ML20247H904
| ML20247H904 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 05/07/1998 |
| From: | Howell A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Mcgaha J ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. |
| References | |
| EA-98-132, NUDOCS 9805210282 | |
| Download: ML20247H904 (6) | |
Text
9 s
d' %
UNITED ST ATIS f
/
- .\\
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
\\
t D
\\
j.
,</ i REGION IV r
l b
g 611 RY AN PL AZA DRIVE, SUll F 400
,P AR L ING T ON. T E X AS 7bO118064 9 *****
May 7, 1998 EA 98-132 John R. McGaha, Vice President - Operations River Bend Station Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box 220 St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775
SUBJECT:
APPARENT VIOLATION OF 10 CFR 50.9 (NRC INVESTIGATION REPORT NO. 4-97-059)
Dear Mr. McGaha:
This refers to an investigation conducted by the NRC's Office of Investigations (01) involving inaccurate information provided to the NRC's senior resident inspector at the River Bend Station (RBS). The purpose of the investigation was to determine whether a licensee official deliberately provided inaccurate information to the senior resident inspector in an apparent attempt to avoid a Notice of Violation for a violation of radiological work permit (RWP) requirements. This issue was discussed with Messrs. Bellamy, Mims, and King of your staff on May 5,1998, during a telephonic exit briefing.
On October 10,1997, an NRC inspector observed a contract radiation protection technician reach across a contaminated area boundary while wearing only cotton liners (refer to NRC Inspection Report 50-458/97-20, dated February 5,1998). Between October 10 and October 15,1997, a licensee official held numerous conversations regarding this issue, including instructing the RBS Radiation Control staff to change the clothing requirements of the applicable RWP ' and other RWPs. However, on October 15, the official met with the NRC senior resident inspector and suggested that the violation did not occur because of the wording of the RWP l
l j
' The RBS program allows a radiation protection technician to work under an RWP without actually signing onto it under certain circumstances (e.g., if the technician is signed in on an RWP in which the technician would likely receive the majority of his or her exposure, and if he or she understands and follows the requirements of the appropriate R W P). On October 10, the technician had signed in on RWP 97-9002, but the RWP that was applicable to the task that he was performing at the time of the violation was actually RWP 97-0002. The technician's supervisor informed the NRC inspector, who observed the radiation protection technician reach across the contaminated area boundary, that RWP 97-0002 was the applicable RWP to the violation, and provided a copy of it to the inspector.
~
9905210282 990507 PDR ADOCK 05000458 G
4 2-requirements. He provided the inspector with a copy of the revised RWP rather than the version of the RWP that was in effect on October 10. 2
' The NRC identified an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.5 on the part of the licensee official based on a review of the 01 report. Specifically, the NRC preliminarily concluded that the official deliberately provided inaccurate information to the senior resident inspector. As a result, the NRC conducted a predecisional enforcement conference with the individual on February 27, 1998. RBS management provided its perspective on the apparent violation prior to the conference,' and a representative of RBS management also attended the conference. The individual's perspectives on the issues are summarized in Enclosure 1.
Based on the information obtained during and after the February 27 conference, the NRC believes that a conference is needed with Entergy Operations, Inc. (EOI). The NRC is deferring a final enforcement decision in the case of the licensee official in order to obtain EOl's perspective on this matter. The official's actions, whether deliberate or not, constitute an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.9. Accordingly, based on the results of the 01 investigation and the February 27 predecisional enforcement conference with the individual, one apparent violation was identified and is being considered for escalated enforcement action in accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600. The apparent violation is a failure to provide the NRC with information that is complete and accurate in all material respects. Specifically, a licensee official provided the NRC with a revised version of RWP 97-0002-00, Revision 2, which contained different protective clothing requirements from those that existed when the violation was observed on October 10, and he represented this RWP as containing the requirements that were in effect at the time. Although the actual RWP that the contractor radiation protection technician had signed in on was RWP-97-9002, RWP-97-0002 was represented to the NRC by responsible licensee management, as well as the technician's supervisor, as the RWP that was applicable to the violation. This information was material because the NRC was reviewing a potential violation of the RWP protective clothing requirements that occurred on October 10, 1997.
Further, the NRC is continuing to review the concern that this apparent violation may involve willfulness on the par 1 of the official and requests that Entergy specifically address this concern.
" Willfulness" as used in the enforcement policy (Section IV.C of the policy) embraces a spectrum l
2 The official provided a total of four different RWPs, which were the RWPs that the i
technician had signed onto during the period October 10-15, 1997. The official suggested l
that the violation did not occur because of the wording of RWP 97-0002.
