ML20141J969
| ML20141J969 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 05/19/1997 |
| From: | Pederson C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Powers K CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20141J973 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-155-97-05, 50-155-97-5, EA-97-197, NUDOCS 9705280273 | |
| Download: ML20141J969 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000155/1997005
Text
~
Od
.
May 19, 1997
EA 97-197
Mr. K. P. Powers
Plant General Manager
Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant
Consumers Energy Company
10269 US 31 North
Charlevoix, MI 49720
SUBJECT:
NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-155/97005(DRS)
Dear Mr. Po' vers:
On April 28,1997, the NRC completed an inspection at the Big Rock Point Nuclear Power
Plant facility. The enclosure to this letter presents the results of this inspection.
During this inspection, we reviewed certain aspects of your radiation protection program
as well as the circumstances surrounding two separate but related radiologically significant
events which recently occurred at the Big Rock Point facility. The events revealed a
number of problems in the radiation protection program including a lack of effective
supervisory oversight and involvement in radiological work activities, a failure to .
adequately address the radiological implications of work activities during the work planning
stage, and a generallack of respect for radiological hazards and controls by the workforce.
The specific events we reviewed included the tour of the power block by a qualified shift
l
supervisor and a senior radiation protection technician under abnormal radiological
.l
conditions which were not appropriately evaluated beforehand and the spread of
!
contamination throughout the turbine building during radioactive waste processing
i
activities. Of concem during the tour event was that there was a general understanding of
the workers that radiological conditions in the area would be more severe than normal yet
'
no contingency plans were considered to compensate for these conditions. Further, when
,
alerted by electronic dosimeter alarms to higher than anticipated dose rates during the
tour, the workers opted to complete the tour rather than immediately exit the area as
required by existing procedures. An inadequate evaluation of the potential radiological
!
hazards also contributed to the spread of contamination in the turbine building.
l
These events, along with the entry of an unqualified worker into a high radiation area
against station procedural requirements, are described in detail in the enclosed report.
l
Three related apparent violations, two of which occurred twice, were identified which
'
collectively indicated that a significant lack of attention toward licensed responsibilities
existed in the radiation protection area. It is important to prepare carefully for radiological
work activities and to always assess the current and potential radiological conditions in the
i
job area, to be familiar with procedural and radiation work permit requirements for the job, i
and to ensure everyone involved is properly qualified for their work activities.
1
"
9705280273 970519
5 "
^
"
' NP
llEIElllllMllllllME
'
,
-
,,
.-
-.w.--
>>- - -
.
. _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
K. P. Powers
-2-
May 19, 1997
Based os. We results of this inspection, the three apparent violations identified are being
considered for escalated enforcement action in accordance with the " General Statement of
Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600.
The apparent violations were either self-identified during your review of these events or
were self-revealing during the events.
The circumstances surrounding the apparent violations, the significance of the issues, and
the need for lasting and effective corrective action were discussed with members of your
staff at an interim inspection exit meeting on April 3,1997 and again when the inspection
was completed on April 28,1997. We were provided the results of your detailed review
of the events, including the immediate and planned corrective actions you developed. As
a result, it may not be necessary to conduct a predecisional enforcement conference in
order to enable the NRC to make an enforcement decision. However, a Notice of Violation
i
is not presently being issued for these inspection findings. Before the NRC makes its
enforcement decision, we are providing you an opportunity to either (1) respond to the
apparent violations addressed in this inspection report within 30 days of the date of this
letter or (2) request a predecisional enforcement conference. Please contact Mr. Thomas
Kozak at (630) 329-9866 within 7 days of the date of this letter to notify the NRC of your
intended response.
Your response should be clearly marked as a " Response to Apparent Violations in
inspection Report No. 50-155\\97005(DRS)" and should include for each apparent
violation: (1) the reason for the apparent violation, or, if contested, the basis for disputing
the apparent 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. Your response should be submitted under
oath or affirmation and may reference or include previous docketed correspondence, if the
correspondence adequately addresses the required response. If an adequate response is
not received within the time specified or an extension of time has not been granted by the
NRC, the NRC will proceed with its enforcement decision or schedule a predecisional
enforcement conference.
