ML21176A049

NRC Investigation Report I-2020-007; NRC Inspection Report 05000219/2021402 & 07200015/2021401

ML21176A049
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	07/28/2021
From:	Blake Welling Division of Reactor Safety I
To:	Cowan P Holtec Decommissioning International
Marjorie McLaughlin
References
EA-21-041, OI 1-2020-007
Download: ML21176A049 (8)

See also: IR 05000219/2021402

Text

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

2100 RENAISSANCE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100

KING OF PRUSSIA, PA 19406-2713

July 28, 2021

EA-21-041

Ms. Pamela B. Cowan

Senior Vice President

and Chief Operating Officer

Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC

1 Holtec Blvd., Krishna P. Singh Technology Campus

Camden, NJ 08104

SUBJECT:

OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - NRC INVESTIGATION

REPORT I-2020-007; NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 05000219/2021402 &

07200015/2021401

Dear Ms. Cowan:

This letter refers to the investigation initiated on March 13, 2020, by the NRC Office of

Investigations (OI) and conducted at Holtec Decommissioning International, LLCs (HDIs)

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster Creek). The investigation, which was

completed on March 11, 2021, evaluated whether a (now-former) training superintendent at

Oyster Creek, who was also responsible for performing armorer duties, deliberately failed to

perform firearms maintenance activities and falsified records related to those activities. Based

on the evidence gathered during the investigation, the NRC preliminarily determined that the

superintendent deliberately failed to perform certain required firearms maintenance activities for

calendar year 2019, that the superintendent deliberately falsified records related to these

activities, and that these falsified records were submitted to the NRC in response to an April 10,

2020, information request. A factual summary of the OI investigation is included as Enclosure 1

to this letter.

Based on the investigation, the NRC identified three apparent violations (AVs), two of which are

being considered for escalated enforcement action, including a civil penalty, in accordance with

the NRC Enforcement Policy. The current Enforcement Policy is available on the NRCs Web

site at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/enforce-pol.html. The AVs being

considered for escalated enforcement action involved: (1) the deliberate failure of the

superintendent to perform required annual material condition inspections of firearms, contrary to

Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 73, Appendix B, Criterion VI.G,

Weapons, Personal Equipment, and Maintenance, and procedures required by the

Commission-approved Oyster Creek Training and Qualification Plan; and (2) the provision of

information to the NRC regarding the annual material inspections of firearms that was not

complete and accurate in all material respects, contrary to 10 CFR 50.9(a). The third violation,

not being considered for escalated enforcement action, involved the failure to perform the

required biennial firearms parts replacement.

Enclosure 2 provides a description of the AVs. Please be advised that the number and

characterization of AVs described in Enclosure 2 may change as a result of further NRC review.

P. Cowan

2

You will be advised by separate correspondence of the results of our deliberations on this

matter.

Before the NRC makes its enforcement decision regarding the AVs, we request that you provide

information in writing regarding HDIs corrective actions. The written response should include:

(1) the reason for the AVs or, if contested, the basis for disputing the AVs; (2) the corrective

steps that have been taken and the results achieved; (3) the corrective steps that will be taken;

and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. You should be aware that the

promptness and comprehensiveness of your actions will be considered in assessing any civil

penalty for the AVs. The guidance in the enclosed excerpt from NRC Information Notice 96-28,

"Suggested Guidance Relating to Development and Implementation of Corrective Action," may

be helpful.

The written response should be sent to the NRC within 30 days of the date of this letter. Your

response may reference or include previously docketed correspondence, if the correspondence

adequately addresses the required response. You should clearly mark the response as a

Response to Apparent Violations in NRC Investigation No. 1-2020-007; EA-21-041, and send

it to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington,

DC 20555-0001 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, NRC Region I, 2100 Renaissance

Boulevard, Suite 100, King of Prussia, PA 19406. If an adequate response is not received

within the time specified or an extension of time has not been granted by the NRC, the NRC will

proceed with its enforcement decision or schedule a pre-decisional enforcement conference

(PEC).

In lieu of providing a written response, you may choose to provide your perspective on this

matter, including the significance, cause, and corrective actions, as well as any other

information that you believe the NRC should take into consideration, by: (1) requesting a PEC

to meet with the NRC and provide your views in person; or (2) requesting Alternative Dispute

Resolution (ADR) mediation.

