In the Matter of Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2; Confirmatory Order, 28245-28248 [2013-11396]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 93 / Tuesday, May 14, 2013 / Notices
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. Chapter 35).
Information pertaining to the
requirement to be submitted:
1. The title of the information
collection: 10 CFR Part 50, ‘‘Domestic
Licensing of Production and Utilization
Facilities.’’
2. Current OMB approval number:
3150–0011.
3. How often the collection is
required: As necessary in order for NRC
to meet its responsibilities to conduct a
detailed review of applications for
licenses and amendments thereto to
construct and operate nuclear power
plants, preliminary or final design
approvals, design certifications,
research and test facilities, reprocessing
plants and other utilization and
production facilities, licensed pursuant
to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act) and to monitor their
activities. Reports are submitted daily,
monthly, quarterly, annually, semiannually, and on occasion.
4. Who is required or asked to report:
Licensees and applicants for nuclear
power plants and research and test
facilities, and approximately 100
materials licensees responding to
generic communications.
5. The number of annual respondents:
251.
6. The number of hours needed
annually to complete the requirement or
request: 4.88M hours; 1.93M hours
reporting (an average of 41.8 hrs/
response) + 2.95M hours recordkeeping
(an average of 19.5K hrs/recordkeeper).
7. Abstract: Part 50 of Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
‘‘Domestic Licensing of Production and
Utilization Facilities,’’ specifies
technical information and data to be
provided to the NRC or maintained by
applicants and licensees so that the NRC
may take determinations necessary to
protect the health and safety of the
public, in accordance with the Act. The
reporting and recordkeeping
requirements contained in 10 CFR part
50 are mandatory for the affected
licensees and applicants.
Submit, by July 15, 2013, comments
that address the following questions:
1. Is the proposed collection of
information necessary for the NRC to
properly perform its functions? Does the
information have practical utility?
2. Is the burden estimate accurate?
3. Is there a way to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected?
4. How can the burden of the
information collection be minimized,
including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology?
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:52 May 13, 2013
Jkt 229001
The public may examine and have
copied for a fee publicly available
documents, including the draft
supporting statement, at the NRC’s
Public Document Room, Room O–1F21,
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The
OMB clearance requests are available at
the NRC’ Web site: https://www.nrc.gov/
public-involve/doc-comment/omb/.
The document will be available on the
NRC’s home page site for 60 days after
the signature date of this notice.
Comments submitted in writing or in
electronic form will be made available
for public inspection. Because your
comments will not be edited to remove
any identifying or contact information,
the NRC cautions you against including
any information in your submission that
you do not want to be publicly
disclosed. Comments submitted should
reference Docket No. NRC–2013–0085.
You may submit your comments by any
of the following methods: Electronic
comments: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov and search for
Docket No. NRC–2013–0085. Mail
comments to the NRC Clearance Officer,
Tremaine Donnell (T–5 F53), U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001.
Questions about the information
collection requirements may be directed
to the NRC Clearance Officer, Tremaine
Donnell (T–5 F53), U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–
6258, or by email to
INFOCOLLECTS.Resource@NRC.GOV.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this May 8,
2013.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Tremaine Donnell,
NRC Clearance Officer,
Office of Information Services.
[FR Doc. 2013–11339 Filed 5–13–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2013–0093; Docket No.: 50–348, 50–
364; License No.: NPF–2, NPF–8; EA–12–
145]
In the Matter of Southern Nuclear
Operating Company, Farley Nuclear
Plant, Units 1 and 2; Confirmatory
Order
I
Southern Nuclear Operating Company
(SNC or Licensee) is the holder of
License Nos. NPF–2 and NPF–8, issued
by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) pursuant to Part 50
of Title 10 of the Code of Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28245
Regulations (10 CFR), on June 25, 1977
and March 31, 1981. The licenses
authorize the operation of Farley
Nuclear Plant (FNP), Units 1 and 2, in
accordance with conditions specified
therein. The facility is located on the
Licensee’s site in Columbia, Alabama.
This Confirmatory Order is the result
of an agreement reached during an
alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
mediation session conducted on March
15, 2013.
II
On July 3, 2012, the NRC’s Office of
Investigations (OI) completed an
investigation (OI Case No. 2–2011–018)
regarding activities at the Farley Nuclear
Plant. Based on the evidence developed
during the investigation, the NRC issued
a letter to FNP dated January 9, 2013,
which documented an apparent
violation that occurred during calendar
years 2010 and 2011.
