0CAN029114, Forwards fitness-for-duty Program Performance Data for Jul-Dec 1990
| ML20070G546 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 02/28/1991 |
| From: | James Fisicaro ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| 0CAN029114, CAN29114, NUDOCS 9103120188 | |
| Download: ML20070G546 (7) | |
Text
_-.
s:- Entergy c a ' " " a a " * " <> " * '" * -
Operations February 28, 1991 OCAN029114 U. S. Nuclear Regulntory Commistolon Document Control Desk Mall Station PI-137 Washington, D. C.
20555 SUluf,CT :
Arkansas Nuclear One - Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-313/50-368 Licenso Nos. DPR-51 and NPT-6 Fitness-for-Duty Progtnm Performance Datn Gentlemen:
In accordance with 10CFR26.71(d), attached in the Arkansas Nucinar One fitness-for-duty program performance datn for the period July - I'ncomber,1990.
Also, included in accordance with this reporting ron"fr Nnt, 19 a listing of management nctions and events reported for the Faire period.
Very t.ruly yours,
I t; d5~
,, n James J.
'Islenro Manager, Licensing l
l JJF/SAll/agw Attachment l
l cc: Regionni Administrator U. S. Nucicar Regulatory Commission Region IV 611 Ryan Plann Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011 NRC Resident Inspector Arkansas Nucionr One - ANO-1 & 2 Number 1. Nuclear Plant Road Russellvillo, AK 72801 rg A \\
9103120188 910228 PDR ADOCK 05000313 p
Fitness for Duty Program Performance Data Personnel Subject to 10CFR 2G A
Entergy Operations Inc. - Arkansas Nuclear One December 31, 1990 cornpaw Lene Russellville, Arkansas 72801 Locaton Kenneth D. Jeffery (501) 967-7525 coma':t Naw PNro Dncluoe n'es cooe)
Cutoff s: ScreervConfirmation (ng>ml)
O Appendix A to 10CFR 26 Marijuana 50/15 Amphetamines 1000 f 500 NA f
Cocaine 300/150 Phencyclidine 25 /25 NA
/
Opiates 300/150 Alcohol (% BAC) 0.040 NA
/
Long Term Short Term l
Testin,. 'esults Corst/ actor Contractot Licensee Employees Personnel Personnel Average Number with Unescorted Access 1382 1759 Referred Access l
Categories Tested Positive to EAP Resfored Tested Positive Totted Positive Pre employment 186 0/0 i;
NA NA NA NA
~
Pre badging 31 0/0 NA flA 2763 40/64 Periodic NA NA NA NA NA
'NA For cause 2
1/1 4
NA NA 1
0/0 Post accident NA NA NA NA 2
0/0 q-Random 743 3/3 NA NA 704 1/2 Follow up 59 0/b NA NA 31 0/0 M
Other NA NA NA
' NA NA
) NA Total 1022 4/4 6
5 NA NA 3501 j41/66 i
x Random Testing Program Results individuals Tested 1989 1990 l
1991 1992 1993
/]
~
- Tested 1447 y
% Positive 0.35%
i l1 Graph of 5
i
- ii I
i l
i 1
4 j
^
3
% Positive i
i s
~
3 4
2 i
s' i
r i
Y t
1 i.
+
i I l
i f
I 3
i
!I i
l r
1 Confirnied Positive Tests for Specific Substances 54 Marijuana Gocaine 6
-4 Opiates J
1 l
I 3
j l
Amphetamenes 0
Phencyclicine Alcohol 7
j h a-
.a
^_
3 l
i s
N
Attachaent February 28, 1991 Pa e 1 w
MANAGEMENT ACT!JNS During our second six-month reporting per//d, the following actions, initiatives, lessons and events have been notcd:
Actions a.
Futerr,y One ations, Inc. management has publishof a letter from our p enide nt and chief executive of ficer to all buclear workers in the ep tem which addresses the FFD expectation tfsat the company has of each bdividual.
b.
Entergy (.w ations, Inc. han established a system "Pe er Group" to identify /re: ilve FFD issues common to the three ruclear sites within the system.
Ir 4 f ative Nuclou one has transitioned to a system of FFD overage such that t.eN ero FTL personnel available for sample collections cf. all shifts Monday through Friday. Veckends and holidays e.re covered by supp T>J v al testing which is specific to a given shift on a given weekend or holiday.
IsesSon Arket.aas Mt ; lear & has observed that consolidation of all inprocming func tions.cn a conu d location combined with on-site testing im 3 gia nt bennilt, in t res of 'ost and time, to the task of conductint a ref ta,, tog ou t o?,e.
P I
l l
l l
~ - -.~
~. -
~
A.ttachment February 28,'1991
,Page 2 Reportablo Events Under 100FR 6 26.73 at Arkansas Nuclear One-during reporting period:
a.