If you choose to request a PEC, the meeting should be held within 30 days of the date of this

letter. The conference will include an opportunity for you to provide your perspective on these

matters and any other information that you believe the NRC should take into consideration

before making an enforcement decision. The decision to hold a PEC does not mean that the

NRC has determined that a violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be taken. This

conference would be conducted to obtain information to assist the NRC in making an

enforcement decision. The topics discussed during the PEC may include information to

determine whether a violation occurred, information to determine the significance of a violation,

information related to the identification of a violation, and information related to any corrective

actions taken or planned.

In lieu of a PEC, you may also request ADR with the NRC in an attempt to resolve this issue.

ADR is a general term encompassing various techniques for resolving conflicts using a neutral

third party. The technique that the NRC has decided to employ is mediation; a voluntary,

informal process in which a trained neutral (the mediator) works with parties to help them

reach resolution. If the parties agree to use ADR, they select a mutually agreeable neutral

mediator who has no stake in the outcome and no power to make decisions. Mediation gives

parties an opportunity to discuss issues, clear up misunderstandings, be creative, find areas of

agreement, and reach a final resolution of the issues. Additional information concerning the

NRC ADR program can be obtained at http://www.nrc.gov/about-

P. Cowan

3

nrc/regulatory/enforcement/adr.html. The Institute on Conflict Resolution (ICR) at Cornell

University has agreed to facilitate the NRC program as a neutral third party. Please contact ICR

at 877-733-9415 within 10 days of the date of this letter if you are interested in pursuing

resolution of this issue through ADR. The ADR mediation session should be held within 45

days of the date of this letter.

Either the PEC or the ADR would be closed to public observation because the NRCs

preliminary findings are based on an NRC OI report that has not been publicly disclosed.

However, the time and date of the PEC or ADR will be publicly announced. Please contact Fred

Bower, Chief, Security, Emergency Preparedness, and Incident Response Branch, NRC Region

I, at 610-337-5200 or Fred.Bower@nrc.gov within 10 days of the date of this letter to notify the

NRC which of the above options you choose.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its

enclosures, and your response, if you choose to provide one, will be made available

electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the NRCs

Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC

Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To the extent possible, your response

should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be

made available to the public without redaction.

Please note that final NRC investigation documents, such as the OI report described above,

may be made available to the public under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), subject to

redaction of information appropriate under the FOIA. Requests under the FOIA should be made

in accordance with 10 CFR 9.23, Requests for Records. Additional information is available on

the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/foia/foia-privacy.html.

The AVs will be administratively tracked under Inspection Report Nos. 05000219/2021402 &

07200015/2021401. If you have any questions related to this matter, please contact Mr. Bower

at 610-337-5200 or Fred.Bower@nrc.gov.

Sincerely,

Blake D. Welling, Director

Division of Radiological Safety and Security

Docket No.

50-219

License No. DPR-16

Enclosures:

1. Factual Summary of NRC OI Case No. 1-2020-007

2. Apparent Violations Identified Through NRC OI Case No. 1-2020-007

3. NRC Information Notice 96-28, "Suggested Guidance Relating to Development and

Implementation of Corrective Action"

cc w/encl:

Distribution via ListServ

Blake D. Welling

Digitally signed by Blake D.

Welling

Date: 2021.07.28 08:28:40 -04'00'

ML21176A049

SUNSI Review/ MMM*

Non-Sensitive

Sensitive

Publicly Available

Non-Publicly Available

OFFICE

RI/ORA

RI/DRSS

RI/DRSS

RI/ORA

RI/ ORA

NAME

M McLaughlin via

email

F Bower via email

J Nicholson for A

Dimitriadis via email

B Klukan NLO via

email

R McKinley via

email

DATE

6/28/21

6/28/21

6/28/21

7/06/21

7/02/21

OFFICE

OE

NMSS

NSIR

OGC

RI/DRSS

NAME

D Furst via email

M Burgess quick

review

S Lee via email

T Steinfeldt NLO via

email

BWelling via email

DATE

7/26/21

7/26/21

7/09/21

7/21/21

7/28/21

• Concurrence on previous page

SUBJECT:

OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - NRC INVESTIGATION

REPORT I-2020-007; NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 05000219/2021402 &

07200015/2021401Dated July 28, 2021

Distribution w/ encl

ADAMS (PARS)

