ML20234C926
| ML20234C926 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/31/1983 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20234C915 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-87-450 PROC-831031, NUDOCS 8709210460 | |
| Download: ML20234C926 (385) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:f I OCT $1 CJ D Q - UNITED STATES . NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION II ENFORCEMENT :ML"AL 6 O
~
O
~
g921 0 870915 ,
@UE LD@7-4)@@ PDR ,..
1 I I i th - 1 USNRC REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL l I TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Supplement 1 - Format and Content of a Notice of Violation (Rev. 0 - 10/31/83) Enclosure 1 - Valid Charges Against Criteria of 1 Appendix B, 10 CFR 50 Enclosure 2 - Sample Citations for Title 10 and Material License Condition Violations (Limited Distribution) Supplement 2 - Enforcement Decision Guide (Rev. 0 - 10/31/83) Supplement 3 - Format and Content of an Inspection Report ; (Rev. 0 - 4/17/84) Suoplement 4 - Format and Content of a Notice of Deviation n V (Rev 0 - 4/17/84) 4 l Supplement 5 - Nonstandard Acknowledgement Letters (Rev. 0 - 4/17/84) l Supplement 6 - NRC Enforcement Policy (Rev. 0 - 4/17/84) Supplement 7 - O idance on Application of 10 CFR 20.403 4eporting Requirements (Rev. 0 - 4/17/84) . Rev. 0 - 10/31/83
O OCT 311983
~
USNRC REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL ., . . TABLE OF CONTENTS l Supplement 1 - Format and Content of a Notice of Violation , i Enclosure 1 - Valid Charges Against Criteria of Appendix B, 10 CFR 50, En:losure 2 - Sample Citatinns for Title 10 and Material License Condition Violations (Limited Distribution) l Supplement 2 - Enforcement Decision Guide 1 0 i 4 e
?
s
d ( USNRC REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL SUPPLEMENT 1 FORMAT AND CONTENT OF A NOTICE OF VIOLATION TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ........... .................................................. 1 j Structure of a Simple Citation ........................ .. ................ 1 l Grouping of Violations ................................. .................. 1 Citation illustrating grouping of event-related violations ........... 2 Citation illustrating grouping of two violations - a cause............ 3 and its effect Citation illustrating a format for multiple examples of a violation... 3 rs 10 CFR 50.54(a)(1) and 10 CFR 50.55(f)(1)........... 4 O ...................... Repe ti ti ve o r Simi l a r Vi ol a t i on s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Li c en see Ide nti fi ed Vi ol a ti on s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Essential Elements of a Citation .......................................... 6 The Requirement ...................................................... .6 The Charge ........................................................... 10 The Substantiation ................................................... 12 O Rev. 0 - 10/31/83
O O - USNRC REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL SUPPLEMENT 1 FORMAT AND CONTENT OF A NOTICE OF VIOLATION
- 1. Introduction
- a. The format of a Notice of Violation (NOV), except for the citation, is standardized in the regional word processing system. It may not be altered without approval of a Division Director. On the other hand, the citation is not standardized, but its author is' constrained by the principles and practices presented in this supplement. Experience has shown that application of these principles and practices will result in clear and concise citations.
- b. General and specific guidance for preparing a citation is presented, with examples of commonly encountered faults found in recently issued Region II citations, showing revisions that correct the faults and improve clarity of the citations. Enclosure 1 contains a listing of valid charges that may be made for violations of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B -
criteria. Enclosure 2 contains sample citations for Title 10 (Parts 19, 20, 30, 32, 34, 35, 71 and .150) and materials license
-~ condition violations.
- 2. Structure of a Simple Citation The citation consists of two parts: the first contains a statement of applicable regulatory requirements; the second contains the charge against the licensee and the basis for the charge. The following is an example of the basic format of a simple citation:
10 CFR 50.54(a)(1) requires the licensee to implement the quality assurance program described or referenced in its Safety Analysis Report. Section 17.2.18 of the licensee quality assurance program requires a system of audits be conducted annually to verify compliance with all aspects of the quality assurance program. Contrary to the above, those aspects of the quality assurance program relating to records and document control conducted at the corporate offices were not audited during the past two years.
