[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 25, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36131-36134]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-14317]



[[Page 36131]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos.: 50-335, 50-389; License Nos.: DPR-67, NPF-16; EA-07-321]


In the Matter of Florida Power and Light Company, St. Lucie 
Nuclear Plant; Confirmatory Order (Effective Immediately)

I

    Florida Power and Light Company (FPL or Licensee) is the holder of 
Operating License Nos. DPR-67 and NPF-16, issued by the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50 on 
March 1, 1976, and April 6, 1983, respectively. The license authorizes 
the operation of St. Lucie Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, (St. Lucie or 
facility) in accordance with conditions specified therein. The facility 
is located on the Licensee's site in Jensen Beach, Florida.
    This Confirmatory Order is the result of an agreement reached 
during an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mediation session 
conducted on May 16, 2008.

II

    On September 1, 2006, the NRC Office of Investigations (OI) began 
an investigation (OI Case No. 2-2006-034) at St. Lucie Nuclear Plant. 
Based on the evidence developed during the investigation, the NRC staff 
concluded that a supervisor at St. Lucie willfully failed to take 
action to identify two contract workers as untrustworthy, subsequent to 
their actions to falsify a work order related to valve maintenance 
activities they performed. The results of the investigation were sent 
to FPL in a letter dated April 2, 2008.
    The NRC's letter of April 2, 2008, documented the forgoing incident 
which occurred on or about March 10, 2005. Two contractors documented a 
work order to indicate that they had used the torque wrench required by 
the work order when, in fact, they had used a different torque wrench, 
in an apparent effort to conceal their over-torquing of a valve. The 
April 2nd letter also documented the subsequent investigation of this 
incident by FPL and the corrective actions taken by FPL's St. Lucie 
management. Although FPL's immediate actions to ensure all maintenance 
and operational issues associated with the valve in question were 
prompt and comprehensive, the NRC's letter of April 2, 2008, documented 
two apparent violations associated with FPL's initial review and 
investigation into the matter.

III

    On May 16, 2008, the NRC and FPL met in an ADR session mediated by 
a professional mediator, arranged through Cornell University's 
Institute on Conflict Resolution. ADR is a process in which a neutral 
mediator with no decisionmaking authority assists the parties in 
reaching an agreement or resolving any differences regarding their 
dispute. This confirmatory order is issued pursuant to the agreement 
reached during the ADR process. The elements of the agreement consist 
of the following:
    1. The NRC and FPL agreed that a violation occurred involving FPL's 
failure to adhere to FPL Nuclear Division Policy, NP-415, Revision 3, 
and ADM-15.02. These procedures require, in part, that in all instances 
where the trustworthiness and reliability of a person who is currently 
granted unescorted access (UA) is called into question by credible 
objective evidence, the responsible supervisor or manager of that 
individual shall promptly contact the appropriate site security manager 
at the nuclear plant site. In this case, the falsification of the work 
order called into question the trustworthiness and reliability of the 
two contract workers. However, FPL did not ensure that the site 
security manager was contacted or otherwise initiate action such that 
the trustworthiness and reliability of the two contract workers could 
be assessed at that time. The actions of the two contract workers 
should have been considered in evaluating the two contract workers' 
suitability for continued unescorted access and possible entry into the 
Personnel Access Data System (PADS). As a result, FPL did not meet the 
Access Authorization program objective in 10 CFR 73.56(b)(1), which is 
to provide high assurance that individuals granted UA are trustworthy 
and reliable, and do not constitute an unreasonable risk to the health 
and safety of the public including a potential to commit radiological 
sabotage. Subsequently, the two contract workers' trustworthiness was 
evaluated and they were entered into PADS. Prior to being entered into 
PADS, however, the contract workers were granted access to a number of 
nuclear sites, including St. Lucie.
    2. The NRC and FPL agreed that CR 2005-7449 did not fully document 
the circumstances of the matter to permit FPL to conduct a thorough 
review such that corrective actions and a trustworthiness and 
reliability assessment would be performed.
    3. The NRC and FPL agreed that the violation described above did 
not result in any adverse consequences. However, the failure to conduct 
a trustworthiness and reliability assessment is of concern to the NRC 
because the potential consequences, under different circumstances, 
could be significant.
    4. FPL reiterated its commitment to the conduct of trustworthiness 
and reliability assessments as required. FPL agreed that the violation 
discussed above occurred as stated, and in response, agreed to 
implement or has completed the following corrective actions and 
enhancements:
    a. FPL will issue a fleet-wide training brief to managers and 
supervisors reinforcing the requirements of NP-415, the corporate 
policy governing Denial of Unescorted Access to FPL's Nuclear 
Facilities, and the site implementing procedures on access control.
    b. FPL will revise the site administrative procedures on access 
control as necessary to ensure that they require that contractor 
representatives and supervisors immediately notify FPL management of 
any incident or behavior that may call into question the 
trustworthiness or reliability of an individual.
    c. Site-specific Control and Acceptance of Contracted Services 
procedures will be revised as necessary to ensure that the NP-415 
requirements are reviewed by the Site Technical Representative (STRs) 
as part of the termination request process. FPL will also conduct a 
review of existing procedures related to contractor oversight and 
administration to ensure that the processes therein properly reflect 
the access control responsibilities of FPL.
    d. All STRs will receive a training bulletin that reinforces 
management expectations regarding FPL ownership of access control as 
part of the procedure revision. The initial and continuing training 
lesson plan will be revised to ensure that STRs, supervisors and 
managers understand management expectations regarding FPL ownership of 
access control.
    e. FPL will review fleet-wide the site administrative procedures 
for access control to ensure they require an express declaration of 
favorable or unfavorable termination, and to ensure that contractors 
are not allowed to manage their own access terminations without FPL 
management or STR approval.
    f. Plant management will reinforce management expectations via a 
fleet-wide training brief to all managers and supervisors, including 
the Management Review Committee (MRC) and the Initial Screening Team 
(IST), reinforcing the requirements of NP-415 and the site

