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
25240 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 88 /Thursday, May 7, 1998 / Notices

employment offer involving NRClicensed activities or his becoming

involved in NRC-licensed activities, as

defined in Paragraph IV.A above,

provide notice to the Director, Office of

Enforcement, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555,

of the name, address, and telephone

number of the employer or the entity

where he is, or will be, involved in the

NRC-licensed activities. In the first

notification, Mr. Johnson shall include a

statement of his commitment to

compliance with regulatory

requirements and the basis why the

Commission should have confidence

that he will comply with applicable

NRC requirements.

The Director, OE, may, in writing,

relax or rescind any of the above

conditions upon demonstration by Mr.

Johnson of good cause.

V

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, Mr.

Johnson must, and any other person

adversely affected by this Order may,

submit an answer to this Order, and

may request a hearing on this Order,

within 20 days of the date of this Order.

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 made in

writing to the Director, Office of

Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555,

and include a statement of good cause

for the extension. 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. Johnson 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,

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff,

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,

NRC Region I, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory,

475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia,

Pennsylvania 19406, and to Mr. Johnson

if the answer or hearing request is by a

person other than Mr. Johnson. If a

person other than Mr. Johnson requests

a hearing, that person shall set forth

with particularity the manner in which

that person’s 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.

Johnson 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.

Johnson may, in addition to demanding

a hearing, at the time the 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

hearing, or written approval of an

extension of time in which to request 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. If an

extension of time for requesting a

hearing has been approved, the

provisions specified in Section IV shall

be final when the extension expires if a

hearing request has not been received.

An answer or a request for hearing shall

not stay the immediate effectiveness of

this order.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 28th day

of April 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

James Lieberman,

Director, Office of Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 98–12182 Filed 5–6–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[IA 98–001]

Mr. Albert M. Nardslico, Jr.; Order

Prohibiting Involvement in NRCLicensed Activities (Effective

Immediately)

I

Mr. Albert M. Nardslico (Mr.

Nardslico) 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.

Nardslico 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. Nardslico 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 for drugs and

alcohol in a statistically random and

unpredictable manner. As a result of

this violation, Mr. Nardslico, the other

contractor employee involved in

planning the scheme, and others, were

prevented from being selected for

random FFD testing. In addition, during

the time in which his name was

excluded from random selection, Mr.

Nardslico had access to the site

protected area, which was also at a time

when Mr. Nardslico may have been

using marijuana offsite. (Mr. Nardslico

admitted, during the predecisional

enforcement conference in the NRC

Region I office on February 13, 1998,

and during a June 21, 1996 interview

with NMPC investigators, that he had

used marijuana while employed at Nine

Mile Point. While he did not recall the

periods of such use, he was unable to

confirm that he did not use marijuana

while his name had been excluded from

the FFD testing pool.)

During his interviews with NMPC, as

well as during the predecisional

enforcement conference with the NRC,

Mr. Nardslico denied that he was

involved in the alteration of the

computer program. Notwithstanding Mr.

Nardslico’s denials, another contractor

computer programmer, who had

admitted his involvement in the

alteration, implicated Mr. Nardslico as

also being involved in the alteration.

Specifically, in transcribed interviews

under oath, the other contract computer

programmer indicated: (1) That the

corruption of the FFD computer code

was a joint effort of him and Mr.

Nardslico; (2) that he and Mr. Nardslico