Specifically, FNP Technical
Specification 5.4.1.a, Procedures,
requires in part, written procedures to
be established, implemented and
maintained covering the applicable
procedures recommended in Regulatory
Guide (RG) 1.33, Revision 2, Appendix
A, February 1978. Section 7.e of
Appendix A to RG 1.33 requires
procedures for training workers in
radiation protection. Farley procedure
FNP–0–AP–42, Access Control, requires
individuals badged as Unescorted
Radiation Workers to undergo annual
radiation worker training (RWT) to
maintain radiation controlled area
(RCA) access authorization. Licensee
procedure NMP–TR–208, ‘‘Examination
and Examination Security’’ requires
examinees to remove or store reference
material in such a way that it would not
compromise the exam, to take the exam
in an uninterrupted session, and for
proctors to ensure all rules are followed
while an examination is being
administered. If cheating is observed the
proctor is required to stop the exam.
The NRC’s letter further stated that,
during calendar years 2010 and 2011,
FNP security personnel proctoring the
annual RWT exams failed to ensure
exams were not compromised as
required by SNC procedure NMP–TR–
208. Specifically, proctors compromised
the integrity of the RWT exams by
helping other security officers cheat on
the exams by either suggesting or giving
answers, or taking the exam in place of
the security officers.
III
On March 15, 2013, the NRC and SNC
met in an ADR session mediated by a
professional mediator, arranged through
Cornell University’s Institute on
E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM
14MYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
28246
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 93 / Tuesday, May 14, 2013 / Notices
Conflict Resolution. ADR is a process in
which a neutral mediator with no
decision-making authority assists the
parties in reaching an agreement or
resolving any differences regarding their
dispute. This confirmatory order is
issued pursuant to the agreement
reached during the ADR process. The
elements of the agreement consist of the
following:
1. NRC and FNP agreed that the issue
described above represents a violation
of regulatory requirements, with the
following clarifications: Based on the
results of FNP’s investigation into the
incidents as described in the NRC’s
letter of January 9, 2013, FNP confirmed
that one security officer inappropriately
proctored annual RWT exams and failed
to ensure that exams were not
compromised, as required by SNC
procedure NMP–TR–208 and Technical
Specifications. In addition, FNP
confirmed that one security officer
received inappropriate assistance on
RWT exams. Based on a review of the
range of elapsed times it took for
security officers and other plant
employees to complete exams, FNP
could not conclude that other security
officers received inappropriate
assistance. The NRC acknowledges and
accepts FNP’s explanation with respect
to the elapsed times for taking RWT
exams, and considers the explanation
plausible and credible.
2. During the ADR, FNP described the
corrective actions and enhancements
completed in response to the issues
described in the NRC’s January 9, 2013,
letter. These actions included but were
not limited to the following:
a. In August 2012 and again in
February 2013, FNP management
briefed all Security Department
personnel on pride, professionalism and
personal accountability with a specific
focus on training processes, exams
procedures and expectations, and
professional integrity.
b. FNP management re-tested all
current Security Department personnel
whose most-recent RWT exams were
proctored by the individual who
admitted to assisting security officers
with their exams. All such employees
passed their exams.
c. FNP management imposed a
requirement that all Security
Department training and test taking be
performed in a training lab to minimize
distractions during the training and
evaluation processes.
d. FNP management established, as
part of the Security Human Behavior
Program, a monitoring program to
ensure that supervision will conduct
random observations of Security
Department personnel during computer-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:52 May 13, 2013
Jkt 229001
based training requalification exams.
The monitoring program requires that
the observations be reviewed by the
FNP Security Manager each month. This
action will continue until December 31,
2014, at which time it will be assessed
to determine whether continuation is
necessary.
e. SNC conducted a thorough
investigation of this matter (including
interviews of 41 employees), which led
to findings of certain violations of
NMP–TR–208, ‘‘Examination and
Examination Security,’’ and
irregularities in the exam processes by
FNP Security Department personnel.
f. FNP management issued
appropriate levels of discipline for
employees involved in violations and
improper behavior, ranging from
coaching to written discipline to
termination.
g. Actions specifically related to FNP
included:
i. SNC disqualified all FNP computerbased training proctors and retrained
them on the requirements of NMP–TR–
208.
ii. SNC performed an additional
review of the results of the most recent
FNP Safety Culture assessment in order
to determine whether—in light of the
RWT exam incident—there were areas
of concern that had not been identified
when the results were initially
reviewed. The additional review of the
Safety Culture assessment did not reveal
indications of problems with training
and test-taking practices.
h. SNC has also completed a FleetWide Action consisting of a formal
review of the ‘‘Examination and
Examination Security’’ Procedure
(NMP–TR–208) by the Training
Department, to ensure adequate
guidance is provided for examination
oversight. As a result, revisions to the
procedure were made to clarify the
proctoring requirements.