[[Page 36132]]

access control procedures. A Lessons-Learned Bulletin will be deployed 
for all Corrective Action Program Coordinators (CAPCOs) to ensure that 
identified CRs contain sufficient detail for the MRCs to make informed 
decisions regarding level, investigation type, and immediate action 
recommendations.
    g. A representative from the Security Department will be added as a 
primary member of the MRC at each site.
    h. Management will conduct a briefing to MRC members with a focus 
on the lessons learned from the NNI event and need for conservative 
action for any issues that question the trustworthiness or reliability 
of any individual. FPL will institutionalize an MRC Job Familiarization 
Guide requiring new MRC and IST members to receive an orientation from 
management on the importance of recognizing potential security concerns 
while reviewing CRs.
    i. To address situations where the CR evaluator is not the person 
primarily responsible for the event/issue, plant procedures will be 
revised to require the system/process owner to review the evaluator's 
analysis and approve of the evaluation.
    j. Supervisor initial and continuing Fitness-For-Duty and Continued 
Behavioral Observation Program training will reinforce FPL's 
expectation of each Supervisor's obligations to notify the Security 
Department of any potential trustworthiness and reliability issues.
    k. At St. Lucie, FPL validated that each fleet nuclear policy was 
appropriately implemented in a site implementing procedure. FPL will 
conduct an extent of condition review to validate the implementation of 
nuclear policies throughout the fleet.
    l. FPL agrees to complete all corrective actions and enhancements 
identified in this paragraph 4 (items a. through k.) within six months 
of the date of issuance of the Confirmatory Order.
    5. The NRC and FPL agree that the above elements will be 
incorporated into a Confirmatory Order.
    6. In consideration of the commitments delineated in Item 4 above, 
the NRC agrees to exercise enforcement discretion to forego issuance of 
a Notice of Violation against FPL for all matters discussed in the 
NRC's letter to FPL of April 2, 2008 (EA-07-321).
    7. This agreement is binding upon successors and assigns of the St. 
Lucie Nuclear Plant and FPL.
    On June 10, 2008, the Licensee consented to issuance of this Order 
with the commitments, as described in Section V below. The Licensee 
further agreed that this Order is to be effective upon issuance and 
that it has waived its right to a hearing.

IV

    Since the licensee has agreed to take additional actions to address 
NRC concerns, as set forth in Section III above, the NRC has concluded 
that its concerns can be resolved through issuance of this Order.
    I find that the Licensee's commitments as set forth in Section V 
are acceptable and necessary and conclude that with these commitments 
the public health and safety are reasonably assured. In view of the 
foregoing, I have determined that public health and safety require that 
the Licensee's commitments be confirmed by this Order. Based on the 
above and the Licensee's consent, this Order is immediately effective 
upon issuance.

