ML20055C045

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Region 3 to Licensee & Notice of Violation & Imposition of Civil Penalty for Zion Facility.Proposed Fine Not Indicative of Future Level of Performance of Byron Plant Mgt
ML20055C045
Person / Time
Site: Byron  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 08/06/1982
From: Matt Young
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
To: Von Zellen B
NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIV., DE KALB, IL
References
NUDOCS 8208100065
Download: ML20055C045 (8)


Text

d# " ** UNITED STATES

$g~

'^

/

n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j ) j WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 y , z

\$..'"...! August 6, 1982 9

Professor Bruce von Zellen Northern Illinois University Department of Biological Sciences DeKalb, IL 66105 In the Matter of COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Byron Station, Units 1 and 2)

Docket Nos. 50-454, 50-455

Dear Professor von Zellen:

I am in receipt of your letter of July 22,1982(copyattached) regarding a fine proposed on July 9,1982 by the NRC for imposition upon the Applicant for an overexposure incident at the Zion plant. A copy of the NRC letter to the Applicant and the notice of violation and proposed imposition of civil penalties is enclosed.

As stated in the attached affidavit of William L. Forney, despite the large amount, this fine, if imposed, would be the first fine imposed at Zion in four years and the first imposed on the Applicant this year.

The proposed fine is not indicative of the future level of performance of Byron plant management and does not change his overall conclusion on Contention 1. See affidavit of William Forney accompanying the July 14 Staff response to Applicant's motion for summary disposition of DAARE/ SAFE Contention 1.

Sincerely, A< L E{. fr-u uf

. Mit * . Young Counsel for NRC Staff Enclosure as stated l cc: (w/ enclosure) service list DESIGNATED ORIGINAI.

Certified BT N

8208100065 820806

{DRADOCK 05000454 PDR

. * .o t

i.

I. -

.I-t% mJ 3 *:HD O'I ATES OT A13 ElCJs .

!!!!Cl.IJ.A XLGl*J.hTOHY CO2 !'.!ST)0:2 p

L*.".'M3 C T.1;* I -"Y A'*f. I.) C!.!;f :liG ! :.-;;!C F8 ) s". Al. TJIT.

1, 4*s 1.ht' d'"?Or 0I 1

Incht t. !;;;F . !eO- *# i 4 COI'TA!!Y )  !,0 /. !,5 CJTJ:;WG:1."M T.*.;: f.

)

) '

(Iyrrm .:.toticn, tv.ite 1 und 2) s

JTiDAVIT C'T W 2,!.3 AM 1.. Fr.*lC;r Y w
rn car.]of.c nr.6 rt c.te to 1p31 t/.cr : i

, Wil.* i am.1,. T 02 ocy , be j ng Ym 2 y .

i::.,t r.s r c h $300,000 .

ct Ot0y,V, 118f12 ihe TAC 3 rover.eu tt J-

.. 3 in aiuc.re that I f tr:.t<ir e: 6. the fine wauld be tJie fine ::;es: Cexn::rwr ed et. I di er.n' t: :' sun ;J ar.t..

t? the Af #idt Vit of

  • :: r: l int s:.wt e:. tit Lior, ir,itnr yr'n: F ( t- t'c I it s.cl.::er nt .1 J ul y M .M aa ' ! rt Fjc:st c. t.o the
  • ; '.1.i,ir ;. . I tir::e . . v!.n l. arr.:.rg.ar.i en iht-

~

net.s on t or etirti.rary cli f } cr:. ; ion) . "J ht. fint: wnulti ElFtn ht? -

:::c:r.ve c2 ti: 1.t.i rr n ' t i or.