In addition, please be advised that the number and characterization of apparent violations
described in the enclosed inspection report may change as a result of further NRC review.
You will be advised by separate correspondence of the results of our deliberations on this
matter.
1
_ _
.
_ _ _ _
.
.
.___.-_ _._.
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
._
i
.
!'
.
K. P. Powers
-3-
May 19, 1997
!
f
in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter,
,
its enclosure, and your response (if you choose to provide one) will be pieced in the NRC
Public Document Room (PDR). To the extent possible, your response should not include
any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the
PDR without redaction.
Sincerely,
/s/ C. D. Pederson
Cynthia D. Pederson, Director
Division of Reactor Safety
Docket No. 50-155
License No. DPR-6
Enclosure:
Inspection Report 50-155/97005(DRS)
I
cc w/ encl:
R. A. Fenech, Senior Vice President,
Nuclear, Fossil, and Hydro Operations
James R. Padgett, Michigan Public
Service Commission
Michigan Department of Public Health
Department of Attorney General (MI)
Distribution:
Docket File w/enci
SRis, BRP, Palis w/enci
CAA1 w/enci
,PtiGLiC IC-Oi w/ encl
LPM, NRR w/enci
J. Lieberman, OE w/enci
OC/LFDCB w/ encl
A. B. Beach, Ritt w/enci
J. Goldberg, OGC w/enci
)
DRP w/ encl
J. L. Caldwell, Rlli w/enct
R. Zimmerman, NRR w/ encl
DRS w/ encl
Rlli Enf. Coordinator w/ encl
Rlli PRR w/enci
TSS w/encI
SEE ATTACHED CONCURRENCES
DOCUMENT NAME: G:DRS\\ BIG 97005.DRS
To receive e copy of thle docurnent, indicate in the box: *C" = Copy w/o att/enci"E' = Copy w/att/enci"N"$No copy
0FFICE
RIII
l
RIII
l
RIII
l
RIII
l
RIII/ W
l
NAME
West / Paul:jp
Kozak
Burgess
Clayton
PedeW dn
DATE
05/
/97
05/
/97
05/
/97
05/
/97
05/ R /97
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
i
_ _ _ .
___.__ _
_ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ _
- _ _ . _ _ _ . . .
.
.
K. P. Powers
-3-
in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter,
its enclosure, and your response (if you choose to provide one) will be placed in the NRC
Public Document Room (PDR). To the extent possible, your response should not include
any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so thet it can be placed in the
PDR without redaction.
Sincerely,
A. Bill Beach
Regional Administrator
1
Docket No. 50-155
i
License No. DPR-6
~
Enclosure:
Inspection Report 50-155/97005(DRS)
{
i
cc w/ encl:
R. A. Fenech, Senior Vice President,
Nuclear, Fossil, and Hydro Operations
.
James R. Padgett, Michigan Public
Service Commission
Michigan Department of Public Health
Department of Attorney General (MI)
Distribution:
i
Docket File w/enci
Rlll PRR w/ encl
Rlli Enf. Coordinator w/enci
PUBLIC IE-01 w/ encl
SRis, BRP, Palis w/enci
TSS w/ encl
OC/LFDCB w/enct
LPM, NRR w/ encl
CAA1 w/enci
DRP w/enct
A. B. Beach, Rlll w/enci
l
DRS w/ encl
C. D. Pederson, Rlll w/ enc!
t
l
DOCUMENT NAME: G:DRS\\ BIG 97005.DRS
To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure
"E" =
Ccpy with attachment /3nclosure
"N" = No copy
0FFICE
RIIW6:: RIII
lN RIlhd
ls
RIII
l6 RIII
l
RIII
NAME
West /PaIJ1:jp KozairTl(/
Bur @n
Clayton // L
Pederson
Beach
DATE
05//.? /97
05/13/97
05/ M /97
05//G /97
05/
/97
05/
/97
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
-
.