Information Notice 2001-02, Summary of Fitness-for-Duty Program Performance Reports for Calendar Years 1998 and 1999: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
Line 14: Line 14:
| page count = 25
| page count = 25
}}
}}
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITEDSTATESNUCLEARREGULATORYCOMMISSIONOFFICEOFNUCLEARREACTORREGULATIONWASHINGTON,D.C.20555-0001March28,2001NRCINFORMATIONNOTICE2001-02:SUMMARYOFFITNESS-FOR-DUTYPROGRAMPERFORMANCEREPORTSFORCALENDAR
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES


===YEARS1998AND1999===
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
 
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
 
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 March 28, 2001 NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2001-02:              SUMMARY OF FITNESS-FOR-DUTY PROGRAM
 
PERFORMANCE REPORTS FOR CALENDAR
 
YEARS 1998 AND 1999


==Addressees==
==Addressees==
Allholdersofoperatinglicensesfornuclearpowerreactors,andlicenseesauthorizedtopossessoruseformulaquantitiesofstrategicspecialnuclearmaterial(SSNM)ortotransport
All holders of operating licenses for nuclear power reactors, and licensees authorized to
 
possess or use formula quantities of strategic special nuclear material (SSNM) or to transport


formulaquantitiesofSSNM.
formula quantities of SSNM.


==Purpose==
==Purpose==
TheU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommission(NRC)isissuingthisinformationnotice(IN)toprovidelessonslearnedandsummarizethedatasubmittedbylicenseestotheNRCintheir
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this information notice (IN) to
 
provide lessons learned and summarize the data submitted by licensees to the NRC in their
 
fitness-for-duty (FFD) program performance reports for calendar years 1998 and 1999. It is
 
expected that recipients will review the information for applicability to their facilities and
 
consider actions, as appropriate. However, suggestions contained in this information notice
 
are not NRC requirements, therefore no specific actions or written response is required.
 
==Description of Circumstances==
Since the fitness-for-duty rule (10 CFR Part 26) was published, licensees have submitted
 
program performance reports to the NRC, as required by 10 CFR 26.71(d). In the past, the
 
NRC summarized and analyzed the data submitted by the licensees and published an annual
 
volume, NUREG/CR-5758, "Fitness for Duty in the Nuclear Power IndustryAnnual Summary
 
of Program Performance Reports." In 1998, the NRC issued IN 98-39 to convey this
 
information for the years 1996 and 1997. This IN provides similar information for 1998 and
 
1999 FFD statistics are provided in Attachment 1.
 
Discussion
 
Lessons learned, management initiatives and problems, and associated corrective actions
 
reported by licensees in 1998 and 1999 are summarized below.
 
(1) Certified Laboratories
 
Some licensees continue to experience problems with laboratory performance or have
 
identified potential weaknesses. Licensees also continue to investigate and review adulterant
 
detection strategies to be used by laboratories.
 
ÿ A licensee assessor noted that a laboratorys quality control blind samples were
 
potentially identifiable. The laboratory is certified by the U.S Department of Health and
 
Human Services (HHS). The laboratory gives the licensee chain-of-custody forms with
 
preprinted numbers and bar codes. However, because the laboratorys blind samples
 
are not processed with the licensees chain-of-custody forms, the blind sample
 
specimen chain-of-custody forms are out of sequence with the rest of the samples in
 
the tray. The laboratory generates chain-of-custody forms for the blind samples, using
 
the laboratorys next sequential numbers. As an interim corrective action, the
 
laboratory is now mixing samples from different sources in the trays so that the non- sequential chain-of-custody forms for the blind samples will be less conspicuous. The
 
laboratory is trying to design a better solution.
 
ÿ One licensee reviewed the potential impact of ingestion of hemp seed oil products on
 
tetrahydrocannabinol test results, disseminated its findings to the plant personnel, and
 
incorporated them into FFD training.
 
ÿ One licensee used Intoxilizer 5000 to verify that over-the-counter substances such as
 
gum, Nyquil, Listerine, etc., do not cause false positive test results.
 
ÿ One licensee laboratory reported that Klear is an effective adulterant for the marijuana
 
metabolite but is easily detected if the specimen is tested for nitrites. Urine Luck made
 
by Spectrum Laboratory is more difficult to detect but is also a less effective adulterant.
 
Two blind specimens were spiked with marijuana metabolite. Urine Luck was
 
introduced into one of the specimens. Onsite immunoassay screening found both
 
specimens positive for marijuana. The HHS-certified laboratory confirmed both
 
specimens positive, although the quantitation level for the specimen containing Urine
 
Luck was slightly lower (189 ng/ml versus 206 ng/ml). The laboratory did not detect the
 
presence of Urine Luck, not having done the additional adulterant testing it would have
 
done if the screening and confirmation testing were contradictory. The specimens
 
were retested a month later and found with quantitation levels of 163 ng/ml and
 
193 ng/ml, respectively. The laboratory will do more research to determine if Urine
 
Luck is an effective adulterant for specimens having lower levels of the marijuana
 
metabolite and to determine whether Multistix 10 SG effectively detects this adulterant.
 
ÿ Other licensees reported they had started testing for the adulterants nitrate, pyridininium chlorochromate, and glutaraldehyde. One laboratory uses Test Sure, manufactured by SmithKline, to test for the following conditions and adulterants: pH,
  specify gravity, bleach, creatinine, glutaraldehyde, nitrate, and pyridine.
 
ÿ Inaccurate laboratory results for blind specimens continued to point out human error
 
problems, particularly the use of incorrect cutoff levels and procedural weaknesses.
 
The different Department of Transportation and NRC testing requirements contribute to
 
the use of incorrect cutoff levels, and laboratories should be alert to develop
 
safeguards against this error. The cause of inaccuracies at one laboratory was that the laboratory had no procedure to control parameter changes made by technologists on
 
the screening instrument and to verify parameter settings. The laboratory corrected the
 
problem by assigning passwords for the screening instrument (so that only approved
 
personnel could change the instrument parameters) and by requiring another qualified
 
technologist or supervisor to corroborate any changes before the instrument is used. In
 
addition, the laboratory implemented a procedure to require a special quality control test
 
of the instrument after instrument parameter changes, reagent changes, and calibration.
 
The procedure involves spiking a sample at a concentration approximately twice as high
 
as the highest calibrator.
 
ÿ      Several licensees reported that reviews of adulterant testing showed it to be useful and
 
cost effective.
 
ÿ      Two licensees reported that the number of blind specimens they submitted to the
 
laboratory was below the required 10% for one or more quarters of 1999. In one case, this was due to misunderstandings between the licensee and site FFD
 
programsadministrative responsibilities for these programs were subsequently
 
separated. No explanation was given for the second case.
 
ÿ      After establishing an onsite testing laboratory, one licensee suspended unescorted
 
access for personnel who tested positive for cocaine and marijuana, pending results
 
from the HHS-certified laboratory.
 
Several licensees reported working with laboratories to improve testing for specific adulterants.
 
Licensees continued to report problems with laboratory performance.
 
ÿ      At one laboratory, a technician scanned the bar code identification on the specimen
 
bottle lid rather than on the side of the bottle. Sample lids had been inadvertently
 
switched, resulting in a sample identification error. The laboratory has eliminated retest
 
bar codes on bottle lids to ensure that technicians scan the sides of specimen bottles.
 
ÿ      Several licensees reported that laboratories used incorrect cutoff levels or failed to test
 
for the full list of substances.
 
ÿ      One licensee reported two blind specimens as negative for opiates when they should
 
have been reported positive. The company that formulated the blind specimens said the
 
blind specimen batches might not have been adequately mixed before they were
 
prepared. In addition, the company was not performing gas chromatography/mass
 
spectrometry on each specimen, only on the batches. The licensee has contracted with
 
a new company to provide blind specimens.
 
(2) Random Testing
 
Licensees continued to report incidents in which employees who should have been included in
 
the random testing pool were omitted.
 
ÿ      A licensee reported that it has reinstated a 100% random testing rate. ÿ      Several licensees reported that workers had been improperly excluded from the drug
 
testing pool for extended periods. For one licensee, an employee who returned to the
 
site after a lengthy stint at the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) was not put
 
back into the random FFD testing pool because he had been hardcoded out of the
 
system. This licensee is reviewing the process of hardcoding individuals out of the pool.
 
ÿ      One licensee reported that it enhanced its quarterly repetitive task process for verifying
 
the integrity of the random testing pool.
 
ÿ      Licensees continued to improve their notification process by reducing the interval
 
between notifying and testing employees and/or by keeping them under continuous
 
observation during this time.
 
ÿ      One licensee analyzed the number of random screenings by day of week and the rate of
 
failures for each weekday during 1998 and 1999. The number of random screenings
 
was greatest on Monday and generally fell on each subsequent day of the week. Very
 
few screenings were done on Saturday or Sunday. In 1998 no positive results were
 
identified on Saturdays or Sundays. However, in 1999 the positive rate on these days
 
was very high (Saturday tests had a 12.5% positive rate and Sunday tests a 15%
        positive rate). The analysis suggests potentially useful changes to the testing schedule.
 
Licensees continued to report incidents in which employees who should have been included in
 
the random testing pool database were not included.
 
ÿ      A licensee that did weekly quality control checks of the random pool discovered a
 
software program interface problem as a result of which contractors were omitted. One
 
weekly check showed 110 contractors to have been omitted.
 
ÿ      Another licensee reported that a new contract worker had not been included in the
 
random test pool for the first draw after being badged and starting work.
 
(3) Policies and Procedures
 
Several licensees reported having improved their FFD policies and procedures on the basis of
 
their experience over the years.
 
ÿ      Another licensee reduced its marijuana cutoff value from 100 ng/ml to 50 ng/ml.
 
ÿ      One licensee introduced a lower cutoff value for alcohol testing for individuals in the
 
followup program due to a previous positive test result for alcohol.
 
ÿ      One licensee reduced its testing list of drugs after finding that there had only been a
 
single positive for barbiturates and benzodiazepines since its program was implemented
 
in 1990. ÿ One licensee changed its specimen collection procedures to include an observed
 
collection if the urine sample fell outside the range of 93-98 degrees Fahrenheit and an
 
oral temperature did not match the urine temperature.
 
ÿ Some licensees have instituted a zero tolerance policy, denying an employee access
 
after a first positive drug test result.
 
ÿ More licensees now count the detection of adulterants as a positive test result and
 
sanction employees accordingly.
 
ÿ A licensee prepared the following policy statement on prescription marijuana and
 
cocaine and communicated the statement to its employees:
          Certain drugs listed in the Controlled Substance Act such as
 
marijuana and cocaine may be legally prescribed and used in
 
certain states. However, federal regulations do not allow
 
involvement with or possession or use of these drugs with or
 
without a prescription by individuals assigned to [licensee name].
 
ÿ Several licensees found weaknesses in their FFD records management procedures. In
 
two cases, the records management process was adequate but not appropriately
 
documented in procedures. In another case, FFD records being prepared for shipment
 
to another location for imaging were not stored in 1-hour fire rated cabinets, as required
 
in the site-established procedures. In a fourth case, a licensee found that the logbook
 
maintained by the FFD program did not satisfy the definition of a permanent, bound
 
record book.
 
ÿ One licensee found that its procedures failed to specify FFD program training required
 
for personnel assigned to work in the FFD program.
 
ÿ To enhance overall FFD at the site, one licensee now requires employees to report non- job-related injuries to a supervisor or manager before the start of work or training
 
activities if the injury could impair the employees ability to safely perform job
 
assignments. The supervisor evaluates injured employees fitness and accommodates
 
them as necessary.
 
ÿ At one site, a computer data entry error allowed a contract worker to enter a protected
 
area before the worker passed a pre-access test. Appropriate FFD personnel were
 
trained and the access authorization process modified to prevent this from happening
 
again.
 
ÿ One licensee introduced limits on how much time an employee may take to give a urine
 
specimen and how much water he may drink beforehand.
 
ÿ One licensee specified that requests for retesting be made within 72 hours.
 
ÿ One licensee reported that an event at another licensee's site helped it identify and
 
address a potential weakness at its own site. The event involved an FFD testing technician who recorded drug screen test results as negative before they were validated
 
by the medical review officer (MRO). As a result, access was granted to a few
 
individuals whose test results were later reported to be positive. To prevent this from
 
happening at its own site, the licensee revised its procedures so that access
 
authorization personnel can only accept reports that have been prepared by the MRO.
 
ÿ      One licensee updated its FFD procedures to include a precise formula by which to
 
calculate blood alcohol concentration when an employee arrives at work.
 
ÿ      One licensee discovered that its pre-employment testing protocol implied breathalyzer
 
testing irrespective of whether the candidate had yet been offered a job, leaving the
 
licensee vulnerable to being found in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act.
 
ÿ      One licensee initiated a standardized chain-of-custody form throughout its sites.
 
(4) Program and System Management
 
Licensees continued to report improvements in overall FFD program management.
 
ÿ      One licensee planed to merge FFD with Access Authorization to improve coordination
 
and eliminate the potential for errors. This licensee is also trying to refine FFD
 
performance indicators.
 
ÿ      A few licensees reported weaknesses in their behavioral observation programs because
 
of insufficient training. Others reported improvements in their behavioral observation
 
programs.
 
ÿ      FFD awareness activities continued to be reported (e.g., sending articles and
 
newsletters to all employees, giving to all employees refrigerator magnets with the toll
 
free employee assistance program telephone number).
 
ÿ      One licensee encouraged supervisors to complete refresher FFD training on time. The
 
licensee now rigorously monitors overdue supervisor FFD training, sends an action
 
request, and suspends unescorted access for a delinquent supervisor and for the
 
workers who report to the supervisor.
 
ÿ      At one site it was discovered that supervisors who were not badged for unescorted
 
access but who were required to report to the emergency operations facility did not have
 
appropriate FFD training. Corrective actions were implemented to track FFD training
 
requirements for nonbadged supervisors.
 
ÿ      Several licensees reported the value of canine searches in enhancing antidrug
 
awareness at their sites, even the searches that typically did not discover drugs. This information notice requires no specific action or written response. If you have any
 
questions about the information in this notice, please contact the person listed below.
 
/RA/
                                              Ledyard B. Marsh, Chief
 
Events Assessment, Generic Communications
 
and Non-Power Reactors Branch
 
Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs
 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
 
===Technical Contact:===
Garmon West, Jr., Ph.D.
 
