In the Matter of Daniel Wilson, 26466-26469 [2014-10582]

Download as PDF emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 26466 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 89 / Thursday, May 8, 2014 / Notices ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this document (if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is referenced. • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Bamford, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001; telephone: 301–415–2833, email: Peter.Bamford@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NRC has granted the request of Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee), to withdraw its April 4, 2012, application (ADAMS Accession No. ML12096A022), proposing an amendment to Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF–6 for ANO, Unit 2, located in Russellville, Arkansas. The proposed amendment incorporates the ANO, Unit 2, revised FHA based on the use of the Alternate Source Term (AST) methodology. This methodology was previously approved for use at ANO, Unit 2, as documented in an NRC safety evaluation dated April 26, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML110980197). The original FHA analysis assumed failure of 60 fuel rods in a single fuel assembly. The revised analysis assumes the failure of all fuel rods in two fuel assemblies (472 rods). The changes necessary to support the revised FHA affect similar Technical Specifications (TSs) associated with the following NRC-approved TSTF Travelers: TSTF–51, Revision 2, ‘‘Revise Containment Requirements During Handling Irradiated Fuel and Core Alterations’’; TSTF–272, Revision 1, ‘‘Refueling Boron Concentration Clarification’’; TSTF–268, Revision 2, ‘‘Operations Involving Positive Reactivity Additions’’; and TSTF–471, Revision 1, ‘‘Eliminate use of Term Core Alterations in Actions and Notes.’’ Therefore, the licensee proposed to adopt these TSTFs in conjunction with changes that reflect the revised FHA. Additionally, administrative and/or editorial errors noted on the affected TS pages were also proposed for correction. The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment published in VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:18 May 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 the Federal Register on July 10, 2012 (77 FR 40652). However, by letter dated April 23, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14113A604), the licensee withdrew the proposed change. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated April 4, 2012, and supplements dated July 9, 2012, June 18, 2013, and July 1, 2013 (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML12192A089, ML13170A197, and ML13183A124, respectively). Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day of April 2014. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Peter Bamford, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV– 1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2014–10587 Filed 5–7–14; 8:45 am] Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of April 2014. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Roy P. Zimmerman, Director, Office of Enforcement. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [IA–13–064; NRC–2014–0103] Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRCLicensed Activities In the Matter of Daniel Wilson I Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Order; issuance. AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an order prohibiting Mr. Wilson from involvement in NRC-licensed activities for a period of 1 year. The order also requires Mr. Wilson to notify the NRC of any current involvement in NRClicensed activities, to immediately cease those activities, and to notify the NRC of the name, address, and telephone number of the employer. DATES: Effective Date: See attachment. ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2014–0103 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may access publicly-available information related to this action by the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2014–0103. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 please contact the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this document (if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is referenced. • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert G. Carpenter, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– 1330, email: Robert.Carpenter@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of the Order is attached. Daniel Wilson (Mr. Wilson) was formally employed as the Chemistry Manager at the Entergy Nuclear Operations (ENO) Indian Point Energy Center (Licensee). ENO holds License Nos. DPR–26 and DPR–64 issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to Part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) on September 28, 1973 and December 12, 1975, respectively. The licenses authorize the operation of Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3 in accordance with the conditions specified therein. The facility is located on the Licensee’s site in Buchanan, New York. II Between March 30, 2012, and March 26, 2013, an investigation was conducted at IP to determine if Mr. Wilson, while employed as the IP Chemistry Manager, deliberately entered false data into a Chemistry database pertaining to an emergency diesel generator (EDG) fuel oil storage tank (FOST) and the reserve fuel oil storage tank (RFOST). Per the IP Technical Specifications (TS), the fuel oil is sampled nominally every 92 days and analyzed to determine if it is within limits for specified parameters, including total particulate concentration. If the particulate concentration is above the stated limit, it must be restored to below the limit within seven days for an FOST, or 30 E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 89 / Thursday, May 8, 2014 / Notices days for the RFOST; otherwise, ENO must immediately declare the associated EDGs inoperable. For the RFOST, all the EDGs would be declared inoperable, which would require ENO to shutdown both operating units. During a self-assessment conducted in January/February 2012 to prepare for an upcoming NRC Component Design Bases Inspection, ENO staff at IP reviewed the EDG fuel oil delivery systems and storage tanks. The IP selfassessment team identified that: (1) Results of RFOST samples taken on June 17, 2011, and December 1, 2011, were not entered into the Chemistry Department database until July 14, 2011, and January 23, 2012, respectively; and (2) although both samples exceeded the TS particulate limits, no condition reports (CRs) had been written to document the issues and notify site operations and, evidently, no resampling performed to confirm that the oil had been restored to below the limit within the 30-day allowed outage time. On February 2, 2012, the IP selfassessment team inquired of Chemistry department staff, including Mr. Wilson, about this issue. Subsequently, on February 5, 2012, Mr. Wilson entered information in the Chemistry database indicating that re-samples for the June 17, 2011, and December 1, 2011, RFOST samples had, in fact, been performed on June 29, 2011, and December 9, 2011, respectively (i.e., within the 30 day period allowed by TS), and that the resamples were below the TS particulate limit. However, during the