3. Based on SNC’s review of the
incident and the NRC’s concerns with
respect to precluding recurrence of the
violation, SNC agrees to the following
corrective actions and enhancements:
a. SNC’s Licensing Department
conducted an assessment of
opportunities for improvement for all
proctored exams. As a result, SNC
initiated a Condition Report for Fleet
Security to evaluate the testing
environment for the Security
Departments at all three sites. The
results of this evaluation will be
assessed to determine whether
corrective actions need to be
implemented.
b. As a result of the review conducted
in Paragraph III.3.a, SNC also issued a
Fleet-wide Condition Report to evaluate
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the testing environment and compliance
with NMP–TR–208 at Corporate and the
three operating sites. The results of this
evaluation will be assessed to determine
whether corrective actions need to be
implemented.
c. By the later of either June 15, 2013,
or 90 days after the date of issuance of
the Confirmatory Order, SNC will
review other procedures referenced in
NMP–TR–208 that relate to proctoring
and determine whether revisions are
needed to clarify any aspects of the
procedures pertaining to proctoring.
d. By the later of either June 15, 2013,
or 90 days after the date of issuance of
the Confirmatory Order, SNC will issue
a company-wide communication
regarding the revisions and
clarifications that have been made to
NMP–TR–208 and other procedures
referenced in NMP–TR–208 to the
extent there were revisions to any
procedure identified in Paragraph
III.3.c.
e. By the later of either June 15, 2013,
or 90 days after the date of issuance of
the Confirmatory Order, senior
management will communicate through
various effective means such as, but not
limited to, video, on a fleet-wide basis.
Messages will clearly articulate that
willful misconduct is incompatible with
safe nuclear construction and operation.
The communication will provide recent
public examples, including those
documented in EA–12–240 and EA–12–
230, and the impacts when there is a
loss of integrity and trustworthiness.
f. By the later of either June 15, 2013,
or 90 days after the date of issuance of
the Confirmatory Order, the senior
management communication will be
followed by a Fleet-wide stand-down
with all employees to address integrity
and trustworthiness. A similar standdown will be conducted for operating
fleet contractors. For Vogtle 3 and 4, the
briefing will be tailored to the unique
management structure of the
construction project.
g. By the later of either June 15, 2013,
or 90 days after the date of issuance of
the Confirmatory Order, SNC will
modify its guidance involving
investigations based on allegations to
include an initial evaluation of potential
nuclear safety implications and to
identify any appropriate immediate
mitigating measures to be taken while
the investigation is ongoing.
h. By August 31, 2014, SNC will
conduct an effectiveness review of all
corrective actions taken under the
Confirmatory Order.
i. By October 30, 2013, SNC will
evaluate and implement appropriate
actions to reinforce the messages of
E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM
14MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 93 / Tuesday, May 14, 2013 / Notices
Paragraph III.3.e and III.3.f above
annually until December 31, 2015.
j. Upon completion of the terms of
Paragraph III.3.a through III.3.h of the
Confirmatory Order, SNC will provide
the NRC with a letter discussing its
basis for concluding that the Order has
been satisfied.
4. The NRC considers the corrective
actions and enhancements discussed in
Paragraph III.2 and III.3 above to be
appropriately prompt and
comprehensive to address the causes
which gave rise to the incident
discussed in the NRC’s letter of January
9, 2013.
5. In consideration of the
commitments delineated above, the
NRC agrees to refrain from proposing a
civil penalty or issuing a Notice of
Violation for all matters discussed in the
NRC’s letter to FNP of January 9, 2013
(EA–12–145). The resulting
Confirmatory Order will not be
considered an escalated enforcement
action by the NRC for any future
assessment of FNP.
6. This agreement is binding upon
successors and assigns of SNC.
On April 29, 2013, the Licensee
consented to issuance of this Order with
the commitments, as described in
Section V below. The Licensee further
agreed that this Order is to be effective
upon issuance and that it has waived its
right to a hearing.
IV
Since the Licensee has agreed to take
actions to address the violation as set
forth in Section V, the NRC has
concluded that its concerns can be
resolved through issuance of this Order.
I find that the Licensee’s
commitments as set forth in Section V
are acceptable and necessary and
conclude that with these commitments
the public health and safety are
reasonably assured. In view of the
foregoing, I have determined that public
health and safety require that the
Licensee’s commitments be confirmed
by this Order. Based on the above and
the Licensee’s consent, this Order is
effective upon issuance.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
V
Accordingly, pursuant to Sections
104b., 161b., 161i., 161o., 182, and 186
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, and the Commission’s
regulations in 10 CFR 2.202 and 10 CFR
Parts 50 and 52, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED, THAT LICENSE NOS. NPF–
2 AND NPF–8 IS MODIFIED AS
FOLLOWS:
a. SNC’s Licensing Department
conducted an assessment of
opportunities for improvement for all
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:52 May 13, 2013
Jkt 229001
proctored exams. As a result, SNC
initiated a Condition Report for Fleet
Security to evaluate the testing
environment for the Security
Departments at all three sites. SNC will
assess the results of this evaluation to
determine whether corrective actions
need to be implemented.