301-415-1044 E-mail: fitnessforduty@nrc.gov
 
Attachments: 1. Fitness-for-Duty Statistics
 
2. List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices
 
ML0102050419 ADAMS DOCUMENT TITLE:C:\119ffd9998.wpd
 
: Publicly Available          Non-Publicly Available          Sensitive    : Non-Sensitive
 
OFFICE Tech Ed                    RSS:DIPM RSS:DIPM          IOLB:DIPM DIPM
 
NAME PKleene*via phone GWest*                  RPRosano*      GTracy*      BBoger*
DATE      11/9/00                11/14/00    11/15/00      12/14/00      01/11/2001 OFFICE OGC                        REXB                C:REXB
 
NAME STreby                        JTappert*            LBMarsh
 
DATE      01/16/2001              03/19/2001          03/28/2001
 
Attachment 1 Table 1A
 
===Test results for each test category, 1999===
                                                    1999 TEST CATEGORY                NUMBER OF        POSITIVE    PERCENT
 
TESTS          TESTS      POSITIVE
 
Pre-Access                      69,139              934        1.35%
  Random                          54,457              140        0.26%
  For-Cause                          736            120      16.30%
  Followup                          3,008              30        1.00%
  Other                            1,742              39        2.24%
  TOTAL*                        129,082            1,263        0.98%
  TOTAL without Other
 
category                      127,340            1,224        0.96%
Table 1B
 
===Test results for each test category, 1998===
                                                    1998 TEST CATEGORY                NUMBER OF        POSITIVE    PERCENT
 
TESTS          TESTS      POSITIVE
 
Pre-Access                      69,146              822        1.19%
  Random                          56,969              157        0.28%
  For-Cause                          720            100      13.89%
  Followup                          2,863              43        1.50%
  Other                            1,929              32        1.66%
  TOTAL                          131,627            1,154        0.88%
  TOTAL without Other
 
category                      129,698            1,122        0.87%
*These totals have been calculated using the Other test category. This category includes results
 
from the periodic testing done by some reporting units during annual physicals or similar periodic
 
activities. Although some reporting units specified the nature of the Other tests (e.g., return to
 
work), most reporting units did not give this information.
 
Attachment 1 Table 2A
 
1999 Test results for each test category and work category
 
LICENSEE        LONG-TERM    SHORT-TERM
 
TEST CATEGORY        EMPLOYEES      CONTRACTORS    CONTRACTORS        TOTAL
 
Pre-Access
 
Number Tested          8,386            1,339        59,414          69,139 Number Positive          44              10            880              934 Percent Positive      0.52%            0.75%        1.48%            1.35%
Random
 
Number Tested          38,692            1,976        13,789          54,457 Number Positive          71                7            62              140
    Percent Positive      0.18%            0.35%        0.45%            0.26%
For-Cause
 
Number Tested            315              25            396              736 Number Positive          29                4            87              120
    Percent Positive      9.21%          16.00%        21.97%          16.30%
Followup
 
Number Tested          1,653            70          1,285            3,008 Number Positive          15                1            14              30
    Percent Positive      0.91%            1.43%        1.09%            1.00%
Other
 
Number Tested            648              318          776            1,742 Number Positive          4                2            33              39 Percent Positive      0.62%            0.63%        4.25%            2.24%
TOTAL
 
Number Tested          49,694            3,728        75,660          129,082 Number Positive          163              24          1,076            1,263 Percent Positive      0.33%            0.64%        1.42%            0.98%
TOTAL without
 
Other category
 
Number Tested          49,046            3,410        74,884          127,340
    Number Positive          159              22          1,043            1,224 Percent Positive      0.32%            0.65%        1.39%            0.96%
 
Attachment 1 Table 2B
 
1998 Test results for each test category and work category
 
LICENSEE        LONG-TERM      SHORT-TERM
 
TEST CATEGORY          EMPLOYEES        CONTRACTORS    CONTRACTORS        TOTAL


fitness-for-duty(FFD)programperformancereportsforcalendaryears1998and1999.Itis
Pre-Access


expectedthatrecipientswillreviewtheinformationforapplicabilitytotheirfacilitiesand
Number Tested            9,422          1,368          58,356        69,146 Number Positive            50              12              760            822 Percent Positive        0.53%            0.88%          1.30%          1.19%
Random


consideractions,asappropriate.However,suggestionscontainedinthisinformationnotice
Number Tested          40,415          1,859          14,695        56,969 Number Positive            71              9              77            157 Percent Positive        0.18%            0.48%          0.52%          0.28%
For-Cause


arenotNRCrequirements,thereforenospecificactionsorwrittenresponseisrequired.DescriptionofCircumstancesSincethefitness-for-dutyrule(10CFRPart26)waspublished,licenseeshavesubmittedprogramperformancereportstotheNRC,asrequiredby10CFR26.71(d).Inthepast,the
Number Tested            327              16              377            720
    Number Positive            27              1              72            100
    Percent Positive        8.26%            6.25%          19.10%        13.89%
Followup


NRCsummarizedandanalyzedthedatasubmittedbythelicenseesandpublishedanannual
Number Tested            1,762            41            1,060          2,863 Number Positive            21              0              22            43 Percent Positive        1.19%            0.00%          2.08%          1.50%
Other


volume,NUREG/CR-5758,"FitnessforDutyintheNuclearPowerIndustry-AnnualSummary
Number Tested            752            192              985          1,929 Number Positive            6                1              25            32 Percent Positive        0.80%            0.52%          2.54%          1.66%
TOTAL


ofProgramPerformanceReports."In1998,theNRCissuedIN98-39toconveythis
Number Tested          52,678          3,476          75,473        131,627 Number Positive          175              23              956          1,154 Percent Positive        0.33%            0.66%          1.27%          0.88%
TOTAL without


informationfortheyears1996and1997.ThisINprovidessimilarinformationfor1998and
Other category


1999FFDstatisticsareprovidedinAttachment1.
Number Tested          51,926          3,284          74,488        129,698 Number Positive          169              22              931          1,122 Percent Positive        0.33%            0.67%          1.25%          0.87%


DiscussionLessonslearned,managementinitiativesandproblems,andassociatedcorrectiveactionsreportedbylicenseesin1998and1999aresummarizedbelow.(1)CertifiedLaboratoriesSomelicenseescontinuetoexperienceproblemswithlaboratoryperformanceorhaveidentifiedpotentialweaknesses.Licenseesalsocontinuetoinvestigateandreviewadulterant
Attachment 1 Table 3A


detectionstrategiestobeusedbylaboratories.ML010250419 IN2001-02Page2of7ÿAlicenseeassessornotedthatalaboratory'squalitycontrolblindsampleswerepotentiallyidentifiable.ThelaboratoryiscertifiedbytheU.SDepartmentofHealthand
1999 Test results by test category


HumanServices(HHS).Thelaboratorygivesthelicenseechain-of-custodyformswith
FIRST    SECOND


preprintednumbersandbarcodes.However,becausethelaboratory'sblindsamples
TEST CATEGORY              SIX MONTHS SIX MONTHS              YEAR


arenotprocessedwiththelicensee'schain-of-custodyforms,theblindsample
Pre-Access


specimenchain-of-custodyformsareoutofsequencewiththerestofthesamplesin
Number Tested                    37,844    31,295              69,139 Number Positive                    510        424                  934 Percent Positive                1.35%      1.35%                1.35%
Random


thetray.Thelaboratorygenerateschain-of-custodyformsfortheblindsamples,using
Number Tested                    28,256    26,201              54,457 Number Positive                    70          70                  140
    Percent Positive                0.25%      0.27%                0.26%
For-Cause


thelaboratory'snextsequentialnumbers.Asaninterimcorrectiveaction,the
Observed Behavior


laboratoryisnowmixingsamplesfromdifferentsourcesinthetrayssothatthenon- sequentialchain-of-custodyformsfortheblindsampleswillbelessconspicuous.The
Number Tested                    283        223                  506 Number Positive                  75          45                  120
      Percent Positive                26.50%    20.18%              23.72%
Post-Accident


laboratoryistryingtodesignabettersolution.
Number Tested                    110        120                  230
      Number Positive                    0          0                    0
      Percent Positive                0.00%      0.00%                0.00%
Followup


ÿOnelicenseereviewedthepotentialimpactofingestionofhempseedoilproductsontetrahydrocannabinoltestresults,disseminateditsfindingstotheplantpersonnel,and
Number Tested                    1,543      1,465                3,008 Number Positive                  16          14                  30
      Percent Positive                1.04%      0.96%                1.00%
Other


incorporatedthemintoFFDtraining.
Number Tested                    866        876                1,742 Number Positive                  18          21                  39 Percent Positive                2.08%      2.40%                2.24%
TOTAL


ÿOnelicenseeusedIntoxilizer5000toverifythatover-the-countersubstancessuchasgum,Nyquil,Listerine,etc.,donotcausefalsepositivetestresults.
Number Tested                  68,902    60,180              129,082 Number Positive                  689        574                1,263 Percent Positive                1.00%      0.95%                0.98%
TOTAL without Other category


ÿOnelicenseelaboratoryreportedthatKlearisaneffectiveadulterantforthemarijuanametabolitebutiseasilydetectedifthespecimenistestedfornitrites.UrineLuckmade
Number Tested                  68,036    59,304              127,340
      Number Positive                  671        553                1,224 Percent Positive                0.99%      0.93%                0.96%


bySpectrumLaboratoryismoredifficulttodetectbutisalsoalesseffectiveadulterant.
Attachment 1 Table 3B


Twoblindspecimenswerespikedwithmarijuanametabolite.UrineLuckwas
1998 Test results by test category


introducedintooneofthespecimens.Onsiteimmunoassayscreeningfoundboth
FIRST    SECOND


specimenspositiveformarijuana.TheHHS-certifiedlaboratoryconfirmedboth
TEST CATEGORY              SIX MONTHS SIX MONTHS  YEAR


specimenspositive,althoughthequantitationlevelforthespecimencontainingUrine
Pre-Access


Luckwasslightlylower(189ng/mlversus206ng/ml).Thelaboratorydidnotdetectthe
Number Tested                  35,455    33,691  69,146 Number Positive                  433        389      822 Percent Positive                1.22%      1.15%  1.19%
Random


presenceofUrineLuck,nothavingdonetheadditionaladulteranttestingitwouldhave
Number Tested                  29,251    27,718  56,969 Number Positive                    80        77      157 Percent Positive                  0.27%      0.28%  0.28%
For-Cause


doneifthescreeningandconfirmationtestingwerecontradictory.Thespecimens
Observed Behavior


wereretestedamonthlaterandfoundwithquantitationlevelsof163ng/mland
Number Tested                    213        242      455 Number Positive                    49        48      97 Percent Positive                23.00%    19.83%  21.32%
Post-Accident


193ng/ml,respectively.ThelaboratorywilldomoreresearchtodetermineifUrine
Number Tested                    176        89      265 Number Positive                    2          1      3 Percent Positive                1.14%      1.12%  1.13%
Followup


Luckisaneffectiveadulterantforspecimenshavinglowerlevelsofthemarijuana
Number Tested                    1,451      1,412    2,863 Number Positive                    18        25      43 Percent Positive                1.24%      1.77%  1.50%
Other


metaboliteandtodeterminewhetherMultistix10SGeffectivelydetectsthisadulterant.
Number Tested                    1,034      895    1,929 Number Positive                    19        13      32 Percent Positive                1.84%      1.45%  1.66%
TOTAL


ÿOtherlicenseesreportedtheyhadstartedtestingfortheadulterantsnitrate,pyridininiumchlorochromate,andglutaraldehyde.OnelaboratoryusesTestSure, manufacturedbySmithKline,totestforthefollowingconditionsandadulterants:pH,
Number Tested                  67,580    64,047  131,627 Number Positive                  601        553    1,154 Percent Positive                0.89%      0.86%    0.88%
specifygravity,bleach,creatinine,glutaraldehyde,nitrate,andpyridine.
TOTAL without Other category


ÿInaccuratelaboratoryresultsforblindspecimenscontinuedtopointouthumanerrorproblems,particularlytheuseofincorrectcutofflevelsandproceduralweaknesses.
Number Tested                  66,546    63,152  129,698 Number Positive                  582        540    1,122 Percent Positive                0.87%      0.86%    0.87%


ThedifferentDepartmentofTransportationandNRCtestingrequirementscontributeto
Attachment 1 Table 4A


theuseofincorrectcutofflevels,andlaboratoriesshouldbealerttodevelop
1999 Test results for licensee employees and contractor personnel


safeguardsagainstthiserror.Thecauseofinaccuraciesatonelaboratorywasthatthe
CONTRACTORS


IN2001-02Page3of7laboratoryhadnoproceduretocontrolparameterchangesmadebytechnologistsonthescreeninginstrumentandtoverifyparametersettings.Thelaboratorycorrectedthe
LICENSEE EMPLOYEES                (Long-Term/Short Term)
                              First      Second              First        Second


problembyassigningpasswordsforthescreeninginstrument(sothatonlyapproved
TEST CATEGORY          Six Months Six Months  Year    Six Months Six Months          Year


personnelcouldchangetheinstrumentparameters)andbyrequiringanotherqualified
Pre-Access


technologistorsupervisortocorroborateanychangesbeforetheinstrumentisused.In
Number Tested            4,691      3,695  8,386      33,153        27,600      60,753 Number Positive          21          23      44          489            401          890
      Percent Positive        0.45%      0.62%  0.52%      1.47%          1.45%        1.46%
Random


addition,thelaboratoryimplementedaproceduretorequireaspecialqualitycontroltest
Number Tested          20,020      18,672  38,692      8,236          7,529      15,765 Number Positive          32          39      71          38            31          69 Percent Positive        0.16%      0.21%  0.18%      0.46%          0.41%        0.44%
For-Cause


oftheinstrumentafterinstrumentparameterchanges,reagentchanges,andcalibration.
Observed Behavior


Theprocedureinvolvesspikingasampleataconcentrationapproximatelytwiceashigh
Number Tested            112        91      203        171            132          303 Number Positive          20          9      29          55            36          91 Percent Positive      17.86%      9.89%  14.29%    32.16%        27.27%        30.03%
Post-Accident


asthehighestcalibrator.
Number Tested            60          52      112          50            68          118 Number Positive            0          0      0            0              0            0
      Percent Positive        0.00%      0.00%  0.00%      0.00%          0.00%        0.00%
Followup


ÿSeverallicenseesreportedthatreviewsofadulteranttestingshowedittobeusefulandcosteffective.
Number Tested            818        835    1,653        725            630        1,355 Number Positive            8          7      15          8              7            15 Percent Positive        0.98%      0.84%  0.91%      1.10%          1.11%        1.11%
Other


ÿTwolicenseesreportedthatthenumberofblindspecimenstheysubmittedtothelaboratorywasbelowtherequired10%foroneormorequartersof1999.Inonecase, thiswasduetomisunderstandingsbetweenthelicenseeandsiteFFD
Number Tested            316        332    648        550            544        1,094 Number Positive            2          2      4          16            19          35 Percent Positive        0.63%      0.60%  0.62%      2.91%          3.49%         3.20%
TOTAL


programs-administrativeresponsibilitiesfortheseprogramsweresubsequently
Number Tested          26,017      23,677  49,694      42,885        36,503      79,388 Number Positive          83          80      163        606            494        1,100
      Percent Positive        0.32%      0.34%  0.33%      1.41%          1.35%        1.39%
TOTAL without Other


separated.Noexplanationwasgivenforthesecondcase.
category


ÿAfterestablishinganonsitetestinglaboratory,onelicenseesuspendedunescortedaccessforpersonnelwhotestedpositiveforcocaineandmarijuana,pendingresults
Number Tested          25,701      23,345  49,046      42,335        35,959      78,294 Number Positive          81          78      159        590            475        1,065 Percent Positive        0.32%      0.33%  0.32%      1.39%          1.32%        1.36%


fromtheHHS-certifiedlaboratory.Severallicenseesreportedworkingwithlaboratoriestoimprovetestingforspecificadulterants.Licenseescontinuedtoreportproblemswithlaboratoryperformance.
Attachment 1 Table 4B


ÿAtonelaboratory,atechnicianscannedthebarcodeidentificationonthespecimenbottlelidratherthanonthesideofthebottle.Samplelidshadbeeninadvertently
1998 Test results for licensee employees and contractor personnel


switched,resultinginasampleidentificationerror.Thelaboratoryhaseliminatedretest
CONTRACTORS


barcodesonbottlelidstoensurethattechniciansscanthesidesofspecimenbottles.
LICENSEE EMPLOYEES                (Long-Term/Short Term)
                              First      Second              First        Second


