ML20149H458

Notice of Violation from Insp on 940926-30 & 1012-14. Violations Noted:Licensee Did Not Provide Training to Operators Relative to Modification or Evaluate Need to Revise Operating Procedures Prior to Restarting Sys

ML20149H458
Person / Time
Site:	Framatome ANP Richland
Issue date:	11/10/1994
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20149H456	List: ML20149H454 ML20149H458 ML20149H477
References
70-1257-94-06, 70-1257-94-6, NUDOCS 9411220210
Download: ML20149H458 (2)

Text

r. _ - _

\

APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Siemens Power Corporation Docket: 70-1257 Richland, Washington License: SNM-1227 During an NRC inspection conducted on September 26-30 and October 12-14, 1994, two violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the

" General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions,"

10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, the violations are listed below:

1. License Condition No. S-1 of SNM License No. 1227 authorizes the use of licensed materials in accordance with the statements, representations, and conditions contained in Part I of the licensee's application dated July 1987, and supplements dated November 12, 1987, and supplements thereto. '

Section 2.5, " Operating Procedures, Standards and Guides," Part I of the .

license application states, in part, that the licensee is committed to I controlling activities in accordance with Standard Operating Procedures, Company Standards and Policy Guides.

A. Item 8.1 of Section 8.0, " Acceptance of Work Completed" of Procedure EMF-858, No,1.13, " Engineering Change Notice (ECN),"

Revision 13, dated December 22, 1993, requires, prior to l operation, the startup approval signatures must be obtained. The startup approval process on Page 2 of the ECN requires the operating supervisor to make a determination that operator training has occurred and standard operating procedures have been ,

revised, or that these actions are not required before startup approval is obtained.

Centrary to the above, following a modification to the powder l preparation systems on February 14 and 18, 1994, the licensee did not provide training to operators relative to the modification or evaluate the need to revise operating procedures prior to restarting these systems. Specifically, when the modification was completed, the engineering department did not forward the applicable ECN to the operations department which circumvented these actions.

This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI).

B. Item 4.16 in Section 4.0, " Radiological, Industrial and Fire Safety," of Operating Procedure EMF-22, No. P66,813. " Preparation of U0, [ uranium dioxide] Powder as Press Feed," Revision 23, dated August 12, 1994, requires that prior to operating the powder I preparation system, a checkoff list must be completed in l accordance with Attachment C to verify that the system has been properly reassembled. One of the checkoff items for the powder preparation system on Attachment C, " Powder Prep Start of Shift 9411220210 941118 PDR ADOCK 07001257 C PDR j

Checkoff List," requires verification that all hood doors are closed and latched. >

Contrary to the above, on September 18, 1994, two bottom latches on a lower door of the Line 2 powder preparation hammermill hood were not verified to be latched before starting the powder preparation system. The failure to secure these latches allowed approximately 41 kilograms of low enriched uranium powder to spill from the hood door onto the floor outside of the hood, in conjunction with a larger spill inside the hood.

This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI).

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Siemens Power Corporation 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 IV,s611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas 76011, and a copy to the Region IV Field Office, Walnut Creek, California, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this 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 this Notice, an order or a Demand for Information 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 Jaf/, day of Norrmber 1994