OI investigation, Mr. Wilson admitted to OI that the re-samples had actually not been obtained. Mr. Wilson informed OI that he had entered false values in the database instead of documenting the issue in a CR or otherwise informing the IP Operations Department that the site was operating in violation of its TS. Mr. Wilson also admitted that he similarly entered false re-sample data for the IP 22 EDG FOST after identifying that the TS particulate limit had been exceeded for a November 18, 2011, sample taken from that tank. Namely, on February 6, 2012, Mr. Wilson entered data to indicate that a resample had been performed on December 7, 2011, and that the resample was below the TS particulate limit. During the investigation, Mr. Wilson testified to OI that he entered the false values because he believed the original sample results were incorrect as a result of poor IP Chemistry Department sampling practices. Namely, the samples had been obtained from the bottom of the RFOST and shipped in a tin-coated can; both practices that were specifically not recommended by newer VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:18 May 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 industry guidance because sediment could collect at the bottom of the tank and the tin coating could contaminate the samples. Mr. Wilson said that he did not report the out-of-specification results because he wanted more time to prove his theory and incorporate new test methods, and he did not want the plant to shut down when he did not believe it really needed to do so. Based on the OI investigation, the NRC determined that Mr. Wilson committed multiple apparent violations (AVs), pursuant to 10 CFR 50.5, in that he deliberately: (a) Caused ENO to remain in violation of the TS Limiting Condition for Operation for the RFOST and 22 FOST for longer than it would have had Mr. Wilson taken the appropriate action of informing IP Operations; and, (b) provided to ENO incomplete and inaccurate information that was material to the NRC by entering false data into the chemistry database and/or related condition reports to indicate that the RFOST and the 22 FOST had been resampled, and the results had been within TS limits when, in fact, resamples had not been taken. In a letter dated December 18, 2013, the NRC described the AV and informed Mr. Wilson that the NRC was considering escalated enforcement action against him. In the letter, we also offered Mr. Wilson the opportunity to discuss the AV during a pre-decisional enforcement conference (PEC) or to engage the NRC in an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mediation session or to provide a written response before we made our enforcement decision. In a December 27, 2013, telephone call with the NRC Acting Deputy Assistant General Counsel, Mr. Wilson’s attorney informed the NRC that he neither required a PEC or an ADR mediation session, nor intended to submit a written response, but that Mr. Wilson was willing to cooperate with the NRC. III Based on the above, the NRC has concluded that Daniel Wilson, a former employee of the Licensee, engaged in deliberate misconduct that has: (1) Caused the Licensee to operate IP Units 2 and 3 in violation of their TS requirements for a longer period than if he had written a CR (or otherwise notified the IP Operations Department of the issue); and (2) prevented ENO from informing the NRC of this TSprohibited condition, in violation of 10 CFR 50.73. NRC must be able to rely on the Licensee and its employees to comply with NRC requirements, including site PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 26467 TS, which establish limits for the safe operation of nuclear reactor facilities and actions to take when such limits are not met. Mr. Wilson’s actions to independently interpret the validity of a TS limit and deliberately disregard the actions required for an exceeded TS limit have raised serious doubt as to whether he can be relied upon to comply with NRC requirements. Consequently, I lack the reasonable assurance that licensed activities can be conducted in compliance with Commission requirements and that the health and safety of the public will be protected, if Daniel Wilson were permitted at this time to be involved in NRC-licensed activities. Therefore, the public health and safety, and the common defense and security of the nation require that Mr. Wilson be prohibited from any involvement in NRC-licensed activities for a period of one year from the date of this Order. IV Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 103, 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 50.5. It is hereby ordered that: 1. Daniel Wilson is prohibited for one year from the date of this Order from engaging in, supervising, directing, or in any other way conducting NRC-licensed activities. NRC-licensed activities are those activities that are conducted pursuant to a specific or general license issued by the NRC, including, but not limited to, those activities of Agreement State licensees conducted in the NRC’s jurisdiction pursuant to the authority granted by 10 CFR 150.20. 2. If Daniel Wilson is currently involved with another licensee in NRClicensed activities, he must immediately cease those activities, and inform the NRC of the name, address, and telephone number of the employer, and provide a copy of this order to the employer. The Director, Office of Enforcement, or designee, may, in writing, relax or rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration by Daniel Wilson of good cause. V Any person adversely affected by this Order may submit a written answer to this Order within 30 days of issuance. In addition, Daniel Wilson and any other person adversely affected by this Order may request a hearing on this Order within 30 days of issuance. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the time to answer or request a hearing. E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 26468 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 89 / Thursday, May 8, 2014 / Notices A request for extension of time must be made in writing to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 001, and include a statement of good cause for the extension. All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for 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 E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139, August 28, 2007, as amended by 77 FR 46562, August 3, 2012), codified in pertinent part at 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart C. 