05000271/FIN-2007010-01
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Improper Entry into a Locked High Radiation Area (Section 4OA5) |
| Description | The Licensees technician did not perform a survey to establish radiological conditions in the LHRA prior to allowing access to an AO. Specifically, on August 17, 2006, the RPT did not perform a survey of the reactor water clean up room following the completion of a resin transfer to establish the current radiological conditions, and to ensure occupational dose limits would not be exceeded. The RPT\'s actions resulted in a violation of 10 CFR 20.1501, which requires that each licensee make, or cause to be made, surveys that may be necessary for the licensee to comply with the regulations in Part 20, including Part 20.1201, occupational dose limits. The NRC further determined that the technician\'s actions were willful, in careless disregard for the requirements. Specifically, despite the fact that the RPT was hampered in his assessment of the job task by not being originally assigned to the job, based on his training, 31 years of experience, and procedural knowledge, there was sufficient evidence to indicate he willfully violated the survey requirements and caused Vermont Yankee to be in violation of NRC regulations. Because you are responsible for the actions of your employees, including contract employees, and because the violation was willful, the violation was evaluated under the NRC traditional enforcement process as set forth in Section IV.A.4 of the NRC Enforcement Policy. The NRC concluded that the violation, absent willfulness, would be considered minor, because the exposure from this incident did not result in the individual\'s occupational dose limits being exceeded. However, the NRC increased the severity level to Severity Level IV because the technician\'s actions were willful. The NRC considered issuance of a Notice of Violation for this issue. However, after considering the factors set forth in Section VI.A.1 of the NRC Enforcement Policy, the NRC determined that a non-cited violation (NCV) is appropriate in this case because: (1) you initially identified the violation and promptly informed the NRC of the occurrence; (2) the violation involved the acts of an individual who was not a supervisor in your organization; (3) the violation appeared to be an isolated action of the employee without management involvement and was not caused by a lack of management oversight; and (4) you took significant remedial action commensurate with the significance of the event such that it demonstrated the seriousness of the violation to other employees and contractors. Although the technician received no supervision leading up to and during his task, the NRC concluded that the violation was not attributable to a lack of management oversight, because it was reasonable to expect that an RPT with 31 years of experience would not need significant oversight to perform this task. |
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000271/2007010 Section 4OA5 |
| Date counted | Sep 30, 2006 (2006Q3) |
| Type: | TEV: Severity level IV |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | |
| Inspectors (proximate) | B Sienel D Pelton J Noggle R Powell T Burnse Wilsonk Farrar N Sieller R Powell R Summers |
| INPO aspect | |
| ' | |
Finding - Vermont Yankee - IR 05000271/2007010 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Vermont Yankee) @ 2006Q3
| |||||||||