ÿSeverallicenseesreportedthatlaboratoriesusedincorrectcutofflevelsorfailedtotestforthefulllistofsubstances.
TEST CATEGORY          Six Months Six Months  Year    Six Months Six Months          Year


ÿOnelicenseereportedtwoblindspecimensasnegativeforopiateswhentheyshouldhavebeenreportedpositive.Thecompanythatformulatedtheblindspecimenssaidthe
Pre-Access


blindspecimenbatchesmightnothavebeenadequatelymixedbeforetheywere
Number Tested            5,141      4,281  9,422      30,314        29,410      59,724 Number Positive            25          25      50        408            364          772 Percent Positive        0.49%      0.58%    0.53%      1.35%          1.24%        1.29%
Random


prepared.Inaddition,thecompanywasnotperforminggaschromatography/mass
Number Tested          20,891      19,524  40,415      8,360          8,194      16,554 Number Positive            41          30      71          39            47          86 Percent Positive        0.20%      0.15%    0.18%      0.47%          0.57%        0.52%
For-Cause


spectrometryoneachspecimen,onlyonthebatches.Thelicenseehascontractedwith
Observed Behavior


anewcompanytoprovideblindspecimens.(2)RandomTestingLicenseescontinuedtoreportincidentsinwhichemployeeswhoshouldhavebeenincludedintherandomtestingpoolwereomitted.
Number Tested              95          90    185        118            152          270
      Number Positive            13          13      26          36            35          71 Percent Positive      13.68%      14.44%  14.05%    30.51%        23.03%        26.30%
Post-Accident


ÿAlicenseereportedthatithasreinstateda100%randomtestingrate.
Number Tested              92          50    142          84            39          123 Number Positive            0          1        1          2              0            2 Percent Positive        0.00%      2.00%    0.70%      2.38%         0.00%        1.63%
Followup


IN2001-02Page4of7ÿSeverallicenseesreportedthatworkershadbeenimproperlyexcludedfromthedrugtestingpoolforextendedperiods.Foronelicensee,anemployeewhoreturnedtothe
Number Tested            867        895    1,762        584            517        1,101 Number Positive            9          12      21          9            13          22 Percent Positive        1.04%      1.34%    1.19%      1.54%          2.51%        2.00%
Other


siteafteralengthystintattheInstituteofNuclearPowerOperations(INPO)wasnotput
Number Tested            416        336    752        618            559        1,177 Number Positive            2          4        6          17            9            26 Percent Positive        0.48%      1.19%    0.80%      2.75%          1.61%        2.21%
TOTAL


backintotherandomFFDtestingpoolbecausehehadbeen"hardcoded"outofthe
Number Tested          27,502      25,176  52,678      40,078        38,871      78,949 Number Positive            90          85    175        511            468          979 Percent Positive        0.33%      0.34%  0.33%      1.28%          1.20%        1.24%
TOTAL without Other


system.Thislicenseeisreviewingtheprocessofhardcodingindividualsoutofthepool.
category


ÿOnelicenseereportedthatitenhanceditsquarterly"repetitivetask"processforverifyingtheintegrityoftherandomtestingpool.
Number Tested          27,086      24,840  51,926      39,460        38,312      77,772 Number Positive            88          81    169        494            459          953 Percent Positive        0.32%      0.33%  0.33%      1.25%          1.20%        1.23%


ÿLicenseescontinuedtoimprovetheirnotificationprocessbyreducingtheintervalbetweennotifyingandtestingemployeesand/orbykeepingthemundercontinuous
Attachment 1 Table 5A


observationduringthistime.
1999 Test results for long-term and short-term contractor personnel


ÿOnelicenseeanalyzedthenumberofrandomscreeningsbydayofweekandtherateoffailuresforeachweekdayduring1998and1999.Thenumberofrandomscreenings
LONG-TERM CONTRACTORS            SHORT-TERM CONTRACTORS


wasgreatestonMondayandgenerallyfelloneachsubsequentdayoftheweek.Very
First    Second                  First    Second


fewscreeningsweredoneonSaturdayorSunday.In1998nopositiveresultswere
TEST CATEGORY        Six Months Six Months  Year    Six Months Six Months      Year


identifiedonSaturdaysorSundays.However,in1999thepositiverateonthesedays
Pre-Access


wasveryhigh(Saturdaytestshada12.5%positiverateandSundaytestsa15%
Number Tested            752        587      1,339      32,401    27,013      59,414 Number Positive          5          5        10          484        396          880
positiverate).Theanalysissuggestspotentiallyusefulchangestothetestingschedule.Licenseescontinuedtoreportincidentsinwhichemployeeswhoshouldhavebeenincludedintherandomtestingpooldatabasewerenotincluded.
      Percent Positive      0.66%      0.85%     0.75%       1.49%      1.47%        1.48%
Random


ÿAlicenseethatdidweeklyqualitycontrolchecksoftherandompooldiscoveredasoftwareprograminterfaceproblemasaresultofwhichcontractorswereomitted.One
Number Tested            947      1,029    1,976      7,289      6,500      13,789 Number Positive          3          4        7          35        27            62 Percent Positive      0.32%      0.39%    0.35%      0.48%      0.42%        0.45%
For-Cause


weeklycheckshowed110contractorstohavebeenomitted.
Observed Behavior


ÿAnotherlicenseereportedthatanewcontractworkerhadnotbeenincludedintherandomtestpoolforthefirstdrawafterbeingbadgedandstartingwork.(3)PoliciesandProceduresSeverallicenseesreportedhavingimprovedtheirFFDpoliciesandproceduresonthebasisoftheirexperienceovertheyears.
Number Tested            6        11        17          165        121          286 Number Positive          2          2        4          53        34            87 Percent Positive      33.33%    18.18%    23.53%      32.12%    28.10%        30.42%
Post-Accident


ÿAnotherlicenseereduceditsmarijuanacutoffvaluefrom100ng/mlto50ng/ml.
Number Tested            2          6        8          48        62          110
      Number Positive          0          0        0          0          0            0
      Percent Positive      0.00%      0.00%    0.00%      0.00%      0.00%        0.00%
Followup


ÿOnelicenseeintroducedalowercutoffvalueforalcoholtestingforindividualsinthefollowupprogramduetoapreviouspositivetestresultforalcohol.
Number Tested            33        37        70          692        593        1,285 Number Positive          1          0        1          7          7            14 Percent Positive      3.03%      0.00%    1.43%      1.01%      1.18%        1.09%
Other


ÿOnelicenseereduceditstestinglistofdrugsafterfindingthattherehadonlybeenasinglepositiveforbarbituratesandbenzodiazepinessinceitsprogramwasimplemented
Number Tested            155        163      318        395        381          776 Number Positive          1          1        2          15        18            33 Percent Positive      0.65%      0.61%    0.63%      3.80%      4.72%        4.25%
TOTAL


in1990.
Number Tested          1,895      1,833    3,728      40,990    34,670      75,660
      Number Positive          12        12        24          594        482        1,076 Percent Positive      0.63%      0.65%    0.64%      1.45%      1.39%        1.42%
TOTAL without Other


IN2001-02Page5of7ÿOnelicenseechangeditsspecimencollectionprocedurestoincludeanobservedcollectioniftheurinesamplefelloutsidetherangeof93-98degreesFahrenheitandan
category


oraltemperaturedidnotmatchtheurinetemperature.
Number Tested          1,740      1,670    3,410      40,595    34,289      74,884 Number Positive          11        11        22          579        464        1,043 Percent Positive      0.63%      0.66%    0.65%      1.43%      1.35%        1.39%


ÿSomelicenseeshaveinstitutedazerotolerancepolicy,denyinganemployeeaccessafterafirstpositivedrugtestresult.
Attachment 1 Table 5B


ÿMorelicenseesnowcountthedetectionofadulterantsasapositivetestresultandsanctionemployeesaccordingly.
1998 Test results for long-term and short-term contractor personnel


ÿAlicenseepreparedthefollowingpolicystatementonprescriptionmarijuanaandcocaineandcommunicatedthestatementtoitsemployees:CertaindrugslistedintheControlledSubstanceActsuchasmarijuanaandcocainemaybelegallyprescribedandusedin
LONG-TERM CONTRACTORS            SHORT-TERM CONTRACTORS


certainstates.However,federalregulationsdonotallow
First    Second                  First    Second


involvementwithorpossessionoruseofthesedrugswithor
TEST CATEGORY        Six Months Six Months  Year    Six Months Six Months    Year


withoutaprescriptionbyindividualsassignedto[licenseename].
Pre-Access


ÿSeverallicenseesfoundweaknessesintheirFFDrecordsmanagementprocedures.Intwocases,therecordsmanagementprocesswasadequatebutnotappropriately
Number Tested          698        670      1,368      29,616    28,740    58,356 Number Positive          4          8        12          404        356      760
      Percent Positive      0.57%      1.19%    0.88%        1.36%    1.24%      1.30%
Random


documentedinprocedures.Inanothercase,FFDrecordsbeingpreparedforshipment
Number Tested          973        886      1,859        7,387      7,308    14,695 Number Positive          8          1        9          31        46        77 Percent Positive      0.82%      0.11%    0.48%        0.42%    0.63%      0.52%
For-Cause


toanotherlocationforimagingwerenotstoredin1-hourfireratedcabinets,asrequired
Observed Behavior


inthesite-establishedprocedures.Inafourthcase,alicenseefoundthatthelogbook
Number Tested            3          6        9          115        146      261 Number Positive          1          0        1          35        35        70
      Percent Positive      33.33%      0.00%    11.11%      30.43%    23.97%    26.82%
Post-Accident


maintainedbytheFFDprogramdidnotsatisfythedefinitionofapermanent,bound
Number Tested            3          4        7          81        35      116 Number Positive          0          0        0            2        0          2 Percent Positive      0.00%      0.00%    0.00%        2.47%    0.00%      1.72%
Followup


recordbook.
Number Tested            24        17        41          560        500      1,060
      Number Positive          0          0        0            9        13        22 Percent Positive      0.00%      0.00%    0.00%        1.61%    2.60%      2.08%
Other


ÿOnelicenseefoundthatitsproceduresfailedtospecifyFFDprogramtrainingrequiredforpersonnelassignedtoworkintheFFDprogram.
Number Tested            88        104      192          530        455      985 Number Positive          1          0        1          16          9        25 Percent Positive      1.14%      0.00%    0.52%        3.02%    1.98%      2.54%
TOTAL


ÿToenhanceoverallFFDatthesite,onelicenseenowrequiresemployeestoreportnon-job-relatedinjuriestoasupervisorormanagerbeforethestartofworkortraining
Number Tested          1,789      1,687    3,476      38,289    37,184    75,473 Number Positive          14          9        23          497        459      956 Percent Positive      0.78%      0.53%    0.66%      1.30%      1.23%    1.27%
TOTAL without Other


activitiesiftheinjurycouldimpairtheemployees'abilitytosafelyperformjob
category


assignments.Thesupervisorevaluatesinjuredemployees'fitnessandaccommodates
Number Tested          1,701      1,583    3,284      37,759    36,729    74,488 Number Positive          13          9        22          481        450      931 Percent Positive      0.76%      0.57%    0.67%      1.27%      1.23%    1.25%


themasnecessary.
Attachment 1 Table 6A


ÿAtonesite,acomputerdataentryerrorallowedacontractworkertoenteraprotectedareabeforetheworkerpassedapre-accesstest.AppropriateFFDpersonnelwere
1999 Number of confirmed positives by substance


trainedandtheaccessauthorizationprocessmodifiedtopreventthisfromhappening
FIRST SIX      SECOND SIX              TOTAL


again.ÿOnelicenseeintroducedlimitsonhowmuchtimeanemployeemaytaketogiveaurinespecimenandhowmuchwaterhemaydrinkbeforehand.
MONTHS            MONTHS


ÿOnelicenseespecifiedthatrequestsforretestingbemadewithin72hours.
SUBSTANCE                Number      Percent Number  Percent  Number    Percent


ÿOnelicenseereportedthataneventatanotherlicensee'ssitehelpeditidentifyandaddressapotentialweaknessatitsownsite.TheeventinvolvedanFFDtesting
Marijuana                    345      52.19%  327    57.17%      672      54.50%
Cocaine                      151      22.84%  122    21.33%      273      22.14%
Opiates                        4        0.61%    12      2.10%      16        1.30%
Amphetamines                  20        3.03%    20      3.50%      40        3.24%
Phencyclidine                  0        0.00%    2      0.35%      2        0.16%
Alcohol                      141      21.33%    89    15.56%      230      18.65%
TOTAL                        661                572                1,233 Table 6B


IN2001-02Page6of7technicianwhorecordeddrugscreentestresultsasnegativebeforetheywerevalidatedbythemedicalreviewofficer(MRO).Asaresult,accesswasgrantedtoafew
1998 Number of confirmed positives by substance


individualswhosetestresultswerelaterreportedtobepositive.Topreventthisfrom
FIRST SIX      SECOND SIX              TOTAL


happeningatitsownsite,thelicenseereviseditsproceduressothataccess
MONTHS            MONTHS


authorizationpersonnelcanonlyacceptreportsthathavebeenpreparedbytheMRO.
SUBSTANCE                Number      Percent Number  Percent  Number    Percent


ÿOnelicenseeupdateditsFFDprocedurestoincludeapreciseformulabywhichtocalculatebloodalcoholconcentrationwhenanemployeearrivesatwork.
Marijuana                    327      53.34%    279    51.67%      606      52.56%
Cocaine                      137      22.35%    132    24.44%      269      23.33%
Opiates                      13      2.12%      6    1.11%      19      1.65%
Amphetamines                  32      5.22%    14    2.59%      46      3.99%
Phencyclidine                1        0.16%      0    0.00%        1      0.09%
Alcohol                      103      16.80%    109    20.19%      212      18.39%
TOTAL                        613                540                1153


ÿOnelicenseediscoveredthatitspre-employmenttestingprotocolimpliedbreathalyzertestingirrespectiveofwhetherthecandidatehadyetbeenofferedajob,leavingthe
Attachment 1 Table 7A


licenseevulnerabletobeingfoundinviolationoftheAmericansWithDisabilitiesAct.
1999 Confirmed positives test results by substance for licensee employees and contractors


ÿOnelicenseeinitiatedastandardizedchain-of-custodyformthroughoutitssites.(4)ProgramandSystemManagementLicenseescontinuedtoreportimprovementsinoverallFFDprogrammanagement.
LICENSEE EMPLOYEES                    CONTRACTORS


ÿOnelicenseeplanedtomergeFFDwithAccessAuthorizationtoimprovecoordinationandeliminatethepotentialforerrors.ThislicenseeisalsotryingtorefineFFD
(Long-Term/Short-Term)
SUBSTANCE                        Number          Percent        Number          Percent


performanceindicators.
Marijuana                            65            41.67%            607          56.36%
Cocaine                              39            25.00%            234          21.73%
Opiates                                0            0.00%            16            1.49%
Amphetamines                          3            1.92%            37            3.44%
Phencyclidine                          0            0.00%              2            0.19%
Alcohol                              49            31.41%            181          16.81%
TOTAL                                156                            1,077 Table 7B