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 the Secretary by email at hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone at (301) 415–1677, to: (1) Request a digital 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 ID certificate). Based upon 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 NRC’s public Web site at http:// www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing the ESubmittal server are detailed in NRC’s ‘‘Guidance for Electronic Submission,’’ which is available on the agency’s public Web site at http://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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:18 May 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 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 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 http://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 hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC public Web site at http://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 system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) 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 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 documents on those participants separately. Therefore, any others who wish to participate in the proceeding (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 agency’s adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System Help Desk through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located on the NRC Web site at http:// www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html, by email at MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a tollfree call at (866) 672–7640. The NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays. PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption 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 to use 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 NRC’s electronic hearing docket, which is available to the public at http:// 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, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and constitute a Fair Use application. If a person other than Daniel Wilson 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). If a hearing is requested by the recipient or 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 E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 26469 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 89 / Thursday, May 8, 2014 / Notices should be sustained. 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 IV above shall be final 30 days from the date this Order is issued without further order or proceedings. If an extension of time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions specified in Section IV shall be final when the extension expires if a hearing request has not been received. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of April 2014. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Roy P. Zimmerman, Director, Office of Enforcement. [FR Doc. 2014–10582 Filed 5–7–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD Proposed Collection; Comment Request Summary: In accordance with the requirement of Section 3506 (c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 which provides opportunity for public comment on new or revised data collections, the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) will publish periodic summaries of proposed data collections. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the RRB’s estimate of the burden of the collection of the information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden related to the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Title and purpose of information collection: Statement of Authority to Act for Employee; OMB 3220–0034. Under Section 5(a) of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (RUIA), claims for benefits are to be made in accordance with such regulations as the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) shall prescribe. The provisions for claiming sickness benefits as provided by Section 2 of the RUIA are prescribed in 20 CFR 335.2. Included in these provisions is the RRB’s acceptance of forms executed by someone else on behalf of an employee if the RRB is satisfied that the employee is sick or injured to the extent of being unable to sign forms. The RRB utilizes Form SI–10, Statement of Authority to Act for Employee, to provide the means for an individual to apply for authority to act on behalf of an incapacitated employee and also to obtain the information necessary to determine that the delegation should be made. Part I of the form is completed by the applicant for the authority and Part II is completed by the employee’s doctor. One response is requested of each respondent. Completion is required to obtain benefits. The RRB proposes no changes to Form SI–10. ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN Form No. Annual responses Time (minutes) Burden (hours) SI–10 ............................................................................................................................................ 250 6 25 2. Title and purpose of information collection: Statement Regarding Contributions and Support; OMB 3220– 0099. Under Section 2 of the Railroad Retirement Act, dependency on an employee for one-half support at the time of the employee’s death can affect (1) entitlement to a survivor annuity when the survivor is a parent of the deceased employee; (2) the amount of spouse and survivor annuities; and (3) the Tier II restored amount payable to a widow(er) whose annuity was reduced for receipt of an employee annuity, and who was dependent on the railroad employee in the year prior to the employee’s death. One-half support may also negate the public service pension offset in Tier I for a spouse or widow(er). The Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) utilizes Form G–134, Statement Regarding Contributions and Support, to secure information needed to adequately determine if the applicant meets the one-half support requirement. One response is completed by each respondent. Completion is required to obtain benefits. The RRB proposes no changes to Form G–134. Estimate of Annual Respondent Burden The estimated annual respondent burden is as follows: Annual responses Form No. 75 25 Total ............................................................................................................................... emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES G–134: With Assistance .................................................................................................................... Without assistance ............................................................................................................... 100 3. Title and purpose of information collection: Employee Non-Covered Service Pension Questionnaire; OMB 3220–0154. Section 215(a)(7) of the Social Security Act provides for a reduction in social security benefits based on employment not covered under the VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:18 May 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 Social Security Act or the Railroad Retirement Act (RRA). This provision applies a different social security benefit formula to most workers who are first eligible after 1985 to both a pension based in whole or in part on noncovered employment and a social security retirement or disability benefit. PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Time (minutes) 147 180 Burden (hours) 184 75 259 There is a guarantee provision that limits the reduction in the social security benefit to one-half of the portion of the pension based on noncovered employment after 1956. Section 8011 of Pub. L. 100–647 changed the effective date of the onset from the first month of eligibility to the first month of E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 89 (Thursday, May 8, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26466-26469]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10582]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[IA-13-064; NRC-2014-0103]


