25238 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 88 /Thursday, May 7, 1998 / Notices

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC).

ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to

submit an information collection

request to OMB and solicitation of

public comment.

SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a

submittal to OMB for review of

continued approval of information

collections under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35).

Information pertaining to the

requirement to be submitted:

1. The title of the information

collection:

NRC Form 327—Special Nuclear

Material (SNM) and Source Material

(SM) Physical Inventory Summary

Report;

NUREG/BR–0096—Instructions and

Guidance for Completing Physical

Inventory Summary Reports.

2. Current OMB approval number:

3150–0139.

3. How often the collection is

required: The frequency of reporting

corresponds to the frequency of required

inventories, which depends essentially

on the strategic significance of the SNM

covered by the particular license.

Certain licensees possessing strategic

SNM are required to report inventories

every 2 months. Licensees possessing

SNM of moderate strategic significance

must report every 6 months. Licensees

possessing SNM of low strategic

significance must report annually.

4. Who is required or asked to report:

Fuel facility licensees possessing special

nuclear material.

5. The number of annual respondents:

10.

6. The number of hours needed

annually to complete the requirement or

request: 98 (an average of approximately

4.25 hours per response for 23

responses).

7. Abstract: NRC Form 327 is

submitted by fuel facility licensees to

account for special nuclear material.

The data is used by NRC to assess

licensee material control and accounting

programs and to confirm the absence of

(or detect the occurrence of) special

nuclear material theft or diversion.

NUREG/BR–0096 provides specific

guidance and instructions for

completing the form in accordance with

the requirements appropriate for a

particular licensee.

Submit, by July 6, 1998, comments

that address the following questions:

1. Is the proposed collection of

information necessary for the NRC to

properly perform its functions? Does the

information have practical utility?

2. Is the burden estimate accurate?

3. Is there a way to enhance the

quality, utility, and clarity of the

information to be collected?

4. How can the burden of the

information collection be minimized,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology?

A copy of the draft supporting

statement may be viewed free of charge

at the NRC Public Document Room,

2120 L Street, NW (lower level),

Washington, DC. OMB clearance

requests are available at the NRC

worldwide web site (http://

www.nrc.gov) under the FedWorld

collection link on the home page tool

bar. The document will be available on

the NRC home page site for 60 days after

the signature date of this notice.

Comments and questions about the

information collection requirements

may be directed to the NRC Clearance

Officer, Brenda Jo. Shelton, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, T–6 F33,

Washington, DC, 20555–0001, or by

telephone at 301–415–7233, or by

Internet electronic mail at

BJS1@NRC.GOV.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day

of April, 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Beth C. St. Mary,

Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the

Chief Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 98–12172 Filed 5–6–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Submission for OMB

Review; Comment Request

AGENCY: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC).

ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of

information collection and solicitation

of public comment.

SUMMARY: The NRC has recently

submitted to OMB for review the

following proposal for the collection of

information under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby

informs potential respondents that an

agency may not conduct or sponsor, and

that a person is not required to respond

to, a collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid OMB control

number.

1. Type of submission: Revision.

2. The title of the information

collection: ‘‘An Approach for Using

Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Riskinformed Decisions on Plant-Specific

Changes to the Current Licensing

Basis,’’ Regulatory Guides RG–1.174

through RG–1.178.

3. The form number if applicable: Not

applicable.

4. How often the collection is

required: Use of the new risk-informed

methodology for making changes in the

licensing basis of operating plants in the

areas of inservice inspection (ISI),

inservice testing (IST), graded quality

assurance (GQA), and technical

specifications (TS), is available to all

licensees but is not required. Licensees

may make voluntary submittals when,

and if, in their judgment, it is to their

advantage to do so (for example, to

improve plant safety, reduce costs, gain

operating flexibility).

5. Who will be required or asked to

report: Licensees of nuclear power

plants may report when, and if, in their

judgment, it is to their advantage to do

so.

6. An estimate of the number of

responses: ISI: 6, IST: 3, QA: 1, TS: 20.

7. The estimated number of annual

respondents: ISI: 6, IST: 3, QA: 1, TS:

20.

8. An estimate of the total number of

hours needed annually to complete the

requirement or request (per respondent):

ISI: 6,200, IST: 5,200, QA: 4,000, TS:

1,060.

9. An indication of whether Section

3507(d), Pub. L. 104–13 applies: Not

applicable.

10. Abstract: In the specific areas of

ISI, IST, GQA, and TS, a new series of

Regulatory Guides provides a riskinformed method for licensees to use in

requesting changes to their current

licensing bases (CLB). No changes or

additions have been made to any rules

or regulations in conjunction with the

issuance of this series of guides. The

new method will be a voluntary

alternative to the deterministicallybased CLB change method previously

used (which will remain acceptable as

an alternative to the new risk-informed

method).

The new risk-informed alternative

method will allow licensees to

concentrate on plant equipment and

operations that are most critically

important to plant safety so as to

achieve a savings in total effort and

greater operating flexibility with an

insignificant change in overall safety.

The guides specify the records,

analyses, and documents that licensees
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 88 /Thursday, May 7, 1998 / Notices 25239

are expected to prepare in support of

risk-informed changes to their CLB in

the specified areas.