- 3. Grouoing of Violations In general, each violation disclosed during an inspection should be addressed separately in the NOV. However, there are circumstances when i logically associated violations should be grouped to show a common cause, describe an event, or point out a cause and effect relationship. Formats that may be used in these instances are illustrated below.
! ) 1 l Rev. 0 - 10/31/83
0 o U .
- a. Citation illustrating grouping of event-related violations:
Technical Specification 3.3.1 requires the licensee to ensure that reactor protection system instrumentation channels shown in Table 3.3.1-1 are operable when the reactor is in Operating Conditions l 1 or 2. The Table identifies the " reactor vessel water level low" instrumentation as a reouired condition of operability. The action j statement requires the licensee to place an inoperable channel in the trip condition. Technical Specification 3.3.2 requires the licensee to ensure that the isolation actuation instrumentation channels shown in Table 3.3.2-1 are operable when the reactor is in Operating Condition 1, 2 or 3. The Table identifies the " reactor vessel water level low" instrumentation l as a required trip function and specifies two operable channels per trip system as a required condition of operability. The action state-ment requires the licensee to place an ineperable channel in the trip i condition. I A. Contrary to the above, from December 26 to 28, 1981, when the reactor was in Operating Condition 1 and the " reactor vessel water l level low" instrumentation did not have two operable channels per ' A trip system, the licensee did not place the inoperable channel of V the reactor protection system in the trip condition. During this time the inoperability of one of four differential pressure transmitters for measuring " reactor vessel water level low" was j indicated by an off-scale reading. These readings were recorded ' each day in a log reserved for " Technical Specifications required" , instrumentation and the entries were initialed on successive shifts each day without being evaluated by three different shift foremen who were senior reactor operators. 1 i This is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement I) { B. Contrary to the above, from December 28, 1981 until December 31, i 1981, the violation of Technical Specifications continued although ; attention was focused on the malfunctioning transmitter when a i'
" trouble ticket" was prepared on December 28, 1981 by an auxiliary operator and reviewed by the shift foreman. The shift foreman I indicated on the ticket that the transmitter was not required by !
Technical Specifications but' also initialed an ent y indicating ' its inoperability in the log reserved for Technical Specification l required instrumentation. l l This is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement I) ) i C. Contrary to the above, on December 31, 1981, corrective action was ; taken to meet the requirements of Technical Specification 3.3.1, O 8ut v4elat4on of Techn4 cal Specificat4en 3.3.2 contiauee oatil the transmitter was returned to service later in the day. l l 2 Rev. 0 - 10/31/83
" ]
i e O . This is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement I)
- b. Citation' illustrating the grouping of two violations - a cause and'it's I effect:
Technical Specification 6.8.1 requires the licensee to implement approved station surveillance test' procedures of safety-related activities. Surveillance Test Procedure ST 2.4.23A, an approved- 4 station procedure covering calibration checks of torus narrow range-level-Loop "A", a safety-related activity, requires independent' verification that affected equipment has been returned to the normal configuration following a calibration. Technical Specification 3.7.A.2 requires 'the licensee to ensure- . . l containment integrity whenever the reactor is critical. Section 1.0 of i the Technical Specifications ' defines containment integrity and ; specifies as one of its conditions that all non-automatic containment i isolation valves on lines connected to containment- be closed, if not-required to be open during accident' conditions. Contrary to the above, on March 20, 1983, the licensee failed to- ) implement Surveillance Test Procedure.ST 2.4.23A in that independent. p verification was not made to ensure that torus' level transmitter i LT-8027A on Unit 2 was returned to the normal configuration following , calibration. From March 20 to March 23', 1983, while the Unit 2 reactor l was critical, the manual isolation valve on LT 8027A remained ope _n and l
- violated primary containment integrity. This valve is not required to. H l be open during accident conditions.
