05000237/FIN-2013407-01
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Apparent violation for failure to report Senior reactor Operator (SRO) for aberrant behavior |
| Description | This letter refers to the investigation conducted from June 6, 2012, to March 29, 2013, at the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3 (Dresden Station). The purpose of the investigation was to determine if a Senior Reactor Operator (SRO), an Equipment Operator (EO), and/or any other personnel at the Dresden Station knew that a former SRO planned to commit a violent crime and willfully failed to report that SRO for aberrant behavior. Based on the results of the NRC investigation, an apparent violation with several examples was identified, although only one example was deemed willful. This apparent violation is being considered for escalated enforcement action in accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy. The NRCs requirements for reactor licensee access authorizations programs are contained in Section 73.56 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR). The NRC requirements applicable to this issue include the following: 10 CFR 73.56(a)(2) requires that a licensee establish, implement and maintain its access authorization program in accordance with the requirements of this section. 10 CFR 73.56(f)(1) requires that licensee and applicant access authorization programs must include a behavioral observation program that is designed to detect behaviors or activities that may constitute an unreasonable risk to the health and safety of the public and common defense and security, including a potential threat to commit radiological sabotage. Licensees, applicants and contractors or vendors must ensure that the individuals specified in paragraph (b)(1) and, if applicable, (b)(2) of this section are subject to behavioral observation. 10 CFR 73.56(f)(3) states, in part, that individuals who are subject to an access authorization program under this section shall at a minimum, report any concerns arising from behavioral observation, including, but not limited to, concerns related to any questionable behavior patterns or activities of others to the reviewing official, his or her supervisor, or other management personnel designated in their site procedures and that the recipient of the report shall, if other than the reviewing official, promptly convey the report to the reviewing official, who shall reassess the reported individuals unescorted access or unescorted access authorization status. The apparent violation examples involve: 1. A former EO, who had unescorted access to the Dresden Station, willfully failed to report to a supervisor observed concerns arising from observed behavior indicating a change of behavior in two other former individuals who had unescorted access to the Dresden Station as required by 10 CFR 73.56(a)(2), 73.56(f)(1), and 73.56(f)(3), when the other individuals attempted to recruit him in their plans to commit a violent crime. 2. A former SRO, who had unescorted access to the Dresden Station, failed to report to a supervisor observed concerns arising from observed behavior indicating a change of behavior in another former individual who had unescorted access to the Dresden Station as required by 10 CFR 73.56(a)(2), 73.56(f)(1), and 73.56(f)(3), when the other individual attempted to recruit him in his plans to commit a violent crime. 3. A former SRO, who had unescorted access to the Dresden Station, failed to report to a supervisor observed concerns arising from observed behavior indicating a change of behavior in another former individual who had unescorted access to the Dresden Station as required by 10 CFR 73.56(a)(2), 73.56(f)(1), and 73.56(f)(3), when the other individual went along with his plans to commit a violent crime. 4. An SRO, with unescorted access to the Dresden Station, failed to promptly contact a reviewing official upon learning of questionable behavior as required by 10 CFR 73.56(a)(2), 73.56(f)(1), and 73.56(f)(3), when the SRO was informed by two reactor operators about the questionable behavior of an EO. Since the NRC has not made a final determination in this matter, no Notice of Violation is being issued for this apparent violation at this time. |
| Site: | Dresden  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000237/2013407 Section 3S01 |
| Date counted | Mar 31, 2013 (2013Q1) |
| Type: | AV: |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71130.01 |
| Violation of: | 10 CFR 73, PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF PLANTS AND MATERIALS |
| INPO aspect | |
| ' | |
Finding - Dresden - IR 05000237/2013407 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Dresden) @ 2013Q1
Self-Identified List (Dresden)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||