ÿAfewlicenseesreportedweaknessesintheirbehavioralobservationprogramsbecauseofinsufficienttraining.Othersreportedimprovementsintheirbehavioralobservation
1998 Confirmed positives test results by substance for each worker category


programs.ÿFFDawarenessactivitiescontinuedtobereported(e.g.,sendingarticlesandnewsletterstoallemployees,givingtoallemployeesrefrigeratormagnetswiththetoll
LICENSEE EMPLOYEES                    CONTRACTORS


freeemployeeassistanceprogramtelephonenumber).
(Long-Term/Short-Term)
TYPE OF SUBSTANCE                Number            Percent        Number          Percent


ÿOnelicenseeencouragedsupervisorstocompleterefresherFFDtrainingontime.ThelicenseenowrigorouslymonitorsoverduesupervisorFFDtraining,sendsanaction
Marijuana                            78            43.58%            528          54.21%
Cocaine                              41            22.91%            228          23.41%
Opiates                                3            1.68%            16            1.64%
Amphetamines                          6            3.35%            40            4.11%
Phencyclidine                          0            0.00%              1            0.10%
Alcohol                              51            28.49%            161          16.53%
TOTAL                                179                              974


request,andsuspendsunescortedaccessforadelinquentsupervisorandforthe
Attachment 1 Table 8A


workerswhoreporttothesupervisor.
Significant* fitness-for-duty events (1990-1999)
Type of Event            1990 1991    1992    1993    1994  1995  1996 1997 1998  1999    Total


ÿAtonesiteitwasdiscoveredthatsupervisorswhowerenotbadgedforunescortedaccessbutwhowererequiredtoreporttotheemergencyoperationsfacilitydidnothave
Reactor Operators          19    16    18      8      7      8      8  9    5    5      103 Licensee Supervisors      26    16    22      25      11      16    19  16  10    2      163 Contract Supervisors      12    24    28      16      11      10    8  10  10    12      141 FFD Program Personnel      1    5      0      0      1      0    2  0    3    2        14 Substances Found            6    8      6      2      0      5    5  4    0      2      38 Total                      64    69    74      51      30      39    42  39  28    23      459
*Subsection 73 of 10 CFR Part 26 requires reporting units to provide the NRC with information


appropriateFFDtraining.CorrectiveactionswereimplementedtotrackFFDtraining
on significant FFD events, such as events involving licensed operators and supervisors, and on


requirementsfornonbadgedsupervisors.
controlled substances found in the protected area of the plant.


ÿSeverallicenseesreportedthevalueofcaninesearchesinenhancingantidrugawarenessattheirsites,eventhesearchesthattypicallydidnotdiscoverdrugs.
Table 8B


IN2001-02Page7of7Thisinformationnoticerequiresnospecificactionorwrittenresponse.Ifyouhaveanyquestionsabouttheinformationinthisnotice,pleasecontactthepersonlistedbelow./RA/LedyardB.Marsh,Chief
Significant fitness-for-duty events (1990-1998)
Type of Event              1990  1991    1992    1993    1994  1995  1996  1997    1998    Total


EventsAssessment,GenericCommunicationsandNon-PowerReactorsBranchDivisionofRegulatoryImprovementPrograms
Reactor Operators          19      16      18      8        7      8    8      9      5      98 Licensee Supervisors        26      16      22      25      11    16    19    16      10      161 Contract Supervisors        12      24      28      16      11    10    8    10      10      129 FFD Program Personnel        1      5      0      0        1      0    2      0      3      12 Substances Found            6      8      6      2        0      5    5      4      0      36 Total                      64      69      74      51      30    39    42    39      28      436


OfficeofNuclearReactorRegulationTechnicalContact:GarmonWest,Jr.,Ph.D.301-415-1044 E-mail:fitnessforduty@nrc.govAttachments:1.Fitness-for-DutyStatistics2.ListofRecentlyIssuedNRCInformationNotices
Attachment 1 Table 9A


IN2001-02Page7of7Thisinformationnoticerequiresnospecificactionorwrittenresponse.Ifyouhaveanyquestionsabouttheinformationinthisnotice,pleasecontactthepersonlistedbelow./RA/LedyardB.Marsh,Chief
Trends in testing by test type (1990-1999)
Type of Test      1990    1991    1992    1993    1994    1995    1996    1997    1998    1999    Total


EventsAssessment,GenericCommunicationsandNon-PowerReactorsBranchDivisionofRegulatoryImprovementPrograms
Pre-Access


OfficeofNuclearReactorRegulationTechnicalContact:GarmonWest,Jr.,Ph.D.301-415-1044 E-mail:fitnessforduty@nrc.govAttachments:1.Fitness-for-DutyStatistics2.ListofRecentlyIssuedNRCInformationNoticesDistribution:INFileFGillespieEMcNeilGMizunoDDesaulniersPUBLICJShapakerADAMSACCESSIONNUMBER:ML0102050419ADAMSDOCUMENTTITLE:C:\119ffd9998.wpdPubliclyAvailableNon-PubliclyAvailableSensitiveNon-SensitiveOFFICETechEdRSS:DIPMRSS:DIPMIOLB:DIPMDIPMNAMEPKleene*viaphoneGWest*RPRosano*GTracy*BBoger*DATE11/9/0011/14/0011/15/0012/14/0001/11/2001OFFICEOGCREXBC:REXBNAMESTrebyJTappert*LBMarshDATE01/16/200103/19/200103/28/2001OFFICIALRECORDCOPY
Number Tested    122,491 104,508 104,842  91,471  80,217  79,305  81,041  84,320  69,146  69,139  886,480
Number Positive  1,548    983    1,110    952    977  1,122  1,132    1,096    822    934    10,676 Percent Positive  1.26%  0.94%  1.06%  1.04%  1.22%  1.41%  1.40%  1.30%    1.19%  1.35%    1.20%
Random


Attachment1IN2001-02
Number Tested    148,743 153,818 156,730 146,605  78,391  66,791  62,307  60,829  56,969  54,457  985,640
Number Positive    550    510    461      341    223    180    202    172    157    140    2,936 Percent Positive  0.37%  0.33%  0.29%  0.23%  0.28%  0.27%  0.32%  0.28%    0.28%  0.26%    0.30%
For-Cause


===Page1of16Table1ATestresultsforeachtestcategory,1999===
Number Tested      732    727    696      751    758    763    848    722    720    736    7,453 Number Positive    214    167    178      163    122    139    138    149    100    120    1,490
1999TESTCATEGORYNUMBEROFTESTSPOSITIVETESTS PERCENTPOSITIVEPre-Access69,1399341.35%Random54,4571400.26%For-Cause73612016.30%Followup3,008301.00%Other1,742392.24%
Percent Positive 29.23% 22.97% 25.57% 21.70% 16.09% 18.22% 16.27% 20.64% 13.89% 16.30%           19.99%
TOTAL*129,0821,2630.98%TOTALwithoutOther
Followup


category127,3401,2240.96%Table1BTestresultsforeachtestcategory,1998
Number Tested    2,633  3,544  4,283    4,139  3,875  3,262  3,262  3,296  2,863  3,008    34,165 Number Positive    65      62      69      56      50      35      40      31      43      30    481 Percent Positive  2.47%  1.75%  1.61%  1.35%  1.29%  1.07%  1.23%  0.94%    1.50%  1.00%    1.41%
1998TESTCATEGORYNUMBEROF
Other


TESTSPOSITIVE TESTSPERCENTPOSITIVEPre-Access69,1468221.19%Random56,9691570.28%For-Cause72010013.89%Followup2,863431.50%Other1,929321.66%
Number Tested    3,610  3,228  4,998    2,511  2,125  2,778  2,082  1,928  1,929  1,742    26,931 Number Positive    32      22      59      36      22      55      37      36      32      39    370
TOTAL131,6271,1540.88%TOTALwithoutOther
Percent Positive  0.89%  0.68%  1.18%  1.43%  1.04%   1.98%   1.78%   1.87%   1.66% 2.24%    1.37%
TOTAL


category129,6981,1220.87%
Number Tested    278,209 265,825 271,549 245,477 165,366 152,899 149,540 151,095 131,627 129,082 1,940,669 Number Positive  2,409  1,744  1,877    1,548  1,394  1,531  1,549  1,484  1,154  1,263    15,953 Percent Positive  0.87%   0.66%  0.69%  0.63%  0.84%  1.00%  1.04%  0.98%    0.88%  0.98%    0.82%
*ThesetotalshavebeencalculatedusingtheOthertestcategory.Thiscategoryincludesresultsfromtheperiodictestingdonebysomereportingunitsduringannualphysicalsorsimilarperiodicactivities.AlthoughsomereportingunitsspecifiedthenatureoftheOthertests(e.g.,returnto


work),mostreportingunitsdidnotgivethisinformation.
===TOTAL without===
Other category


Attachment1IN2001-02 Page2of16Table2A1999TestresultsforeachtestcategoryandworkcategoryTESTCATEGORYLICENSEEEMPLOYEESLONG-TERMCONTRACTORSSHORT-TERMCONTRACTORSTOTALPre-AccessNumberTested8,3861,33959,414
Number Tested    274,599 262,597 266,551 242,966 163,241 150,121 147,458 149,167 129,698 127,340 1,913,738 Number Positive  2,377  1,722  1,818    1,512  1,372  1,476  1,512  1,448  1,122  1,224    15,583 Percent Positive  0.87%  0.66%  0.68%  0.62%   0.84%   0.98%  1.03%  0.97%    0.87%  0.96%   0.81%
69,139NumberPositive4410880 934PercentPositive0.52%0.75%1.48%
1.35%RandomNumberTested38,6921,97613,789
54,457NumberPositive


71762 140PercentPositive
Attachment 1 Table 9B


0.18%0.35%0.45%
Trends in testing by test type (1990-1998)
0.26%For-CauseNumberTested31525396 736NumberPositive29487 120PercentPositive9.21%16.00%21.97%
Type of Test      1990    1991    1992    1993    1994    1995    1996    1997    1998    Total
16.30%FollowupNumberTested1,653701,285
3,008NumberPositive15114 30PercentPositive0.91%1.43%1.09%
1.00%OtherNumberTested648318776 1,742NumberPositive4233 39PercentPositive0.62%0.63%4.25%
2.24%TOTALNumberTested49,6943,72875,660129,082NumberPositive163241,0761,263PercentPositive0.33%0.64%1.42%0.98%TOTALwithoutOthercategoryNumberTested49,0463,41074,884127,340NumberPositive


159 221,0431,224PercentPositive0.32%0.65%1.39%0.96%
Pre-Access
Attachment1IN2001-02 Page3of16Table2B1998TestresultsforeachtestcategoryandworkcategoryTESTCATEGORY


LICENSEE EMPLOYEES LONG-TERMCONTRACTORS
Number Tested    122,491 104,508 104,842  91,471  80,217  79,305  81,041  84,320  69,146  817,341 Number Positive  1,548    983    1,110    952    977  1,122  1,132  1,096    822    9,742 Percent Positive  1.26%    0.94%  1.06%  1.04%  1.22%  1.41%  1.40%  1.30%  1.19%    1.19%
Random


SHORT-TERMCONTRACTORSTOTALPre-AccessNumberTested9,4221,36858,356
Number Tested    148,743 153,818 156,730 146,605  78,391  66,791  62,307  60,829  56,969  931,183 Number Positive    550      510    461    341    223    180    202    172    157    2,796 Percent Positive  0.37%   0.33% 0.29%   0.23%   0.28%   0.27%   0.32%   0.28%   0.28%     0.30%
69,146NumberPositive5012760 822PercentPositive0.53%0.88%1.30%
For-Cause
1.19%RandomNumberTested40,4151,85914,695
56,969NumberPositive71977 157PercentPositive0.18%0.48%0.52%
0.28%For-CauseNumberTested32716377 720NumberPositive27172 100PercentPositive8.26%6.25%19.10%
13.89%FollowupNumberTested1,762411,060
2,863NumberPositive21022 43PercentPositive1.19%0.00%2.08%
1.50%OtherNumberTested752192985 1,929NumberPositive6125 32PercentPositive0.80%0.52%2.54%
1.66%TOTALNumberTested52,6783,47675,473131,627NumberPositive175239561,154PercentPositive0.33%0.66%1.27%0.88%TOTALwithoutOthercategoryNumberTested51,9263,28474,488129,698NumberPositive169229311,122PercentPositive0.33%0.67%1.25%0.87%
Attachment1IN2001-02 Page4of16Table3A1999TestresultsbytestcategoryTESTCATEGORYFIRSTSIXMONTHSSECONDSIXMONTHSYEARPre-AccessNumberTested37,84431,29569,139NumberPositive510424934PercentPositive1.35%1.35%1.35%
RandomNumberTested28,25626,20154,457NumberPositive7070140PercentPositive0.25%0.27%0.26%For-Cause


ObservedBehaviorNumberTested283223506NumberPositive7545120PercentPositive26.50%20.18%23.72%Post-AccidentNumberTested
Number Tested      732      727    696    751    758    763    848    722    720    6,717 Number Positive    214      167    178    163    122    139    138    149    100    1,370
Percent Positive 29.23% 22.97% 25.57% 21.70% 16.09% 18.22% 16.27% 20.64% 13.89%           20.40%
Followup


110120230NumberPositive
Number Tested    2,633    3,544  4,283  4,139  3,875  3,262  3,262  3,296  2,863    31,157 Number Positive    65      62      69      56      50      35      40      31      43      451 Percent Positive  2.47%    1.75%  1.61%  1.35%  1.29%  1.07%  1.23%  0.94%  1.50%    1.45%
Other


000PercentPositive0.00%0.00%0.00%FollowupNumberTested1,5431,4653,008NumberPositive161430PercentPositive1.04%0.96%1.00%OtherNumberTested8668761,742NumberPositive182139PercentPositive2.08%2.40%2.24%
Number Tested    3,610    3,228  4,998  2,511  2,125  2,778  2,082  1,928  1,929    25,189 Number Positive    32      22      59      36      22      55      37      36      32      331 Percent Positive  0.89%   0.68% 1.18%   1.43%   1.04%   1.98%   1.78%   1.87%   1.66%     1.31%
TOTALNumberTested68,90260,180129,082NumberPositive6895741,263PercentPositive1.00%0.95%0.98%TOTALwithoutOthercategoryNumberTested68,03659,304127,340NumberPositive6715531,224PercentPositive0.99%0.93%0.96%  
TOTAL
Attachment1IN2001-02 Page5of16Table3B1998TestresultsbytestcategoryTESTCATEGORYFIRSTSIXMONTHSSECONDSIXMONTHSYEARPre-AccessNumberTested35,45533,69169,146NumberPositive433389822PercentPositive1.22%1.15%1.19%
RandomNumberTested29,25127,71856,969NumberPositive8077157PercentPositive0.27%0.28%0.28%For-Cause


ObservedBehaviorNumberTested213242455NumberPositive494897PercentPositive23.00%19.83%21.32%Post-AccidentNumberTested17689265NumberPositive
Number Tested    278,209 265,825 271,549 245,477 165,366 152,899 149,540 151,095 131,627 1,811,587 Number Positive  2,409    1,744  1,877  1,548  1,394  1,531  1,549  1,484  1,154    14,690
Percent Positive  0.87%    0.66%  0.69%  0.63%  0.84%  1.00%   1.04%  0.98%  0.88%     0.81%