I
- c. Citation illustrating a format for multiple' examples of a violation: , j j
License Condition 16 requires the licensee to use licensed. material in ; accordance with procedures contained in its application dated . September 14, 1978 and letters dated December 12, 1979 and May 27, 1982. ? Contrary to the above, the licensee did not use its licensed material in accordance with three procedures contained in its application or appurtenant letters as follows:
- 1. Although a procedure requires daily constancy checks. for dose calibrators, alternating a cesium-137 sealed source and a (
cobalt-57. sealed source, such checks have not been performed as , required since June 1980 as no cobalt-57 sealed source has been ; purchased for this purpose. '
- 2. Although a procedure requires quarterly linearity checks on the dose calibrator, such checks have not been performed since June' O 198o.
3 Rev. 0 - 10/31/83-E----____--_--------_------_---_-----_--------- - - - - - - - - - -- o
y a, i
, a
/ e'
- 3. Although a procedure requires the licensee to have a high level '
radiation survey meter continuously available for use in its Nuclear Medicine Department, no such meter was available on June 29, 1983. l y t
- d. Multiple examples of a violation may not in each case be best handled- I by grouping. For example, grouping would be inadvisable if different I parties in the licensee management structure would be required to take 1 action to correct the violations.
- 4. 10 CFR 50.54(a)(1) and 10 CFR 50.55(f)(1) 1
- a. Enclosure 1 (Valid Charges Against Criteria' of Appendix B,10 CFR 50) I was prepared as guidance in formulating citations against 10 CFR 50, 1 i Appendix B. Since the issuance of 10 CFR 50.54(a) and 50'.55(f) on March 11, 1983, a citation that was formerly written thus:
, t ,,'
.j l 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Citation XVIII, as implemented by .
) Section 17.T 18 of the accepted QA program, requires a system
- l ...etc. ,
i Would now be written as'follows: l O d 10 CFR 50.54(a)(1) requires the licensee to implement the quality ! assurance program described or referenced in its Safety Analysis , Report. Section 17.2.18 of the licensee quality assurance program requires a system ...etc. {
- b. Despite this change in format, it was decided that Enclosure 1 should be retained because most quality assurance manuals contain statements l
that are identical to those found in Appendix B. ~
- c. In formulating a citation against a requirement of a licensee's QA l program, an ' inspector should ensure the.t his charge is valid, For example, if a licensee fails to accomplish welding in accordance with applicable welding codes, standards, ...etc, he may be cited by reference to that section of his QA manual containing the statements l found in Criterion IX if, and only if, he failed to establish measures (i.e., instructions, procedures, or drawings) intended to assure that welding was controlled and accomplished by qualified personnel _using qualified procedures in accordance with applicable codes, standards, specifications, criteria, and other special requirements. If the welding was unacceptable because the welder did not follow the prescribed procedure, the section of the QA manual containing'the Criterion V statements should be cited.
- 5. Repetitive or Similar Violations t
l O- a. The NRC Enforcement Policy defines a similar violation as one that i could have been reasonably expected to have been prevented by the - licensee's corrective action for the previous violation. The Policy 0
/
4 Rev. 0 - 10/31/83
j O, . \ l 4 states that civil penalties may be imposed for.. Severity-Level IV i violations.that are similar to violations discussed in a previous .{ enforcement conference, and for which the enforcement conference was .j ineffective in achieving the required corrective action. In applying. -4 thf s guidance for Severity Level IV violations, NRC normally considers civil penalties only for similar. violations that occur.after the date of the last inspection.or within two years, whichever period is
/
greater. i- ) .
- b. In accordance.with the policy, the Regional Office may hold an-enforcement c6nference to discuss NRC concerns'about a Severity Level j IV violation of particular-' significance (i.e...one'that' approaches a. !
Severity Level III violation)< Following this conference, and~within the stated time parameters, should the licensee incur a similar violation, he would be' vulnerable to a civil penalty.
- c. In each instance of a similar Severity Level IV violation, an enforce- ,
ment panel should be convoked.to consider whether the circumstances' j warrant asking the licensee to attend an enforcement conference.. In an egregious case, a civil penalty.mey be proposed following the enforce- .j ment conference. ~In a less serious case, although we may not propose a ; penalty, the ground work'will have been laid for a penalty at a 1ater.. l date should the li.censee incur another'similar violation.
