IR 05000313/1987025
| ML20237B737 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 12/14/1987 |
| From: | Callan L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Campbell G ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8712170105 | |
| Download: ML20237B737 (2) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:November 20, 1987
SUBJECT:
Arkansas Nuclear One - Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-313/50-368 License No. DPR-51 and NPF-6 Response to Inspection Report 50-313/8725 and 50-368/8725
Dear Mr. Callan:
Pursuant to the provisions of 10CFR2.201, a response to the violation identified in the subject inspection report is submitted.
Sincerel, I{{
J/ M.
evine xecutive Director, ANO Site Operations JML:PLM:dm Enclosure
cc w/ encl: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Regional Administrator Region IV U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, TX 76011 \\ {')
usueca uoote sour-uriuries sysreu
< .
.. . ( r.
.. . Notice of Violation . Failure to Perform Radiological Surveys 10CFR Part 20.201(b) requires that licensee shall make or cause to be made such surveys as: (1) may be necessary for the licensee to comply with the regulations in this part, and (2)- are. reasonable under the circumstances to evaluate the extent of radiation hazards that may be present.
As defined in 10CFR Part 20.201(a), " survey" means an evaluation of the radiation hazards incident to the production, use, release, disposal, or presence .of radioactive materials or other sources of radiation under a specific set of conditions.
Technical Specifications 6.10 and 6.11 for Units 1 & 2, respectively, require that procedures for personnel radiation protection shall be' adhered to for all operations involving personnel radiation exposure.
Licensee Procedures 1622.001, " Radiological Surveys and Documentation;" 1622.008, " Operation of a Control Point;" and 1000.031, " Radiation Protection Manual," require that material be considered as radioactive if during a direct frisk / survey with an Eberline RM14 count rate meter with an HP 210 probe the material exhibits activity of 100 counts per minute above background (approximately 1000 disintegrations per minute (dpm)). Material must be controlled, labeled and/or marked as radioactive material when it exceeds the aforementioned limit.
Contrary to the above, the NRC inspector determined on September 17, 1987, during the performance of independent surveys in the licensee's maintenance shop clean tool room that several hand ' tools had radiation levels greater then 1000 dpm above background, but these tools were not labeled, marked, or controlled as radioactive material.
This is a Severity Level IV violation.
(Supplement IV) (313/8725-01; 368/8725-01) Response to Violation 313-368/8725-01 (1) The reason for the violation if admitted: AP&L admits that the requirements of 10CFR20.201 and AP&L procedures were not met in that several tools were found with radiation levels greater than 1000 dpm above background and these tools were not labeled, marked, or controlled as ! radioactive material.
The failure of the smears and frisking to detect the contamination was due to personnel inattention to detail in the performance of activities.
An investigation of the incident revealed that the volume of material required to be surveyed along with the additional duties of the Health Physics (HP) technician created a work load that resulted in less than optimum attention to detail.
l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
, c.
-. .
. . . . -- s, < g.
- l
',_ -(2) The corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved: Following the identification of this condition by the NRC i inspector, an immediate survey of the clean tool room was conducted.
Tools that indicated greater then 1000 dpm were removedfto a radiologically controlled area.
A l subsequent survey of the clean tool room was conducted and no additional contaminated material was identified.
The HP technician believed to be responsible for the release of the contaminated tools was counselled and the tool' room personnel along with HP technicians were advised of the details relating to the incident and the need for increased attention.
A demonstration by an HP technician on how to perform surveys of items was provided for tool ' room personnel and a portable frisker was placed in the ' tool room.
This provides tool room personnel with a means j to check tools they suspect to have surface contamination remaining and also serves as a second check of tools that have.been decontaminated.
! Additionally, two HP technicians were assigned to the controlled access station for frisking.
This provides a condition more conducive for attention to detail while L performing frisking activities.
Also, the need for assuring allocation of resources to meet peak work load conditions was stressed in discussion with appropriate supervisory personnel.
(3) The corrective steps what will be taken to avoid further violations: The actions already taken as a result of this incident should prevent recurrence.
A large automated frisking monitor is currently being considered for purchase during 1988.
This will eliminate problems of personnel incorrectly or inadequately surveying items such as tools or equipment being transferred to a clean area.
The automated frisking monitor will provide an additional measure of assurance that adequate frisking is performed prior to release of items.
(4) The date when full compliance will be achieved: Full compliance was achieved upon removal of the contaminated tools from the clean tool room on September 17, 1987.
_ _ _ _ - _ _______ _ _ _ _ - __ _ - }}