barrier i are inadequate; E See 10 CFR 73.2(x).
53 l-L. , t .
1 . . ; . , yg l t g,a .
, M'
. Failure (tocontrolaccesstoatransportvehicleor)the'SNMbeing'
~
- 2. ,
g , , g , transported that does not constitute'a Severity I or II violation;- 7 .
. . ,, . N
- 3. - Failure to' establish or maintain safeguards, systems designed or used to prevent'or detect'the unauthorized removal of SNM of moderate.
sttategic significance' from areas of authorized use or storage !
, ,. d 4.. Failure to tmplement approvedLeompensatory measures when the central d (or secondary) alarm station is inoperable; 9: ;
^\
- 5. Failure to con' duct a proper search at the access control point that results in introduction to the site of firearms, explosives,-incendiary devices,.'or other items which could be used for industrial sabotage'; or i 6.. ' Failure to properly secure or protect classified or other sensitive safeguards ~information which would significantly. .i assist an individual in an act of 'l radiological sabotage or. theft of special nuclear material.
D.- Severity IV - Violations involving for example: i
- 1. Failure to establish or maintain safeguards systems designed or used to prevent or detect the unauthorized removal of SNM of low strategic significance 5 from areas of au'horized use or storage; E See 10 CFR 73.2(y).
54 ,
.e,i *P..'-
i
. l
- 2. Failure'to implement 10 CFR Parts 25 and 95 and information addressed:
1 under Section 142'of the Act, and the.NRC approved security plan relevant-to those parts; 3.- Failure to control access to a vital area or material access area from'inside the protected a,ea.or failure to control access.to the-
. protected area in that one of the three elements of access' control '
.is inadequate; -
1
- 4. -Failure to properly secure or: protect classified or other sensitive safeguards information which would not significantly assist an indi-
~
l l vidual in an act of-radiological-sabotage or theft of special nuclear nd erial; or : I ! i
- 5. Other violations, such as failure to follow an approved se.curity
- plan, that have more than minor safeguards significance.
E. Severity V - Violations that have minor safeguards significance, i l 1 1 55 l l
w ,
~ . ? ?; i ['-'
t
- s \ .l s
,l*
SUPPLEMENT IV - SEVERITY CATEGORIES n a . t HEALTH PHYSICS 10 CFR PART 20EI - A. . Severity'I Violations. involving for example:
~
- 1. . Single exposure of a worker in excess of 25 rems of' rediation to the
- i. whole body, 150 rems to the skin.of the whole body, or 375 rems to .i the' feet, ankles, hands, or' forearms;
,1
- 2. Annual whole body exposure of a member of the public in excess of 2.5 rems of radiation; l
- 3. Release of radioactive material to an unrestricted area in excess of l ten times the limits of 10 CFR 20.106;
- 4. Disposal of licensed material in quantities or concentrations in l l; . excess of ten times the limits of 10 CFR 20.303; or l
I
.i
- 5. Exposure of a worker in restricted areas of ten times the limits of 10 CFR 20.103.
-13/
Personnel overexposure and associated violations, incurred during a life saving effort, will be treated on a case-by-case basis. , L I 1 i 56
)
m^ ; ..
.r*i c1:
l' i I B. ' Severity II. : Violations involving for example: .l [ 1 1
, l I
'1. . . Single' exposure of a worker' i n excess of 5 rems of radiation to the. ;
4 ! whole body, 30 rems to the skin of the whole body, or 75 rems to the l i feet, ankles, hands or forearms; ; 1 2.. Annual whole body exposure of a member of the public in excess of 0.5 ;-j q rems of radiation, r,'
- 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) and 10 CFR 20.403(a)(2); !
1 l
- 5. Disposal of licensed material in quantities er concentrations in excess of five times the limits of 10 CFR 20.303; or j
- 6. . Exposure of a worker in restricted areas in excess of five times the j limits of 10 CFR 20.103.
1 i C. Severity III - Violations involving for example: ;
- 1. Single exposure of a worker in excess of 3 rems of radiation to the jl whole body, 7.5 rems to the skin of the whole body, or 18.75 rems to !
i the feet, ankles, hands or forearms; ! 57 _ _ = _ _ _ _ _. _ )
9, , ce: ' ij l' l [Q' i
.2. A radiation level 'n in unrestricted area such that an individual-could receive gree.ic than 100 millirem.in a one' hour period-or 500 millirem 1.n any seven consecutive days;.
, I
- 3. Failure to make.a 24-hour notification as required by 10 CFR. J
-l 20.403(b) or an immediate notification required by 10 CFR 20.402(a);' c.j l' 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 ! I into high radiation areas, such as'under reactor vessels'or in the .j viciriityof'exposedradiographicsources,withouthavingperformedan ] adequate survey, operation of a' radiation facility with a l nonfunctioning interlock system);. 1
- 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 Levels I or II; 7.- Exposure of a worker in restricted areas in excess of the limits of.
