IR 05000128/2015202: 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 2: Line 2:
| number = ML15279A634
| number = ML15279A634
| issue date = 10/22/2015
| issue date = 10/22/2015
| title = Ea-14-230, Texas A&M University, Notice of Violation And Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty - $3,500.00 (Nrc Inspection Report 50 128/2015-202 And Office of Investigations Report No. 4-2014-010, Texas A&M Nuclear Science Center)
| title = EA-14-230, Texas A&M University, Notice of Violation And Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty - $3,500.00 (NRC Inspection Report 50 128/2015-202 And Office of Investigations Report No. 4-2014-010, Texas A&M Nuclear Science Center)
| author name = Kokajko L E
| author name = Kokajko L E
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DPR
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DPR

Revision as of 20:51, 15 February 2018

EA-14-230, Texas A&M University, Notice of Violation And Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty - $3,500.00 (NRC Inspection Report 50 128/2015-202 And Office of Investigations Report No. 4-2014-010, Texas A&M Nuclear Science Center)
ML15279A634
Person / Time
Site: 05000128
Issue date: 10/22/2015
From: Kokajko L E
Division of Policy and Rulemaking
To: McDeavitt S
Texas A&M Univ
Morlang G M
References
EA-14-230
Download: ML15279A634 (9)


Text

October 22, 2015

EA-14-230

Dr. Sean McDeavitt, Director Texas A&M University Texas A&M Engineering Experiment Station Nuclear Science Center 1095 Nuclear Science Road, M/S 3575 College Station, TX 77843-3575

SUBJECT: NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY - $3,500.00 (NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION INSPECTION REPORT 50-128/2015-202 AND OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS REPORT NO. 4-2014-010, TEXAS A&M NUCLEAR SCIENCE CENTER)

Dear Dr. McDeavitt:

This refers to an investigation completed on December 1, 2014, by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Office of Investigations (OI) at the Texas A&M Nuclear Science Center (Texas A&M NSC), College Station, Texas, as described in NRC Inspection Report 50-128/2015-202 dated September 11, 2015.

The purpose of the investigation was to determine whether the reactor operations manager willfully falsified a reactor operations log shutdown checklist. The investigation examined whether the manager certified that the required shutdown procedures were performed, although the manager knew they had not been done. The inspection report documented the identification of two apparent violations involving the failure to comply with the required procedures for securing the reactor console and willful falsification of procedurally required paperwork. In addition, Texas A&M NSC staff failed to meet the minimum facility staffing requirements on May 1415, 2013. This non-willful violation occurred during the time the reactor was not secured. Both apparent violations were considered for escalated enforcement in accordance with the NRC's Enforcement Policy.

In the letter transmitting the inspection report, we provided you the opportunity to address the apparent violations identified in the report by either attending a pre-decisional enforcement conference, providing a written response, or requesting alternative dispute resolution (ADR) before we made our final enforcement decision. In a letter dated October 8, 2015, you provided a written response to the apparent violations. In your response, you accepted the violations as described in the inspection report, including the willful aspects, and provided details of your corrective actions to preclude recurrence.

Based on the information developed during the investigation and the information that you provided in your response of October 8, 2015, the NRC has determined that two violations of NRC requirements occurred. These violations are cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation (Notice). The circumstances surrounding them are described in detail in NRC Inspection Report 50-128/2015-202 dated September 11, 2015. The first violation involves the Texas A&M NSC staff's failure to comply with Technical Specifications (TS), Appendix A, to License No. R-83, Sections 1.23 and 1.27. These sections detail the required procedures for securing the reactor console. The Nuclear Science Center (NSC) Standard Operating Procedure (i.e., NSC Form-112, 1-73) was also violated when the manager certified on the Daily Reactor Shutdown Checkoff section of the reactor operations log that the shutdown procedures had been completed when in fact they had not been completed.

The reactor operations manager's actions were not in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 50.5, "Deliberate misconduct," paragraph (a). The willful actions of the manager resulted in Texas A&M NSC violating 10 CFR 50.9, "Completeness and accuracy of information," states, in part, that information required by the Commission's regulations, orders, or license conditions to be maintained shall be accurate in all material respects. Specifically, on or after May 15, 2013, the reactor operations manager willfully falsified the reactor operations log shutdown checklist by certifying that the required shutdown procedures had been completed when they had not been performed. The inaccurate reactor operations log shutdown checklist was material to the NRC because it provided evidence of completion of a procedure required by Texas A&M NSC's TS.

The second violation involves the non-willful failure of Texas A&M NSC to meet the minimum facility staffing requirements on May 1415, 2013, during which time the reactor was not secured. TS 6.1.3, "Staffing," requires that at least two individuals, a senior reactor operator and either a licensed reactor operator or operator trainee, be on duty when the reactor is not secured. The senior reactor operator and reactor operator left the facility complex without securing the reactor, resulting in a violation of staffing requirements on May 1415, 2013. Although these violations did not result in an actual consequence, the failure to provide accurate and complete information is of significant concern to the NRC. The NRC's regulatory program is based on licensees and their employees acting with integrity and communicating with candor The NRC cannot tolerate willful violations. Although the actions were taken by an individual, the NRC generally holds licensees accountable for the actions of their employees. Given the significance of the underlying issues and the deliberate nature of the reactor operations manager's actions, these violations are collectively categorized in accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy as a Severity Level III problem.

