skip navigation links 
 
 Search Options 
Index | Site Map | FAQ | Facility Info | Reading Rm | New | Help | Glossary | Contact Us blue spacer  
secondary page banner Return to NRC Home Page

Escalated Enforcement Actions Issued to Individuals - H

Name and
NRC Action Number
NRC Action Type Date Issued Description
Michael C. Heins
IA-06-037
IANOV
(SL III)
08/02/2006 On August 2, 2006, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation based on the individual’s failure to comply with NRC requirements governing fitness-for-duty as a senior reactor operator working at the River Bend Station for Entergy Operations, Inc.
Michael R. Hess
IA-07-015
IANOV
(SL III)
05/01/2007 On May 1, 2007, a Severity Level III violation was issued for a violation involving 10 CFR 55.53, “Conditions of Licenses” and “Exelon Nuclear’s Fitness-for-Duty Program,” which is required by 10 CFR 26.20. Specifically, the individual, a licensed operator, reported for duty at the Braidwood Station, operated by Exelon Nuclear, after having used an illegal substance, marijuana.
James Hesler Jr.
IA-06-045
IANOV
(SL III)
12/19/2006 On December 19, 2006, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving deliberate wrongdoing by a former contract mechanical engineer working at the Beaver Valley Power Station. The violation was cited against 10 CFR 50.5, “Deliberate Misconduct;” 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, ”Design Control;” and the licensee’s procedures for engineering changes and design interface reviews and evaluations. Specifically, the former contract engineer, who was responsible for preparation of the replacement reactor vessel closure head engineering change package (ECP), deliberately failed to adhere to a procedural requirement when he signed the ECP even though the majority of design interface evaluations were neither performed nor included in the ECP.
Stephen W. Humphries
IA-06-007
IANOV
(SL III)
05/15/2006 On May 15, 2006, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving an individual licensed operator who did not participate in the Part 50 licensee drug and alcohol testing program (i.e., fitness for duty program), in that he refused to provide a specimen for testing when randomly selected to do so.
       


Privacy Policy | Site Disclaimer
Monday, June 18, 2007