On November 5, 1990, JL was dolormined by Entergy management that a llealth Physics supervisor would require a for-cause test.
The concern was alcohol related.
It was reported to the Individual's supervisor that an odor of alcohol could be detected on the individual.
The supervisor confirmed these reports by having a direct discussion with the individual.
A for-cause test was requested by the individual's
-supervisor and was approved by approprlato management.
Upon testing, the individual was confirmed positive for the presence of alcohol with h eath alcohol readings of.095% and.090%.
Unescorted access was removed pending outcomo of all tests and a favorable FFD ovaluation as performed in accordance with the EAP program.
The. ind1vidual was suspended for a period of fourteen (14) days and was referred to outpatient counseling.
Prior to re-entry' :into the workforce, the individual was required to provido a " clean
.pccimen and to enter an it tensified testing program.
An event notification was modo to the NRC Operations Center as required.
Other Events Not Reportable Under 10CFR 6 26.73 a.
A for-cause -test was administered on an Entergy employee due to porceived abnormal behavior. Access was suspended pending outcomo of testing results.
All results were negative and it was eventually determined that the individual had a neurological problem, b.
A for-cause tost was administered on an Interstate Nuclear Services (INS) employon.
The behavioral concern was alcohol related.
The Individual's unescorted access was removed pending outcome of all test results. All results 'woro negativo and the individual's unescorted access was restored.
The individual was released to the INS management for approprinto continued observation and other actions as they doomed necessary.
A post-accident test was administered on two Bechtel employcos following c.
an accident resulting in personal injury to onn ind iv idua l.
Entergy and Bochtel management determined the necessity for the tests. Unescorted access was removed pending outcomo of all test results.
All results woro l
- negativo, i
l.
d.
Doctor's and Physician's Laboratory (DPL) is a NIDA certified laboratory l.
under contract to Entergy Operations to conduct confirmation drug l
testing.- In October, 1990, it was repotted to the ANO medical revlow officer by DPL that a DPL laboratory technician had inadvertently disposed of thren specimens af ter the initial screening test bu* prior to GC/MS analysJs..One specimen was screened as negative and two were screened as positive.
Wo had retained portions of those samples at our facility and the two positive samples were re-submitted for analysis.
DPL advised us in a letter of the steps they were taking to ensure that an o.currence of this nature would not be repeated.
1 i
L
- ~
Attachment inbr,uary ?5, 1991 Page 3 c.
A concern was raised to DPL regarding a discrepancy between a ser 6
result obtained on-site and a screening result obtained at their laboratory.
A sample which rendered a high value for THC by our screening test was forwarded to our of f-site laboratory for confirmation and was subsequently reported back to the MRO as a negative sample. This result raised a concern because the screening result obtained in our laboratory was significantly higher than our cutoff IcVel of 50 ng/ml. Discussions held between our medical review officer and the laboratory director at j
DPL revealed that a dif ference in screening values of approximately 50 ng/ml was observed between their screening instrumentation and ours. Our medical review of ficer asked for DPL to perform a GC/MS test on the remaining portion of that sample which DPL possessed.
The value they obtained was 46 ng/ml.
Additional sample, from that we had retained, was forwarded to DPL and our MRO asked for special processing on the sample to include another screening test as well as GC/MS. Subsequent discussion with DPL indicated that these tests, conducted in accordance with our MR0's request, indicated c screening result which very closely matched our initial screening result and DPL verbally indicated to the MRO that they had obtained a GC/MS value for THC metabolite at a level of 43 ng/ml.
The DPL laboratory director indicated that according to the NIDA guidelines, with which they must comply, they could not issue another report on a sample which had already been officially reported by them to be negative.
The action taken by our MRO was to request that the laboratory conduct a full investigation of the incident, perform a root cause analysis, and furnish us with a report of their findings. We roccived a report f rom DPL stating that humans can make errors and instruments can fall and that they were unable to conclusively identify the root cause of this occurrence.
After conferring with Entergy FFD and legal management, it was observed that there is no written guidance in 10CFR26 which specifically addresses the irsue of falso negative samples.
Further, it was determined that this matter would be addressed in the six-month report.
It is anticipated that an Entergy Operations Inc. team will conduct an audit of DPL carly in 1991.
The individual who provided the sample in question was a contractor who was attempting to gain unescorted access. This person was terminated by the employer prior to our receipt of the negative report from DPL.
It was also determined that if the individual returned to ANO, it would be necessary to conduct another screening test prior to consideration for uneocorted access.
. Attachment
- ' ' Febr,uary 28, 1991
_ Page 4 General Information i
During the reporting period, one individual was responsible for a multiple positive test. 'Both TilC and' amphetamine worn present in the sample at confirmed levels exceeding t.he cutoff.
This accounts for the dif ference between the number of personnel positive and 'the number of confirmed positi<e tests for specific substances.
i i
i l'
I i.
u l
I:
..,