ML20129E863
| ML20129E863 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron  |
| Issue date: | 09/27/1996 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20129E844 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-454-96-08, 50-454-96-8, 50-455-96-08, 50-455-96-8, NUDOCS 9610030311 | |
| Download: ML20129E863 (2) | |
Text
4 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Commonwealth Edison Company Docket Nos. 50-454; 50-455 Byron Station, Units 1 and 2 Licenses No. NPF-37; NPF-66 During an NRC inspection conducted from September 3-6, 1996, a violation of NRC requirements was identified.
In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG-1600, the violation is listed below:
10 CFR 20.1902(a) requires that the licensee post each radiation area with a conspicuous sign or signs bearing the radiation symbol and the words " CAUTION, RADIATION AREA."
Contrary to the above, on September 5, 1996, the area outside the high level tool storage area on the 346' elevation of the Auxiliary Building, a radiation area with a radiation dose rate of approximately eight millirem in one hour at 30 cm from the surface that the radiation penetrated was not posted with a sign bearing the radiation symbol and the words " CAUTION, RADIATION AREA."
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Commonwealth Edison is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region III, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the facility that is the subject of this Notice, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting the Notice of Violation (Notice). This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include for each violation:
(1) the reason for the violation, 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 the 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.
Because your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), to the extent possible, it should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the PDR without redaction.
However, if you find it necessary to include such information, you should clearly indicate the specific information that you desire not to be placed in the PDR, and provide the legal basis to support your request for withholding the information from the public.
Dated at Lisle, Illinois this 27th day of September 1996 9610030311 960927 PDR ADOCK 05000454 G
PDR m
f EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Byron Generating Station, Units 1 & 2 NRC Inspection Report 50-454/96-08, 50-455/96-08 1
f This inspection included an announced review of the radiation protection program. One violation was identified concerning the inadequate posting of a radiation area (Section RI.1).
Plant Support The licensee provided good control of radioactive material in the i
reactor Containment Building and posting of radiological hazards.
However, a weakness was identified concerning the licensee's control of radioactive material within Auxiliary Building storage areas and the licensee's posting of radiation areas (Violation No. 50-454/455-96008-Ol(DRS)) (Section RI.1).
The licensee's control of Unit 2 outage dose was a strength. The i
licensee effectively used past outage work critiques to apply lessons learned to existing work. Although pre-job ALARA meetings ensured workers were aware of radiological requirements, weaknesses in worker preparation and a lack-of identifying work contingencies was evident.
i During outage work evolutions, workers demonstrated good radiological practices (Section RI.2).
1 Teamwork between radiation protection, chemistry, and operations staff was effective in reducing source term.
Shutdown chemistry control and system flushing have had positive effects (Section RI.3).
.