213PercentPositive1.14%1.12%1.13%FollowupNumberTested1,4511,4122,863NumberPositive182543PercentPositive1.24%1.77%1.50%OtherNumberTested1,0348951,929NumberPositive191332PercentPositive1.84%1.45%1.66%
===TOTAL without===
TOTALNumberTested67,58064,047131,627NumberPositive6015531,154PercentPositive0.89%0.86%0.88%TOTALwithoutOthercategoryNumberTested66,54663,152129,698NumberPositive5825401,122PercentPositive0.87%0.86%0.87%
Other category
Attachment1IN2001-02 Page6of16Table4A1999TestresultsforlicenseeemployeesandcontractorpersonnelLICENSEEEMPLOYEESCONTRACTORS(Long-Term/ShortTerm)TESTCATEGORYFirstSixMonthsSecondSixMonthsYearFirstSixMonthsSecondSixMonthsYearPre-AccessNumberTested4,6913,6958,38633,15327,60060,753NumberPositive212344489401890PercentPositive0.45%0.62%0.52%1.47%1.45%1.46%
RandomNumberTested20,02018,67238,6928,2367,52915,765NumberPositive323971383169PercentPositive0.16%0.21%0.18%0.46%0.41%0.44%For-CauseObservedBehaviorNumberTested11291203171132303NumberPositive20929553691PercentPositive17.86%9.89%14.29%32.16%27.27%30.03%Post-AccidentNumberTested60521125068118NumberPositive


0 00 000PercentPositive
Number Tested    274,599 262,597 266,551 242,966 163,241 150,121 147,458 149,167 129,698 1,786,398 Number Positive  2,377    1,722  1,818  1,512  1,372  1,476  1,512  1,448  1,122    14,359 Percent Positive  0.87%    0.66%  0.68%  0.62%  0.84%  0.98%  1.03%  0.97%  0.87%    0.80%


0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%FollowupNumberTested8188351,6537256301,355NumberPositive87158715PercentPositive0.98%0.84%0.91%1.10%1.11%1.11%OtherNumberTested3163326485505441,094NumberPositive
Attachment 1 Table 10A


2 24161935PercentPositive0.63%0.60%0.62%2.91%3.49%3.20%
Trends in substances identified (1990-1999)
TOTALNumberTested26,01723,67749,69442,88536,50379,388NumberPositive83801636064941,100PercentPositive0.32%0.34%0.33%1.41%1.35%1.39%TOTALwithoutOther
Substance          1990      1991      1992      1993      1994      1995      1996      1997      1998    1999 Marijuana          1,153        746      953        781        739      819      868      842      606    672 Cocaine              706        549      470        369        344      374      352      336      269    273 Alcohol              452        401      427        357        251      265      281      262      212    230
Amphetamines          69        31        31        51        54        61        53        49        46      40
Opiates              45        24        8        13        11        17        14        39      19      16 Phencyclidine          8        11        4          5        1        7        2         0       1        2 Total*            2,433      1,762      1,893    1,576      1,400    1,543    1,570      1,528    1,153    1,233 Table 10B


categoryNumberTested25,70123,34549,04642,33535,95978,294NumberPositive81781595904751,065PercentPositive
Trends in substances identified (1990-1998)
Substance                1990      1991      1992      1993      1994      1995      1996      1997      1998 Marijuana                1,153      746      953        781      739      819        868      842      606 Cocaine                  706        549      470        369      344      374        352      336      269 Alcohol                  452        401      427        357      251      265        281      262      212 Amphetamines              69        31        31        51        54      61          53      49        46 Opiates                    45        24        8        13        11        17        14        39        19 Phencyclidine              8        11        4        5        1        7          2        0        1 Total*                  2,433      1,762    1,893      1,576    1,400    1,543      1,570    1,528    1,153
* These totals do not include positives for multiple substances and other substances than those listed


0.32%0.33%0.32%1.39%1.32%1.36%
above.
Attachment1IN2001-02 Page7of16Table4B1998TestresultsforlicenseeemployeesandcontractorpersonnelLICENSEEEMPLOYEESCONTRACTORS(Long-Term/ShortTerm)TESTCATEGORYFirstSixMonthsSecondSixMonthsYearFirstSixMonthsSecondSixMonthsYearPre-AccessNumberTested5,1414,2819,42230,31429,41059,724NumberPositive252550408364772PercentPositive0.49%0.58%0.53%1.35%1.24%1.29%
RandomNumberTested20,89119,52440,4158,3608,19416,554NumberPositive413071394786PercentPositive0.20%0.15%0.18%0.47%0.57%0.52%For-Cause


ObservedBehaviorNumberTested9590185118152270NumberPositive131326363571PercentPositive13.68%14.44%14.05%30.51%23.03%26.30%Post-AccidentNumberTested92501428439123NumberPositive011202PercentPositive0.00%2.00%0.70%2.38%0.00%1.63%FollowupNumberTested8678951,7625845171,101NumberPositive9122191322PercentPositive1.04%1.34%1.19%1.54%2.51%2.00%OtherNumberTested4163367526185591,177NumberPositive24617926PercentPositive0.48%1.19%0.80%2.75%1.61%2.21%
Attachment 1 Table 11A
TOTALNumberTested27,50225,17652,67840,07838,87178,949NumberPositive9085175511468979PercentPositive0.33%0.34%0.33%1.28%1.20%1.24%TOTALwithoutOther


categoryNumberTested27,08624,84051,92639,46038,31277,772NumberPositive8881169494459953PercentPositive0.32%0.33%0.33%1.25%1.20%1.23%
Trends in positive test rates for workers with unescorted access (1990-1999)*
Attachment1IN2001-02 Page8of16Table5A1999Testresultsforlong-termandshort-termcontractorpersonnelLONG-TERMCONTRACTORSSHORT-TERMCONTRACTORSTESTCATEGORYFirstSixMonthsSecondSixMonthsYearFirstSixMonthsSecondSixMonthsYearPre-AccessNumberTested7525871,33932,40127,01359,414NumberPositive5510484396880PercentPositive0.66%0.85%0.75%1.49%1.47%1.48%
                                      Positive Test Rate
RandomNumberTested9471,0291,9767,2896,50013,789NumberPositive347352762PercentPositive0.32%0.39%0.35%0.48%0.42%0.45%For-Cause


ObservedBehaviorNumberTested61117165121286NumberPositive224533487PercentPositive33.33%18.18%23.53%32.12%28.10%30.42%Post-AccidentNumberTested
1990                          0.54%
            1991                          0.47%
            1992                          0.44%
            1993                          0.37%
            1994                          0.48%
            1995                          0.50%
            1996                          0.57%
            1997                          0.54%
            1998                          0.50%
            1999                          0.50%
Table 11B


2684862 110NumberPositive
Trends in positive test rates for workers with unescorted access (1990-1998)*
                                      Positive Test Rate


000 0 00PercentPositive0.00%0.00%0.00%
1990                          0.54%
0.00%0.00%0.00%FollowupNumberTested3337706925931,285NumberPositive
            1991                          0.47%
            1992                          0.44%
            1993                          0.37%
            1994                          0.48%
            1995                          0.50%
            1996                          0.57%
            1997                          0.54%
            1998                          0.50%
*Includes random, for-cause, and followup testing results. The random test rate was reduced from


1 017714PercentPositive
100% to 50% in 1994.


3.03%0.00%1.43%1.01%1.18%1.09%OtherNumberTested155163318395381776NumberPositive
Attachment LIST OF RECENTLY ISSUED


112151833PercentPositive0.65%0.61%0.63%3.80%4.72%4.25%
NRC INFORMATION NOTICES
TOTALNumberTested1,8951,8333,72840,99034,67075,660NumberPositive1212245944821,076PercentPositive0.63%0.65%0.64%1.45%1.39%1.42%TOTALwithoutOther


categoryNumberTested1,7401,6703,41040,59534,28974,884NumberPositive1111 225794641,043PercentPositive0.63%0.66%0.65%1.43%1.35%1.39%
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Attachment1IN2001-02 Page9of16Table5B1998Testresultsforlong-termandshort-termcontractorpersonnelLONG-TERMCONTRACTORSSHORT-TERMCONTRACTORSTESTCATEGORYFirstSixMonthsSecondSixMonthsYearFirstSixMonthsSecondSixMonthsYearPre-AccessNumberTested6986701,36829,61628,74058,356NumberPositive4812404356760PercentPositive0.57%1.19%0.88%1.36%1.24%1.30%
Information                                        Date of
RandomNumberTested9738861,8597,3877,30814,695NumberPositive819314677PercentPositive0.82%0.11%0.48%0.42%0.63%0.52%For-Cause


ObservedBehaviorNumberTested369115146261NumberPositive101353570PercentPositive33.33%0.00%11.11%30.43%23.97%26.82%Post-AccidentNumberTested3478135116NumberPositive
Notice No.             Subject                    Issuance  Issued to


000202PercentPositive0.00%0.00%0.00%2.47%0.00%1.72%FollowupNumberTested2417415605001,060NumberPositive00091322PercentPositive0.00%0.00%0.00%1.61%2.60%2.08%OtherNumberTested88104192530455985NumberPositive10116925PercentPositive1.14%0.00%0.52%3.02%1.98%2.54%
______________________________________________________________________________________
TOTALNumberTested1,7891,6873,47638,28937,18475,473NumberPositive14923497459956PercentPositive0.78%0.53%0.66%1.30%1.23%1.27%TOTALwithoutOther
2001-01          The Importance of Accurate      03/26/01    All material licensees


categoryNumberTested1,7011,5833,28437,75936,72974,488NumberPositive13922481450931PercentPositive0.76%0.57%0.67%1.27%1.23%1.25%
Inventory Controls to Prevent
Attachment1IN2001-02 Page10of16Table6A1999NumberofconfirmedpositivesbysubstanceFIRSTSIXMONTHSSECONDSIXMONTHS TOTALSUBSTANCENumberPercentNumberPercentNumberPercentMarijuana34552.19%32757.17%67254.50%Cocaine15122.84%12221.33%27322.14%Opiates40.61%122.10%161.30%Amphetamines203.03%203.50%403.24%Phencyclidine00.00%20.35%20.16%Alcohol14121.33%8915.56%23018.65%TOTAL6615721,233Table6B1998NumberofconfirmedpositivesbysubstanceFIRSTSIXMONTHSSECONDSIXMONTHS TOTALSUBSTANCENumberPercentNumberPercentNumberPercentMarijuana32753.34%27951.67%60652.56%Cocaine13722.35%13224.44%26923.33%Opiates132.12%61.11%191.65%Amphetamines325.22%142.59%463.99%Phencyclidine10.16%00.00%10.09%Alcohol10316.80%10920.19%21218.39%TOTAL6135401153 Attachment1IN2001-02 Page11of16Table7A1999ConfirmedpositivestestresultsbysubstanceforlicenseeemployeesandcontractorsLICENSEEEMPLOYEESCONTRACTORS(Long-Term/Short-Term)SUBSTANCENumberPercentNumberPercentMarijuana6541.67%60756.36%Cocaine3925.00%23421.73%Opiates00.00%16 1.49%Amphetamines31.92%373.44%Phencyclidine00.00%20.19%
Alcohol4931.41%18116.81%TOTAL1561,077Table7B1998ConfirmedpositivestestresultsbysubstanceforeachworkercategoryLICENSEEEMPLOYEESCONTRACTORS(Long-Term/Short-Term)TYPEOFSUBSTANCENumberPercentNumberPercentMarijuana7843.58%52854.21%Cocaine4122.91%22823.41%
Opiates31.68%161.64%
Amphetamines63.35%404.11%
Phencyclidine00.00%10.10%
Alcohol5128.49%16116.53%TOTAL179974 Attachment1IN2001-02 Page12of16Table8ASignificant*fitness-for-dutyevents(1990-1999)TypeofEvent1990199119921993199419951996199719981999TotalReactorOperators1916188788955
103LicenseeSupervisors2616222511161916102
163ContractSupervisors1224281611108101012
141FFDProgramPersonnel1500102032
14SubstancesFound6862055402
38Total64697451303942392823459*Subsection73of10CFRPart26requiresreportingunitstoprovidetheNRCwithinformationonsignificantFFDevents,suchaseventsinvolvinglicensedoperatorsandsupervisors,andon


controlledsubstancesfoundintheprotectedareaoftheplant.Table8BSignificantfitness-for-dutyevents(1990-1998)TypeofEvent199019911992199319941995199619971998TotalReactorOperators191618878895
the Unauthorized Possession
98LicenseeSupervisors261622251116191610
161ContractSupervisors12242816111081010
129FFDProgramPersonnel


150010203 12SubstancesFound
of Radioactive Material


686205540 36Total646974513039423928436 Attachment1IN2001-02 Page13of16Table9ATrendsintestingbytesttype(1990-1999)TypeofTest1990199119921993199419951996199719981999TotalPre-AccessNumberTested122,491104,508104,84291,47180,21779,30581,04184,32069,14669,139886,480NumberPositive1,5489831,1109529771,1221,1321,09682293410,676PercentPositive1.26%0.94%1.06%1.04%1.22%1.41%1.40%1.30%1.19%1.35%1.20%
2000-17,         Crack in Weld Area of Reactor    02/28/01    All holders of operating licenses
RandomNumberTested148,743153,818156,730146,60578,39166,79162,30760,82956,96954,457985,640NumberPositive5505104613412231802021721571402,936PercentPositive0.37%0.33%0.29%0.23%0.28%0.27%0.32%0.28%0.28%0.26%0.30%For-CauseNumberTested7327276967517587638487227207367,453NumberPositive2141671781631221391381491001201,490PercentPositive29.23%22.97%25.57%21.70%16.09%18.22%16.27%20.64%13.89%16.30%19.99%FollowupNumberTested2,6333,5444,2834,1393,8753,2623,2623,2962,8633,00834,165NumberPositive65626956503540314330481PercentPositive2.47%1.75%1.61%1.35%1.29%1.07%1.23%0.94%1.50%1.00%1.41%OtherNumberTested3,6103,2284,9982,5112,1252,7782,0821,9281,9291,74226,931NumberPositive32225936225537363239370PercentPositive0.89%0.68%1.18%1.43%1.04%1.98%1.78%1.87%1.66%2.24%1.37%
TOTALNumberTested278,209265,825271,549245,477165,366152,899149,540151,095131,627129,0821,940,669NumberPositive2,4091,7441,8771,5481,3941,5311,5491,4841,1541,26315,953PercentPositive0.87%0.66%0.69%0.63%0.84%1.00%1.04%0.98%0.88%0.98%0.82%TOTALwithoutOthercategoryNumberTested274,599262,597266,551242,966163,241150,121147,458149,167129,698127,3401,913,738NumberPositive2,3771,7221,8181,5121,3721,4761,5121,4481,1221,22415,583PercentPositive0.87%0.66%0.68%0.62%0.84%0.98%1.03%0.97%0.87%0.96%0.81%
Attachment1IN2001-02 Page14of16Table9BTrendsintestingbytesttype(1990-1998)TypeofTest199019911992199319941995199619971998TotalPre-AccessNumberTested122,491104,508104,84291,47180,21779,30581,04184,32069,146817,341NumberPositive1,5489831,1109529771,1221,1321,0968229,742PercentPositive1.26%0.94%1.06%1.04%1.22%1.41%1.40%1.30%1.19%1.19%
RandomNumberTested148,743153,818156,730146,60578,39166,79162,30760,82956,969931,183NumberPositive5505104613412231802021721572,796PercentPositive0.37%0.33%0.29%0.23%0.28%0.27%0.32%0.28%0.28%0.30%For-CauseNumberTested7327276967517587638487227206,717NumberPositive2141671781631221391381491001,370PercentPositive29.23%22.97%25.57%21.70%16.09%18.22%16.27%20.64%13.89%20.40%FollowupNumberTested2,6333,5444,2834,1393,8753,2623,2623,2962,86331,157NumberPositive656269565035403143451PercentPositive2.47%1.75%1.61%1.35%1.29%1.07%1.23%0.94%1.50%1.45%OtherNumberTested3,6103,2284,9982,5112,1252,7782,0821,9281,92925,189NumberPositive322259362255373632331PercentPositive0.89%0.68%1.18%1.43%1.04%1.98%1.78%1.87%1.66%1.31%
TOTALNumberTested278,209265,825271,549245,477165,366152,899149,540151,095131,6271,811,587NumberPositive2,4091,7441,8771,5481,3941,5311,5491,4841,15414,690PercentPositive0.87%0.66%0.69%0.63%0.84%1.00%1.04%0.98%0.88%0.81%TOTALwithoutOthercategoryNumberTested274,599262,597266,551242,966163,241150,121147,458149,167129,6981,786,398NumberPositive2,3771,7221,8181,5121,3721,4761,5121,4481,12214,359PercentPositive0.87%0.66%0.68%0.62%0.84%0.98%1.03%0.97%0.87%0.80%
Attachment1IN2001-02 Page15of16Table10ATrendsinsubstancesidentified(1990-1999)Substance1990199119921993199419951996199719981999Marijuana1,153746953781739819868842606672Cocaine706549470369344374352336269273Alcohol452401427357251265281262212230Amphetamines69313151546153494640Opiates4524813111714391916Phencyclidine81145172012Total*2,4331,7621,8931,5761,4001,5431,5701,5281,1531,233Table10BTrendsinsubstancesidentified(1990-1998)Substance199019911992199319941995199619971998Marijuana1,153746953781739819868842606Cocaine706549470369344374352336269Alcohol452401427357251265281262212Amphetamines693131515461534946Opiates45248131117143919Phencyclidine8114517201Total*2,4331,7621,8931,5761,4001,5431,5701,5281,153*Thesetotalsdonotincludepositivesformultiplesubstancesandothersubstancesthanthoselistedabove.