b. As a result of the review conducted
in Paragraph V.a, SNC also issued a
Fleet-wide Condition Report to evaluate
the testing environment and compliance
with NMP–TR–208 at Corporate and the
three operating sites. SNC will assess
the results of this evaluation to
determine whether corrective actions
need to be implemented.
c. By the later of either June 15, 2013,
or 90 days after the date of issuance of
the Confirmatory Order, SNC will
review other procedures referenced in
NMP–TR–208 that relate to proctoring
and determine whether revisions are
needed to clarify any aspects of the
procedures pertaining to proctoring.
d. By the later of either June 15, 2013,
or 90 days after the date of issuance of
the Confirmatory Order, SNC will issue
a company-wide communication
regarding the revisions and
clarifications that have been made to
NMP–TR–208 and other procedures
referenced in NMP–TR–208 to the
extent there were revisions to any
procedure identified in Paragraph V.c.
e. By the later of either June 15, 2013,
or 90 days after the date of issuance of
the Confirmatory Order, senior
management will communicate through
various effective means such as, but not
limited to, video, on a fleet-wide basis.
Messages will clearly articulate that
willful misconduct is incompatible with
safe nuclear construction and operation.
The communication will provide recent
public examples, including those
documented in EA–12–240 and EA–12–
230, and the impacts when there is a
loss of integrity and trustworthiness.
f. By the later of either June 15, 2013,
or 90 days after the date of issuance of
the Confirmatory Order, the senior
management communication will be
followed by a Fleet-wide stand-down
with all employees to address integrity
and trustworthiness. A similar standdown will be conducted for operating
fleet contractors. For Vogtle 3 and 4, the
briefing will be tailored to the unique
management structure of the
construction project.
g. By the later of either June 15, 2013,
or 90 days after the date of issuance of
the Confirmatory Order, SNC will
modify its guidance involving
investigations based on allegations to
include an initial evaluation of potential
nuclear safety implications and to
identify any appropriate immediate
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28247
mitigating measures to be taken while
the investigation is ongoing.
h. By August 31, 2014, SNC will
conduct an effectiveness review of all
corrective actions taken under the
Confirmatory Order.
i. By October 30, 2013, SNC will
evaluate and implement appropriate
actions to reinforce the messages of
Paragraph V.e and V.f above annually
until December 31, 2015.
j. Upon completion of the terms of
Paragraph V.a through V.h of the
Confirmatory Order, SNC will provide
the NRC with a letter discussing its
basis for concluding that the Order has
been satisfied.
The Regional Administrator, NRC
Region II, may relax or rescind, in
writing, any of the above conditions
upon a showing by SNC of good cause.
VI
Any person adversely affected by this
Order, other than SNC, may submit a
written answer and/or request a hearing
on this Order within 30 days from the
date of this Order. Where good cause is
shown, consideration will be given to
extending the time to answer or request
a hearing. A request for extension of
time must be directed to the Director,
Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001, and include a
statement of good cause for the
extension.
If a hearing is requested by a person
whose interest is adversely affected, the
Commission will issue an Order
designating the time and place of any
hearings. If a hearing is held, the issue
to be considered at such hearing shall be
whether this Order should be sustained.
All documents filed in the NRC
adjudicatory proceedings, including a
request for a hearing, a petition for leave
to intervene, any motion or other
document filed in the proceeding prior
to the submission of a request for
hearing or petition to intervene, and
documents filed by interested
governmental entities participating
under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in
accordance with the NRC’s E-Filing rule
(72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The EFiling process requires participants to
submit and serve all adjudicatory
documents over the internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic
storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings
unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures
described below.
To comply with the procedural
requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the
participant should contact the Office of
E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM
14MYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
28248
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 93 / Tuesday, May 14, 2013 / Notices
the Secretary by email at
hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone
at 301–415–1677, to request (1) a digital
identification (ID) certificate, which
allows the participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign
documents and access the E-Submittal
server for any proceeding in which it is
participating; and (2) advise the
Secretary that the participant will be
submitting a request or petition for
hearing (even in instances in which the
participant, or its counsel or
representative, already holds an NRCissued digital certificate). Based on this
information, the Secretary will establish
an electronic docket for the hearing in
this proceeding if the Secretary has not
already established an electronic docket.
Information about applying for a
digital ID certificate is available on the
NRC’s public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/
apply-certificates.html. System
requirements for accessing the ESubmittal server are detailed in the
NRC’s ‘‘Guidance for Electronic
Submission,’’ which is available on the
NRC’s public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. Participants may
attempt to use other software not listed
on the Web site, but should note that the
NRC’s E-Filing system does not support
unlisted software, and the NRC Meta
System Help Desk will not be able to
offer assistance in using unlisted
software.