A copy of the final supporting

statement may be viewed free of charge

at the NRC Public Document Room,

2120 L Street, NW (lower level),

Washington, DC. OMB clearance

requests are available at the NRC

worldwide web site (http://

www.nrc.gov) under the FedWorld

collection link on the home page tool

bar. The document will be available on

the NRC home page site for 60 days after

the signature date of this notice.

Comments and questions should be

directed to the OMB reviewer by June 8,

1998: Erik Godwin, Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs

(3150–0011), NEOB–10202, Office of

Management and Budget, Washington,

DC 20503.

Comments can also be submitted by

telephone at (202) 395–3084.

The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda

Jo. Shelton, 301–415–7233.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day

of May 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Brenda Jo. Shelton,

NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief

Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 98–12173 Filed 5–6–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[IA 98–002]

Mr. Thomas C. Johnson; Order

Prohibiting Involvement in NRCLicensed Activities (Effective

Immediately)

I

Mr. Thomas C. Johnson (Mr. Johnson)

was formerly employed as a contractor

employee at the Niagara Mohawk Power

Corporation (NMPC), Nine Mile Point

nuclear facility as a computer

programmer. NMPC holds Facility

License Nos. DPR–63 and NPF–69

issued by the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC or Commission)

pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50. These

licenses authorize NMPC to operate the

Nine Mile Point facilities, Units 1 and

2, in accordance with the conditions

specified therein.

II

In May 1996, NMPC initiated an

investigation into whether Mr. Johnson

and others were involved in the

alteration of a computer code used to

select individuals for random drug and

alcohol testing. Based on the evidence

developed during the NMPC

investigation, as well as a subsequent

review by the NRC Office of

Investigations (OI), OI concluded that

Mr. Johnson and another contractor

computer programmer intentionally

altered the fitness-for-duty (FFD)

computer program to ensure that certain

individuals (including themselves)

would be excluded from random FFD

screening. Specifically, a patch had

been inserted into the computer

program to ensure certain individuals

would not be selected. Moreover, the

two individuals planned and executed a

scheme (and a number of precautions)

to elude detection and prevent tracing.

These actions caused NMPC to violate

10 CFR 26.24, which requires that

individuals be tested in a statistically

random and unpredictable manner. As a

result of this violation, Mr. Johnson, the

other contractor, and others, were

prevented from being selected for

random FFD testing.

Although Mr. Johnson, in an

interview with NMPC investigators on

May 15, 1996, denied knowledge of this

matter, during a subsequent interview

by NMPC investigators on May 22, 1996,

Mr. Johnson admitted that he was

involved in a joint effort with another

individual in altering the computer

program for FFD testing selection. Mr.

Johnson was offered an opportunity for

an enforcement conference with the

NRC, but declined.

III

Based on the above, the NRC has

concluded that Mr. Johnson engaged in

deliberate misconduct. Mr. Johnson’s

actions constitute a violation of 10 CFR

50.5(a)(1), which prohibits an

individual from engaging in deliberate

misconduct that causes or, but for

detection, would have caused, a

licensee to be in violation of any rule,

regulation, or order, or any term,

condition, or limitation of any license,

issued by the Commission. In this case,

Mr. Johnson caused the Licensee to be

in violation of 10 CFR 26.24.

Specifically,

10 CFR Part 26.24, requires, in part, that as

a means to deter and detect substance abuse,

the licensee shall implement a testing

program that includes unannounced drug

and alcohol testing that is to be imposed in

a statistically random and unpredictable

manner so that all persons in the population

subject to the testing shall have an equal

probability of being selected and tested.

Contrary to the above, at some time prior

to May 1996, Mr. Johnson and another

contractor computer programmer altered the

FFD computer program used to ensure that

individuals were tested for drugs and alcohol

in a statistically random and unpredictable

manner, resulting in certain individuals

being excluded from random FFD screening.

As a result, for a indeterminate period prior

to May 1996, individuals were selected for

testing in a manner that was not statistically

random and unpredictable.

The NRC must be able to rely on the

Licensee, its contractors, and the

Licensee and contractor employees to

comply with NRC requirements. Mr.

Johnson’s action in altering the FFD

program, and his collusion with another

individual to hide that alteration,

constitute deliberate violations of

Commission regulations, and by doing

so, raises serious doubt as to whether he

can be relied upon to comply with NRC

requirements and to provide complete

and accurate information to NRC

Licensees and their contractors in the

future, and raises doubt about his

trustworthiness and reliability.

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 would be protected

if Mr. Johnson were permitted at this

time to be involved in NRC-licensed

activities. Therefore, the public health,

safety and interest require that Mr.

Johnson be prohibited from any

involvement in NRC-licensed activities

for a period of five years from the date

of this Order. Additionally, for a period

of three years after the five year period

of prohibition has expired, Mr. Johnson

is required to notify the NRC of his

acceptance of each employment offer

involving NRC-licensed activities.

Furthermore, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202,

I find that the significance of Mr.

Johnson’s 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, 161b, 161i, 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 150.20,

it is hereby ordered, effective

immediately, that:

A. Thomas C. Johnson is prohibited

from engaging in activities licensed by

the NRC for five years from the date of

this Order. 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 pursuant to

the authority granted by 10 CFR 150.20.

B. For a period of three years after the

five year period of prohibition has

expired, Mr. Johnson shall, within 20

days of his acceptance of each