- d. ThePolicyissilenkwithregardtosimilarSeverityLevelVviola-tions. The regional policy provides for incorporation of a. standard paragraph in an' enforcement-letter to .a licensee who incurs a similar Severity Level V violation. In the event.that the licensee incurs a-third violation similar to the first two, his apparent' inability to l prevent this type of violation will be discussed in an enforcement:
, conference. Should the licensee incur another violation similar~to " ! those discussed in the conference, thispaction could warrant'a civil. penalty, although it is more likely that'we would. during the enforce-ment conference, demand more comprehensive corrective action confirmed by a Confirmation of Action Letter,
- e. The enforcement actions described above are-appropriate for'similar violations. It would.be inappropriate to increase the severity. level of a violation because it Was s.imilar to-a previous violation. The violation per se is no more serious in the'second instance.than in the.
I first. It is of concarn to the NRC because it 'is indicative of the licensee's failure to identify and correct the root cause of a viola-tion. Accordingly, this fault should be brought to the licensee's' attention in the Notice of Violation and in the letter transmitting the Notice. The Notice should be annotated-thus: This is a Severity Level'V violation (Supplement I)' This violation is similar to Item 2 contained in a Notice of O vi0lati0n Sent to YOU in Our January 29, 1981 letter. t
' 5. Rev. 0 - 10/31/83
?
I
'l 1
-l O ..
1 The letter transmitting the Notice should contain the Similar Viola-
] I tions Paragraph from the Standard Paragraphs for Enforcement Letters.
- 6. Licensee Identified Violations
- a. The following text is extracted from the NRC Enforcement Policy: !)
Because the NRC wants to encourage and support' licensee initiative .i for self-identification and correction of problems', NRC will. not ! generally issue a Notice of Violation for a violation that meets. all of the following tests: (1) It was identified by the licensee; a (2) It fits in Severity Level IV or V; (3) It was reported, if required; (4) It was or will be corrected, including measures to preven't recur-rence, within a reasonable-time; and I (5) It was not a violation that could reasonably be' expected to have 1 l been prevented by the licensee's corrective action for a previous. 3 l , violation. ;
- b. In accordance with the Policy, an inspector should not cite a licensee ;
for a violation that meets the five tests. Conversely, if the viola- i i d<- tion does not meet each test, the violation should be issued. Note
- that Test (5) is the definition of a Similar Violation. Its: reference to a previous violation includes licensee-identified violations as well .,
as NRC-identified violations. Accordingly, an inspector who finds that ! a licensee's audit or self-inspection' records repeatedly document -l similar violations should cite the licensee for. its most recent viola- i tion and substantiate the charge by documenting the pevious instance,s in which the licensee uncovered similar violations,
- c. A licensee-identified violation need not be tracked by the NRC Open Items List unless the licensee does not have an effective system to ensure that adequate followup action is taken to correct it - a cir-cumstance that would warrant issuance of a violation.
- 7. Essential Elements of a Citation
- a. There are three essential elements in a citation: (1)La statement of the regulatory requirement (the requirement), (2) a statement of the charge against the licensee (the charge), and (3) a statement that substantiates the charge (the substantiation).
'i (1) The Requirement An "NRC regulatory requirement" is a legally binding requirement or prohibition imposed on a licensee or other person. When-it is lQ imposed as a rule, regulation, order, license or permit condition, or Technical Specification, issued pursuant to the Atomic Energy 6 Rev. 0 - 10/31/83
_. _ - - _ _ . . _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -- _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ =
~- --
T o - s ;'i
] ,7 v -
4 ' a
. l o < *
; i O \ '
s Q) u hit, tha Energy Reorglnizatior Act or other Federal Statute, it may be considered to tN an !'bdependent requireseit" When an-1 independent requirement ippdaes addit'tocel. requirements ;on c licensee (e.g., a Technirv115pecificati6n. requires a li.:ensee to coMact a certain program iri accordance'with a certain R?gulatory Guide) these latter requ4en'ents msy be considered as " dependent q ' requirements". 1 (2) A citation should be writter, so that the lega) basis for a. P dependent requirement R evident. That is, the dependent require- ) i, 3 ment must be trared back to an independent requirerrent. ) i . . (3) A hfety Analysis ktoort, RegulatorygMe, IE= Bulletin, or other , suc:i;NRC ptW 9 1cattor, Anot legaMy bir.Wng on a licensee unless i the oubl,ication has.<been explicitly icientified as an-NRC regula- I il tory requirement in a rule; rdgulatio'n, order, license, or I a consgractionpermit.