If a participant is electronically
submitting a document to the NRC in
accordance with the E-Filing rule, the
participant must file the document
using the NRC’s online, Web-based
submission form. In order to serve
documents through the Electronic
Information Exchange System, users
will be required to install a Web
browser plug-in from the NRC’s Web
site. Further information on the Webbased submission form, including the
installation of the Web browser plug-in,
is available on the NRC’s public Web
site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a
digital ID certificate and a docket has
been created, the participant can then
submit a request for a hearing or
petition for leave to intervene.
Submissions should be in Portable
Document Format (PDF) in accordance
with the NRC guidance available on the
NRC’s public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered
complete at the time the documents are
submitted through the NRC’s E-Filing
system. To be timely, an electronic
filing must be submitted to the E-Filing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:52 May 13, 2013
Jkt 229001
system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern
Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system
time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an email notice
confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an email
notice that provides access to the
document to the NRC’s Office of the
General Counsel and any others who
have advised the Office of the Secretary
that they wish to participate in the
proceeding, so that the filer need not
serve the document on those
participants separately. Therefore,
applicants and other participants (or
their counsel or representative) must
apply for and receive a digital ID
certificate before a hearing request/
petition to intervene is filed so that they
can obtain access to the document via
the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using
the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system
may seek assistance by contracting the
NRC Meta System Help Desk through
the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located on the
NRC’s public Web site at https://
www.nrc/gov/site-help/esubmittals.html, by email to
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll
free call to 1–866–672–7640. The NRC
Meta System Help Desk is available
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern
Time, Monday through Friday,
excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they
have a good cause for not submitting
documents electronically must file an
extension request, in accordance with
10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper
filing requesting authorization to
continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted
by: (1) First-class mail addressed to the
Office of the Secretary of the
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier,
express mail, or expedited delivery
service to the Office of the Secretary,
Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking
and Adjudications Staff. Participants
filing a document in this manner are
responsible for serving the document on
all other participants. Filing is
considered complete by first-class mail
as of the time of deposit in the mail, or
by courier, express mail, or expedited
delivery service upon depositing the
document with the provider of the
service. A presiding officer, having
granted an exemption request from
using E-Filing, may require a participant
or party using E-Filing if the presiding
officer subsequently determines that the
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory
proceedings will appear in the NRC’s
electronic hearing docket, which is
available to the public at https://
ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded
pursuant to an order of the Commission,
or the presiding officer. Participants are
requested not to include personal
privacy information, such as social
security numbers, home addresses, or
home phone numbers in their filings,
unless an NRC regulation or other law
requires submission of such
information. With respect to
copyrighted works, except for limited
excerpts that serve the purpose of the
adjudicatory filings and would
constitute a Fair Use application,
participants are requested not to include
copyrighted materials in their
submissions.
If a person other than the licensee
requests a hearing, that person shall set
forth with particularity the manner in
which his interest is adversely affected
by this Order and shall address the
criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d) and
(f).
In the absence of any request for
hearing, or written approval of an
extension of time in which to request a
hearing, the provisions specified in
Section V above shall be final 30 days
from the date of this Order without
further order or proceedings. If an
extension of time for requesting a
hearing has been approved, the
provisions specified in Section V shall
be final when the extension expires if a
hearing request has not been received.
Dated this 6th day of May 2013.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Frederick D. Brown,
Deputy Regional Administrator for
Construction.
[FR Doc. 2013–11396 Filed 5–13–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2013–0084]
Biweekly Notice; Applications and
Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses and Combined Licenses
Involving No Significant Hazards
Considerations
Background
Pursuant to Section 189a. (2) of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission or NRC)
is publishing this regular biweekly
notice. The Act requires the
E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM
14MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 93 (Tuesday, May 14, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28245-28248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-11396]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2013-0093; Docket No.: 50-348, 50-364; License No.: NPF-2, NPF-8;
EA-12-145]
In the Matter of Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Farley
Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2; Confirmatory Order
I
Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC or Licensee) is the holder
of License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8, issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) pursuant to Part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), on June 25, 1977 and March 31, 1981. The licenses
authorize the operation of Farley Nuclear Plant (FNP), Units 1 and 2,
in accordance with conditions specified therein. The facility is
located on the Licensee's site in Columbia, Alabama.
This Confirmatory Order is the result of an agreement reached
during an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mediation session
conducted on March 15, 2013.
II
On July 3, 2012, the NRC's Office of Investigations (OI) completed
an investigation (OI Case No. 2-2011-018) regarding activities at the
Farley Nuclear Plant. Based on the evidence developed during the
investigation, the NRC issued a letter to FNP dated January 9, 2013,
which documented an apparent violation that occurred during calendar
years 2010 and 2011.
