ML20199A162
| ML20199A162 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 01/05/1999 |
| From: | Merschoff E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Wells A ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20199A167 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-458-97-20, IA-98-004, IA-98-4, NUDOCS 9901120375 | |
| Download: ML20199A162 (4) | |
Text
,,,,
p REcu
- q UNITED STATES f
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
REGloN IV
'f b,
611 nYAN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 400 ARUNGToN. TEXAS 76011-8064 January 5, 1999 IA 98-004 Mr. A. Davey Wells Superintendent of Radiation Control River Bend Station P.O. Box 220
. St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC INVESTIGATION REPORT NO. 4-97-059)
Dear Mr Wells:
This refers to the predecisional enforcement conferences ~ conducted on February 27,1998, and on June 26,1998, in the NRC's Region IV office in Arlington, Texas. The conferences were
. conducted to discuss whether you provided the NRC senior resident inspector at the River Bend Station (RBS) with information that you knew was incomplete and inaccurate. An apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.5 was described in a 1etter to you dated February 4,1998. We identified an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.9 involving your employer, Entergy Operations,
- Inc., on May 5,1998, and documented it in a letter dated May 7,1998.
The circumstances of the case are briefly described as follows. On October 10,1997, an NRC inspector observed a contract radiation protection (RP) technician reach across a contaminated area boundary (to perform a smear survey) in the fuel storage building while wearing only cotton liners on his hands, in violation of radiation work permit (RWP) requirements (refer to NRC Inspection Report 50-458/97-20, dated February 5,1998). The inspector was informed by the technician's supervisor that the applicable RWP was 97-0002, which required " booties and gloves" as minimum protective clothing. The inspector who observed the violation left the site on October 14,1997, after providing the information regarding the potential violation to the NRC's onsite senior resident inspector. On October 15, you scheduled a meeting with the NRC senior resident inspector to discuss the poten ial RWP violation. Specifically, the potential violation was a failure to adhere to RWP 97-0002 in that the RWP listed minimum anti-contamination clothing requirements as " booties and gloves," when the technician, on October 10,1997, only wore cotton glove liners.
During the October 15,1997, meeting, you showed the senior resident inspector the access logs and the four RWPs that the technician signed onto during the period October 10-15,1997.
The access logs indicated that on October 10, the technician had signed onto RWP 97-9002, which applied to drywell activities, and not to the technician's activities which were observed in
'the fuel storage building. The log also indicated that the technician had signed onto RWP 97-0002 on October 14. During the October 15 meeting, you explained that RBS' program allows a radiation protection technician to work under an RWP (i.e.,97-0002) without actually signing onto it under certain circumstances (e.g., if the technician is signed on an RWP in which the technician would likely receive the majority of his or her exposure and if he or she understands and follows the requirements of the appropnate RWP, and if the dose received is transferred to 9901120375 990105 PDR ADOCK 05000458 G
Mr. A. Davey Wells.
2 the appropriate RWP). You stated that none of the RWPs, including RWP 97-0002, were violated because none of the RWPs required " minimum booties and gloves;"instead the RWPs allowed a technician to determine the protective clothing requirements. However, during that
. meeting you did not present the version of RWP 97-0002 that had been in effect on October 10, 1997. You presented a subsequent revision to the RWP that changed the minimum protective clothing requirements to state that the protective clothing requirements could be established by
'the RP technician.
Your positions during the February 27 and June 26,1998 predecisional enforcement conferences are summarized in Enclosure 2.
After careful consideration, the NRC has concluded that during the October 15,1997, meeting with the NRC's senior resident inspector, you provided him with information that you knew was l
inaccurate and incomplete, in violation of 10 CFR 50.5, " Deliberate Misconduct." The bases for l
our conclusion are summarized in Enclosure 2.
"The integrity of licensee managers is a matter that the NRC views as particularly important. In light of your position in the company, we carefully reviewed the factors discussed in Section Vill of the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions"
_ (Enforcement Policy), NUREG 1600. Specifically, we recognize that the issue of a radiation
- protection technician reaching across a contamination area boundary with only a cotton glove liner as opposed to a rubber glove is of relatively low safety significance and would not result in undue radiation exposures (notably because the technician was familiar with the contamination
~
l' levels present). Accordingly,in consideration of your position within the company and the safety significance of the underlying violation, the violation has been categorized at Severity Level Ill.
In addition to the enforcement action against you, we are, simultaneously, issuing to Entergy a Notice of Violation and Proposed imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of $55,000 as a result of your misconduct. A copy of this action is attached.
The NRC has concluded that information regarding the reason for the violation, the corrective ac%ns taken and planned to correct the violation and prevent recurrence and the date when fuli compliance was achieved is already adequately addressed in the following letters: Undated
- letter from Davey Wells to Ellis Merschoff with accompanying affidavit dated February 24,1998; February 23,1998 letter from John McGaha to Ellis Merschoff; June 22,1998 letter from Davey Wells to Ell _is Merschoff; June 25,1998 letter from John McGaha to Ellis Merschoff; July 1,
-1998 letter from' John McGaha to Ellis Merschoff; and July 8,1998 letter from Rick King l-(Entergy) to Art Howell (NRC). However, you are required to submit a written statement or L
_ explanation pursuant to 10 CFR 2.201 if the description therein does not accurately reflect your l.
corrective actions or your position. However,if you choose to provide a response, please j
provide it within 30 days of the date of this letter, following the instructions in the attached l
Notice.-
I This matter has been discussed between the NRC, Entergy, and you in severalletters. You and Entergy requested that the letters be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice " Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.
These letters have not yet been placed into the PDR. However, records or documents l
l i
I 1
l Mr. A. Davey Wells 3
compiled for enforcement purposes are normally placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR). In light of the fact the NRC has concluded that you engaged in deliberate misconduct, correspondence related to this issue will be placed in the PDR after appropriate redaction for personal privacy information such as home address. Any subsequent response, if you choose
/
to submit one, may also be placed in the PDR.
if you have any questions or comments,'please contact Mr. Art Howell at 817-860-8100 or 800-
[
952-9677.
i Sincerely, Ellis W. Merschof Regional Admini rator Docket No. 50-458 License No. NPF-47
Enclosures:
As stated cc w/
Enclosures:
Randall K. Edington, Vice President - Operations River Bend Station Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box 220 St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 i
.