10 CFR 20.103; i
- 8. Release for unrestricted use of contaminated or radioactive material 1 or eouipment 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; 58
'i i .
l l i
- 9. Cumulative worker exposure above regulatory-limits when such cumu 1 j
a lative exposure reflects a' progrannatic, rather than an isolated .i weakness in radiation protection; i i
. 'i
- 10. Conduct of licensee activities by a technically _ unqualified i
. person; or
-11. Significant failure to control licensed material.
1 D. ' Severity TV - 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; 1'
- 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 J millirem in any seven consecutive days;
- 3. Failure to make a 30-day notification required by 10 CFR 20.405; i
i
- 4. Failure to make a followup written report as required by 10 CFR t 20.402(b), 20.408, and 20.409; or !
l
- 5. Any other matter that has more than minor safety or environmental j significance.
E. Severity V - Violations that have minor safety or environmental ! l significance. ; l i i 59
l,. . L
' SUPPLEMENT V - SEVERITY CATEGORIES TRANSPORTATIONEI o
' A. . Severity I - Violations of NRC transportation requirements involving i
for example:
- 1. Annual whole body radiation exposure of a member of the public in excess of 0.5 rems of radiation; or l
- 2. Breach of package integrity resulting in surface contamination or external radiation levels in excess of ten times the NRC limits.
i B. Severity II - Violations of NRC transportation requirements involving for example:
- 1. Breach of package integrity resulting in surface contamination or external radiation levels in excess of NRC requirements;
- 2. Surface contamination or external radiaticn levels in excess of five times NRC limits that did not resu?t from a breach of pr.ckage integrity; or E/ometransportationrequireirntsareappliedtomorethanonelicensee S
involved in the same activity such as e shipper (10 CFR 73.20) and a carrier (10 CFR 70.20a). When a violatton cf such a requirement occurr, enforcement action will be directed agal,1st the responsible licer,see
$<hich, under the circumstances of the case, may he one or more of the licensees involved.
60 = _
7 . 1 i
-(
h^, ' I !
~ 3. - Failure'to.make requi. red; initial notifications' associated with !
L
.. Severity Level.I.or.II violations.- l J
p. ! - C. Severity III - Violations of.NRC transportation. requirements: involving for , L i l- example: . l 1 ; (. . . .
. 4
-- 1. Breach of package integrity; !
i l 1 2.- Surfsce contamination or external radiation' levels in excess of, but less than a factor of~five above NRC requirements, that did not result from a breach of packsge integrity;. 1
- 3. Any noncomplier.ce with labelling, placarding, shipping paper, .j packagint;, 1cading, cc other requirements that could ressonably result in the follow 1og
- a. Improper identification'of the type, quantity, or form of l l
material;
.'i
- b. Failure of the carrier or recipient to exercise adequate controls; er
- c. Substantial potential for personnel exposure or contamination, or improper transfer of material;'or i
l
- 4. Failure to make required initial notification associated with
> , Severity Level III violations.
)
61 i
D. -Severity IV - Violations of NRC transportation requirements involving for example:
- 1. Package selection or preparation requirements which do net result in
'a breach of package integrity or surface contamination or external l i
radiation levels in excess of NRC requirements; or i
- 2. Other violations that have more than minor sefety or environmental significance. l E. Severity V - Violations that have minor safety or environmental significance.
t SUPPLEMENT VI - SEVERITY CATEGORIES FUEL CYCLE AND MATERIALS OPERATIONS A. Severity I - Violations involving for example:
- 1. Radiation levels, contamination levels, or releases that exceed ten times the limits specified in the license;
- 2. A system designed to prevent or mitigate a serious safety event not being operable when actually required to perform its design function; or
- 3. A nuclear criticality accident.
I J 62
7 ..
- c. ,
w l .; ' (. , s x B.. Severity'II'- Violations invciving for example: . . 1 !
- 1. Radiation levels, contamination levels, or-releases that exceed five )
' meslthe-limits specified in the license; or ti I 2. A system designed.to' prevent or mitigate a ser.ious safety event being 1
W ' d J inoperable.-
-]
.i C. Severity III - Violations involving for example: ,
- 1. Failure to control access to' licensed materials for radiation ;
purposes as specified by NRC requirements;
- 2. Possession or use of. unauthorized equipment or materials in the conduct of. licensee activities which degrades safety; !
i
- 3. Use of radioactive material on humans where such use is not authorized;
- 4. . Conduct of licensed activities-by a technically unqualified person; l
- 5. Radiation levels, contamination levels, or releases that exceed the limits specified in the license; or
- 6. Medical therapeutic misadministration. ;
D. Severity IV - Violations involving for example: 4
- 1. Failure to maintain patients hospitalized who have cobalt-60, !
cesium-137, or iridium-192 implants or to conduct required leakage or 63
m , ,
-v ,
n , " - Q: j
~
Lsai p, q t contamination' tests,corltouseproperlycalibratedequipment; - 4 L '2. .0ther violations,that have more than iinor-safety or environmental b 1 significance; or 'l 1 l !
