05000313/FIN-2013503-01: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| CCA = N/A for ROP | | CCA = N/A for ROP | ||
| INPO aspect = | | INPO aspect = | ||
| description = Based on the results of this investigation, one apparent violation was identified and is being considered for escalated enforcement action in accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy. On January 12, 2012, the Arkansas Nuclear One Emergency Preparedness Manager notified the NRC resident inspector and regional emergency preparedness inspectors that a senior emergency planner had apparently falsified documents related to emergency preparedness drills conducted in December 2011. Specifically, the senior emergency planner falsely submitted documents that showed a postaccident sampling system drill and an environmental monitoring drill were conducted in 2011. Further investigation by Arkansas Nuclear One determined that these two drills were also falsified in December 2010 and several other required surveillances were also falsified by the senior emergency planner. The NRC investigation substantiated the above falsifications as described in the enclosed Factual Summary. These drills are required to be performed annually by the site emergency plan and maintained for inspection by the NRC. The NRC requires records of licensee activities to be complete and accurate in all material respects in order for the NRC to be able to perform its regulatory function. This information is material to the NRC because it provides assurance that the licensee has performed periodic drills to develop and maintain key emergency response organization skills and has adequately maintained facilities to support an emergency response. The circumstances surrounding these apparent violations, the significance of the issues, and the need for lasting and effective corrective action were discussed with members of your staff at the inspection exit meeting on February 21, 2013. In addition, since you identified the violation and based on our understanding of your corrective action, a civil penalty may not be warranted in accordance with Section 2.3.4 of the Enforcement Policy. The final decision will be based on your confirming on the license docket that the corrective actions previously described to the staff have been or are being taken. In lieu of a PEC, you may also request Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) with the NRC in an attempt to resolve this issue. ADR is a general term encompassing various techniques for resolving conflicts using a third party neutral. The technique that the NRC has decided to employ is mediation. Mediation is a voluntary, informal process in which a trained neutral (the mediator ) works with parties to help them reach resolution. If the parties agree to use ADR, they select a mutually agreeable neutral mediator who has no stake in the outcome and no power to make decisions. Mediation gives parties an opportunity to discuss issues, clear up misunderstandings, be creative, find areas of agreement, and reach a final resolution of the issues. Additional information concerning the NRC\'s program can be obtained at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/adr.html. The Institute on Conflict Resolution (ICR) at Cornell University has agreed to facilitate the NRC\'s program as a neutral third party. Please contact ICR at 877-733-9415 within 10 days of the date of this letter if you are interested in pursuing resolution of this issue through ADR. In addition, please be advised that the number and characterization of apparent violations described in the enclosed inspection report 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. | | description = Based on the results of this investigation, one apparent violation was identified and is being considered for escalated enforcement action in accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy. On January 12, 2012, the Arkansas Nuclear One Emergency Preparedness Manager notified the NRC resident inspector and regional emergency preparedness inspectors that a senior emergency planner had apparently falsified documents related to emergency preparedness drills conducted in December 2011. Specifically, the senior emergency planner falsely submitted documents that showed a postaccident sampling system drill and an environmental monitoring drill were conducted in 2011. Further investigation by Arkansas Nuclear One determined that these two drills were also falsified in December 2010 and several other required surveillances were also falsified by the senior emergency planner. The NRC investigation substantiated the above falsifications as described in the enclosed Factual Summary. These drills are required to be performed annually by the site emergency plan and maintained for inspection by the NRC. The NRC requires records of licensee activities to be complete and accurate in all material respects in order for the NRC to be able to perform its regulatory function. This information is material to the NRC because it provides assurance that the licensee has performed periodic drills to develop and maintain key emergency response organization skills and has adequately maintained facilities to support an emergency response. The circumstances surrounding these apparent violations, the significance of the issues, and the need for lasting and effective corrective action were discussed with members of your staff at the inspection exit meeting on February 21, 2013. In addition, since you identified the violation and based on our understanding of your corrective action, a civil penalty may not be warranted in accordance with Section 2.3.4 of the Enforcement Policy. The final decision will be based on your confirming on the license docket that the corrective actions previously described to the staff have been or are being taken. In lieu of a PEC, you may also request Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) with the NRC in an attempt to resolve this issue. ADR is a general term encompassing various techniques for resolving conflicts using a third party neutral. The technique that the NRC has decided to employ is mediation. Mediation is a voluntary, informal process in which a trained neutral (the mediator ) works with parties to help them reach resolution. If the parties agree to use ADR, they select a mutually agreeable neutral mediator who has no stake in the outcome and no power to make decisions. Mediation gives parties an opportunity to discuss issues, clear up misunderstandings, be creative, find areas of agreement, and reach a final resolution of the issues. Additional information concerning the NRC\\\'s program can be obtained at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/adr.html. The Institute on Conflict Resolution (ICR) at Cornell University has agreed to facilitate the NRC\\\'s program as a neutral third party. Please contact ICR at 877-733-9415 within 10 days of the date of this letter if you are interested in pursuing resolution of this issue through ADR. In addition, please be advised that the number and characterization of apparent violations described in the enclosed inspection report 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. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 18:59, 20 February 2018
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000313/2013503 Section 1EP1 |
| Date counted | Dec 31, 2012 (2012Q4) |
| Type: | TEV: Severity level III |
| cornerstone | Emergency Prep |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71114.01 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | D Allen G Guerra H Gepford K Fuller M Haire P Elkmann T Blounta Howell D Allen G Guerra H Gepford K Fuller M Haire M Halter R Kahler R Lewis T Bloun |
| INPO aspect | |
| ' | |