ML20065K786
| ML20065K786 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Brunswick |
| Issue date: | 03/31/1980 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML082180535 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-82-261 NUDOCS 8210080122 | |
| Download: ML20065K786 (6) | |
Text
_ -
~
l i
l}
BRUNSWICK Evaluation Period: 4/1/79 - 3/31/80 1
i-I.
General f
Steps have been taken to correct specific weaknesses in the areas of radiation control, contamination control, and environmental protection
'~
n as identified in non-compliances and escalated enforcement actions O
referenced below. Licensee corrective actions have been reviewed and onsite inspection performed where necessary. Enforcement conferences were held with senior licensee management to discuss specific problems Ri and corrective actions. Programmatic improvements were made by the
.i
.S; addition of a Manager of Environmental and Radiation Control and the E
reorganization of Quality Assurance functions.
.O
^}
II. Specific L
IN
~
A.
Contention
..c...
l 2Q "The Brunswick facility displayed evidence of weaknesses in the areas of
~ y; radiation control, contamination control, and environmental protection."
.g ;
i,3 The basis, NRC actions, and licensee corrective actions for this contentio$
are discussed is contentions B-F below.
B.
Contention r-
- n "The inadequate management control over radiation exposure and contaminati am y
resulted in unmonitored and uncontrolled release of airborne radioactive g
material."
.14
,.T 1.
Basis Reference On February 22, 1980 a hole in an IE Rpt. 50-325/80-12,
'~
auxiliary boiler tube resulted in the and 50-324/80-11 l
uncontrolled and unmonitored release of radioactive materials. Evaluation of,the event by the licensee indicated that the release had occurred over-a period of approximately 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />.
l The auxiliary boiler had been contami-IE. Rpt. 50-325/76-21, 780 nated since 1976. The boiler had been decontaminated but was contaminated IE Rpt. 50-324/76-22, 780 again in 1978. The licensee had known that the auxiliary boiler was contami-LER 78-051 nated, but inadequate actions were taken to minimize the release or to collect effluent samples following the February 22, tube rupture.
2.
NRC Action
(
Following the inspection of the event, IE Rpt. 50-325/80-12, the NRC issued an Immediate Action letter and 50-324/80-11 for actions' taken or planned to be taken NRC letter of 3/28/80 by the licensee. An enforcement con-NRC letter of 6/11/80
. B210000122 820712
~~
POR FDIA UDELLB2-261 PDR
2 ference was held on April 15, 1980 to discuss the NRC concerns regarding the release and other managemer ; problems of the health physics program. On June 11, the licensee was issued a Civil Penalty in the amount of $24,000.
These and related topics were discussed IE Rpt. 50-325/80-36, at meetings with senior licensee manage-and 50-324/80-32 ment on May 19, 1980, October 17, 1980, licensee letter of 4/22/80 j
and April 3, 1981. An inspection was licensee letter of 7/3/80 conducted on September 2-4, 1980 regarding the licensee's actions contained in the response to the Immediate Action letter and to the Civil Penalty.
l 4,
3.
Licensee Corrective Action j
l The licensee has taken the specific 11censee letter of 7/34 L,;-j corrective actions contained in the IE Rpt. 50-325/80-36, c l.. $j Immedi, ate Action letter andethe 50-324/80-33 p_ - 13 response to the Civil Penalty. Addi-if;-?)
2?%
tionally, a new boiler system was Qir:fi -
M installed to replace the contaminated k #3 auxiliary boiler. The licensee has
- .2jj$
strengthened the facility's-Health
[.
7; Physics Program by adding a Manager of Environmental & Radiation Control, who reports directly to the Plant Manager.
C.
Contention
"- Management control weaknesses also resulted in-the improper release of licensed material to a sanitary landfill and local salvage dealer."
1.
Basis Reference On April 28, 1980, while conducting a IE Rpt. 50-325/80-18, survey of a sanitary landfill where and 50-324/80-15 trash from the plant is buried, an inspector identified radiation levels higher than background. Subsequent excavation and surveys identified that the landfill contained materials from the plant which were radioactively contaminated above the plant release limits. An inspection was conducted April 26 - May 16 of the site, burial
[
facilities and scrap yards to identify
(
where materials from the site had been buried or sold.
r
~ ~ - - - - - - '
I l
3 2.
NRC Action
,./
The NRC issued two Immediate Action NRC letter of 4/29/81 letters for actions taken or planned NRC letter of 5/2/81 l
,,j to be taken by the licensee. An IE Rpt. 50-325/80-18, I
In enforcement conference was held on and 50-324/80-15
'.c'.')4 May 19 to discuss the NRC concerns NRC letter of 8/1/80 regarding the control and release of radioactive material. On August 1, m a:
the licensee was issued a Civil Penalty l_f. s',
in the amount of $89,000.
l:t;;e:3-i
)
~/d.~:
These and related topics were dicussed IE Rpt. No. 50-325/80-3L r
L3%3 with senior licensee management on and 50-324/80-33 October 17, 1980. An inspection was licensee letter of 5/29z (N y M.
conducted on September 2-4 regarding "ds.i the licensee's actions contained in 9
the response to the Civil Penalty.
U.: L.
[;'dd{
3.