In the Matter of Daniel Wilson

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Order; issuance.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an 
order prohibiting Mr. Wilson from involvement in NRC-licensed 
activities for a period of 1 year. The order also requires Mr. Wilson 
to notify the NRC of any current involvement in NRC-licensed 
activities, to immediately cease those activities, and to notify the 
NRC of the name, address, and telephone number of the employer.

DATES: Effective Date: See attachment.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-0103 when contacting the 
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You 
may access publicly-available information related to this action by the 
following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2014-0103. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC 
Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the 
search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and then select ``Begin Web-
based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's 
Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-
4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number 
for each document referenced in this document (if that document is 
available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is 
referenced.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert G. Carpenter, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-
1330, email: Robert.Carpenter@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of the Order is attached.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of April 2014.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Roy P. Zimmerman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.

Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-Licensed Activities

I

    Daniel Wilson (Mr. Wilson) was formally employed as the Chemistry 
Manager at the Entergy Nuclear Operations (ENO) Indian Point Energy 
Center (Licensee). ENO holds License Nos. DPR-26 and DPR-64 issued by 
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to 
Part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) on 
September 28, 1973 and December 12, 1975, respectively. The licenses 
authorize the operation of Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 
3 in accordance with the conditions specified therein. The facility is 
located on the Licensee's site in Buchanan, New York.