.:a

's: M its,tet.rd on; any Corrennjt alth Init:o . f.5 :.iity t h r; yr ir.dient vc c! tht- *::turc Jcvv3 vi pcytestance

r.e p en cev6 fi nc i s s.:'.t ~'
ha :pr sny overa13 7),e ps orer-r d i d rie de es 3.o-r f tht ' res. 3 3 r.r.: tr.:.t..,y e.e nt .

ti.t.- t bc 19 3 3.icant her. decaon-cent ~ :r.f on.

c:2 ir61::p r,:.AW./5NT. cia. entier. I 1: oj t r.te Eyrcin rnf uly and O rt r a.; e6 1.: t': t' c 9 t ch:: iced idii3 i t y innd rt r ui ac.:.1 w :.h :It.c ytcdizriar.ntt.

. c.r ..' r r :.;.::ct. _

1.en < f v y 1:nvr4e6ps .

err .: - i r t. oc. una c.:: tet

- tc : lit 1( .~r  %. >

. c3

'N- ,./ ...

k. LLb As.*

a . .t 3 : :r :s !. . . c : i:t :. (

~

tu'rs to hticre ,

.~::.::o c r. r t i. ..

-t. :n $ ,'1:u du e :! 7..:; t:* , . : W.

  • ,.\ ** */ .

t

. e

- d ,- s.5 cq. . s . / /,,J ._'t. -L -

f.: r.: . 7 :. a e .

  • ,t.:c tv..ts. ~xi.iytt.:

' .* - VS _ -.

is 1 - . Idly I.1NI l

  • l Docket No. 50-293 License No. DPR-39 l EA 82-78 l

Coemonwealth Edison Dorpany ATIN: Mr. James .7. D'Connor President i

Test Office Box 7&T -

l Chicago, IL 60690 -

Centlement i

nis refera to the specl&) Insped}on conducted by liessr&. b. f,. bilier and

' L. R. Greger of our Region III staff on Harch 30-31 April 7-6, and 29,1982 .

of activities at the Zion h'ucle&r Poser station, hit 1. In Zion, Illinois, authorf red by KRC Operating License h*o. DPR-39. H e results of this special inspection were discussed on April 17. 1982 during an enforcement conferenc4 at the NRC Region III Office between Mr. t. Reed and others of your staff and Mr. J. Keppler and others of the RRC staff. The special inspectlen was con-ducted to review the circunstances hurrounding the overexposure received by a worker during an entry beneath the h it i reactor vessel (reactor cavity) en March 25, 1982.

1 The results of thi Inspecl$on IndicAtk &Erfout weaknesses in your radiation

'- protection prograr. concerning systecatje evaluation and planning of radiation work. Specific weaknesses exhibited in this incident include: (1) lack of I

coordination between plant health physicists And rad /cher foremen in planning the entries, (2) Anadequate radiation surveys associated with the entries, (3) use of inexperienced rad /ches technicians to monitor the entries, (4) lack of understanding by radiation protection personnel of the reactor cavity radio-logical hazards including the radiation tources (3) Anadequate training in reactor cavity radiological hazards even though & tiellar overexposure had occurred in 1976, (6) failure of shift operations personnel in leadership positions to exhibit good radiation protection practices, And (7) unevailabil-ity of survey instruments calibrated to greater than $0 R/hr.

k*e consider the breakdown In kanskemeni. tontro}s khich Aihed this overexposure to occur to represent herloui programatic L eeknesset in your radiation protec-tion program, k'e are particularly concerned that this overexposure occurred 1 I CERTITIED MAIL ffETLTM T5MDTMf Ff6t@Jtsf@il

Comonwealth Edison borpany A a' July I,1982 even though you lepleeented Actions to preclude 6uch an occurrence es & result of a similar overexposure et Zion, Unit 1 in 1976 and in response to It Circular 76-03, which warned of the potential radiation hazards Ass.ociated*with PWR re'ector cavities. Our concerns kere discussed kith your representatives durin&

the enforcement conference At the Region Ill of fice. Although the correctiva actions proposed during the enforcement conference and th your keportabla Occurrence Repprt dated Ap:11 23, 1982 generally represent positive steps to resolve our concerns, additional Actions Are required.