V

    Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 104b, 161b, 161i, 161o, 182 and 
186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's 
regulations in 10 CFR 2.202 and 10 CFR Part 50, it is hereby ordered, 
effective immediately, that License Nos. DPR-67 and NPF-16 are modified 
as follows:
    a. FPL will issue a fleet-wide training brief to managers and 
supervisors reinforcing the requirements of NP-415, the corporate 
policy governing Denial of Unescorted Access to FPL's Nuclear 
Facilities, and the site implementing procedures on access control.
    b. FPL will revise the site administrative procedures on access 
control as necessary to ensure that they require that contractor 
representatives and supervisors immediately notify FPL management of 
any incident or behavior that may call into question the 
trustworthiness or reliability of an individual.
    c. Site-specific Control and Acceptance of Contracted Services 
procedures will be revised as necessary to ensure that the NP-415 
requirements are reviewed by the Site Technical Representative (STRs) 
as part of the termination request process. FPL will also conduct a 
review of existing procedures related to contractor oversight and 
administration to ensure that the processes therein properly reflect 
the access control responsibilities of FPL.
    d. All STRs will receive a training bulletin that reinforces 
management expectations regarding FPL ownership of access control as 
part of the procedure revision. The initial and continuing training 
lesson plan will be revised to ensure that STRs, supervisors and 
managers understand management expectations regarding FPL ownership of 
access control.
    e. FPL will review fleet-wide the site administrative procedures 
for access control to ensure they require an express declaration of 
favorable or unfavorable termination, and to ensure that contractors 
are not allowed to manage their own access terminations without FPL 
management or STR approval.
    f. Plant management will reinforce management expectations via a 
fleet-wide training brief to all managers and supervisors, including 
the Management Review Committee (MRC) and the Initial Screening Team 
(IST), reinforcing the requirements of NP-415 and the site access 
control procedures. A Lessons-Learned Bulletin will be deployed for all 
Corrective Action Program Coordinators (CAPCOs) to ensure that 
identified CRs contain sufficient detail for the MRCs to make informed 
decisions regarding level, investigation type, and immediate action 
recommendations.
    g. A representative from the Security Department will be added as a 
primary member of the MRC at each site.
    h. Management will conduct a briefing to MRC members with a focus 
on the lessons learned from the NNI event and need for conservative 
action for any issues that question the trustworthiness or reliability 
of any individual. FPL will institutionalize an MRC Job Familiarization 
Guide requiring new MRC and IST members to receive an orientation from 
management on the importance of recognizing potential security concerns 
while reviewing CRs.
    i. To address situations where the CR evaluator is not the person 
primarily responsible for the event/issue, plant procedures will be 
revised to require the system/process owner to review the evaluator's 
analysis and approve of the evaluation.
    j. Supervisor initial and continuing Fitness-For-Duty and Continued 
Behavioral Observation Program training will reinforce FPL's 
expectation of each Supervisor's obligations to notify the Security 
Department of any potential trustworthiness and reliability issues.
    k. At St. Lucie, FPL validated that each fleet nuclear policy was 
appropriately implemented in a site implementing procedure. FPL will 
conduct an extent of condition review to validate the implementation of 
nuclear policies throughout the fleet.

[[Page 36133]]

    l. FPL agrees to complete all corrective actions and enhancements 
identified in this paragraph (Section V, items a. through k.) within 
six months of the date of issuance of the Confirmatory Order.
    The Regional Administrator, NRC Region II, may relax or rescind, in 
writing, any of the above conditions upon a showing by FPL of good 
cause.

VI

    Any person adversely affected by this Confirmatory Order, other 
than the Licensee, may request a hearing within 20 days of its 
issuance. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to 
extending the time to request a hearing. A request for extension of 
time must be directed to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and include a 
statement of good cause for the extension.
    If a person other than FPL 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 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 Confirmatory Order should be 
sustained.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), any person adversely affected by 
this Order may, within 20 days of the issuance of this order, in 
addition to requesting a hearing, 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. The motion must state with particularity the reasons why the 
Order is not based on adequate evidence and must be accompanied by 
affidavits or other evidence relied on.
    A request for a hearing or to set aside the immediate effectiveness 
of this Order must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, 
which became effective on October 15, 2007. The NRC E-filing Final Rule 
was issued on August 28, 2007 (72 FR 49,139) and was codified in 
pertinent part at 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart B. The E-Filing process 
requires participants to submit and serve documents over the Internet 
or, in some cases, to mail copies on electronic optical storage media. 
Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they 
seek a waiver in accordance with the procedures described below.
    To comply with the procedural requirements associated with E-
Filing, at least five (5) days prior to the filing deadline the 
requestor must contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at 
[email protected], or by calling (301) 415-1677, to request (1) 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 NRC proceeding in which it is participating; and/or (2) 
creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances 
when the requestor (or its counsel or representative) already holds an 
NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Each requestor will need to 
download the Workplace Forms Viewer\TM\-- to access the Electronic 
Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the E-Filing system. The 
Workplace Forms Viewer\TM\ is free and is available at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. Information 
about applying for a digital ID certificate also is available on NRC's 
public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html.
    Once a requestor has obtained a digital ID certificate, had a 
docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, it can then submit a 
request for a hearing through EIE. 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 filer submits its 
document through EIE. To be timely, electronic filings must be 
submitted to the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on 
the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-
stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming 
receipt of the document. The EIE system also distributes an e-mail 
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 document 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 is filed so that they may 
obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system.
    A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the 
``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html or by calling the NRC technical help line, 
which is available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time, 
Monday through Friday. The help line number is (800) 397-4209 or 
locally, (301) 415-4737.
    Participants who believe that they have good cause for not 
submitting documents electronically must file a motion, 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.
    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in 
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at 
http://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, unless excluded pursuant 
to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, or 
a 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. With respect to copyrighted 
works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the 
adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, 
Participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in 
their works.

VII

    In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of 
an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions 
specified in Section V above shall be final 20 days from the date of 
this Order without further order or proceedings. If an extension of 
time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions 
specified in Section V shall be final when the extension expires if a 
hearing request has not been received. A

[[Page 36134]]

request for hearing shall not stay the immediate effectiveness of this 
order.

    Dated this 13th day of June 2008.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Luis A. Reyes,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. E8-14317 Filed 6-24-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P