> 1 (4) A regulatory requirement need net te luoted verbatim; but, to the l extent practicable, tbs c'tatio, shall contain the essential words l
from the requiatory requirement'. In turn, these essential words l should be rupeateCin tr'e charge or contracy to" paragraph, . 1 1 O (5) The'requiro+ent shou @ contain o'nly those elemen't's addressed in the charge. (For example, if the charge is " failure to follow a W ocedure",1 it,1i une,ecessary b stete in the requirement that the cicenseeintl,.9 also rr.aintain the procedure. i . . (6) Do not edelify a requirement by' static's thdt the regu3ation lt, " requires'"in part" that certain act'pns be taken; simpiy state the relevant reqafrements. , () If the requirement cont,aini a.w ed or definf tion, def he the word er abrasa,; phrase Saving anthe For exampla, unusual word i
" survey" and the phrase "restr Ited alea" may war-ant definition iftthe licensee is not familiar with regulatory phraseolog'.
(8) Do'nof., by omisstn , misstate a requirement. For 1xamp h , it wouir be incorrect to state at'follows: :
.iG CFRJ6.203(f)(4):reqvires k licensee, prior to disposal of m any empty vneontamine,ed <.ontainer to an unrestricted area, w fnske or'defa d the radioactive materialalabel, The readtoment shouk reabas shown below:
i 10 CFR 20.203(f)(4) requires a licensee, prior to disposal of l a:1 ertpty uricantninded container --to an unrestricted area,- to l n- Jedove or deface D e radioactive material label or otherwise-V Auririndicat e that the container no longer contains radioacMy materials. l t 7 riev. 0 - 10/31/83 n a ,, _i -_ m _i jE a_
l i i q l 1
)
l g . j (9) A citation should focus a licensee's attention on a general rather than a particular failure. If a licensee is charged with having 3 failed to follow a particular requirement, he will respond only to ] the particular charge; but, if the particular failure is used to j substantiate a more general charge, his corrective action should i be more comprehensive. The difference between these two J approaches is illustrated below. In the first citation, the licensee is charged with having shipped material with inadequate { provisions for heat dissipation - a particular fault. In the i revision of the citation, he is charged with having failed to i ensure that each condition of the certificate of compliance had been met - a more general fault. 1 10 CFR 71.12(b)(1)(fi) states, in part, that a general 1 I license is hereby isst'd to. persons holding a' general or j specific license pursu nt to this chapter, to. deliver 1 licensed material to a carrier for transport in a package for ] which a certificate of compliance has been issued by the Commission's Director of Nuclear' Material Safety and Safeguards, provided that the person using the package complies with the terms and conditions of the certificate. Certificate of Compliance No. 6698, Revision 9, dated l December 12, 1979, which is' applicable to the Model No, i
/'N NFS-4, Serial No. NAC-IE cask. states in Condition 5(b)(2) k/ that the maximum quantity of material per package will not exceed a decay heat generation of 2.5 Kw.
