[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 83 (Monday, May 2, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-10373]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: May 2, 1994]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 55-30662; License No. OP-30277-02; IA 94-007]

 

Kenneth G. Pierce, Shorewood, IL; Order Prohibiting Involvement 
in NRC-Licensed Activities (Effective Immediately)

I

    Mr. Kenneth G. Pierce (Licensee) held Reactor Operator's License 
No. OP-30277-02 issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC 
or Commission) on July 25, 1984. Mr. Pierce was employed by the 
Commonwealth Edison Company (CECo) from April 30, 1979 until CECo 
terminated his employment on December 2, 1992, which terminated his 
license. He most recently held the position of Nuclear Station Operator 
(NSO) with responsibilities involving compliance with NRC requirements 
for the operation of a nuclear power plant. CECo holds Facility 
Licenses DPR-19 and DPR-25 issued by the NRC pursuant to 10 CFR part 
50. The licenses authorize CECo to operate the Dresden Nuclear Station 
Units 2 and 3 located near Morris, Illinois. The licenses were issued 
by the NRC on December 22, 1969, and March 2, 1971, respectively.

II

    On November 24, 1992, CECo notified the NRC that CECo senior 
managers had just become aware of an incident that had occurred on 
September 18, 1992, when Unit 2 was operating at 75% power. Mr. Pierce, 
who was the NSO on duty, incorrectly positioned control rod H-1 while 
repositioning control rods to change localized power levels within the 
reactor core, and the event was concealed from CECo management. Both 
CECo and NRC initiated an investigation of the incident.
    On September 18, 1992, Mr. Pierce erroneously moved the rod H-1 
from Position 48 (the fully withdrawn position) to Position 36. A 
Qualified Nuclear Engineer (QNE) and two individuals in training to 
become ``qualified'' nuclear engineers were in the control room when 
the QNE recognized the NSO's error. Mr. Pierce failed to insert the 
mispositioned rod to Position 00 and continued to move other control 
rods at the direction of the QNE. The QNE then informed the Station 
Control Room Engineer (SCRE) of the mispositioned rod. Later the SCRE 
spoke with Mr. Pierce and the three nuclear engineers and they all 
agreed that they would not discuss the incident with anyone else. As a 
result, neither the mispositioned rod nor the subsequent deviations 
from the planned control rod pattern were documented in the control 
room log, a Form 14-14C plant record was falsified, and CECo management 
was not informed of the incident.
    The NRC licenses individuals pursuant to 10 CFR part 55, 
``Operators' Licenses,'' to manipulate the controls of a utilization 
facility. The operator license requires the individual to observe all 
applicable rules, regulations and orders of the Commission, including 
the operating procedures and other conditions specified in the facility 
license.
    Dresden Technical Specification 6.2.A.1. stated that applicable 
procedures recommended in appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 
2 dated February 1978, shall be established, implemented, and 
maintained. Regulatory Guide 1.33 Appendix A.1.C. included 
administrative procedures, general plant operating procedures, and 
procedures for startup, operation, and shutdown of safety related 
systems.
    Dresden Operating Abnormal Procedure (DOA) 300-12, ``Mispositioned 
Control Rod,'' Revision 2, dated November 1991, section C, ``Immediate 
Operator Actions,'' step 2, required, in part, that if a control rod is 
found or moved more than one even notch from its in-sequence position, 
then all control rod movement must be discontinued. Section D, 
``Subsequent Operator Actions,'' step 2.a.(1), required in part that if 
a single control rod is inserted more than one even notch from its in-
sequence position and reactor power was greater than 20%, and if the 
mispositioning was within the last 10 minutes, then the mispositioned 
control rod must be continuously inserted to Position 00. Step 5 
required the NSO to compare the current off gas radiation level to the 
off gas radiation level prior to the suspected time of the 
mispositioning, and to record data in the Unit log book including the 
location of the mispositioned rod(s), time of discovery of the 
mispositioning, actions taken, and any other observation determined to 
be relevant. Step 6 required that an upper management representative 
will conduct an evaluation into the cause of the mispositioning and 
implement immediate corrective actions prior to the resumption of 
routine control rod movements.
    These procedures were not followed. Specifically, Mr. Pierce failed 
to insert the mispositioned control rod H-1 to Position 00, failed to 
compare the off gas radiation level at the time of the event to the 
level prior to the time of the mispositioning, and continued to move 
control rods without the performance of an evaluation and corrective 
actions by an upper management representative. Mr. Pierce's failure to 
record any information concerning the rod mispositioning event in the 
Unit log book put CECo in violation of its procedures and 10 CFR 
50.9(a).
    Based on the NRC Office of Investigations (OI) investigation of 
this matter (OI Report No. 3-92-055R), I conclude that Mr. Pierce, 
along with certain other CECo employees, attempted to conceal the 
mispositioned control rod event by deliberately failing to document the 
event in the Unit log book as required by plant procedures.
    Further, in a transcribed sworn statement on December 30, 1992, Mr. 
Pierce stated that he did not remember the SCRE making a statement to 
the effect that information about the mispositioned control rod should 
not leave the control room. Based on the transcribed testimony of three 
individuals who were present during the incident that the SCRE had made 
a statement to them to the effect that information about the 
mispositioned control rod should not leave the control room, that Mr. 
Pierce was present when the SCRE made that statement, and that all five 
individuals had agreed not to discuss the event with anyone else, I 
conclude that Mr. Pierce's testimony to the contrary constituted the 
deliberate provision of inaccurate information which he knew to be 
material to the NRC, in violation of 10 CFR 55.9, ``Completeness and 
Accuracy of Information.''