Attachment1IN2001-02 Page16of16Table11ATrendsinpositivetestratesforworkerswithunescortedaccess(1990-1999)*PositiveTestRate
Supp. 2          Coolant System Hot Leg Piping                for nuclear power reactors except


1990 0.54%1991 0.47%1992 0.44%1993 0.37%1994 0.48%1995 0.50%1996 0.57%1997 0.54%1998 0.50%1999 0.50%Table11BTrendsinpositivetestratesforworkerswithunescortedaccess(1990-1998)*PositiveTestRate
at V.C. Summer                              those who has ceased operations


1990 0.54%1991 0.47%1992 0.44%1993 0.37%1994 0.48%1995 0.50%1996 0.57%1997 0.54%1998 0.50%*Includesrandom,for-cause,andfollowuptestingresults.Therandomtestratewasreducedfrom100%to50%in1994.
and have certified that fuel has


______________________________________________________________________________________OL=OperatingLicense
permanently removed from


CP=ConstructionPermitAttachmentIN2001-02
reactor vessel


===Page1of1LISTOFRECENTLYISSUEDNRCINFORMATIONNOTICES===
2000-22          Medical Misadministrations      12/18/00    All medical use licensees
_____________________________________________________________________________________InformationDateof


===NoticeNo.SubjectIssuanceIssuedto===
Caused by Human Errors                      authorized to conduct gamma
______________________________________________________________________________________2001-01TheImportanceofAccurateInventoryControlstoPrevent


theUnauthorizedPossession
Involving Gamma Stereotactic                stereotactic radiosurgery


ofRadioactiveMaterial03/26/01Allmateriallicensees2000-17,Supp.2CrackinWeldAreaofReactorCoolantSystemHotLegPiping
Radiosurgery (GAMMA KNIFE)                  treatments


atV.C.Summer02/28/01Allholdersofoperatinglicensesfornuclearpowerreactorsexcept
2000-21          Detached Check Valve Disc        12/15/00    All holders of OLs for nuclear


thosewhohasceasedoperations
not Detected by Use of                      power reactors except those who


andhavecertifiedthatfuelhas
Acoustic and Magnetic                        have ceased operations and have


permanentlyremovedfrom
Nonintrusive Test Techniques                certified that fuel has been


reactorvessel2000-22MedicalMisadministrationsCausedbyHumanErrors
permanently removed from the


===InvolvingGammaStereotactic===
reactor
Radiosurgery(GAMMAKNIFE)12/18/00Allmedicaluselicenseesauthorizedtoconductgamma


stereotacticradiosurgery
2000-20          Potential Loss of Redundant      12/11/2000  All holders of operating licenses


treatments2000-21DetachedCheckValveDiscnotDetectedbyUseof
Safety Related Equipment Due                or construction permits for


===AcousticandMagnetic===
to Lack of a High-Energy Line                nuclear power reactors
NonintrusiveTestTechniques12/15/00AllholdersofOLsfornuclearpowerreactorsexceptthosewho


haveceasedoperationsandhave
Break Barrier


certifiedthatfuelhasbeen
2000-19          Implementation of Human Use      12/05/2000  All medical use licensees


permanentlyremovedfromthe
Research Protocols Involving


reactor2000-20PotentialLossofRedundantSafetyRelatedEquipmentDue
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory


toLackofaHigh-EnergyLine
Commission Regulated


BreakBarrier12/11/2000Allholdersofoperatinglicensesorconstructionpermitsfor
Materials


nuclearpowerreactors2000-19ImplementationofHumanUseResearchProtocolsInvolving
2000-18          Substandard Material Supplied    11/29/2000  All 10 CFR Part 50 licensees and


===U.S.NuclearRegulatory===
by Chicago Bullet Proof                      applicants. All category 1 fuel
CommissionRegulated


Materials12/05/2000Allmedicaluselicensees2000-18SubstandardMaterialSuppliedbyChicagoBulletProof
Systems                                      facilities. All 10 CFR Part 72 licensees and applicants


Systems11/29/2000All10CFRPart50licenseesandapplicants.Allcategory1fuel
______________________________________________________________________________________
OL = Operating License


facilities.All10CFRPart72 licenseesandapplicants}}
CP = Construction Permit}}


{{Information notice-Nav}}
{{Information notice-Nav}}

Latest revision as of 06:02, 24 November 2019

Summary of Fitness-for-Duty Program Performance Reports for Calendar Years 1998 and 1999
ML010250419
Person / Time
Issue date: 03/28/2001
From: Marsh L
Operational Experience and Non-Power Reactors Branch
To:
References
IN-01-002
Download: ML010250419 (25)
v • d • e


UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 March 28, 2001 NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2001-02: SUMMARY OF FITNESS-FOR-DUTY PROGRAM

PERFORMANCE REPORTS FOR CALENDAR

YEARS 1998 AND 1999

Addressees

All holders of operating licenses for nuclear power reactors, and licensees authorized to

possess or use formula quantities of strategic special nuclear material (SSNM) or to transport

formula quantities of SSNM.

Purpose

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this information notice (IN) to

provide lessons learned and summarize the data submitted by licensees to the NRC in their

fitness-for-duty (FFD) program performance reports for calendar years 1998 and 1999. It is

expected that recipients will review the information for applicability to their facilities and

consider actions, as appropriate. However, suggestions contained in this information notice

are not NRC requirements, therefore no specific actions or written response is required.

Description of Circumstances

Since the fitness-for-duty rule (10 CFR Part 26) was published, licensees have submitted

program performance reports to the NRC, as required by 10 CFR 26.71(d). In the past, the

NRC summarized and analyzed the data submitted by the licensees and published an annual

volume, NUREG/CR-5758, "Fitness for Duty in the Nuclear Power IndustryAnnual Summary

of Program Performance Reports." In 1998, the NRC issued IN 98-39 to convey this

information for the years 1996 and 1997. This IN provides similar information for 1998 and

1999 FFD statistics are provided in Attachment 1.

Discussion

Lessons learned, management initiatives and problems, and associated corrective actions

reported by licensees in 1998 and 1999 are summarized below.

(1) Certified Laboratories

Some licensees continue to experience problems with laboratory performance or have

identified potential weaknesses. Licensees also continue to investigate and review adulterant

detection strategies to be used by laboratories.

ÿ A licensee assessor noted that a laboratorys quality control blind samples were

potentially identifiable. The laboratory is certified by the U.S Department of Health and

Human Services (HHS). The laboratory gives the licensee chain-of-custody forms with

preprinted numbers and bar codes. However, because the laboratorys blind samples

are not processed with the licensees chain-of-custody forms, the blind sample

specimen chain-of-custody forms are out of sequence with the rest of the samples in

the tray. The laboratory generates chain-of-custody forms for the blind samples, using

the laboratorys next sequential numbers. As an interim corrective action, the

laboratory is now mixing samples from different sources in the trays so that the non- sequential chain-of-custody forms for the blind samples will be less conspicuous. The

laboratory is trying to design a better solution.

ÿ One licensee reviewed the potential impact of ingestion of hemp seed oil products on

tetrahydrocannabinol test results, disseminated its findings to the plant personnel, and

incorporated them into FFD training.

ÿ One licensee used Intoxilizer 5000 to verify that over-the-counter substances such as

gum, Nyquil, Listerine, etc., do not cause false positive test results.

ÿ One licensee laboratory reported that Klear is an effective adulterant for the marijuana

metabolite but is easily detected if the specimen is tested for nitrites. Urine Luck made

by Spectrum Laboratory is more difficult to detect but is also a less effective adulterant.

Two blind specimens were spiked with marijuana metabolite. Urine Luck was

introduced into one of the specimens. Onsite immunoassay screening found both

specimens positive for marijuana. The HHS-certified laboratory confirmed both

specimens positive, although the quantitation level for the specimen containing Urine

Luck was slightly lower (189 ng/ml versus 206 ng/ml). The laboratory did not detect the

presence of Urine Luck, not having done the additional adulterant testing it would have

done if the screening and confirmation testing were contradictory. The specimens

were retested a month later and found with quantitation levels of 163 ng/ml and

193 ng/ml, respectively. The laboratory will do more research to determine if Urine

Luck is an effective adulterant for specimens having lower levels of the marijuana

metabolite and to determine whether Multistix 10 SG effectively detects this adulterant.

ÿ Other licensees reported they had started testing for the adulterants nitrate, pyridininium chlorochromate, and glutaraldehyde. One laboratory uses Test Sure, manufactured by SmithKline, to test for the following conditions and adulterants: pH,

specify gravity, bleach, creatinine, glutaraldehyde, nitrate, and pyridine.

ÿ Inaccurate laboratory results for blind specimens continued to point out human error

problems, particularly the use of incorrect cutoff levels and procedural weaknesses.

The different Department of Transportation and NRC testing requirements contribute to

the use of incorrect cutoff levels, and laboratories should be alert to develop

safeguards against this error. The cause of inaccuracies at one laboratory was that the laboratory had no procedure to control parameter changes made by technologists on

the screening instrument and to verify parameter settings. The laboratory corrected the

problem by assigning passwords for the screening instrument (so that only approved

personnel could change the instrument parameters) and by requiring another qualified

technologist or supervisor to corroborate any changes before the instrument is used. In

addition, the laboratory implemented a procedure to require a special quality control test

of the instrument after instrument parameter changes, reagent changes, and calibration.

The procedure involves spiking a sample at a concentration approximately twice as high

as the highest calibrator.

ÿ Several licensees reported that reviews of adulterant testing showed it to be useful and

cost effective.

ÿ Two licensees reported that the number of blind specimens they submitted to the

laboratory was below the required 10% for one or more quarters of 1999. In one case, this was due to misunderstandings between the licensee and site FFD

programsadministrative responsibilities for these programs were subsequently

separated. No explanation was given for the second case.

ÿ After establishing an onsite testing laboratory, one licensee suspended unescorted

access for personnel who tested positive for cocaine and marijuana, pending results

from the HHS-certified laboratory.

Several licensees reported working with laboratories to improve testing for specific adulterants.

Licensees continued to report problems with laboratory performance.

ÿ At one laboratory, a technician scanned the bar code identification on the specimen

bottle lid rather than on the side of the bottle. Sample lids had been inadvertently

switched, resulting in a sample identification error. The laboratory has eliminated retest

bar codes on bottle lids to ensure that technicians scan the sides of specimen bottles.

ÿ Several licensees reported that laboratories used incorrect cutoff levels or failed to test

for the full list of substances.

ÿ One licensee reported two blind specimens as negative for opiates when they should

have been reported positive. The company that formulated the blind specimens said the

blind specimen batches might not have been adequately mixed before they were

prepared. In addition, the company was not performing gas chromatography/mass

spectrometry on each specimen, only on the batches. The licensee has contracted with

a new company to provide blind specimens.

(2) Random Testing

Licensees continued to report incidents in which employees who should have been included in

the random testing pool were omitted.

ÿ A licensee reported that it has reinstated a 100% random testing rate. ÿ Several licensees reported that workers had been improperly excluded from the drug

testing pool for extended periods. For one licensee, an employee who returned to the

site after a lengthy stint at the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) was not put

back into the random FFD testing pool because he had been hardcoded out of the

system. This licensee is reviewing the process of hardcoding individuals out of the pool.

ÿ One licensee reported that it enhanced its quarterly repetitive task process for verifying

the integrity of the random testing pool.

ÿ Licensees continued to improve their notification process by reducing the interval

between notifying and testing employees and/or by keeping them under continuous

observation during this time.

ÿ One licensee analyzed the number of random screenings by day of week and the rate of

failures for each weekday during 1998 and 1999. The number of random screenings

was greatest on Monday and generally fell on each subsequent day of the week. Very

few screenings were done on Saturday or Sunday. In 1998 no positive results were

identified on Saturdays or Sundays. However, in 1999 the positive rate on these days

was very high (Saturday tests had a 12.5% positive rate and Sunday tests a 15%

positive rate). The analysis suggests potentially useful changes to the testing schedule.

Licensees continued to report incidents in which employees who should have been included in

the random testing pool database were not included.

ÿ A licensee that did weekly quality control checks of the random pool discovered a

software program interface problem as a result of which contractors were omitted. One

weekly check showed 110 contractors to have been omitted.

ÿ Another licensee reported that a new contract worker had not been included in the

random test pool for the first draw after being badged and starting work.

(3) Policies and Procedures

Several licensees reported having improved their FFD policies and procedures on the basis of

their experience over the years.

ÿ Another licensee reduced its marijuana cutoff value from 100 ng/ml to 50 ng/ml.

ÿ One licensee introduced a lower cutoff value for alcohol testing for individuals in the

followup program due to a previous positive test result for alcohol.

ÿ One licensee reduced its testing list of drugs after finding that there had only been a

single positive for barbiturates and benzodiazepines since its program was implemented

in 1990. ÿ One licensee changed its specimen collection procedures to include an observed

collection if the urine sample fell outside the range of 93-98 degrees Fahrenheit and an

oral temperature did not match the urine temperature.

ÿ Some licensees have instituted a zero tolerance policy, denying an employee access

after a first positive drug test result.

