ML20011A348
| ML20011A348 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wood River Junction |
| Issue date: | 05/19/1981 |
| From: | Gregg R UNITED NUCLEAR CORP. (SUBS. OF UNC, INC.) |
| To: | Martin T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20011A337 | List: |
| References | |
| RJG-81-77, NUDOCS 8110090340 | |
| Download: ML20011A348 (3) | |
Text
s
'l UnC RECOVEFtV SYSTGm5 RJG 81-77 Dmsion of United Nuclear Co porabon One Narragansett Trail Telephone 401/364-7701 A UnC RESOURCES Cortpany Wood P.sver Junction. Rhode Island 02894 j
May 19, 1981 U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commissicn Mr. Thomas P. Martin, Acting Director Division of Engineering and Technical Inspection Region I 631 Park Aver.uc King of Prussia, PA 19406
Subject:
USNRC Inspection 70-820/80-25
Reference:
1.
Letter on Subject, R.
J. Gregg to George H.
Smith, RJG: 81-48, dated March 10, 1981 2.
- Telecen, P.
- Knapp, H. W.
- Crocker, R.
J.
Gregg, May 6, 1981 Gentlemen:
The reference (1) letter presented UNC's response to the subject inspection report.
However, as discussed in the reference (2) telephone conversation, we neglected to provide, in all cases, the " corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations",
as requested in the report.
That information is included in the attachment to this letter.
We apologize for this overnight, and hope that this correspondence is acceptable to you.
In addition, as we discussed, we have included our com-ments to the question of delays in information which you reviewed in your letter of October 28, 1980 to C.
E.
Bowers, in connection with NRC Inspection 70-820/80-05.
If we can be of any further assistance, please contact me.
Very truly yours, UNC RECOVERY SYSTEMS
\\'3 aung a.
J.
Gregg Plant Manager cc:
G.
O.
Amy J.
L'Heureux K.
A.
Helgeson C110090340 810924
{DRADOCK 07000820 PDR l.
e
,;., e q
ATTACHMENT.TO LETTER-RJG: 81-77 R. J. GREGG TO T. P. MARTIN DATED MAY.19, 1981 -
USNRC. INSPECTIONS 70-820/80-25 and 80-05 INSPECTION 80-25 UNC CORRECTIVE ACTION ITEM'A The individual item corrective action was presented in UNC letter RJG: 81-48.
To protect against future occurrences, the current license requirements have been reviewed with the responsible personnel, and until 4
such time as those requirements are officially deleted from the license, a nuclear criticality safety evalua-tion will be documented and made a part of the records associated with the introduction of new equipment hav -
ing unsafe geometry.
ITEM B Specific corrective action was presented in letter BJG: 81-48.
As the situation was caused by removal of process equipment, and since no more process equipment remains in the building, this condition cannat be re-peated until such time as the actual exhaust systems are disabled or removed.
That action will not be taken unless a.) it can first be assured that the air flow balance will be properly maintained, b. ) additional
(
compensating exhaust capability is provided, c.) the maintenance of the process area as a contamination con-trol zone is no longer necessary, or d.) the license requirement is modififed.
ITEM C No'ccrrective action response is required.
ITEM D A listing of required reports has been generated and will be made available to future replacement personnel.
In addition, all members of NIS have been made know-legable of the list.
ITEM E Upon identification of this item by the inspector, an exposure history form was prepared.
This report was transmitted to the individual on January 5, 1981, and to the Director of Management and Program Analysis.
The responsible personnel were reinstructed as to the re-l quirements for termination exposure reports.
r 3-
~
q N. ;; %
_v 1
92
- INSPECTION 80-05 In the NRC letter of October 28, 1980'(George H. Smith to C..E.
Bowers), concern was expressed relative.to Item A
- that the flow of information to the NRC at the time of the inspection might not always be adequate., It must be recognized that, in cortain types of NRC inspections, ex-
-tremely large volumes of information (files,. reports'. forms, Llogs,=etc.) are requested by and provided to the inspector.
While UNC makes every reasonable' effort to provide the're-quested information in a timely manner,'it is not always possible to do so..
In the specific case in question, we were dependent uponian outside auditor to provide the in-formation, and thus encountered a delay.
None the less, UNC wills a.) continue to make every reasonable attempt to provido.the information when requested,-b.) identify, during the inspection or closcout meeting, those cases where we have been unable to locate the requested information, c.)
con--
tinue to search for sucn information' subsequent to the in-spectien, and when it is located, inform the inspector of that. fact.
To help assure the complete flow of information, we feel that it would-be useful for the inspector, prior to finalizing his report, to contact UNC to determine whether or not any new information was available which could affect the substance F'
of.the report.
We hope that these actions will help assure that future inspec-tion reports are based on a complete availability and knowledge of casential information..
t 1
1 i
,e.-
,,n,
,.,.,---.,..n
- _ _, - - -.,..,