Specifically, FNP Technical Specification 5.4.1.a, Procedures,
requires in part, written procedures to be established, implemented and
maintained covering the applicable procedures recommended in Regulatory
Guide (RG) 1.33, Revision 2, Appendix A, February 1978. Section 7.e of
Appendix A to RG 1.33 requires procedures for training workers in
radiation protection. Farley procedure FNP-0-AP-42, Access Control,
requires individuals badged as Unescorted Radiation Workers to undergo
annual radiation worker training (RWT) to maintain radiation controlled
area (RCA) access authorization. Licensee procedure NMP-TR-208,
``Examination and Examination Security'' requires examinees to remove
or store reference material in such a way that it would not compromise
the exam, to take the exam in an uninterrupted session, and for
proctors to ensure all rules are followed while an examination is being
administered. If cheating is observed the proctor is required to stop
the exam.
The NRC's letter further stated that, during calendar years 2010
and 2011, FNP security personnel proctoring the annual RWT exams failed
to ensure exams were not compromised as required by SNC procedure NMP-
TR-208. Specifically, proctors compromised the integrity of the RWT
exams by helping other security officers cheat on the exams by either
suggesting or giving answers, or taking the exam in place of the
security officers.
III
On March 15, 2013, the NRC and SNC met in an ADR session mediated
by a professional mediator, arranged through Cornell University's
Institute on
[[Page 28246]]
Conflict Resolution. ADR is a process in which a neutral mediator with
no decision-making authority assists the parties in reaching an
agreement or resolving any differences regarding their dispute. This
confirmatory order is issued pursuant to the agreement reached during
the ADR process. The elements of the agreement consist of the
following:
1. NRC and FNP agreed that the issue described above represents a
violation of regulatory requirements, with the following
clarifications: Based on the results of FNP's investigation into the
incidents as described in the NRC's letter of January 9, 2013, FNP
confirmed that one security officer inappropriately proctored annual
RWT exams and failed to ensure that exams were not compromised, as
required by SNC procedure NMP-TR-208 and Technical Specifications. In
addition, FNP confirmed that one security officer received
inappropriate assistance on RWT exams. Based on a review of the range
of elapsed times it took for security officers and other plant
employees to complete exams, FNP could not conclude that other security
officers received inappropriate assistance. The NRC acknowledges and
accepts FNP's explanation with respect to the elapsed times for taking
RWT exams, and considers the explanation plausible and credible.
2. During the ADR, FNP described the corrective actions and
enhancements completed in response to the issues described in the NRC's
January 9, 2013, letter. These actions included but were not limited to
the following:
a. In August 2012 and again in February 2013, FNP management
briefed all Security Department personnel on pride, professionalism and
personal accountability with a specific focus on training processes,
exams procedures and expectations, and professional integrity.
b. FNP management re-tested all current Security Department
personnel whose most-recent RWT exams were proctored by the individual
who admitted to assisting security officers with their exams. All such
employees passed their exams.
c. FNP management imposed a requirement that all Security
Department training and test taking be performed in a training lab to
minimize distractions during the training and evaluation processes.
d. FNP management established, as part of the Security Human
Behavior Program, a monitoring program to ensure that supervision will
conduct random observations of Security Department personnel during
computer-based training requalification exams. The monitoring program
requires that the observations be reviewed by the FNP Security Manager
each month. This action will continue until December 31, 2014, at which
time it will be assessed to determine whether continuation is
necessary.
e. SNC conducted a thorough investigation of this matter (including
interviews of 41 employees), which led to findings of certain
violations of NMP-TR-208, ``Examination and Examination Security,'' and
irregularities in the exam processes by FNP Security Department
personnel.
f. FNP management issued appropriate levels of discipline for
employees involved in violations and improper behavior, ranging from
coaching to written discipline to termination.
g. Actions specifically related to FNP included:
i. SNC disqualified all FNP computer-based training proctors and
retrained them on the requirements of NMP-TR-208.
ii. SNC performed an additional review of the results of the most
recent FNP Safety Culture assessment in order to determine whether--in
light of the RWT exam incident--there were areas of concern that had
not been identified when the results were initially reviewed. The
additional review of the Safety Culture assessment did not reveal
indications of problems with training and test-taking practices.
h. SNC has also completed a Fleet-Wide Action consisting of a
formal review of the ``Examination and Examination Security'' Procedure
(NMP-TR-208) by the Training Department, to ensure adequate guidance is
provided for examination oversight. As a result, revisions to the
procedure were made to clarify the proctoring requirements.
