ML15224A519
| ML15224A519 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 02700047, Oconee |
| Issue date: | 01/26/1982 |
| From: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Parker W DUKE POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML15224A520 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8203080412 | |
| Download: ML15224A519 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000269/1981025
Text
DEANED OIALLM
Cert'iediR
~
~
JAN 2 6 1982 \\C
Duke Power Company
ATTN:
Mr. W. 0. Parker, Jr.
Vice President, Steam Production
M
P. 0. Box 2178
cu
91
MAs
H
Charlotte, NC
28242
Gentlemen:
Subject: Report No
1
50-270/81-25 and 50-287/81-25
Thank you for your response of December 23, 1981, informing us of steps
you have taken to correct the violation brought to your attention in our
letter of November 25, 1981. We will examine your corrective actions
and plans during future inspections.
While you acknowledged that the violation occurred and provided the
response required by 10 CFR 2.201, your letter took exception to the
characterization and classification of severity level of the violation.
Our evaluation of the issues you raised is included as an enclosure.
Based on that evaluation we have concluded that the violation was
appropriately characterized and its classification as a Severity Level
III was proper.
Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please
contact us.
Sincerely,
James P. O'Reilly
Regional Administrator
Enclosure:
Evaluation and Conclusions
cc: J. E. Smith, Station Manager
bcc:
NRC Resident Inspector
D6cument Management Branch
State of North Carolina
9203080412 820126
PDR ADOCK 05000269
G
OFFICE-
RI I: ETI
RII:EIS
RII:EIS
SURNAMEEa4AFGibson:cmc
CEConer
CEAlderson
__
DATE E- 1
82
1/</8 21
t'R0 Form 31R34 (RID (6-M0 NRCM 0240
-er I
lUIN
$lM
Wf~
~Y
Enclosure
EVALUATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Duke Power Company, in its response dated December 23, 1981, admitted
the violation identified in the NRC letter and Notice of Violation of
November 25, 1981, but took exception to the characterization of the
violation and the severity level assigned. The licensee's exceptions
are presented below along with the NRC's evaluation and conclusions.
1. Characterization of Violation
LICENSEE'S POSITION
The licensee states that Chem-Nuclear is authorized to receive
licensed byproduct material and claims that the first sentence,
second paragraph of the violation (i.e., "...
the licensee disposed
of licensed byproduct material by transfer to an unauthorized
recipient.") implies that the recipient was not authorized to
receive byproduct material.
The licensee further claims that the
actual violation concerned the State's limit of 1% free-standing
liquid, not the licensed byproduct material.
EVALUATION AND CONCLUSION
The licensee's observation that Chem-Nuclear is authorized to
receive licensed byproduct material is generally correct; however,
Chem-Nuclear's license, issued by the State of South Carolina
restricts the quantity and form of byproduct material which Chem
Nuclear may receive.
Specifically, Condition 26 of the license
establishes restrictions on the form of byproduct material as
follows:
"Unless otherwise specified in this license, the licensee shall
not receive any liquid radioactive waste regardless of the
chemical or physical form. Solidified radioactive waste shall
have no detectable free standing liquids.
For purposes of
this condition, the terminology "no detectable free standing
liquids" is defined as follows:
(a)
One percent (1%)
liquid by waste volume until December 31,
1980.
(b) Effective January 1, 1981, one-half percent (0.5%) by
waste volume or one gallon of non-corrosive liquids per
container, whichever is less.
In lieu of the requirements of sub-paragraph (b) above, solidified
waste containing liquids in excess of one-half percent (0.5%)
by waste volume, but less than one percent (1%) liquid by
waste volume, may be received and disposed of in approved high
integrity containers."
EVALUATIONS AND CONLSIONS
-2
As a result of this license condition, Chem-Nuclear was specifically
prohibited from receiving the byproduct material in the form that
it was shipped by Duke Power Company. Therefore, Chem-Nuclear was
not an authorized recipient and the transfer violated 10 CFR 20.301
and 10 CFR 30.41 as characterized by the violation.
2.
Severity Level
LICENSEE'S POSITION
The licensee states that no details are provided to support the
determination of Severity Level III under Supplement IV (subtitled
"Health Physics, 10 CFR Part 20") of 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C.
Rather, the licensee believes that classification as a Severity
Level IV in accordance with Supplement V (subtitled "Transportation")
is more appropriate.
EVALUATION AND CONCLUSION
The severity level categorizations contained in Supplement V to
10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C relate to the requirements contained in
10 CFR Part 71, "Packaging of Radioactive Material for Transportation
and Transportation of Radioactive Material Under Certain Conditions,"
and to the regulations of certain other Federal agencies relative
to transportation of radioactive materials.
The licensee was not
cited for violation of any Federal transportation regulation;
therefore. use of Supplement V would be inappropriate.
On the other hand, Supplement IV categorizes violations of 10 CFR
Part 20, and violations of 10 CFR 20.301 relative to disposal of
byproduct material by transfer to an unauthorized recipient are
appropriately categorized as a Severity Level III violation in
accordance with paragraph C.6 of Supplement IV.