SECY

RIDSSECYMAILCENTER

OEMAIL

OEWEB

M Doane, EDO

RIDSEDOMAILCENTER

D Roberts, DEDM

M Lombard, OE

RIDSOEMAILCENTER

J Peralta, OE

N Hasan, OE

D Furst, OE

J Lubinski, NMSS

RIDSNMSSMAIL CENTER

R Lewis, NMSS

K Williams, NMSS

M Burgess, NMSS

M Gavrilas, NSIR

RIDSNSIRMAILCENTER

S Prasad, NSIR

Enforcement Coordinators RII, RIII, RIV

(M Kowal, J Cameron, D Dodson)

M Lemoncelli, OGC

RIDSOGCMAILCENTER

T Steinfeldt, OGC

H Harrington, OPA

RIDSOPAMAILCENTER

R Feitel, OIG

RIDSOIGMAILCENTER

A Higgs, OI

RIDSOIMAILCENTER

D DAbate, OCFO

RIDSOCFOMAILCENTER

D Lew, RA

R1ORAMAIL RESOURCE

R Lorson, DRA

R1ORAMAIL RESOURCE

B Welling, DRSS

R1DRSSMAIL RESOURCE

T Bloomer, DRSS

R1DRSSMAIL RESOURCE

A Dimitriadis, DRSS

F Bower, DRSS

J Rey, DRSS

D Screnci, PAO-RI / N Sheehan, PAO-RI

D Tifft, SLO-RI

B Klukan, RI

R McKinley, RI

C Crisden, RI

D Garvin, RI

Region I OE Files (with concurrences)

ENCLOSURE 1

Factual Summary of NRC Office of Investigations (OI) Case No. 1-2020-007

In February 2020, while reviewing the 2019 firearms maintenance and testing logs provided to

the NRC by Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster Creek) for an upcoming security

baseline inspection, NRC inspectors identified several inconsistencies suggesting that an

armorer potentially falsified the records. During the subsequent investigation by the NRC Office

of Investigations (OI), the NRC determined that the armorer most likely completed the required

firearms tests but apparently documented inaccurate dates on which tests for certain weapons

took place in October 2019. In testimony to OI, the armorer acknowledged that he may have

messed up and documented incorrect weapons and/or dates when completing the firearms

maintenance and testing logs.

However, during the investigation, the NRC also identified that the licensees 2019 firearms

maintenance and testing logs had apparently been changed to falsely indicate that the armorer

performed the required annual material condition inspections on firearms. Therefore, OI

considered whether the armorer knowingly failed to perform the inspections and whether he

falsified related inspection records submitted to the NRC. Namely, on the 2019 firearms records

the licensee submitted for the NRC inspection, the fields for date and performed by for the

annual material condition inspections were left blank, indicating to the NRC that the licensee did

not conduct this activity. On March 16, 2020, the armorer told the NRC security inspector that

Oyster Creek staff no longer performed this inspection and that the procedure was being

changed to remove the requirement. However, the armorer acknowledged that the procedure

change had not yet happened and that such a change required NRC approval. In response to

an April 10, 2020, information request from OI, the licensee resubmitted its firearms logs to the

NRC, and the date and performed by fields were filled out, which would indicate that the

licensee had completed the annual material condition inspections. The armorer informed OI

that he filled in these fields after talking to the NRC inspector. He stated that he probably did

not perform the inspections but maintained that he did not exactly remember what he did. The

NRC determined that the annual material inspections were not performed in 2019 due to the

armorers deliberate failure to perform them and that the armorer deliberately falsified the

records provided to the NRC to indicate that the inspections had been performed.

Separately, on March 16, 2020, the armorer told an NRC security inspector that he did not

perform biennial parts replacements on contingency rifles in 2019. The armorer acknowledged

to the inspector and to OI that he did not perform the parts replacement because the procedure

was being revised to remove the requirement. Unlike with the material inspection, the armorer

stated that he had discussed the parts replacement with his supervisor, and the armorer

believed that he had permission from his management to not perform this work. The armorer

also documented the failure to perform the replacement activity in an Issue Report. Therefore,

the NRC determined that the biennial parts replacement was not performed in 2019 as required,

but did not find sufficient evidence to conclude that this failure was willful.

ENCLOSURE 2

Apparent Violations Identified Through NRC OI Case No. 1-2020-007

APPARENT VIOLATIONS BEING CONSIDERED FOR ESCALATED ACTION

A. 10 CFR Part 73, Appendix B, Criterion VI.G, Weapons, Personal Equipment, and

Maintenance, Section 3(a), Firearms maintenance program, requires that each licensee

shall implement a firearms maintenance and accountability program in accordance with the

Commission regulations and the Commission-approved training and qualification plan. The

program must include, in part: (1) Semiannual test firing for accuracy and functionality; (2)

Firearms maintenance procedures that include cleaning schedules and cleaning

requirements; (3) Program activity documentation; and (4) Control and accountability

(weapons and ammunition).