Contrary to the above, on May 1, 1980, the Model No. NFS-4, l Serial No. NAC-IE cask, loaded with failed fuel bundle H07, l was delivered to a carrier for transport with a decay heat generation in excess of 2.5 Kw (2.97 to 3.51). . Revised Citation 10 CFR 71.12(b)(1)(11) requires a person who delivers licensed material to a carrier for transport pursuant to a 10 CFR 71.12 general license, to comply with the terms and-conditions of the certificate of compliance, applicable to l the licensed material package, issued by the Commission's Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. Contrary to the above, on May 1, 1080, the licensee delivered failed fuel to a carrier for transport pursuant to a 10 CFR 71.12 general license, but did not comply with each condition of the certificate of compliance. Specifically, Condition 5(b)(2) of Certificate of Compliance No. 6698, Revision 9, December 12, 1979, applicable to package Model NFS-4, limited the quantity of material per package to a quantity that would not exceed a decay heat generation of (n) 2.5. Kw, but the licensee loaded the package with a quantity of material that generated between 2.97 and 3.51 Kw. 8 Rev. 0 - 10/31/83
C A V . (10) It is unnecessary and tedious to identify multiple regulatory requirements if a single requirement covers' the essential elements in the charge. When multiple regulatoryLrequire-ments are necessary, the first sentence in the citation.
-should contain.the principal requirement.
(11) Avoid naming an individual'in a citation;' thus: " License l Condition X requires'the 1icensee to ensure that-licensed L material in used only by a certain named individual. . Con-1 trary to t e above, between .and , the licensee permitted an individual other than the named-l individual to use licensed material."' (12) Summarize a long requirement. The following citation illustrates the fault. 10 CFR 20.103(a)(1)' states- no licensee shall possess, use or transfer licensed material!in such'a manner as'to-permit an individual in a restricted area to. inhale a quantity of radioactive material in any period of one l calendar; quarter greater than the quantity which would result from inhalation for 40 hours per week for.13 l Q weeks at uniforra concentrations of radioactive material in air specified in Appendix B,. Table 1, Column 1. If the radioactive material is of such~ form.that intake by absorption through the skin.is likely, . individual exposures to. radioactive material shall be controlled so that the uptake of radioactive materials by any organ l from either inhalation or; absorption or both routes of intake in any calendar quarter does not exceed that , which would result from. f r; haling such radioactive l material for 40 hours per week for '13 weeks at uniform concentrations specified in Appendix B, Table 1, Column 1. i Significant intake by ingestion or injection'must.be ! evaluated and accounted for by techniques and procedures: I as may be appropriate to the circumstances of the' . . occurrence. Exposures so evaluated shall.be included in ; determining whether the limitation on' individual exposures in 10 CFR 20.103(a)(1) has been. exceeded.' Contrary to the above, the licensee's bioassayLrecords-showed that an individual working in a restricted area during the first quarter of 1981 had an uptake of'. iodine-125 that resulted from an intake greater than the n equivalent of inhaling iodine-125 for 40 hours per week V for 13 weeks at the uniform concentration specified.in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 1, Column 1. Specifically, a bioassay conducted on March 16, 1981, showed the ; 9 Rev. 0 ,10/31/83
OJ - individual's uptake of. iodine-125 was about 3 times-the; 13 week limit. The cit'ation should read: 10 CFR 20.103(a)(1) prohibits possession or use of
~
licensed material underl conditions which result:in an. vptake.of the material by.an. organ of_ an individual in'ai restricted l area in any calendar. quarter.-in excess of-that which would result from inhaling such material for-40 hours per week for 131 weeks at uniform ' concentrations. specifications specified in,10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 1, Column 1. Contrary to the'above, the, licensee possessed and.used iodine-125 under conditions which'resulted,in an uptake of iodine-125.in the' thyroid of one employee.in-'ac restricted area in;the'first' calendar. quarter of 1981 in' excess (about.three times) of that which would have-resulted from his inhaling such material.for 40 hours , per week for 13 weeks at uniform concentrations-specified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 1,- Column.-l.
- b. The Charge (1) Above all else, the charge should be unambiguous. If the charge is unclear, the licensee response may not address our. concern,for-the health, safety, or security of the operation.
