ML19345H151
| ML19345H151 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | La Crosse File:Dairyland Power Cooperative icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/04/1981 |
| From: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19345H150 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-409-80-10, NUDOCS 8105010057 | |
| Download: ML19345H151 (3) | |
Text
.
()
Appendix B Notice of Violation Dairyland Power Cooperative Docket No. 50-409 t
As a result of the Health Physics Appraisal conducted September 22 to October 3, 1980, and in accordance with the Interim Enforcement Policy, 45 FR 66754 (October 7, 1980), the following violations were identified.
1.
10 CFR 20.201(b) requires evaluations as necessary to comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 20.203(b) for posting radiation areas.
Contrary to the above, radiation levels that exceeded 5 mR/hr were measured by the appraisers, and verified by licensee personnel, in an unposted area approximately eighteen inches from the outside wall of the waste treatment building. Although the radiation source had been in place for approximately five days when discovered, the licensee's survey program had not identified the excessive radiation levels.
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement IV).
2.
Technical Specifications 3.8.1 and 3.11 require adherence to radiation protection procedures. The following instances of failure to meet this requirement were identified during the appraisal.
Procedure HSP 4.3, Section 6.16 requires that retaining ring lock a.
nuts on filled radwaste drums be tightened upon removal of the drums from the compactor. The lock nut is designed to prevent the retaining (ring) bolt from loosening.
Contrary to the above, the lock nuts on approximately 25 percent of the radwaste drums being held for shipment were not adequately tight to prevent retaining bolt movement.
b.
Procedure HSP 2.6, Section 7.11 requires that areas containing dose rates which exceed the general area dose rate by a factor of three be posted " Caution Radiation Hotspot."
t 8105030057
O Appendix B Contrary to the above, the Appraisal Team and the NRC resident inspectors identified four areas in the containment building and three areas in the turbine building which should have been posted as hotspets but sere not.
c.
Procedure HSP 2.9, Section 7.10 requires that beta-gamma survey instrument calibration records include pre-calibration readings for comparison with the post-calibration readings.
Contrary to the above, pre-calibration readings were not recorded for approximately 50 percent of the 1980 calibrations, d.
Procedure HSP 2.9, Section 7.2 requires multiple point calibrations on each instrument 3cale.
Contrary to the above, at least one instrument (Technical Associates CP-TP-1A, No. 600), was routinely calibrated at single points on the XI and X10 scales.
e.
Procedure HSP 2.8, Section 7.1 requires that portal monitors be source checked daily, with specified sources, to ensure proper operation. The specified source for the Eberline PMC-4B portal monitor is a nominal 8600 dpm technetium-99 solid source.
Contrary to the above, the specified technetium-99 source is not used to perform the portal monitor source checks. Sources ~of significantly greater activity are used, resulting in a less sensitive check on the portal monitor response.
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement IV).
3.
Technical Specification 3.9.3(a) requires that a report of radioactive effluents to unrestricted areas be made to the NRC within 60 days after January 1 and July 1 of each year.
Contrary to the above, the required reports for the six-month periods ending December 31, 1977, June 30, 1978, December 31, 1978, June 30, 1979, and December 31, 1979, were submitted approximately one week to eight weeks late. The report for the six month period ending June 30, 1980, had not been submitted as of January 8, 1981.
This is a Severity Level VI violation (Supplement IV).
l
Appendix B 3-Pursuant to tbc provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, you are required to submit to this office within twenty-five days of the date of this Notice a written statement or explanation in reply, including for each item of noncompliance:
(1) corrective action taken and the results achieved; (2) corrective action to be taken to avoid further noncompliance; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Under the authority of Section 182 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation.
] Vf[/
{
M Date
/ ~/
ames G. Keppler Director I
i i
i I
--r--
-+-we 3-y
~.+ e +,-,,,
m.-,
,y,y,,y_
9
+
7-y
____,y-
-.wrm,,,y,y,
.,,-,.,, _,,, -., - -.,,,,.. ~...,.
,,9
,_7_,