ÿ More licensees now count the detection of adulterants as a positive test result and

sanction employees accordingly.

ÿ A licensee prepared the following policy statement on prescription marijuana and

cocaine and communicated the statement to its employees:

Certain drugs listed in the Controlled Substance Act such as

marijuana and cocaine may be legally prescribed and used in

certain states. However, federal regulations do not allow

involvement with or possession or use of these drugs with or

without a prescription by individuals assigned to [licensee name].

ÿ Several licensees found weaknesses in their FFD records management procedures. In

two cases, the records management process was adequate but not appropriately

documented in procedures. In another case, FFD records being prepared for shipment

to another location for imaging were not stored in 1-hour fire rated cabinets, as required

in the site-established procedures. In a fourth case, a licensee found that the logbook

maintained by the FFD program did not satisfy the definition of a permanent, bound

record book.

ÿ One licensee found that its procedures failed to specify FFD program training required

for personnel assigned to work in the FFD program.

ÿ To enhance overall FFD at the site, one licensee now requires employees to report non- job-related injuries to a supervisor or manager before the start of work or training

activities if the injury could impair the employees ability to safely perform job

assignments. The supervisor evaluates injured employees fitness and accommodates

them as necessary.

ÿ At one site, a computer data entry error allowed a contract worker to enter a protected

area before the worker passed a pre-access test. Appropriate FFD personnel were

trained and the access authorization process modified to prevent this from happening

again.

ÿ One licensee introduced limits on how much time an employee may take to give a urine

specimen and how much water he may drink beforehand.

ÿ One licensee specified that requests for retesting be made within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.

ÿ One licensee reported that an event at another licensee's site helped it identify and

address a potential weakness at its own site. The event involved an FFD testing technician who recorded drug screen test results as negative before they were validated

by the medical review officer (MRO). As a result, access was granted to a few

individuals whose test results were later reported to be positive. To prevent this from

happening at its own site, the licensee revised its procedures so that access

authorization personnel can only accept reports that have been prepared by the MRO.

ÿ One licensee updated its FFD procedures to include a precise formula by which to

calculate blood alcohol concentration when an employee arrives at work.

ÿ One licensee discovered that its pre-employment testing protocol implied breathalyzer

testing irrespective of whether the candidate had yet been offered a job, leaving the

licensee vulnerable to being found in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

ÿ One licensee initiated a standardized chain-of-custody form throughout its sites.

(4) Program and System Management

Licensees continued to report improvements in overall FFD program management.

ÿ One licensee planed to merge FFD with Access Authorization to improve coordination

and eliminate the potential for errors. This licensee is also trying to refine FFD

performance indicators.

ÿ A few licensees reported weaknesses in their behavioral observation programs because

of insufficient training. Others reported improvements in their behavioral observation

programs.

ÿ FFD awareness activities continued to be reported (e.g., sending articles and

newsletters to all employees, giving to all employees refrigerator magnets with the toll

free employee assistance program telephone number).

ÿ One licensee encouraged supervisors to complete refresher FFD training on time. The

licensee now rigorously monitors overdue supervisor FFD training, sends an action

request, and suspends unescorted access for a delinquent supervisor and for the

workers who report to the supervisor.

ÿ At one site it was discovered that supervisors who were not badged for unescorted

access but who were required to report to the emergency operations facility did not have

appropriate FFD training. Corrective actions were implemented to track FFD training

requirements for nonbadged supervisors.

ÿ Several licensees reported the value of canine searches in enhancing antidrug

awareness at their sites, even the searches that typically did not discover drugs. This information notice requires no specific action or written response. If you have any

questions about the information in this notice, please contact the person listed below.

/RA/

Ledyard B. Marsh, Chief

Events Assessment, Generic Communications

and Non-Power Reactors Branch

Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical Contact:

Garmon West, Jr., Ph.D.

301-415-1044 E-mail: fitnessforduty@nrc.gov

Attachments: 1. Fitness-for-Duty Statistics

2. List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices

ML0102050419 ADAMS DOCUMENT TITLE:C:\119ffd9998.wpd

Publicly Available Non-Publicly Available Sensitive  : Non-Sensitive

OFFICE Tech Ed RSS:DIPM RSS:DIPM IOLB:DIPM DIPM

NAME PKleene*via phone GWest* RPRosano* GTracy* BBoger*

DATE 11/9/00 11/14/00 11/15/00 12/14/00 01/11/2001 OFFICE OGC REXB C:REXB

NAME STreby JTappert* LBMarsh

DATE 01/16/2001 03/19/2001 03/28/2001

Attachment 1 Table 1A

Test results for each test category, 1999

1999 TEST CATEGORY NUMBER OF POSITIVE PERCENT

TESTS TESTS POSITIVE

Pre-Access 69,139 934 1.35%

Random 54,457 140 0.26%

For-Cause 736 120 16.30%

Followup 3,008 30 1.00%

Other 1,742 39 2.24%

TOTAL* 129,082 1,263 0.98%

TOTAL without Other

category 127,340 1,224 0.96%

Table 1B

Test results for each test category, 1998

1998 TEST CATEGORY NUMBER OF POSITIVE PERCENT

TESTS TESTS POSITIVE

Pre-Access 69,146 822 1.19%

Random 56,969 157 0.28%

For-Cause 720 100 13.89%

Followup 2,863 43 1.50%

Other 1,929 32 1.66%

TOTAL 131,627 1,154 0.88%

TOTAL without Other

category 129,698 1,122 0.87%

  • These totals have been calculated using the Other test category. This category includes results

from the periodic testing done by some reporting units during annual physicals or similar periodic

activities. Although some reporting units specified the nature of the Other tests (e.g., return to

work), most reporting units did not give this information.

Attachment 1 Table 2A

1999 Test results for each test category and work category

LICENSEE LONG-TERM SHORT-TERM

TEST CATEGORY EMPLOYEES CONTRACTORS CONTRACTORS TOTAL

Pre-Access

Number Tested 8,386 1,339 59,414 69,139 Number Positive 44 10 880 934 Percent Positive 0.52% 0.75% 1.48% 1.35%

Random

Number Tested 38,692 1,976 13,789 54,457 Number Positive 71 7 62 140

Percent Positive 0.18% 0.35% 0.45% 0.26%

For-Cause

Number Tested 315 25 396 736 Number Positive 29 4 87 120

Percent Positive 9.21% 16.00% 21.97% 16.30%

Followup

Number Tested 1,653 70 1,285 3,008 Number Positive 15 1 14 30

Percent Positive 0.91% 1.43% 1.09% 1.00%

Other

Number Tested 648 318 776 1,742 Number Positive 4 2 33 39 Percent Positive 0.62% 0.63% 4.25% 2.24%

TOTAL

Number Tested 49,694 3,728 75,660 129,082 Number Positive 163 24 1,076 1,263 Percent Positive 0.33% 0.64% 1.42% 0.98%

TOTAL without

Other category

Number Tested 49,046 3,410 74,884 127,340

Number Positive 159 22 1,043 1,224 Percent Positive 0.32% 0.65% 1.39% 0.96%

Attachment 1 Table 2B

1998 Test results for each test category and work category

LICENSEE LONG-TERM SHORT-TERM

TEST CATEGORY EMPLOYEES CONTRACTORS CONTRACTORS TOTAL

Pre-Access

Number Tested 9,422 1,368 58,356 69,146 Number Positive 50 12 760 822 Percent Positive 0.53% 0.88% 1.30% 1.19%

Random

Number Tested 40,415 1,859 14,695 56,969 Number Positive 71 9 77 157 Percent Positive 0.18% 0.48% 0.52% 0.28%

For-Cause

Number Tested 327 16 377 720

Number Positive 27 1 72 100

Percent Positive 8.26% 6.25% 19.10% 13.89%

Followup

Number Tested 1,762 41 1,060 2,863 Number Positive 21 0 22 43 Percent Positive 1.19% 0.00% 2.08% 1.50%

Other

Number Tested 752 192 985 1,929 Number Positive 6 1 25 32 Percent Positive 0.80% 0.52% 2.54% 1.66%

TOTAL

Number Tested 52,678 3,476 75,473 131,627 Number Positive 175 23 956 1,154 Percent Positive 0.33% 0.66% 1.27% 0.88%

TOTAL without

Other category

Number Tested 51,926 3,284 74,488 129,698 Number Positive 169 22 931 1,122 Percent Positive 0.33% 0.67% 1.25% 0.87%

Attachment 1 Table 3A

1999 Test results by test category

FIRST SECOND

TEST CATEGORY SIX MONTHS SIX MONTHS YEAR

Pre-Access

Number Tested 37,844 31,295 69,139 Number Positive 510 424 934 Percent Positive 1.35% 1.35% 1.35%

Random

Number Tested 28,256 26,201 54,457 Number Positive 70 70 140

Percent Positive 0.25% 0.27% 0.26%

For-Cause

Observed Behavior

Number Tested 283 223 506 Number Positive 75 45 120

Percent Positive 26.50% 20.18% 23.72%

Post-Accident

Number Tested 110 120 230

Number Positive 0 0 0

Percent Positive 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Followup

Number Tested 1,543 1,465 3,008 Number Positive 16 14 30

Percent Positive 1.04% 0.96% 1.00%

Other

Number Tested 866 876 1,742 Number Positive 18 21 39 Percent Positive 2.08% 2.40% 2.24%

TOTAL

Number Tested 68,902 60,180 129,082 Number Positive 689 574 1,263 Percent Positive 1.00% 0.95% 0.98%

TOTAL without Other category

Number Tested 68,036 59,304 127,340

Number Positive 671 553 1,224 Percent Positive 0.99% 0.93% 0.96%

Attachment 1 Table 3B

1998 Test results by test category

FIRST SECOND

TEST CATEGORY SIX MONTHS SIX MONTHS YEAR

Pre-Access

Number Tested 35,455 33,691 69,146 Number Positive 433 389 822 Percent Positive 1.22% 1.15% 1.19%

Random

Number Tested 29,251 27,718 56,969 Number Positive 80 77 157 Percent Positive 0.27% 0.28% 0.28%

For-Cause

Observed Behavior

Number Tested 213 242 455 Number Positive 49 48 97 Percent Positive 23.00% 19.83% 21.32%

Post-Accident

Number Tested 176 89 265 Number Positive 2 1 3 Percent Positive 1.14% 1.12% 1.13%

Followup

Number Tested 1,451 1,412 2,863 Number Positive 18 25 43 Percent Positive 1.24% 1.77% 1.50%

Other

Number Tested 1,034 895 1,929 Number Positive 19 13 32 Percent Positive 1.84% 1.45% 1.66%

TOTAL

Number Tested 67,580 64,047 131,627 Number Positive 601 553 1,154 Percent Positive 0.89% 0.86% 0.88%

TOTAL without Other category

Number Tested 66,546 63,152 129,698 Number Positive 582 540 1,122 Percent Positive 0.87% 0.86% 0.87%

Attachment 1 Table 4A

1999 Test results for licensee employees and contractor personnel

CONTRACTORS

LICENSEE EMPLOYEES (Long-Term/Short Term)

First Second First Second

TEST CATEGORY Six Months Six Months Year Six Months Six Months Year

Pre-Access

Number Tested 4,691 3,695 8,386 33,153 27,600 60,753 Number Positive 21 23 44 489 401 890

Percent Positive 0.45% 0.62% 0.52% 1.47% 1.45% 1.46%

Random

Number Tested 20,020 18,672 38,692 8,236 7,529 15,765 Number Positive 32 39 71 38 31 69 Percent Positive 0.16% 0.21% 0.18% 0.46% 0.41% 0.44%

For-Cause

Observed Behavior

Number Tested 112 91 203 171 132 303 Number Positive 20 9 29 55 36 91 Percent Positive 17.86% 9.89% 14.29% 32.16% 27.27% 30.03%

Post-Accident

Number Tested 60 52 112 50 68 118 Number Positive 0 0 0 0 0 0

Percent Positive 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Followup

Number Tested 818 835 1,653 725 630 1,355 Number Positive 8 7 15 8 7 15 Percent Positive 0.98% 0.84% 0.91% 1.10% 1.11% 1.11%

Other

Number Tested 316 332 648 550 544 1,094 Number Positive 2 2 4 16 19 35 Percent Positive 0.63% 0.60% 0.62% 2.91% 3.49% 3.20%

TOTAL

Number Tested 26,017 23,677 49,694 42,885 36,503 79,388 Number Positive 83 80 163 606 494 1,100

Percent Positive 0.32% 0.34% 0.33% 1.41% 1.35% 1.39%

TOTAL without Other

category

Number Tested 25,701 23,345 49,046 42,335 35,959 78,294 Number Positive 81 78 159 590 475 1,065 Percent Positive 0.32% 0.33% 0.32% 1.39% 1.32% 1.36%

Attachment 1 Table 4B

1998 Test results for licensee employees and contractor personnel

CONTRACTORS

LICENSEE EMPLOYEES (Long-Term/Short Term)

First Second First Second

TEST CATEGORY Six Months Six Months Year Six Months Six Months Year

Pre-Access

Number Tested 5,141 4,281 9,422 30,314 29,410 59,724 Number Positive 25 25 50 408 364 772 Percent Positive 0.49% 0.58% 0.53% 1.35% 1.24% 1.29%

Random

Number Tested 20,891 19,524 40,415 8,360 8,194 16,554 Number Positive 41 30 71 39 47 86 Percent Positive 0.20% 0.15% 0.18% 0.47% 0.57% 0.52%

For-Cause

Observed Behavior

Number Tested 95 90 185 118 152 270

Number Positive 13 13 26 36 35 71 Percent Positive 13.68% 14.44% 14.05% 30.51% 23.03% 26.30%

Post-Accident

Number Tested 92 50 142 84 39 123 Number Positive 0 1 1 2 0 2 Percent Positive 0.00% 2.00% 0.70% 2.38% 0.00% 1.63%

Followup

Number Tested 867 895 1,762 584 517 1,101 Number Positive 9 12 21 9 13 22 Percent Positive 1.04% 1.34% 1.19% 1.54% 2.51% 2.00%

Other

Number Tested 416 336 752 618 559 1,177 Number Positive 2 4 6 17 9 26 Percent Positive 0.48% 1.19% 0.80% 2.75% 1.61% 2.21%

TOTAL

Number Tested 27,502 25,176 52,678 40,078 38,871 78,949 Number Positive 90 85 175 511 468 979 Percent Positive 0.33% 0.34% 0.33% 1.28% 1.20% 1.24%

TOTAL without Other

category

Number Tested 27,086 24,840 51,926 39,460 38,312 77,772 Number Positive 88 81 169 494 459 953 Percent Positive 0.32% 0.33% 0.33% 1.25% 1.20% 1.23%

Attachment 1 Table 5A

1999 Test results for long-term and short-term contractor personnel

LONG-TERM CONTRACTORS SHORT-TERM CONTRACTORS

First Second First Second

TEST CATEGORY Six Months Six Months Year Six Months Six Months Year

Pre-Access

Number Tested 752 587 1,339 32,401 27,013 59,414 Number Positive 5 5 10 484 396 880

Percent Positive 0.66% 0.85% 0.75% 1.49% 1.47% 1.48%

Random

Number Tested 947 1,029 1,976 7,289 6,500 13,789 Number Positive 3 4 7 35 27 62 Percent Positive 0.32% 0.39% 0.35% 0.48% 0.42% 0.45%