II

    Between March 30, 2012, and March 26, 2013, an investigation was 
conducted at IP to determine if Mr. Wilson, while employed as the IP 
Chemistry Manager, deliberately entered false data into a Chemistry 
database pertaining to an emergency diesel generator (EDG) fuel oil 
storage tank (FOST) and the reserve fuel oil storage tank (RFOST). Per 
the IP Technical Specifications (TS), the fuel oil is sampled nominally 
every 92 days and analyzed to determine if it is within limits for 
specified parameters, including total particulate concentration. If the 
particulate concentration is above the stated limit, it must be 
restored to below the limit within seven days for an FOST, or 30

[[Page 26467]]

days for the RFOST; otherwise, ENO must immediately declare the 
associated EDGs inoperable. For the RFOST, all the EDGs would be 
declared inoperable, which would require ENO to shutdown both operating 
units.
    During a self-assessment conducted in January/February 2012 to 
prepare for an upcoming NRC Component Design Bases Inspection, ENO 
staff at IP reviewed the EDG fuel oil delivery systems and storage 
tanks. The IP self-assessment team identified that: (1) Results of 
RFOST samples taken on June 17, 2011, and December 1, 2011, were not 
entered into the Chemistry Department database until July 14, 2011, and 
January 23, 2012, respectively; and (2) although both samples exceeded 
the TS particulate limits, no condition reports (CRs) had been written 
to document the issues and notify site operations and, evidently, no 
re-sampling performed to confirm that the oil had been restored to 
below the limit within the 30-day allowed outage time.
    On February 2, 2012, the IP self-assessment team inquired of 
Chemistry department staff, including Mr. Wilson, about this issue. 
Subsequently, on February 5, 2012, Mr. Wilson entered information in 
the Chemistry database indicating that re-samples for the June 17, 
2011, and December 1, 2011, RFOST samples had, in fact, been performed 
on June 29, 2011, and December 9, 2011, respectively (i.e., within the 
30 day period allowed by TS), and that the re-samples were below the TS 
particulate limit. However, during the OI investigation, Mr. Wilson 
admitted to OI that the re-samples had actually not been obtained. Mr. 
Wilson informed OI that he had entered false values in the database 
instead of documenting the issue in a CR or otherwise informing the IP 
Operations Department that the site was operating in violation of its 
TS. Mr. Wilson also admitted that he similarly entered false re-sample 
data for the IP 22 EDG FOST after identifying that the TS particulate 
limit had been exceeded for a November 18, 2011, sample taken from that 
tank. Namely, on February 6, 2012, Mr. Wilson entered data to indicate 
that a resample had been performed on December 7, 2011, and that the 
resample was below the TS particulate limit.
    During the investigation, Mr. Wilson testified to OI that he 
entered the false values because he believed the original sample 
results were incorrect as a result of poor IP Chemistry Department 
sampling practices. Namely, the samples had been obtained from the 
bottom of the RFOST and shipped in a tin-coated can; both practices 
that were specifically not recommended by newer industry guidance 
because sediment could collect at the bottom of the tank and the tin 
coating could contaminate the samples. Mr. Wilson said that he did not 
report the out-of-specification results because he wanted more time to 
prove his theory and incorporate new test methods, and he did not want 
the plant to shut down when he did not believe it really needed to do 
so.
    Based on the OI investigation, the NRC determined that Mr. Wilson 
committed multiple apparent violations (AVs), pursuant to 10 CFR 50.5, 
in that he deliberately: (a) Caused ENO to remain in violation of the 
TS Limiting Condition for Operation for the RFOST and 22 FOST for 
longer than it would have had Mr. Wilson taken the appropriate action 
of informing IP Operations; and, (b) provided to ENO incomplete and 
inaccurate information that was material to the NRC by entering false 
data into the chemistry database and/or related condition reports to 
indicate that the RFOST and the 22 FOST had been resampled, and the 
results had been within TS limits when, in fact, resamples had not been 
taken.
    In a letter dated December 18, 2013, the NRC described the AV and 
informed Mr. Wilson that the NRC was considering escalated enforcement 
action against him. In the letter, we also offered Mr. Wilson the 
opportunity to discuss the AV during a pre-decisional enforcement 
conference (PEC) or to engage the NRC in an alternative dispute 
resolution (ADR) mediation session or to provide a written response 
before we made our enforcement decision.
    In a December 27, 2013, telephone call with the NRC Acting Deputy 
Assistant General Counsel, Mr. Wilson's attorney informed the NRC that 
he neither required a PEC or an ADR mediation session, nor intended to 
submit a written response, but that Mr. Wilson was willing to cooperate 
with the NRC.