After consultation with the Director of the Offlet of inspection and Enforcement.

I have been authorized to issue the enclosed h'otice of Violation and Proposed leposition of Civil Penalties in the ar.ount of One Hundred Thousand Dollars. la assessing these civil penalties we gave consideration not only to the circum-stances described above which led to the violations At issue but also to the prior notice (IE Circular 76-03) and civil penalties for sia;ilar events at this facility and elsewhere. These considerations resulted in proposed civil penal-ties of $100,000 because we believe & herious breakdown in kanagement controla and your radiation protection prograns occurred which resulted in in unnecessary exposure.

  • In your response to this $etter, please follow thi $nstructions $n the Itotica.

' Your response should specifically address the weaknesses noted above, corrective actions you have taken or plan to take to leprove the sansgesent effectiveness of your radiation protection program, And your plans to provide & high level of l assurance that unnecessary exposuret resulting free 6ntry into the reactor cavity will not occur stein at the Zion f acility. Tou should consider engineer-Ang controls, such es & camere eonitoring syster. er a leak detection systes, to eliminate the need to enter the reactor cavity when incere thlebles or detectors are withdrawn. You thould 41so consider autozatit tystems And procedural controls for preventing reactor cavity entries when high radiation levels exist and procedural controls to rinleine the time the incere thimbles or detectors are in unshielded positont. Your response should include an analysis and rationale for your conclusions regarding these considerations.

Your written reply to this letter and the results of future inspections will be considered in determining whether further enforcement action is appropriath.

In accordance with section i.790 of the NRC*t " Rules of bractich," Part 2 6 Title 10, code of Federal Regulations, a copy of thik letter and the enclosura vill be placed la the NRC Public bocument Room.

S e

W h

l

.j u y'l h, 1985 Comonwealth Edison borpiny ')&

t i ne response directed by thjt jelikt and th6 Mciosed Notjck krh not subject d to the clearance procedures of the Offici of kanagerent ind ludset* is seguire by the Paperwork Reduction Act bi 1980. F1,96-311.

blnckrk))4 janei 6. keppleir itegional Administritor i

i Inclosure:

NoticeofV3olationkndfropossd Imposition of Civil Penaltlet

  • cc: ~.

IllinoisDepartzentofNuciairkabi) '

~

AT1%: Dr. Philip t. Custafsos - .

Director ~

1035 Outer Park briv&

Springfield, IL 62708 .

Tyrone C. Tahner Attorney Genersi of 1111mbl&

500 5. Second St.

Springfield. IL 627M l

I Michael V. Hasten, Chiirsin l Illinois Connerce Co::cisalon

! 527 E. Capitol Ave. .

Springfield. IL 62708 .

e 4

ND71Cl 6T V101AT10M Am MPOPOSEb l*: POSITION OF CIVIL hENALTitt Co.anonwenith Edison Comp &ny M ket No. $0-19$

Zion Nuc1sar Power station Licensa No. DPA-39 ,

1A 42-74 Unit 1 I

As a result of an inspection conduct 4d harch 30-31 and April 1-I. and N .

l 1982 at the Zion Nuclear Power Station. Unit 1. In Zion. Illinois. It j

appears that significant problems in the inplerentation of the licensee's t

health physics program resulted in en overexposure incident. The ifconsee

! failed to make adequate evaluationt of radiation horards before entries into an area beneath the Unit i reactor vessel, 4 high radiation area, and infled to ensure that en individu&l kould not he exposed to a radiation .

dose in excess of regulatory limith.

l In accordance with the h*RC knforcement Polic (10 brR fart I Appendia 5) *

! 47 TR 9987 (March 9, 1982). And pursuant to action 234 of the Atoele l

Energy Act of 1954 es 6 tended ("Act"), 42 t!.$.C. 2282, PL 96-29$. &nd 3

10 CFR 2.205, the particular violations and the Assotiat6d tivil penaltiat

- are set forth belout 1

A. 10 CrR 20.201(b) requires that each 15censee makt er cause to he made such evaluations of radiation hazards es (1) may he necessary for the

- licensee to comply with the regulaticns in 10 CTR Part 20, and (2) ar6 reasonable under the circumstances to avaluate the extant of radiation hazards that may be present.

