ML20002C771
| ML20002C771 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 12/23/1980 |
| From: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Hancock J FLORIDA POWER CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20002C772 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8101100842 | |
| Download: ML20002C771 (1) | |
See also: IR 05000302/1980025
Text
_
k
perug[e
o
UNITED STATES
g
'
,.
8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION _
% ; ' C,
o
$
$
REGION 11
Uj
e,
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SulTE 3100
y3
E
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
/' f
%g + * . . . ,o
47
In Rep'y Refer To:
DEC 2 31980
-
l
rib JMP
w
cf A
' S"V/c 3
' {0g2/80-25)
.
c
Florida Power Corporation
Attn:
J. A. Hancock, Assistant
Vice President
Nuclear Operations
P. O. Box 14042, Mail Stop C-4
St. Petersburg, FL
33733
l
'
Gentlemen:
l
Thank you for your letters of September 30 and October 22, 1980, informing us
of steps you have ~taken to correct the items of noncompliance concerning activities
l
under NRC Operating License No. DPR-72 brought to your attention in our letter of
September 8, 1980.
The September 30 letter also outlined steps you have taken in
response to the Notice of Significant Appraisal Findings.
We will' examine your
corrective actions and plans during subsequent inspe::tions.
With regard to Item B.b of the Notice of Violation,10 CFR 20.103(a)(3) states
that, as appropriate, licensees shall use measurements of radioactivity excreted
from the body, or any combination of such measurements as may be necessary for
timely detection and assessment of individual intakes of radioactivity by exposed
individuals.
Your supplemental response of October 22, 1980 describes actions
you have taken in this area of concern.
We believe these actions provide the
appropriate measurement required by the regulation and we will examine them
during future inspections.
With regard to your response to Items F and G, review of additional infomation
provided in the October 22 submittal leads us to concur with your position on
these items.
The information provided in your supplemental response indicates
that Item F did not constitute noncompliance.
Items G.a and G.b also did not
constitute noncompliance based on the information provided in your letter of
September 30.
Item G.c will be combined with Item E as an additional example
of failure to post in accordance with 10 CFR 20.203.
We will take appropriate
~
'
action to amend our records to reflect these changes.
'
We appreciate your cooperation with us.
Sincerely,
-
J.oR.11
mes P. O'Re' illy
D ector
C
'
cc:
D. C. Poole, Nuclear
Plant Manager
-
-
$ 1. .
~00719
g
,
...
.
.
.-
..
'
.
_,'
,
o
4%
. f% hip
4. MM
-
'
} ' f, ;M?y A
O @'
'
,q
,
0.NM
.
*
g
October 22, 1980
3-0-3-a-2
e........o
CS-80-252
Mr. J. P. O'Reilly, Director
Docket No. 50-302
Office of Inspection & Enforcement
Licensee No. DPR-72
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Ref.:
RII:RWZ
101 Marietta St., Suite 3100
50-302/80-25
l
Atlanta, GA 30303
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
In accordance with your request, we offer the following supplemental re-
l
sponses to the apparent Items of Noncompliance identified as items B(b),
F, and G in the referenced inspection report.
B(b) Supplemental Response: Procedural revisions have been made
to RP-102, " Respiratory Equipment Manual, Revision 9" and RP-208,
(
" Bioassay' Sampling Procedure, Revision 1" requiring all personnel
assigned to the Crystal River Unit #3 respiratory program to have
a baseline whole body count prior to initial respiratory assignment.
Additionally, termination whole body counts wil~. be provided for
respirator wearers whenever possible.
If an individual fails to
present himself before departure, an explanation of that fact will
be added to his exposure record.
All personnel dosimetered after
November 1980 will be informed of this policy during the badging pro-
Cess.
We are presently in compliance with our new baseline counting re-
quirements.
Full implementation of termination counting requirements
will be accomplished by November 1, 1980
F. Supplemental Response: As referenced in our response to Appendix
B, item F, dated 9-30-80, we indicated that air samples were taken
in the vicinity of the workers in question.
Copies of these samples
t to this correspondence for your
to H/P technicians and procedural
require better definition as to
DUPLICATE DOCUMENT
,
i.e., reference RWP number
ken in vicinity of workers.
.
Entire document previously
entered into system under:
SO)04%C%9
No. of
es:
M S8JJ1M 96%f M%F@ $6K) .
.
-
.
.
.
i
ld
'
2
Sebtember 30, 1980
3-
3-a-2
M ['
coa o m e
CS-80-226
Mr. J. P. O'Reilly, Director
Docket No. 50-302
Office of Inspection & Enforcement
Licensee No. DPR-72
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Ref:
RII:RWZ
101 Marietta St., Suite 3100
50-302/80-25
Atlanta, GA 30303
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
We offer the following responses to the items identified as significant appraisal
findings of Appendix A, and the apparent items of noncompliance of Appendix B in
the referenced inspection report.
Appendix A
NOTICE OF SIGNIFICANT APPRAISAL FINDDiGS
.
A.
An adequate Respiratory Protection Program, from training to use did not exist.
The importance of this significant appraisal finding is underscored by the
number of noncompliance items listed in Appendix B (Items A, B, and F) which
relate to the Respiratory Protection Program (Sections 7 and 9).
A. Response:
Some corrective action has been taken to upgrade'our Respiratory
Protection Program as of this date. This action includes current economic and
safety evaluation of feasibility for purchase of a respiratory fitting chamber,
interim assignment of a Health / Physics technician to the Training Department,
permanent assignment of a Health / Physics Training Instructor by October 6, 1980,
and addressing several Inspector Followup Items in a proposed procedural re-
vision.
Additionally, two trips have been completed to other nuclear facilities for
the purpose of whole body counts evaluation. Documentation is being prepared
to facilitate Inspector Followup action.
,
'-nent of a new Respiratory Protection Training
The commitmt nts mada fm-
A
11 personnel trained by October 1, 1981 and
m review by November 30, 1980 remain unchanged.
,
DUPLICATE DOCUMENT
sted as infractions are addressed in our
Entire document previously
entered into system under:
rogram which would maintain the proficiency
$Q 004 @d
had not been developed nor implemented.
contributed to several of the noncompliance
No. of pages:
ection 5).
-
OFFICIAL OPS
-
G_e_neral Offim M1 Thirty-GES D hth o P.@. Box 14042. St. Petersbu_rg, Fionda 33733 e 81$ _866-5151 _
.
'