The Oyster Creek Training and Qualification Plan is Appendix B to the sites Physical

Security Plan. Section 20.5 of Revision 18 of the Training and Qualification Plan states, in

part, that a testing and maintenance program for all assigned firearms is established to

ensure that the firearms and related accessories function as intended. The program is

described in facility procedures.

Oyster Creek procedure SY-AA-150-103, Revision 0, Firearms Maintenance, Testing, and

Accountability, constitutes the facility procedure for the testing, cleaning, and inspecting of

security weapons. Step 4.2.4.2 states, in part, annually, perform the material condition

inspection on all duty firearms. Step 2.3, in terms and definitions, defines "annual" as once

per calendar year.

Contrary to the above, from January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, the licensee did

not implement a firearms maintenance and accountability program in accordance with

Commission regulation and the Commission-approved training and qualification plan, in that,

the licensee did not implement the firearms testing and maintenance program as described

in facility procedures. Specifically, for calendar year 2019, the licensee did not annually

perform the material condition inspection on all duty firearms

B. 10 CFR 50.9(a) requires, in part, that information provided to the Commission by a licensee

or information required by the Commission's regulations to be maintained by the licensee

shall be complete and accurate in all material respects.

10 CFR 73.70(e) states, in part, that each licensee subject to the provisions of 10 CFR

73.55 shall keep documentation of all tests, inspections, and maintenance performed on

security related equipment used pursuant to the requirements of this part for three years

from the date of documenting the event. 10 CFR 73.55(a)(1) indicates that the section

applies to nuclear power reactor licensees that are licensed under 10 CFR Part 50.

Contrary to the above, as of approximately April 10, 2020, information provided to the

Commission by the licensee and that was required by the Commission's regulations to be

maintained by the licensee was not complete and accurate in all material respects.

Specifically, in response to an April 10, 2020, information request from the NRC, the

licensee submitted to the NRC copies of the 2019 firearms maintenance logs that contained

inaccurate information. The logs documented that annual material condition inspections had

2

been performed on each of the licensees duty firearms; however, the licensee had not

performed the inspections. This information is material to the NRC because the NRC

requires testing and maintenance of weapons to ensure they are in acceptable working

condition. Accurate recordkeeping of such activities ensures that the weapons maintenance

program is fulfilling these requirements.

APPARENT VIOLATION BEING CONSIDERED FOR NON-ESCALATED ACTION

10 CFR Part 73, Appendix B, Criterion VI.G, Weapons, Personal Equipment, and

Maintenance, Section 3(a), Firearms maintenance program, requires that each licensee

shall implement a firearms maintenance and accountability program in accordance with the

Commission regulations and the Commission-approved training and qualification plan. The

program must include, in part: (1) Semiannual test firing for accuracy and functionality; (2)

Firearms maintenance procedures that include cleaning schedules and cleaning

requirements; (3) Program activity documentation; and (4) Control and accountability

(weapons and ammunition).

The Oyster Creek Training and Qualification Plan is Appendix B to the sites Physical

Security Plan. Section 20.5 of Revision 18 of the Training and Qualification Plan states, in

part, that a testing and maintenance program for all assigned firearms is established to

ensure that the firearms and related accessories function as intended. The program is

described in facility procedures.

Oyster Creek procedure SY-AA-150-103, Revision 0, Firearms Maintenance, Testing, and

Accountability, constitutes the facility procedure for the testing, cleaning, and inspecting of

security weapons. Step 4.2.5, states, replace the following components on duty rifles

biennially: hammer spring, trigger spring, disconnector spring, extractor spring, ejector

spring, and gas rings. SY-AA-150-103-F-04, Rifle Material Condition Inspection/

Functionality/ Accuracy Tests states, in part, biennially, replace the following components on

contingency rifles and note this as being completed in the weapons maintenance log. Step

2.7 defines "biennial" as at least once every two years.

Contrary to the above, as of January 1, 2020, the licensee did not implement a firearms

maintenance and accountability program in accordance with Commission regulation and the

Commission-approved training and qualification plan, in that, the licensee did not implement

the firearms testing and maintenance program as described in facility procedures.

Specifically, in calendar year 2019, the licensee did not complete the biennial replacement

of components on duty and contingency rifles. The licensee had not replaced the rifle

components since 2017.