III

    Based on the above, Mr. Pierce, an employee of CECo at the time of 
the event, engaged in deliberate misconduct which caused CECo to be in 
violation of its license conditions and 10 CFR 50.9(a), and which 
constitutes a violation of 10 CFR 50.5. Further, Mr. Pierce, a licensed 
reactor operator at the time of the event, provided to NRC 
investigators information which he knew to be inaccurate in some 
respect material to the NRC, in violation of 10 CFR 55.9.
    The NRC must be able to rely on its licensees and their employees, 
especially NRC-licensed operators, to comply with NRC requirements, 
including the requirement to maintain records and provide information 
to the NRC that is complete and accurate in all material respects. Mr. 
Pierce's action in causing CECo to violate its license conditions and 
10 CFR 50.9, and his misrepresentations to the NRC have raised serious 
doubt as to whether he can be relied upon to comply with NRC 
requirements applicable to licensed facilities and licensed individuals 
and to provide complete and accurate information to the NRC. Mr. 
Pierce's deliberate misconduct that caused CECo to violate Commission 
requirements, and his false statements to Commission officials, cannot 
and will not be tolerated.
    Consequently, I lack the requisite reasonable assurance that 
licensed activities can be conducted in compliance with the 
Commission's requirements and that the health and safety of the public 
will be protected, if Mr. Pierce were permitted at this time to be 
engaged in the performance of NRC-licensed and regulated activities. 
Therefore, the public health, safety and interest require that Mr. 
Pierce be prohibited from being involved in any NRC-licensed activities 
for three years from the date of this Order. In addition, for the same 
period, Mr. Pierce is required to give notice of this Order to any 
prospective employer engaged in NRC-licensed activities, as described 
in Section IV, Paragraph C, below, from whom he seeks employment in 
non-licensed activities to ensure that such employer is aware of Mr. 
Pierce's previous history. For five years from the date of Order, Mr. 
Pierce is also required to notify the NRC of his employment by any 
person engaged in NRC-licensed activities, as described in Section IV, 
Paragraph B, below, so that appropriate inspections can be performed. 
Furthermore, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, I find that the significance of 
the conduct described above is such that the public health, safety and 
interest require that this Order be immediately effective.

IV

    Accordingly, pursuant to sections 103, 107, 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, 10 CFR 50.5 and 10 CFR 55.61, 
it is hereby ordered, effective immediately, that:
    A. Mr. Pierce is prohibited for three years from the date of this 
Order from engaging in activities licensed by the NRC.
    B. Should Mr. Pierce seek employment in non-licensed activities 
with any person engaged in NRC-licensed activities for three years from 
the date of this Order, Mr. Pierce shall provide a copy of this Order 
to such person at the time Mr. Pierce is soliciting or negotiating 
employment so that the person is aware of the Order prior to making an 
employment decision. For the purposes of this Order, NRC-licensed 
activities include the activities of: (1) An NRC licensee; (2) an 
Agreement State licensee conducting licensed activities in NRC 
jurisdiction pursuant to 10 CFR 150.20; and (3) an Agreement State 
licensee involved in the distribution of products that are subject to 
NRC jurisdiction.
    C. For three years from the date of this Order, Mr. Pierce shall 
provide notice to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, of the name, address, and 
telephone number of the employer, within 72 hours of his acceptance of 
an employment offer involving non-licensed activities, for any employer 
engaged in NRC-licensed activities described in Paragraph IV.B, above.
    D. After the three year prohibition has expired as described in 
Paragraphs IV. A and B, above, Mr. Pierce shall provide notice to the 
Director, Office of Enforcement, for acceptance of any employment in an 
NRC-licensed activity for an additional two year period.
    The Director, Office of Enforcement may, in writing, relax or 
rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration by Mr. Pierce of 
good cause.

V

    In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, Mr. Pierce must, and any other 
person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an answer to this 
Order, and may request a hearing within 30 days of the date of this 
Order. The answer may consent to this Order. Unless the answer consents 
to this Order, the answer shall, in writing and under oath or 
affirmation, specifically admit or deny each allegation or charge made 
in this Order and shall set forth the matters of fact and law on which 
Mr. Pierce or other person adversely affected relies and the reasons as 
to why the Order should not have been issued. Any answer or request for 
a hearing shall be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, ATTN: Chief, Docketing and Service Section, Washington, DC 
20555. Copies also shall be sent to the Director, Office of 
Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555; 
to the Assistant General Counsel for Hearings and Enforcement at the 
same address; to the Regional Administrator, Region III, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois 60532-
4351; and to Mr. Pierce, if the answer or hearing is by a person other 
than Mr. Pierce. If a person other than Mr. Pierce 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 2.714(d).
    If a hearing is requested by Mr. Pierce or a person whose interest 
is adversely affected, the Commission will issue an Order designating 
the time and place of any hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to 
be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Order should be 
sustained.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), Mr. Pierce, or any person 
adversely affected by this Order, may in addition to demanding a 
hearing, at the time that answer is filed or sooner, move the presiding 
officer to set aside the immediate effectiveness of the Order on the 
ground that the Order, including the need for immediate effectiveness, 
is not based on adequate evidence but on mere suspicion, unfounded 
allegations, or error.
    In the absence of any request for a hearing, the provisions 
specified in Section IV above shall be final 20 days from the date of 
this Order without further order or proceedings. An Answer or a REQUEST 
for a Hearing Shall Not Stay the Immediate Effectiveness of This Order.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 21 day of April 1994.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James L. Milhoan,
Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Regional 
Operations and Research.
[FR Doc. 94-10373 Filed 4-29-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M