ML20206R739

Notice of Violation from Investigation on 970616-0718. Violations Noted:On 961209 & 10,J Foley Deliberately Caused Util to Be in Violation of 10CFR50.9 & TS 6.11 & in June 1997 Provided Inaccurate Info to NRC Inspector

ML20206R739
Person / Time
Site:	Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png
Issue date:	05/12/1999
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20206R728	List: ML20206R722 ML20206R739
References
IA-99-055, IA-99-55, NUDOCS 9905200193
Download: ML20206R739 (3)

Text

.

O l

ENCLOSURE NOTICE OF VIOLATION Mr. Joseph Foley lA 98-055

[HOME ADDRESS DELETED UNDER 10 CFR 2.790 During an NRC inspection conducted from June 16,1997 to July 18,1997, a violation of NRC requirements was identified at the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (CYAPCo) Haddam Neck facility. A Notice of Violation (NOV) was issued on August 12,1997, to CYAPCo for failure to follow radiation protection procedures as required by Technical Specification 6.11. In a subsequent investigation conducted by the NRC Office of Investigations between August 20,1997 and May 14,1998, an additional violation of NRC requirements was identified. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600, Revision 1, the violation is listed below.

i 10 CFR 50.5(a)(1) states, in part, that any employee of a licensee may not engage in deliberate misconduct that causes or, but for detection, would have caused a licensee to be in violation of any rule, regulation, or any term or condition of a license, issued by the Commission. 10 CFR 50.5(a)(2), in part, prohibits any employee of a licensee from deliberately submitting information to the NRC that the person knows to be incomplete or inaccurate in some respect material to the NRC.

10 CFR 50.9 requires, in part, that information required to be maintained by the licensee be complete and accurate in all material respects.

Haddam Neck Technical Specification 6.11. " Radiation Protection Program," requires that procedures for personnel radiation protection be prepared consistent with the requirements l

of 10 CFR Part 20 and shall be adhered to for all operations involving personnel radiation protection.

I Radiation Protection Procedure 2.2-13, Revision 2, " Underwater Surveys," a procedure that implements requirements of 10 CFR Part 20, requires that (1) all meters used for underwater surveys be source checked daily; (2) pre-job and routine diving surveys be performed with two independent underwater radiation survey meters; and (3) the results of the surveys be recorded on survey forms for comparison purposes.

Contrary to the above, on December 9 and December 10,1996, you deliberately caused CYAPCo to be in violation of 10 CFR 50.9 and Technical Specification 6.11, and in June 1997, you provided inaccurate information to a NRC inspector conceming the performance I

of dive surveys in December 1996. Specifically:

l e

During a pre-dive survey on December 9,1996, you did not use two independent operable underwater radiation survey meters for the entire pre-dive survey in that one of the survey meters failed before the survey was completed. Additionally, you did not record the results of two independent meters for comparison purposes.

)

9905200193 990512

~

PDR ADOCK 05000213 G

PDR

Enclosure 2

During a pre-dive survey on Decei..M 40,1996, you failed to source check one of the radiation survey meters and did not use two independent operable underwater radiation survey meters for the pre-dive survey. Additionally, you did not record the results of each independent meter on the survey form and you created an inaccurate record by using instead a photocopy of the pre-dive survey results obtained on December 9,1996.

During a dive survey on December 10,1996, you did not record the survey results on the survey form, but instead created an inaccurate record by using a photocopy of the pre-dive survey results obtained on December 9,1996.

in June 1997, you told an NRC inspector that the surveys were conducted in e

accordance with procedures, including performance of the required source checks, and that no problems were encountered with any of the meters used to perform the surveys, when you knew that the information was not accurate.

The survey results are material in that they provide information necessary to ensure that the diver's exposure to radiation is within limits. The information provided to the inspector conceming the surveys was material in that the information was used to assess whether the dive surveys were conducted in accordance with procedures.

This is a Severity Level lli violation (Supplements IV and Vil).

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Mr. Joseph Foley 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 I, 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: (1) the reason for the violation, or, if contested, the basis for disputing the violation or severity level, (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, and (3) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations. If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order or a Demand for information may be issued as to why other action as may be proper should not be taken. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.

Under the authority of Section 182 of the Act,42 U.S.C. 2232, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation.

If you contest this enforcement action, you should also provide a copy of your response to the Director, Office of Enforcement, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

Because your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), to the extent possible, it should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the PDR without redaction. If personal privacy or proprietary information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, then please provide a bracketed copy of your response that identifies the information that should be protected and a redacted copy of your response that deletes such information. If you request withholding of such material, youmust I

r Enclosure 3

specifically identify the portions of your response that you seek to have withheld and provide in detail the bases for your claim of withholding (e.g., explain why the disclosure of information will create an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy).

Dated at King of Prussia, PA this 12th day of May 1999 i

d