3. Based on SNC's review of the incident and the NRC's concerns
with respect to precluding recurrence of the violation, SNC agrees to
the following corrective actions and enhancements:
a. SNC's Licensing Department conducted an assessment of
opportunities for improvement for all proctored exams. As a result, SNC
initiated a Condition Report for Fleet Security to evaluate the testing
environment for the Security Departments at all three sites. The
results of this evaluation will be assessed to determine whether
corrective actions need to be implemented.
b. As a result of the review conducted in Paragraph III.3.a, SNC
also issued a Fleet-wide Condition Report to evaluate the testing
environment and compliance with NMP-TR-208 at Corporate and the three
operating sites. The results of this evaluation will be assessed to
determine whether corrective actions need to be implemented.
c. By the later of either June 15, 2013, or 90 days after the date
of issuance of the Confirmatory Order, SNC will review other procedures
referenced in NMP-TR-208 that relate to proctoring and determine
whether revisions are needed to clarify any aspects of the procedures
pertaining to proctoring.
d. By the later of either June 15, 2013, or 90 days after the date
of issuance of the Confirmatory Order, SNC will issue a company-wide
communication regarding the revisions and clarifications that have been
made to NMP-TR-208 and other procedures referenced in NMP-TR-208 to the
extent there were revisions to any procedure identified in Paragraph
III.3.c.
e. By the later of either June 15, 2013, or 90 days after the date
of issuance of the Confirmatory Order, senior management will
communicate through various effective means such as, but not limited
to, video, on a fleet-wide basis. Messages will clearly articulate that
willful misconduct is incompatible with safe nuclear construction and
operation. The communication will provide recent public examples,
including those documented in EA-12-240 and EA-12-230, and the impacts
when there is a loss of integrity and trustworthiness.
f. By the later of either June 15, 2013, or 90 days after the date
of issuance of the Confirmatory Order, the senior management
communication will be followed by a Fleet-wide stand-down with all
employees to address integrity and trustworthiness. A similar stand-
down will be conducted for operating fleet contractors. For Vogtle 3
and 4, the briefing will be tailored to the unique management structure
of the construction project.
g. By the later of either June 15, 2013, or 90 days after the date
of issuance of the Confirmatory Order, SNC will modify its guidance
involving investigations based on allegations to include an initial
evaluation of potential nuclear safety implications and to identify any
appropriate immediate mitigating measures to be taken while the
investigation is ongoing.
h. By August 31, 2014, SNC will conduct an effectiveness review of
all corrective actions taken under the Confirmatory Order.
i. By October 30, 2013, SNC will evaluate and implement appropriate
actions to reinforce the messages of
[[Page 28247]]
Paragraph III.3.e and III.3.f above annually until December 31, 2015.
j. Upon completion of the terms of Paragraph III.3.a through
III.3.h of the Confirmatory Order, SNC will provide the NRC with a
letter discussing its basis for concluding that the Order has been
satisfied.
4. The NRC considers the corrective actions and enhancements
discussed in Paragraph III.2 and III.3 above to be appropriately prompt
and comprehensive to address the causes which gave rise to the incident
discussed in the NRC's letter of January 9, 2013.
5. In consideration of the commitments delineated above, the NRC
agrees to refrain from proposing a civil penalty or issuing a Notice of
Violation for all matters discussed in the NRC's letter to FNP of
January 9, 2013 (EA-12-145). The resulting Confirmatory Order will not
be considered an escalated enforcement action by the NRC for any future
assessment of FNP.
6. This agreement is binding upon successors and assigns of SNC.
On April 29, 2013, the Licensee consented to issuance of this Order
with the commitments, as described in Section V below. The Licensee
further agreed that this Order is to be effective upon issuance and
that it has waived its right to a hearing.
IV
Since the Licensee has agreed to take actions to address the
violation as set forth in Section V, the NRC has concluded that its
concerns can be resolved through issuance of this Order.
I find that the Licensee's commitments as set forth in Section V
are acceptable and necessary and conclude that with these commitments
the public health and safety are reasonably assured. In view of the
foregoing, I have determined that public health and safety require that
the Licensee's commitments be confirmed by this Order. Based on the
above and the Licensee's consent, this Order is effective upon
issuance.
V
Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 104b., 161b., 161i., 161o., 182,
and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202 and 10 CFR Parts 50 and 52, IT
IS HEREBY ORDERED, THAT LICENSE NOS. NPF-2 AND NPF-8 IS MODIFIED AS
FOLLOWS:
a. SNC's Licensing Department conducted an assessment of
opportunities for improvement for all proctored exams. As a result, SNC
initiated a Condition Report for Fleet Security to evaluate the testing
environment for the Security Departments at all three sites. SNC will
assess the results of this evaluation to determine whether corrective
actions need to be implemented.
b. As a result of the review conducted in Paragraph V.a, SNC also
issued a Fleet-wide Condition Report to evaluate the testing
environment and compliance with NMP-TR-208 at Corporate and the three
operating sites. SNC will assess the results of this evaluation to
determine whether corrective actions need to be implemented.