III

    Based on the above, the NRC has concluded that Daniel Wilson, a 
former employee of the Licensee, engaged in deliberate misconduct that 
has: (1) Caused the Licensee to operate IP Units 2 and 3 in violation 
of their TS requirements for a longer period than if he had written a 
CR (or otherwise notified the IP Operations Department of the issue); 
and (2) prevented ENO from informing the NRC of this TS-prohibited 
condition, in violation of 10 CFR 50.73.
    NRC must be able to rely on the Licensee and its employees to 
comply with NRC requirements, including site TS, which establish limits 
for the safe operation of nuclear reactor facilities and actions to 
take when such limits are not met. Mr. Wilson's actions to 
independently interpret the validity of a TS limit and deliberately 
disregard the actions required for an exceeded TS limit have raised 
serious doubt as to whether he can be relied upon to comply with NRC 
requirements.
    Consequently, I lack the reasonable assurance that licensed 
activities can be conducted in compliance with Commission requirements 
and that the health and safety of the public will be protected, if 
Daniel Wilson were permitted at this time to be involved in NRC-
licensed activities. Therefore, the public health and safety, and the 
common defense and security of the nation require that Mr. Wilson be 
prohibited from any involvement in NRC-licensed activities for a period 
of one year from the date of this Order.

IV

    Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 103, 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 50.5. It is hereby ordered 
that:
    1. Daniel Wilson is prohibited for one year from the date of this 
Order from engaging in, supervising, directing, or in any other way 
conducting NRC-licensed activities. NRC-licensed activities are those 
activities that are conducted pursuant to a specific or general license 
issued by the NRC, including, but not limited to, those activities of 
Agreement State licensees conducted in the NRC's jurisdiction pursuant 
to the authority granted by 10 CFR 150.20.
    2. If Daniel Wilson is currently involved with another licensee in 
NRC-licensed activities, he must immediately cease those activities, 
and inform the NRC of the name, address, and telephone number of the 
employer, and provide a copy of this order to the employer.
    The Director, Office of Enforcement, or designee, may, in writing, 
relax or rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration by 
Daniel Wilson of good cause.

V

    Any person adversely affected by this Order may submit a written 
answer to this Order within 30 days of issuance. In addition, Daniel 
Wilson and any other person adversely affected by this Order may 
request a hearing on this Order within 30 days of issuance. Where good 
cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the time to 
answer or request a hearing.

[[Page 26468]]

A request for extension of time must be made in writing to the 
Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-001, and include a statement of good cause for the 
extension.
    All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a 
request for 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 E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139, 
August 28, 2007, as amended by 77 FR 46562, August 3, 2012), codified 
in pertinent part at 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart C. 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 the Secretary by email at 
hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone at (301) 415-1677, to: (1) 
Request a digital 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 ID certificate). Based upon 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 NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing 
the E-Submittal server are detailed in NRC's ``Guidance for Electronic 
Submission,'' which is available on the agency's public Web site at 
http://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 
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 http://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 
hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in 
Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance 
available on the NRC public Web site at http://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 (ET) 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 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 documents on those participants separately. Therefore, 
any others who wish to participate in the proceeding (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 agency's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System 
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site 
at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email at 
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-free call at (866) 672-7640. The 
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., ET, 
Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not 
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption 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 to use 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 
NRC's electronic hearing docket, which is available to the public at 
http://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, participants are requested not to include 
copyrighted materials in their submission, except for limited excerpts 
that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and constitute a 
Fair Use application.
    If a person other than Daniel Wilson 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).
    If a hearing is requested by the recipient or 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

[[Page 26469]]

should be sustained. 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 IV above shall be final 30 days 
from the date this Order is issued without further order or 
proceedings. If an extension of time for requesting a hearing has been 
approved, the provisions specified in Section IV shall be final when 
the extension expires if a hearing request has not been received.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of April 2014.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Roy P. Zimmerman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.


[FR Doc. 2014-10582 Filed 5-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P