For-Cause

Observed Behavior

Number Tested 6 11 17 165 121 286 Number Positive 2 2 4 53 34 87 Percent Positive 33.33% 18.18% 23.53% 32.12% 28.10% 30.42%

Post-Accident

Number Tested 2 6 8 48 62 110

Number Positive 0 0 0 0 0 0

Percent Positive 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Followup

Number Tested 33 37 70 692 593 1,285 Number Positive 1 0 1 7 7 14 Percent Positive 3.03% 0.00% 1.43% 1.01% 1.18% 1.09%

Other

Number Tested 155 163 318 395 381 776 Number Positive 1 1 2 15 18 33 Percent Positive 0.65% 0.61% 0.63% 3.80% 4.72% 4.25%

TOTAL

Number Tested 1,895 1,833 3,728 40,990 34,670 75,660

Number Positive 12 12 24 594 482 1,076 Percent Positive 0.63% 0.65% 0.64% 1.45% 1.39% 1.42%

TOTAL without Other

category

Number Tested 1,740 1,670 3,410 40,595 34,289 74,884 Number Positive 11 11 22 579 464 1,043 Percent Positive 0.63% 0.66% 0.65% 1.43% 1.35% 1.39%

Attachment 1 Table 5B

1998 Test results for long-term and short-term contractor personnel

LONG-TERM CONTRACTORS SHORT-TERM CONTRACTORS

First Second First Second

TEST CATEGORY Six Months Six Months Year Six Months Six Months Year

Pre-Access

Number Tested 698 670 1,368 29,616 28,740 58,356 Number Positive 4 8 12 404 356 760

Percent Positive 0.57% 1.19% 0.88% 1.36% 1.24% 1.30%

Random

Number Tested 973 886 1,859 7,387 7,308 14,695 Number Positive 8 1 9 31 46 77 Percent Positive 0.82% 0.11% 0.48% 0.42% 0.63% 0.52%

For-Cause

Observed Behavior

Number Tested 3 6 9 115 146 261 Number Positive 1 0 1 35 35 70

Percent Positive 33.33% 0.00% 11.11% 30.43% 23.97% 26.82%

Post-Accident

Number Tested 3 4 7 81 35 116 Number Positive 0 0 0 2 0 2 Percent Positive 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.47% 0.00% 1.72%

Followup

Number Tested 24 17 41 560 500 1,060

Number Positive 0 0 0 9 13 22 Percent Positive 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.61% 2.60% 2.08%

Other

Number Tested 88 104 192 530 455 985 Number Positive 1 0 1 16 9 25 Percent Positive 1.14% 0.00% 0.52% 3.02% 1.98% 2.54%

TOTAL

Number Tested 1,789 1,687 3,476 38,289 37,184 75,473 Number Positive 14 9 23 497 459 956 Percent Positive 0.78% 0.53% 0.66% 1.30% 1.23% 1.27%

TOTAL without Other

category

Number Tested 1,701 1,583 3,284 37,759 36,729 74,488 Number Positive 13 9 22 481 450 931 Percent Positive 0.76% 0.57% 0.67% 1.27% 1.23% 1.25%

Attachment 1 Table 6A

1999 Number of confirmed positives by substance

FIRST SIX SECOND SIX TOTAL

MONTHS MONTHS

SUBSTANCE Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Marijuana 345 52.19% 327 57.17% 672 54.50%

Cocaine 151 22.84% 122 21.33% 273 22.14%

Opiates 4 0.61% 12 2.10% 16 1.30%

Amphetamines 20 3.03% 20 3.50% 40 3.24%

Phencyclidine 0 0.00% 2 0.35% 2 0.16%

Alcohol 141 21.33% 89 15.56% 230 18.65%

TOTAL 661 572 1,233 Table 6B

1998 Number of confirmed positives by substance

FIRST SIX SECOND SIX TOTAL

MONTHS MONTHS

SUBSTANCE Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Marijuana 327 53.34% 279 51.67% 606 52.56%

Cocaine 137 22.35% 132 24.44% 269 23.33%

Opiates 13 2.12% 6 1.11% 19 1.65%

Amphetamines 32 5.22% 14 2.59% 46 3.99%

Phencyclidine 1 0.16% 0 0.00% 1 0.09%

Alcohol 103 16.80% 109 20.19% 212 18.39%

TOTAL 613 540 1153

Attachment 1 Table 7A

1999 Confirmed positives test results by substance for licensee employees and contractors

LICENSEE EMPLOYEES CONTRACTORS

(Long-Term/Short-Term)

SUBSTANCE Number Percent Number Percent

Marijuana 65 41.67% 607 56.36%

Cocaine 39 25.00% 234 21.73%

Opiates 0 0.00% 16 1.49%

Amphetamines 3 1.92% 37 3.44%

Phencyclidine 0 0.00% 2 0.19%

Alcohol 49 31.41% 181 16.81%

TOTAL 156 1,077 Table 7B

1998 Confirmed positives test results by substance for each worker category

LICENSEE EMPLOYEES CONTRACTORS

(Long-Term/Short-Term)

TYPE OF SUBSTANCE Number Percent Number Percent

Marijuana 78 43.58% 528 54.21%

Cocaine 41 22.91% 228 23.41%

Opiates 3 1.68% 16 1.64%

Amphetamines 6 3.35% 40 4.11%

Phencyclidine 0 0.00% 1 0.10%

Alcohol 51 28.49% 161 16.53%

TOTAL 179 974

Attachment 1 Table 8A

Significant* fitness-for-duty events (1990-1999)

Type of Event 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Total

Reactor Operators 19 16 18 8 7 8 8 9 5 5 103 Licensee Supervisors 26 16 22 25 11 16 19 16 10 2 163 Contract Supervisors 12 24 28 16 11 10 8 10 10 12 141 FFD Program Personnel 1 5 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 2 14 Substances Found 6 8 6 2 0 5 5 4 0 2 38 Total 64 69 74 51 30 39 42 39 28 23 459

  • Subsection 73 of 10 CFR Part 26 requires reporting units to provide the NRC with information

on significant FFD events, such as events involving licensed operators and supervisors, and on

controlled substances found in the protected area of the plant.

Table 8B

Significant fitness-for-duty events (1990-1998)

Type of Event 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Total

Reactor Operators 19 16 18 8 7 8 8 9 5 98 Licensee Supervisors 26 16 22 25 11 16 19 16 10 161 Contract Supervisors 12 24 28 16 11 10 8 10 10 129 FFD Program Personnel 1 5 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 12 Substances Found 6 8 6 2 0 5 5 4 0 36 Total 64 69 74 51 30 39 42 39 28 436

Attachment 1 Table 9A

Trends in testing by test type (1990-1999)

Type of Test 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Total

Pre-Access

Number Tested 122,491 104,508 104,842 91,471 80,217 79,305 81,041 84,320 69,146 69,139 886,480

Number Positive 1,548 983 1,110 952 977 1,122 1,132 1,096 822 934 10,676 Percent Positive 1.26% 0.94% 1.06% 1.04% 1.22% 1.41% 1.40% 1.30% 1.19% 1.35% 1.20%

Random

Number Tested 148,743 153,818 156,730 146,605 78,391 66,791 62,307 60,829 56,969 54,457 985,640

Number Positive 550 510 461 341 223 180 202 172 157 140 2,936 Percent Positive 0.37% 0.33% 0.29% 0.23% 0.28% 0.27% 0.32% 0.28% 0.28% 0.26% 0.30%

For-Cause

Number Tested 732 727 696 751 758 763 848 722 720 736 7,453 Number Positive 214 167 178 163 122 139 138 149 100 120 1,490

Percent Positive 29.23% 22.97% 25.57% 21.70% 16.09% 18.22% 16.27% 20.64% 13.89% 16.30% 19.99%

Followup

Number Tested 2,633 3,544 4,283 4,139 3,875 3,262 3,262 3,296 2,863 3,008 34,165 Number Positive 65 62 69 56 50 35 40 31 43 30 481 Percent Positive 2.47% 1.75% 1.61% 1.35% 1.29% 1.07% 1.23% 0.94% 1.50% 1.00% 1.41%

Other

Number Tested 3,610 3,228 4,998 2,511 2,125 2,778 2,082 1,928 1,929 1,742 26,931 Number Positive 32 22 59 36 22 55 37 36 32 39 370

Percent Positive 0.89% 0.68% 1.18% 1.43% 1.04% 1.98% 1.78% 1.87% 1.66% 2.24% 1.37%

TOTAL

Number Tested 278,209 265,825 271,549 245,477 165,366 152,899 149,540 151,095 131,627 129,082 1,940,669 Number Positive 2,409 1,744 1,877 1,548 1,394 1,531 1,549 1,484 1,154 1,263 15,953 Percent Positive 0.87% 0.66% 0.69% 0.63% 0.84% 1.00% 1.04% 0.98% 0.88% 0.98% 0.82%

TOTAL without

Other category

Number Tested 274,599 262,597 266,551 242,966 163,241 150,121 147,458 149,167 129,698 127,340 1,913,738 Number Positive 2,377 1,722 1,818 1,512 1,372 1,476 1,512 1,448 1,122 1,224 15,583 Percent Positive 0.87% 0.66% 0.68% 0.62% 0.84% 0.98% 1.03% 0.97% 0.87% 0.96% 0.81%

Attachment 1 Table 9B

Trends in testing by test type (1990-1998)

Type of Test 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Total

Pre-Access

Number Tested 122,491 104,508 104,842 91,471 80,217 79,305 81,041 84,320 69,146 817,341 Number Positive 1,548 983 1,110 952 977 1,122 1,132 1,096 822 9,742 Percent Positive 1.26% 0.94% 1.06% 1.04% 1.22% 1.41% 1.40% 1.30% 1.19% 1.19%

Random

Number Tested 148,743 153,818 156,730 146,605 78,391 66,791 62,307 60,829 56,969 931,183 Number Positive 550 510 461 341 223 180 202 172 157 2,796 Percent Positive 0.37% 0.33% 0.29% 0.23% 0.28% 0.27% 0.32% 0.28% 0.28% 0.30%

For-Cause

Number Tested 732 727 696 751 758 763 848 722 720 6,717 Number Positive 214 167 178 163 122 139 138 149 100 1,370

Percent Positive 29.23% 22.97% 25.57% 21.70% 16.09% 18.22% 16.27% 20.64% 13.89% 20.40%

Followup

Number Tested 2,633 3,544 4,283 4,139 3,875 3,262 3,262 3,296 2,863 31,157 Number Positive 65 62 69 56 50 35 40 31 43 451 Percent Positive 2.47% 1.75% 1.61% 1.35% 1.29% 1.07% 1.23% 0.94% 1.50% 1.45%

Other

Number Tested 3,610 3,228 4,998 2,511 2,125 2,778 2,082 1,928 1,929 25,189 Number Positive 32 22 59 36 22 55 37 36 32 331 Percent Positive 0.89% 0.68% 1.18% 1.43% 1.04% 1.98% 1.78% 1.87% 1.66% 1.31%

TOTAL

Number Tested 278,209 265,825 271,549 245,477 165,366 152,899 149,540 151,095 131,627 1,811,587 Number Positive 2,409 1,744 1,877 1,548 1,394 1,531 1,549 1,484 1,154 14,690

Percent Positive 0.87% 0.66% 0.69% 0.63% 0.84% 1.00% 1.04% 0.98% 0.88% 0.81%

TOTAL without

Other category

Number Tested 274,599 262,597 266,551 242,966 163,241 150,121 147,458 149,167 129,698 1,786,398 Number Positive 2,377 1,722 1,818 1,512 1,372 1,476 1,512 1,448 1,122 14,359 Percent Positive 0.87% 0.66% 0.68% 0.62% 0.84% 0.98% 1.03% 0.97% 0.87% 0.80%

Attachment 1 Table 10A

Trends in substances identified (1990-1999)

Substance 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Marijuana 1,153 746 953 781 739 819 868 842 606 672 Cocaine 706 549 470 369 344 374 352 336 269 273 Alcohol 452 401 427 357 251 265 281 262 212 230

Amphetamines 69 31 31 51 54 61 53 49 46 40

Opiates 45 24 8 13 11 17 14 39 19 16 Phencyclidine 8 11 4 5 1 7 2 0 1 2 Total* 2,433 1,762 1,893 1,576 1,400 1,543 1,570 1,528 1,153 1,233 Table 10B

Trends in substances identified (1990-1998)

Substance 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Marijuana 1,153 746 953 781 739 819 868 842 606 Cocaine 706 549 470 369 344 374 352 336 269 Alcohol 452 401 427 357 251 265 281 262 212 Amphetamines 69 31 31 51 54 61 53 49 46 Opiates 45 24 8 13 11 17 14 39 19 Phencyclidine 8 11 4 5 1 7 2 0 1 Total* 2,433 1,762 1,893 1,576 1,400 1,543 1,570 1,528 1,153

  • These totals do not include positives for multiple substances and other substances than those listed

above.

Attachment 1 Table 11A

Trends in positive test rates for workers with unescorted access (1990-1999)*

Positive Test Rate

1990 0.54%

1991 0.47%

1992 0.44%

1993 0.37%

1994 0.48%

1995 0.50%

1996 0.57%

1997 0.54%

1998 0.50%

1999 0.50%

Table 11B

Trends in positive test rates for workers with unescorted access (1990-1998)*

Positive Test Rate

1990 0.54%

1991 0.47%

1992 0.44%

1993 0.37%

1994 0.48%

1995 0.50%

1996 0.57%

1997 0.54%

1998 0.50%

  • Includes random, for-cause, and followup testing results. The random test rate was reduced from

100% to 50% in 1994.

Attachment LIST OF RECENTLY ISSUED

NRC INFORMATION NOTICES

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Information Date of

Notice No. Subject Issuance Issued to

______________________________________________________________________________________

2001-01 The Importance of Accurate 03/26/01 All material licensees

Inventory Controls to Prevent

the Unauthorized Possession

of Radioactive Material

2000-17, Crack in Weld Area of Reactor 02/28/01 All holders of operating licenses

Supp. 2 Coolant System Hot Leg Piping for nuclear power reactors except

at V.C. Summer those who has ceased operations

and have certified that fuel has

permanently removed from

reactor vessel

2000-22 Medical Misadministrations 12/18/00 All medical use licensees

Caused by Human Errors authorized to conduct gamma

Involving Gamma Stereotactic stereotactic radiosurgery

Radiosurgery (GAMMA KNIFE) treatments

2000-21 Detached Check Valve Disc 12/15/00 All holders of OLs for nuclear

not Detected by Use of power reactors except those who

Acoustic and Magnetic have ceased operations and have

Nonintrusive Test Techniques certified that fuel has been

permanently removed from the

reactor

2000-20 Potential Loss of Redundant 12/11/2000 All holders of operating licenses

Safety Related Equipment Due or construction permits for

to Lack of a High-Energy Line nuclear power reactors

Break Barrier

2000-19 Implementation of Human Use 12/05/2000 All medical use licensees

Research Protocols Involving

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission Regulated

Materials

2000-18 Substandard Material Supplied 11/29/2000 All 10 CFR Part 50 licensees and

by Chicago Bullet Proof applicants. All category 1 fuel

Systems facilities. All 10 CFR Part 72 licensees and applicants

______________________________________________________________________________________

OL = Operating License

CP = Construction Permit


Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=Information_Notice_2001-02,_Summary_of_Fitness-for-Duty_Program_Performance_Reports_for_Calendar_Years_1998_and_1999&oldid=2202875"