' in a letter dated February 23,1998, you provided us with the results of your reviews. Your inquiry did not conclude that the official intended to deliberately mislead the NRC senior resident inspector; rather, it indicated that the official "did not exercise sufficient care or judgment in obtaining the copies of RWPs or in eventually providing the l
RWPs to the NRC senior resident inspector."
l
. of violations ranging from a careless disregard for requirements up to a deliberate intent to violate. The circumstances that might indicate willfulness are discussed in Enclosure 2.
)
A predecisional enforcement conference to discuss this apparent violation will be scheduled by separate correspondence. The decision to hold a conference does not mean that the NRC has determined that a violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be taken. This conference is being held to obtain information to enable the NRC to make an enforcement decision, vch as a common understanding of the facts, root causes, missed opportunities to identifv the apparent violation sooner, corrective actions, significance of the issues and the need
]
for lasting and effective corrective action. In particular, we expect you to address our concern g
that the apparent violation involved willfulness (either a careless disregard for requirements or E
deliberate misconduct). In addition, this is an opportunity for you to point out any errors in our understanding of the circumstances and for you to provide any information concerning your perspectives on 1) 60 severity of the apcarent violation,2) the application of the factors that the NRC considers when c. determines the amount of a civil penalty that may be assessed in accordance with Section VI.B.2 of the Enforcement Policy, and 3) any other application of the Enforcement Policy to this case, including the exercise of discretion in accordance with Section Vll.
Because the information contained in the enclosures directly relate to an individual's actions that may involve wrongdoing, and to prevent a potential unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, the enclosues will not be placed in the public document room (PDR) at this time and the enclosures will be limited in distribution (the enclosures will not be sent to the individuals on the distribution list). The NRC will determine whether to place the enclosures in the PDR after making final enforcement decisions. Furtner, in accoroance wlth Section V of the enforcemerit policy, the predecisional enforcement conference will be closed to public observation.
Be advised that tha number and characterization of any apparent violation discussed in this letter may change as a result of further NRC review. You will be advised by separate correspondence of the results of our deliberations on this matter. No written response regarding the aparent violation is required at this time.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter without its enclosures, will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR).
Sincerely, Arthur T. How Il Director Division of Reacto Safety Docket: 50-458 License: NPF-47 1
P.c:asures: As statcd l
l l
4 cc w/out enclosures:
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box 31995 Jackson, Mississippi 39286-1995 Vice President Operations Support Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box 31995 Jackson, Mississippi 39286-1995 General Manager Plant Operations River Bend Station Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box 220.
St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 Director - Nuclear Safety River Bend Station Entergy Operations, Inc.
P..O. Box 220 St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 Wise, Carter, Child & Caraway P.O. Box 651 -
Jackson, Mississippi 39205 Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq.
Winston & Strawn 1401 L Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-3502 Manager - Licensing River Bend Station Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O Box 220 St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 l
l
5 The Honorable Richard P. leyoub Attorney General Department of Justice State of Louisiana P.O. Box 94005 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804-9005 H. Anne Plettinger 3456 Villa Rose Drive Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70806 i
President of West Feliciana Police Jury P.O. Box 1921 St. Francisville, Louisiana '0775 William H. Spell, Administrator Louisiana Radiation Protection Division P.O. Box 82135 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70884-2135
4 ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. / RIVER BEND STATION -- EA 98-132 bec DISTRIBUTION Iw/outenclosuresl:
E-Mail report to T. Frye (TJF)
E-Mail report to D. Lange (DJL)
E-Mail report to NRR Event Tracking System (IPAS)
E-Mail report to Document Control Desk (DOCDESK)
E-Mail to: B. Henderson (BWH), C. Hackney (CAH), D. Kunihiro (DMK1) bec to DCD (IE01)- DRS, DRP, and Decommissioning Senior Resident inspector (Grand Gulf)
MIS System RIV File DISTRIBUTION Iw/ enclosures 1 :
Regional Administrator Branch Chief (DRP/TSS)
Resident inspector JLieberman, O-7H5 GSanborn (EA file)
OE:EA file RWise WmBrown LWilliamson, 01 JGoldberg, OGC (0-15B18) e-mail [w/ enclosures 1:
OEMAIL JDyer (JED2)
TPGwynn (TPG)
EMerschoff (EWM)
GSanborn (GFS)
WBrown (WLB)
GMVasquez (GMV)
MShannon (MPS1)
Art Howell (ATH)
Chamberlain (DDC)
KPerkins (KEP)
ECollins (EEC)
GReplogie (GDR)
KBrockman (KEB)
BMurray (BXM)
WSmith (WFS)
DNelson, OE (DJN)
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\EA\\ CASES \\RBSRWP\\EA98132.LTR To receive copy of document, indicate in bqx:"C" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copf with enclosures "N" = No copy ES l
EO /M RC l
D:DILi[
l MVasquez*
GSabbbd WmBrown*
AHd491 05/ /98 05D/98 05/ /98 05/7/98 I
I OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- denotes previous concurrence
!!} O C [x 1
_ _ - _ _ _. _