ML20058D541
| ML20058D541 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 11/29/1993 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058D502 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9312030190 | |
| Download: ML20058D541 (2) | |
Text
__.
l l
APPENDIX A NOTRE OF VIOLATION Entergy Operations, Inc.
Docket Nos. 50-313 50-368 Russellville, Arkansas 72801 License No. DPR-51 NPF-6 During an NRC inspection conducted on November 1-5, 1993, violations of NRC requirements were identified.
In accordm.e with the " General Statement of f
Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforceme%
7tions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, the violations are listed below:
I A.
Unit 1 Technical Specification 6.8.1.a requires, in part, that written l
procedures be established, implemented, and maintained covering the applicable procedures recommended in Appendix A of Safety Guide 33, November 1972. Safety Guide 33, Appendix A, states, in part, that radiation work permits be covered by written procedures.
I l
Unit 2 Technical Specification 6.8.1.a requires, in part, that written procedures be established, implemented, and maintained covering the applicable procedures recommended in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, February 1978. Regulatory Guide 1.33 states, in part, that radiation work permits be covered by written procedures.
Section 5.5 of Procedure 1000.031, Revision 16. " Radiation Protection Manual," states, in part, that " individuals are responsible for:
adherence to radiological protection requirements..." and "... being knowledgeable of and understanding the requirements and contents of the Radiological Work Permit under which work will be perfc' med."
Radiation Work Permits 930553 and 930311 state, " Alarming Dosimeters are required for entry on this Radiological Work Permit."
Contrary to the above, on November 3,1993, the inspector identified two l
individuals who entered the radiological controlled area under Radiation Work Permits 930553 and 930311 who had not been issued alarming dosimeters.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV) (313/9330-01; 368/9330-01).
B.
10 CFR 20.201(b) requires that each licensee make such surveys as may be necessary to comply with the requirements of Part 20 and which are reasonable under the circumstances to evaluate the extent of radiation hazards that may be present. As defined in 10 CFR 20.201(a), " surveys" means an evaluation of the radiation hazards incident to the production, use, release, disposal, or presence of radioactive materials or other sources of radiation under a specific set of conditions.
9312030190 931129 i
PDR ADOCK 05000313 G
pyg Contrary to the above, the licensee identified that on August 18, 1993, surveys were not made to assure compliance with 10 CFR 20.301, which describes authorized means of disposing of licensed material contained in waste. Specifically, a radiation survey was not performed of two dru; of solvent prior to shipment to an offsite facility for disposal.
Subsequent surveys identified radiation levels of between 0.02 to 2.6 millirem per hour on contact with the drums.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV) (313/9330-02;
'468/9330-02).
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR Part 2.201, Entergy Operations, Inc., is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region IV, and a copy to the NRC Resident inspector at the facility that is the subject of this Notice of Violation (Notice), within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice. This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Vick ?. ion" and should include for each violation:
(1) the reason for the violacion or, if contested, the basis for disputing the violation, (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, (3) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order may be issued to show cause why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked, or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.
Dated at Arlington, Texas, this 29th day of November 1993