Contrary to the above, ih ileensee failed to make tuch radiation aval-untions at were necessary And reasonable under the circumstances to ensure compliance with 10 CTR 20.101 for entries of individuals into l

an area beneath the Unit i reactor vessh) on.harch 24 and 25,1982.

1his is a Severity level ill idoihtlon (8vpplemeni kV).

(Civil Penalty - $70,000).

3. 10 CTR 20.101(a) limits the whole body radiation dose of Any individ-val in a restricted area to one and one quarter rees per calendar quarter, except es provided by 10 CTR 20.303(b). Paragraph (b) permits

. a whole body dose of three rems per calendar quarter provided certain

. specified conditiont Are met.

a, t

4

, Notice of Violation I Contrary to the &bov6, durin thefirsttelenderquart6rof1941.An individual received 4 whole body dose of approximately five rest.

Most of this dose kes received khile asking an entry into the tras beneath the Unit i reactor vessel on Hare.h 25 6 1982.

This is 4 leverity 1,evel ill tlotation (suppiesent IV).

(Civil Pensity - $30,000).

Pursuant to the provisions of N CFR I.201. Conconwealth tdison Coeipany is hereby required to submit to the birector. Office of Inspection and Enforcement. USNRC. 4'ashington. DC 20$$$. And 4 copy to the Regional Administrator. USNRC Region III. kithin 30 days of the date of thle Notice a written statement or explanation including for each alleged violation: (1) admission or denial of the alleged violation; (2) the reasons for the violation if 6deftted; (3) the corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved; (L) the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations: And ($) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Donsideration ony be given to extending the response time for good cause shown. Under the authority of Section i 182 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2232, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation.

l k'ithin the same time As provided for the responte required above under 10 CFR 2.201, Coernonwealth Edison Company may pay the civil penaltiat in the cumulative amount of one Hundred Thousand Dollars or may protest imposition of the civil penalties in whole or in part by a written answer.

Should comonwealth Edison company fall to answer within the time specified.

the Director, Office of Inspection &nd Enforcement will issue an order imposing the civil penalties in the amount proposed above. Should Coanonwealth Edison Company elect to file an answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.203 pro-testing the civil penaltiets kuch answer may (1) deny the violations listed in this Notice in whole or in parti (2) demonstrate extenuating circumstances; (3) show error in this Notice; or (I.) show other reasons Why the penalties should not be imposed.

In addition to protesting the tivli penaltiet in Whole or in part. 6uch answer may request remission or mitigation of the penalties. In requesting mitigation of the proposed penalties, the fise factors contained in Section I IV (B) of to CrR part 2. Appendix C should be addressed. Any written answer in accordance with 10 CTR 2.205 should be set forth separately from the statement or explanation in reply potate by specific reference (e.g. pursuant to 10and titing page CTR 2.201, but paragraph may Jncor-numbers) to L.

1 g

s

5 Notice of Violation avoid repetition. Dommonwe&lth tdison'toepany's ettention for 16imposing directed to the other provisions of 10 CFR 2.203, regarding the procedurb a civil penalty.

Uponfailuretopayanyelvlipensitlekdu6.khldshavebeensubsequently determined in accordance with the App)f cable provisions of li30 CTR 2.20$. -

this matter any be referred to the Attorney General, and the pena t ese l unless compromised, reeltted, or altigated. tay be collected by civi action pursuant to Section 234c of the Act. 42 U.R.C. 2282.

Itk THE h'UC12AR kEGUll1VRY COE15$10 james C. keppler Regional Administrator Dated at Glen Ellyn. 1111nols this day of July 1981

. A M. _

- - -

  • __-_ -