ML20206B561

Forwards Insp Rept 70-7002/99-06 on 990322-26 & Nov.One Violation Identified Involving Failure of Plant Shift Superintendent,Acting as Incident Commander for Er to Fire on 981209,to Classify Emergency Condition as Alert

ML20206B561
Person / Time
Site:	Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant
Issue date:	04/22/1999
From:	Pederson C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	Adkins J UNITED STATES ENRICHMENT CORP. (USEC)
Shared Package
ML20206B564	List: ML20206B561 ML20206B565 ML20206B570
References
70-7002-99-06, 70-7002-99-6, EA-99-080, EA-99-80, NUDOCS 9904290293
Download: ML20206B561 (4)

Text

Q, -._,

April 22, 1999

' EA-99-080 Mr. James N. Adkins Vice President - Production United States Enrichment Corporation Two Democracy Center 6903 Rockledge Drive Bethesda, MD 20817

SUBJECT:

NRC INSPECTION REPORT 70-7002/99006(DNMS) AND NOTICE OF VIOLATION

Dear Mr. Adkins:

' On March 22 through 26,1999, the NRC conducted a followup inspection for the Augmented

' inspection Team review of December 9,1998 through January 8,1999, at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant. The inspection was conducted by Messrs. Kenneth O'Brien and John Jacobson of this office, and Alphonsa Gooden of the NRC's Region ll Office. At the conclusion of the inspection, the findings were discussed with you and those members of your staff identified in the enclosed report.

The purpose of the inspection was to determine whether activities authorized by your certificate

' were conducted safely and in accordance with NRC requirements. Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the report.

Based on the results of this inspection, one apparent violation was identified and is being considered for escalated enforcement action in accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600, Revision 1. The apparent violation occurred on December 9,1998, when the Plant Shift Superintendent, acting as the Incident Commander for an emergency response to a fire involving the Building X-326 Cell 25-7-2, did not classify the emergency condition as an Alert in

- accordance with the NRC-approved Portsmouth Emergency Plan. The circumstances surrounding the apparent violation, the significance of the issue, and the need for lasting and effective corrective action were discussed with you and members of your staff during the

- inspection and the exit meeting on March 26. In addition, your staff has outlined initial corrective actions for the event and some of the surrounding issues as described in the report and in letters to the NRC dated March 19,1999 (GDP 99-0047 and GDP 99-2014). As a result, it may not be necessary to conduct a pre-decisional enforcement conference in order to enable the NRC to make an enforcement decision.

D OO 00 '

~2 _

l t: .,

J. Adkins Based on the information known to the NRC at this time and a preliminary review of the civil penalty adjustment factors in the Enforcement Policy, it appears that a civil penalty may be assessed for this violation.. However, before the NRC makes its enforcement decision, we are l

providing you an opportunity to either: (1) respond to the apparent violation addressed in this inspection report within 30 days of the date of this letter or (2) request a pre-decisional enforcement conference, if a conference is held, it will normally be open for public observation.

The NRC will also issue a press relesse to announce the conference. Please contact Patrick L.

Hiland at (630) 829-9603 within 7 days of the date of this letter to notify the NRC of your intended response.

If you choose to respond, your response should be clearly marked as a " Response to An Apparent Violation in inspection Report 70-7002/99006(DNMS)" and should include: (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 orevious docketed correspondence, if the correspondence adequately addresses the requir. ?sponse. 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 l decision or schedule a pre-decisional enforcement conference.

In addition, please be advised that the number and characterization of the apparent violation 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 in addition to the apparent violation described above, the NRC has determined that other j violations of NRC requirements occurred. The violations are cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation (Notice) and the circumstances surrounding the violations are described in detail in the enclosed report. The violations are of concern because they indicate a lack of rigor on the part i of your staff in the development and use of written procedures, and the application of the ,

guidance in those procedures to evaluate and respond to events affecting safety. In addition, .

the corrective actions violation is of concern because it indicates your staff are narrowly I focusing their attention on selected aspects of a non-conforming or non-compliant condition, 4 rather than addressing the conditions comprehensively to prevent similar conditions from occurring.

j You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the l enclosed Notice when preparing your response. The NRC will use your resp.onse, in part, to determine whether further enforcement action is necessary to ensure complitnce with regulatory requirements.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of th's letter, its enclosures, and your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Roon.

ry ,,

L J. Adkins We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning these observations.

Sincerely,

/s/ C.D. Pederson Cynthia D. Pederson, Director Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Docket No. 70-7002 Certificate No. GDP-2

Enclosures:

1. Notice of Violation

2. Inspection Report 70-7002/99006(DNMS) -

i cc w/encts: J. M. Brown, Portsmouth General Manager I P. J. Miner, Manager, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs, Portsmouth H. Pulley, Paducah General Manager S. A. Toelle, Manager, Nuclear Regulatory {

Assurance and Policy, USEC Portsmouth Resident inspector Office Paducah Resident inspector Office R. M. DeVault, Regulatory Oversight Manager, DOE E. W. Gillespie, Portsmouth Site Manager, DOE

)

l l

DOCUMENT NAME: G:\SEC\POR99006.DNM To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: C = Copy without enclosure E = Copy with enclosure N do copy b OFFICE Rlli:DNMSjf lE HQ:NMS$pf y lE' h6LQE [ Rill:EICE//// C RIll:1 )f IMS l[

NAME Hiland:ib%kW Pierson Ne[#72allieberM Claytonf///#3 Podefon DATE 04/J\/99 J*-D 04/Ol/99 %<A g/99 N 040//99 04I'))99 FF Cy ORD COPY S arx J 3.1own //$ CE

==

f, r,...:.c" c.c,V" V 'y l

w fit W d'-&

W f&

,, .-- 2

~ _ .

J. Adkins -4 Distribution:

Docket File w/encls PUBLIC IE-07 w/encls J. Lieberman, OE w/encls N. Mamish, OE w/encls D. Dambly, OGC w/encls E. Ten Eyck, NMSS w/encls R. Pierson, NMSS w/encls P. Ting, NMSS w/encls W. Troskoski, NMSS w/encls P. Harich, NMSS w/encls Y. H. Faraz, NMSS w/encls J. L. Caldwell, Rill w/encls C. D. Pederson, Rlli w/encls Rlli Enf. Coordinator w/encls R. Bellamy, RI w/encls )

EJM, Rll (e-mail)

D. B. Spitzberg, RIV w/encls  ;

IEO (e-mail) i DOCDESK (e-mail)

Greens w/o encls 290035 1

l-