Licensee Corrective Action 99
=-
M The licensee has taken the specific IE Rpt. 50-325/80-36, W55 corrective actions contained in the and 50-324/80-33
@2f D}Y Immediate Action letters and the response licensee letter of 8/27z Chf to the Civil Penalty. Additionally,
-Q d the licensee obtained a permit to operate ~
a sanitary landfill on the plant property.
,n, l_~'
D.
Contention
" Brunswick management control weaknesses were characterized by numerous l
noncompliances concerning the quality assurance program (some of which' were z;epetitive), problems in supervisory overview and the conduct of committee activities, and instances of activities conducted without procedures."
1.
Basis Reference Examples of noncompliances concerning the IE Rpt. 50-324/78-30, quality assurance program include the 79-02, 79-27, 80-39 failure to establish storage, househeeping IE Rpt. 50-325/78-30 and records measures; operation with an 79-02, 79-28, 80-42 inadequate calibration program; and the IE Rpt. 50-400/80-12, failure to perform periodic audits in 50-401/80-10, required areas 50-402/80-10, and 50-403/80-10 Examples of supervisory overview and IE Rpt. 50-324/78-30,
(
conduct of committee activities noncom-79-2, 79-4, 79-7, 79-19 pliances include four occasions on which 79-27, 79-33, 80-10, x
pg
4 the Plant Nuclear Safety committee did 80-11, 80-39 not perform its required safety analysis IE Rpt. 325/78-30, 79-2 reviews. Supervisory overview of noncom-79-3, 79-7, 79-19, 79-28 pliances also include several instances 79-34, 80-11, 80-12, 80-48 of late reports to the NRC, failure to perform required safety evaluations and inadequate reviews of periodic tests.
Examples of noncompliances concerning LER 324-80-66 1.;
activities conducted without procedures IE Rpt. 50-324/79-2, include the calibration of a conductivity 79-29, 79-35, 80-5, 9
meter and a Reactor Core Isolation Cooling 80-18, 80-24, 80-37, 7
system module installation.
In addition 80-38 v
several instances of inadequate procedure IE Rpt. 50-325/79-2, j
use occurred.
79-30, 79-34, 80-5, d
80-21, 80-27, 80-40,
/;fl) 80-41 Nd 2.
NRC Action g
Items of noncompliance were issued for qJJ the items as detailed in the above y
references. Followup and overview of N.'
licensee actions in this area will be g_
[.f.h provided by the Resident Inspectors and
~
tj w
routine inspections conducted by Region II specialists. These ind related topics were discussed at meeti~ngs with senior licensee management on October 17, 1980.
3.
Licensee Corrective Action The licensee has corrected or is in the IE Rpt. 50-324/79-2, process of' correcting those items identi-79-27, 79-35, 80.10, fled. The licensee recently reorganized 81-06 the QA functions which should improve IE Rpt. 50-325/79-2, performance in this area.
79-28, 79-34, 80-19 E.
Contention "The IE performance appraisal team found significant weaknesses in areas involving meanagement overview, training and corrective actions."
1.
Basis Reference In the area of management overview, IE Rpt. 50-324/79-19 and l
corporate managers were found not to 50-325/79-19 review, on a routine basis, operating
(
records and logs as required. Onsite 1
--m.m,...__
u..
_m.
supervisors and nonsupervisory personnel
(-
Additionally, the Plant Nuclear Safety did not review all required documents.
Committee (PNSC) did not perform trend analyses or review events requiring 24-hour reporting. The PNSC did not provide a timely review of Licensee Event Reports. The licensee did not have an offsite review committee.
In the areas of training, the licensee IE Rpt. 50-324/79-19 had no formal program to assure that and 50-325/79-19 changes in the license, technical speci-fications, regulations, guides, codes, l
or standards would result in changes to the training program.
Individual super-
,j visor were relied upon to initiate j
training program changes. No formal j
program for evaluating the effectiveness of the site and corporate training pro-1 grams existed.
1 Corporate training requirements were IE Rpt. 50-324/79-19 j
found not to be well defined. Managers and 50-325/79-19
}.
and supervisors were, in general, relied j
upon to identify the training needs of their personnel. On-the-job training
&g was not well documented.
b
}j Examples of corrective action pgoblems IE Rpt. 50-324/79-19, 3>
include four examples of a failure to and 50-325/79-19 l
make required reports to the NRC. The program for tracking outstanding items was fragmented with no individual assigned responsibility. Management problems or concerns were identified
.through an informal (verbal) system, relying primarily on first line super-l vision to pass concerns to upper manage-ment.
l 2.
NRC Action As a result of this inspection on IE Rpt. 50-324/79-19, September 13, 1979 three items of non-and 50-325/79-19 compliance and one item of deviation were issued. Additionally, eight unresolved items were identified for followup during future inspections.
i These and related topics were l
discussed at meetings with senior licensee management on October 17,
/
1980.
I I
l l
a--,-..-
. _ ~
6 3.
Licensee Corrective Action By letter dated October 5,1979 the licensee letter 10/5/79 the licensee responded to the report and committed to modify their management systems to correct the items of noncom-pliance and the deviation identified.
F.
Contention "However, an Immediate Action Letter was issued concerning inadvertant release of radioactivity to unrestricted areas."
The basis, NRC actions, and licensee corrective action for this contention are discussed in contentions B and C above.
=-
f'.
' ],. '
o i
l 4
s
-