ML20003E398
| ML20003E398 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 03/05/1981 |
| From: | Trimble D ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Madsen G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20003E396 | List: |
| References | |
| 1R-0381-01, 1R-381-1, 2R-0381-04, 2R-381-4, NUDOCS 8104030332 | |
| Download: ML20003E398 (2) | |
Text
'
)
ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT COMPAN Y POST OFFICE BOX 551 UTTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72203 (501) 371-4000 March 5, 1981 IR-0381-01 2R-0381-04 Mr. G. L. Madsen, Chief Reactor Operations & Nuclear Support Office of Inspection & Enforcement U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011
Subject:
Arkansas Nuclear One-Unit 1 & 2 Docket No's. 50-313,50-368 License No's. OPR-51, NPF-6 Inspection Report No's.
50-313/80-24 and 50-368/80-24 (File: 0232,2-0232)
Gentlemen:
We are in receipt of your letter of February 5,1981, which provides the results of Inspection 80-24 conducted at ANG during the period of Novem-ber 22 to December 21, 1980. Although your letter does not require a response from AP&L, upon review of this letter, we feel that a response is necessary.
The necessity for this letter stems from our disagreement with your classification of the key control problem as a Severity Level IV vio-lation.
We strongly disagree that this finding should t'e classified as a violation, and do not believe that adequate justification exists for such a classification.
In our letter of August 27, 1980, AP&L committed to establisn more rigorous administrative controls of keys to doors to high radiation areas.
These controls primarily consisted of transferring the admin-instrative control of the issuance of these keys from Plant Security responsibility to the Health Physics personnel and the shift supervisor.
This transfer of control was accomplished on September 1,1980. On December 12, 1980, it wac discovered my the Resident Inspector that control of issuance of one of approximately eleven keys had not been transferred to the Health Physics personnel. This appears to have been caused by a minor administrative oversight in the key transfer and the situation was imediately corrected.
810 4 0 3 0 33A MEMBEA MCCLE SCUTH UT:UTIES SYSTEM
i Mr. G. L. Madsen March 6, 1981 AP&L does not believe that this event constitutes a violation as defined by Federal regulations, but does acknowledge that it is a deviation from a commitment made in our letter of August 27, 1980. Our determination is based on the following infonnation.
10 CFR 2.201(a) states:
"Before instituting any proceeding to modify, suspend, or revoke a license or to take other action for alleged violation of any provision of the Act or this chapter or the conditions of the license, the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, will serve on the licensee a written notice of violation, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section." (Emphasis Added)
The Proposed General Statement of Policy and Procedures for Enforcement Action, (45 FR 66754) which is being used by the Office of Inspection and Enforcement even though it has not been incorporated in 10 CFR 2 states:
"A Notice of Violation is a written notice setting forth one or more violations of a legally binding requirement."
The consnitment made in our letter of August 27, 1980, is not a require-ment of the Act or a condition of the license, but is an additional administrative control established to assure high radiation area doors are maintained locked as required by 10 CFR 20. Access into high radiation areas also requires Health Physics escort fo. non-operations personnel.
In addition, the Notice of Violation attached to Inspection Report 80-24 indicates that this event was classified as a Severity Level IV Violation based on Supplement I.D.3. to the Proposed General Statement of Policy and Procedures for Enforcement Action which pertains to violations involving:
i
" Failure to meet requirements not covered in hverity Levels I, II, or III, that measurably degrades the safety of operations, incident response, or the environment." We do not believe that this event caused measurable degradation of the safe +.y of operations, incident response, or the environment.
In summary, based on the facts cited above, AP&L strongly disagrees with the classification of this event as a violation. We request that the NRC review this infonnation, re-classify the eve.it as a deviation from a commitment, and issue a revised inspection repo'.t reflecting this change.
Your promptrattention to this matter will be appreciated.
Very truly yours, Baddf.'74 David C. Trimble Manager, Lic2nsing DCT:1p
-.