In accordance with the Enforcement Policy, a base civil penalty in the amount of $3,500.00 is considered for a Severity Level III problem. Because the violation was willful, the NRC considered whether credit was warranted for Identification and Corrective Action in accordance with the civil penalty assessment process in Section 2.3.4 of the Enforcement Policy. The NRC determined that credit was not warranted for Identification as the violation was identified by the NRC. Your corrective actions include, but were not limited to: (1) restoring the proper emphasis on the purpose of checkoffs, checklists, and procedures by establishing checkoffs and checklists that are completed when actions are undertaken and internally audited at the end of every operating day; (2) reviewing the audit documents at the beginning of the next operating day to verify conformance; (3) conducting a re-audit of reactor operations logbooks when each logbook is complete (approximately quarterly); (4) investigating and documenting deviations by a memo attaching the memo to the original document that explains the deviation its effect of the deviation; (5) bringing deviations to the attention of management, outside of the operations department, in a timely manner; and (6) sharing information about the deviations and the results of deviation investigations with the Texas A&M NSC staff in a timely manner. Additionally, you are in the process of revising your facility operating procedures (SOP-II), including your facility staffing procedures to ensure (1) the licensed operator in the control room is the person who understands the condition of the entire site, (2) mid-day changes in staffing are logged appropriately, and (3) training modules that explain checkoffs, checklists, and procedures reflect the changed facility operating procedures. You have estimated that formal submission of the revised SOP-II will be made at the Reactor Safety Board scheduled for Fall 2015. The NRC requests that the determination of the Reactor Safety Board be submitted to NRC, when issued.

Based on the above actions, the NRC determined that credit was warranted for Corrective Action.

Therefore, to emphasize the importance of procedural compliance, accurate and complete information, compliance with technical specifications, and the identification of violations, I have been authorized, after consultation with the Director, Office of Enforcement, to issue the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice) in the base amount of $3, 500.00.

If you disagree with this enforcement sanction, you may deny the violation, as described in the Notice, or you may request ADR with the NRC in an attempt to resolve this issue. ADR is a general term encompassing various techniques for resolving conflict outside of court using a neutral third party. The technique that the NRC has decided to employ is mediation. In mediation, a neutral mediator with no decision-making authority helps parties clarify issues, explore settlement options, and evaluate how best to advance their respective interests. The mediator's responsibility is to assist the parties in reaching an agreement. However, the mediator has no authority to impose a resolution upon the parties. Mediation is a confidential and voluntary process. If the parties to the ADR process agree to use ADR, they select a mutually agreeable neutral mediator and share equally the cost of the mediator's services. Additional information concerning the NRC's ADR program can be found at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/adr.html.

The Institute on Conflict Resolution (ICR) at Cornell University has agreed to facilitate the NRC's program as an intake neutral. Intake neutrals perform several functions, including: assisting parties in determining ADR potential for their case, advising parties regarding the ADR process, aiding the parties in selecting an appropriate mediator, explaining the extent of confidentiality, and providing other logistic assistance as necessary. If you are interested in pursuing this issue through the ADR program, within 10 days of the date of this letter, please contact: (1) the ICR at (877) 733-9415; and (2) Dr. Kevin Hsueh at (301) 415-7256. You may also contact both ICR and Dr. Hsueh for additional information.

The NRC has concluded that information regarding: (1) the reason for the violations; (2) the corrective actions that have been taken and the results achieved; and (3) the date when full compliance was achieved is already adequately addressed on the docket in the letter from you dated October 8, 2015. Therefore, you are not required to respond to this letter unless the description does not accurately reflect your corrective actions or your position. In that case, or if you choose to provide additional information, you should follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, "Public inspections, exemptions, requests for withholding," a copy of this letter, its enclosure(s), and your response will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room and from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To the extent possible, your response, if you choose to provide one, should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be made available to the Public without redaction. If personal privacy or proprietary information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, then please provide a bracketed copy of your response that identifies the information that should be protected and a redacted copy of your response that deletes such information. If you request that such material is withheld from public disclosure, you must specifically identify the portions of your response that you seek to have withheld and provide in detail the bases for your claim (e.g., explain why the disclosure of information will create an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy or provide the information required by 10 CFR 2.390(b) to support a request for withholding confidential commercial or financial information). If safeguards information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, please provide the level of protection described in 10 CFR 73.21.

The NRC recognizes that positive changes to the Texas A&M NSC culture, organization, and procedures have occurred under your leadership since the 2013 events and we look forward to receiving the requested information on the Reactor Safety Board's determination. If you have any questions, please contact Dr. Kevin Hsueh at (301) 415-7256.

Sincerely,/Mirela Gavrilas for RA/ Lawrence E. Kokajko, Director Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Docket No. 50-128 License No. R-83

Enclosure:

Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty