ML20132E602
| ML20132E602 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 07/09/1985 |
| From: | Grace J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Williams J FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20132E605 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8508020041 | |
| Download: ML20132E602 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000250/1985017
Text
____
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
- _ - _ _ . .__ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _
_ _ _
kM
-
.
.
JUL 0 91985
i
/ Florida Power and Light Company
ATTN: Mr. J. W. Williams, Jr.
Group Vice President
Nuclear Energy Department
P. O. Box 14000
Juno Beach, FL 33408
Gentlemen:
'
,
SUBJECT:
REPORT NOS. 50-250/85-17 AND 50-251/85-17
l
,
j
On May 13-17, 1985, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff inspected
j
activities authorized by NRC Operating License Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41 for your
i
Turkey Point facility. At the conclusion of the inspection, the findings were
discussed with those members of your staff identified in the enclosed inspection
report. The NRC's concerns relative to the inspection findings were dift'UTIT5 by
myself, members of this office, and C. O. Woody, Vice President - Nuclear
Operations, of your office in an enforcement conference held at the NRC Region !!
Office on June 4, 1985.
During the enforcement conference, you stated that the specific activity of the
radioactive material in the package that 1 caked was less than the exempt
concentration stated in 10 CFR 71.10 and that, consequently, no violation of
NRC requirements occurred.
However, your personnel made no evaluation of this
,
i
package or its contents for applicability of the exempt concentrations stated in
10 CFR 71.10 prior to the shipment.
It is the NRC position that the
i
',
determination by an ex post facto evaluation that a shipment could have been made
'
under less restrictive requirements than those actually used is not an option
available to a shipper of radioactive material.
You also stated that the
!
!
calculated average specific activity in the package was made using the
methodology contained in an NRC Branch Technical Position Paper concerning
classification of radioactive waste required by 10 CFR 61.55.
None of the
I
calculation methods described in the Branch Technical Position Paper are
i
appitcable to the shipment you made in that the Branch Technical Position does
i
not address the determination of specific activity for a mixture of contaminated
l
,
i
equipment and dewatered, unsolidified resin in the same package.
The activity
I
in the package was not homogeneously dispersed; thereforo, the determination of
the specific activity by dividing the total activity by the total weight waste
l
was inappropriate.
i
Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the report. Within these
areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and
representative records, interviews with personnel, and observation of activities
in progress.
,
The inspection findings indicated that certain activities violated NRC require-
monts.
The violations, references to pertinent requirements, and elements to be
included in your response are presented in the enclosed Notice of Violation,
k
0
"' m'
.
-
_ _ _ - _ - - -
,
I
l
o
'
N 0 91985
Flori 4 Power and Light Company
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Fractice", Part 2,
Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosures
will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
The responses directed by this letter and the enclosures are not subject to the
,
clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget issued under the
>
'
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
,
Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact us.
Sincerely,
j
i
i
J. Nelson Grace
l
Regional Administrator
l
Enclosures:
i
1.
i
2.
Inspection Report Nos. 50-250/85-17
i
and 50-251/85-17
i
,
cc w/encis:
[
vC. M. Wethy, Vice President
Turkey Point Nuclear Plant
I
/C. J. Baker, Plant Manager
'
Turkey Point Nuclear Plant
rR. J. Acosta, Plant QA Superintendent
,
bec w/encls:
vNRC Resident Inspector
i
,
l
Document Control Desk
'
'
State of Florida
See previous concurrence sheet
R!!
R!!
RI!
RI!
RI!
RAlbright:bhg
CMHosey
DMCollins
JPStohr
SAElrod
l
06/ /85
06/ /85
06/ /05
06/ /85
06/ /85
t
i
!
l
R!
R!!
R!!
RI
RI!
!
M) d
JA01
'
'
c
ini
vtsrowniee
Rowaiker
nski
06
/85
06/ /85
06/ /85
06/Qf85 06
/85
(
i
!
'
H 774p/me<mmm
i
ly 9 kr.ey h e e n 7.* ur
'
l
r
i
L
. _.
.
-
,
Florida Power and Light Company
2
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice", Part 2,
Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosure
will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
The responses directed by this letter and the enclosures are not subject to the
clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget issued under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact us.
Sincerely,
J. Nelson Grace
Regional Administrator
Enclosures:
1.
2.
Inspection Report Nos. 50-250/85-17
and 50-251/85-17
cc w/ enc 1s:
C. M. Wethy, Vice President
Turkey Point Nuclear Plant
C. J. Baker, Plant Manager
Turkey Point Nuclear Plant
R. J. Acosta, Plant QA Superintendent
bec w/encis:
NRC Resident Inspector
1b
dib.L. g N
Document Control Desk
la /l3
State of Florida
RII
RI!
/
R
RI!
RI!
f
RAlbrigh ibhg
CMHosdf
DMCollins
JP3tohr
06/}y/85
06/gy/85
06/11/85
064%/85
06/s /85
RI!
R!!
t
RI!
R!!
qd
of
(Y
GMJenkins
VLBrownlee
RDWi er
JA01shinskt
06/ /85
06/3/85
06
- /85
06/ /85
N s.
I 1/d o ' '
,
cc /
,; -
- -
~