c. By the later of either June 15, 2013, or 90 days after the date
of issuance of the Confirmatory Order, SNC will review other procedures
referenced in NMP-TR-208 that relate to proctoring and determine
whether revisions are needed to clarify any aspects of the procedures
pertaining to proctoring.
d. By the later of either June 15, 2013, or 90 days after the date
of issuance of the Confirmatory Order, SNC will issue a company-wide
communication regarding the revisions and clarifications that have been
made to NMP-TR-208 and other procedures referenced in NMP-TR-208 to the
extent there were revisions to any procedure identified in Paragraph
V.c.
e. By the later of either June 15, 2013, or 90 days after the date
of issuance of the Confirmatory Order, senior management will
communicate through various effective means such as, but not limited
to, video, on a fleet-wide basis. Messages will clearly articulate that
willful misconduct is incompatible with safe nuclear construction and
operation. The communication will provide recent public examples,
including those documented in EA-12-240 and EA-12-230, and the impacts
when there is a loss of integrity and trustworthiness.
f. By the later of either June 15, 2013, or 90 days after the date
of issuance of the Confirmatory Order, the senior management
communication will be followed by a Fleet-wide stand-down with all
employees to address integrity and trustworthiness. A similar stand-
down will be conducted for operating fleet contractors. For Vogtle 3
and 4, the briefing will be tailored to the unique management structure
of the construction project.
g. By the later of either June 15, 2013, or 90 days after the date
of issuance of the Confirmatory Order, SNC will modify its guidance
involving investigations based on allegations to include an initial
evaluation of potential nuclear safety implications and to identify any
appropriate immediate mitigating measures to be taken while the
investigation is ongoing.
h. By August 31, 2014, SNC will conduct an effectiveness review of
all corrective actions taken under the Confirmatory Order.
i. By October 30, 2013, SNC will evaluate and implement appropriate
actions to reinforce the messages of Paragraph V.e and V.f above
annually until December 31, 2015.
j. Upon completion of the terms of Paragraph V.a through V.h of the
Confirmatory Order, SNC will provide the NRC with a letter discussing
its basis for concluding that the Order has been satisfied.
The Regional Administrator, NRC Region II, may relax or rescind, in
writing, any of the above conditions upon a showing by SNC of good
cause.
VI
Any person adversely affected by this Order, other than SNC, may
submit a written answer and/or request a hearing on this Order within
30 days from the date of this Order. Where good cause is shown,
consideration will be given to extending the time to answer or request
a hearing. A request for extension of time must be directed to the
Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and include a statement of good cause for
the extension.
If a hearing is requested by a person whose interest is adversely
affected, the Commission will issue an Order designating the time and
place of any hearings. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered
at such hearing shall be whether this Order should be sustained.
All documents filed in the NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including
a request for a hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion
or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a
request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by
interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c),
must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139;
August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit
and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the
Office of
[[Page 28248]]
the Secretary by email at hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone at
301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital identification (ID) certificate,
which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to
digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any
proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary
that the participant will be submitting a request or petition for
hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or
representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital certificate). Based
on this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket
for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already
established an electronic docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on the NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing
the E-Submittal server are detailed in the NRC's ``Guidance for
Electronic Submission,'' which is available on the NRC's public Web
site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants
may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but
should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted
software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer
assistance in using unlisted software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC
in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the
document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to
serve documents through the Electronic Information Exchange System,
users will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC's
Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form,
including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on
the NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a
docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for
a hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in
Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with the NRC guidance
available on the NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the
documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system
no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access
to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any
others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the
document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for
and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition
to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document
via the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contracting the NRC Meta System
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's public
Web site at https://www.nrc/gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll free call to 1-866-672-7640. The
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file an extension request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First-class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland
20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants
filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the
document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by
first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier,
express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the
document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having
granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a
participant or party using E-Filing if the presiding officer
subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the
NRC's electronic hearing docket, which is available to the public at
https://ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the
Commission, or the presiding officer. Participants are requested not to
include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers,
home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC
regulation or other law requires submission of such information. With
respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve
the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use
application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted
materials in their submissions.
If a person other than the licensee requests a hearing, that person
shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his interest is
adversely affected by this Order and shall address the criteria set
forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d) and (f).
In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of
an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions
specified in Section V above shall be final 30 days from the date of
this Order without further order or proceedings. If an extension of
time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions
specified in Section V shall be final when the extension expires if a
hearing request has not been received.
Dated this 6th day of May 2013.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Frederick D. Brown,
Deputy Regional Administrator for Construction.
[FR Doc. 2013-11396 Filed 5-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P