- 3. . Failure to report medical diagnostic misadministration. 3 E. Severity V.-' Violations that have minor safety or. environmental t!
significance. j i
. SUPPLEMENT VII -' SEVERITY CATEGORIES 1
MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS 4 q A. Severity I - Violations involving for example: 1.. AMaterialFalseStatement(MFS)El in which the statement made was deliberately false;
- 2. Falsification of records which NRC requires be kept of significant information in which the records were deliberately falsified by or.
i with the knowledge of management; 9 E/nessence,aMaterialFalseStatementisastatementthatisfalseby I omission or commission and is relevant to the regulatory process. As can be seen in the examples, in determining the specific severity level of a violation involving material false statements or falsific6 tion of records, consideration will be given to such factors as the position of the person involved in the violation (e.g., first line supervisor or senior manager), the significance of the inforr.ation involved, and the intent of the I violator (i.e., negligence not amounting to careless disregard, careless disregard, or deliberateness). The relative weight given to each of these factors in arriving at the appropriate severity level will be dependent on the~ circumstances of the violation. 64
..y, ---m q 4 '
1 m 1 f 3
-1
- 3. A knowing and intentional failure to provide the notice required by j
- L. 1
'$ Part'21;'or f 4 Action by senior corporate management in violation of 10 CFR 50.7 i or similar regulations against an employee.
B. Severity II - Violations involving for example:
- 1. A MFS or a reporting failure, involving information which, had it been available to the NRC and accurate at the time the-information -
should have been submitted, would have resulted in regulatory. action
-or would.likely have resulted in NRC seeking further information;
- 2. A MFS in which the false statement was made with careless disregard; ;
- 3. Deliberate falsification of records which NRC requires be kept involving significant information;
- 4. Action by plant management above first-line supervision in violation of 10 CFR 50.7 or similar regulations.against an employee; or- l S. A failure to provide the notice required by Part 21. ;
C. Severity III - Violations involving for example:
- 1. A MFS not amounting to a Severity Level I or II violation. '
- 2. Deliberate falsification, or falsification by cr with the knowledge of management, of records which the NRC requires be kept that did not involve significant information.
- 3. Action by first-line supervision in violation of 10 CFR 50.7 or similar
- regulations against an employee; or
- 4. Inadequate review or failure to review such that, if an appropriate l review had been made as required, a Part 21 report would have been made.
65 l . .
y ,,y - r . ,
,4 , , , .
' > 'i
'? ' ' i' .i l
+ ,
, y
.! VJ 3
.' _ . .,G, s bD~ ; D.4 i5everitylIV'-xViolations'involvingforexample: ,
D f:
.}
InadequateLrevieworfailuretoreviewunderP5rt21orother
~
' 10 proced' ural l violations. associated with PartT21 with more than' minor safety: significance; b
, N 2.1 A false. statement caused by an inadvertent clerical or similar error 1 ' involving;information which, had it been availsble to NRC and accurate at the! time the information should have.been submitted, would U 1
.probably not have resulted in regulatory action or NRC seeking additional information; or E. ' Severity V -' Violations of minor procedural requirements of Part 21.
, 1 SUPPLEMENT VIII - SEVERITY CATEGORIES
. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS A. lSeverityI-Violationsinvolvingforexample: . 1 In a general emergency, licensee failure to promptly (1) correctly classify the' event, (2) make required notifications to responsible j Federal, State, and local agencies, or (3) respond to the event (e.g.,
assess actual or potential offsite consequences, activate emergency response facilities, and. augment shift staff). B. Severity II - Violations involving for example: I f
- 1. In a site area emergency, licensee failure to promptly (1) correctly I classify the event, (2) make required notifications to responsible i Federal, State, and local agencies, or (3) respond to the event 66
=_=
gw n 1, . -- - - -- - q
,m7 ,
w
,, :l
% ^'
8v E' -(e.g.~,_ assess-actual or potential offsite consequences, activate-emergency response facilities, and augme'nt shift staff);'or
~
1
' 2; Licensee failure to meet or implement more than:one emergency planning' standard. involving assessment or notification.
s. l C. Severity III - Violations involving for example: q
'* 1. In an alert, licensee failure to promptly (1) correctly classify the_ j i
event, (2) make required notifications to responsible Federal, State, l and local agencies, or (3) respond to the event (e.g., assess actual } q or potential offsite consequences, activate emergency response faci- d ! lities, and augment shift staff); or j
- 2. Licensee failure to meet or implement one emergency planning standard-involving assessment or notification.
1 D. Severity IV - Violations involving for example: j Licensee failure to meet or implement any emergency planning standard or requirement not directly related to assessment and notification.- l l 67
s t 'lk 1
~ E.: Severity V - Violations that have minor safety or environmental j l significance.-
@ Dated at Washington,' DC, 'this 2.34 day of h/eak1987. . For the Nuclear Regulatory Comission, j l ( 1 ; MJed C !
/ Samuel J. @ ilk, f Secretary oY the Commission. j I
i
!l l
i l l s
-l i
l
.l l
i l i l l l l l l l l 68 , l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _}}