1 (2) .The words and format of the charge should reflect the words and l format of the requirement. The following.. citation violates thi,s.: u rule. , 10 CFR 20.105 requires that no licensee shall' possess'or.use .; licensed material in such a manner as to create in any R unrestricted area from radioactive material in his possession radiation levels which, if an individual were_ continuously.present , in the area, could result in his receiving a dose 1n excess,of 100 , millirems in any seven consecutive days. y Contrary to the-above, on September 15, 1981,. the day lof the. , l: inspection, radiation levels of 1.5 millirems per hour.were ' measured in an unrestricted examination room-adjacent to your Nuclear Medicine Laboratory. These radiation . levels would result : in a dose of 252 millirems in seven consecutive days.. The citation is improved as follows: 10 CFR 20.105(b)(2) prohibits a licensee from possessing or
.h using its licensed material in a manner that causes radiation 10 Rev. 0 - 10'/31/83 i L; _-_ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1 O V levels in any unrestricted area of a magnitude such that if an individual were continuously present in the area he could receive a dose in excess of 100 millirems in any seven consecutive days. Contrary to the above, between September 1 and 15, 1981, the licensee possessed or used licensed material in its Nuclear Medicine Laboratory in such a manner as to create in accessible areas of the adjacent unrestricted examination room a radiation level of 1.5 millirem per hour. If an individual had been continuously present for seven consecu-tive days in the examination room, he could have received a dose in excess of 100 millirems. , (3) Except under simplistic conditions, do not substitute the substantia-tion for the charge. The following citation illustrates this fault. 10 CFR 20.207(b) requires that licensed materials in an unres- , tricted area and not in storage shall be tended under the constant- ' surveillance and immediate control of the licensee. Contrary to the above, on February 17, 1981, seven attache cases containing licensed material fell from the back of the licensee's p delivery vehicle onto a public road. One of the cases was not retrieved by the licensee. This unattended case was left in the unrestricted area and was not under the constant surveillance and immediate control of the licensee. The case was later found by a passing motorist. It is more clearly written as follows: 10 CFR 20.207(b) requires a licensee to keep licensed material under constant surveillance and immediate control when the material is in an unrestricted area and not in storage. An unrestricted area is defined in 10 CFR 20.3(a)(17) as any area access to which is not controlled by the licensee for purposes of protection of individuals frou exposure to radiation and radio-active' materials. Contrary to the above, on February 17, 1981, the licensee did not keep an attache case containing licensed materials under constant i surveillance and immediate control when the material fell from the licensee's delivery vehicle onto a public road. The attache case i was retrieved by a passing motorist. i (4) The Notice of Violation identifies the date of inspection. The j violations were disclosed during the inspection. Therefore, it is . unnecessary to include the date of violation in a charge unless it serves another purpose. Such purposes may include the following: 11 Rev. 0 - 10/31/83 i
( - (1) the regulatory requirement contains a time factor, (2) identi-fication of the violator, (3) to emphasize the duration of violation, (4) to identify a violation that occurred prior to the inspection, and (5) to identify a violation with an " event".
- c. The Substantiation (1) Each charge must be substantiated. That which is gratuitously ,
i asserted may be gratuitously denied. A " charge" that is ' unsupported by facts is merely an opinion. (2) It is unnecessary and undesirable to include information not I relevant to the charge. Do not include the cause of the violation, its effect,* how it was disclosed, or the regulatory a concerns relating to it. Such matters should be included in the _j transmittal letter or the inspection report, as appropriate, j l l l (3) In the substantiation, or elsewhere in the citation, avoid- . l- indecisive phrases such as "it appeared that" or "it is considered to be".
Enclosures:
, 1. Valid Charges Against' Criteria of I O 2. Appendix B, 10 CFR 50 Sample Citations for Title l') and Materials License Condition 4 i l l
*0 occasionally it is appropriate to state the consequences of a violation in 1 order to justify the assigned Severity Level.
l l O 12 Rev. 0 - 10/31/83
Enclosure-1 to Supplement-1 of Region II Enforcement Manual. O - VALIO CHARGES AGAINST CRITERIA 0F APPENDIX B, 10 CFR 50 INTRODUCTION l The following charges were. derived directly from the' declarative sentences contained in the criteria. The relation-between a' criterion and the' charges'that. may be made against it is illustrated below. Criterion XIII reads as follows: Measures shall be established to control the handling', storage, shipping, cleaning and preservation of material and equipment in accordance with' work' and inspection instructions to prevent damage or deterioration. When
.necessary for particular products, special protective environments, such.as l inert gas atmosphere, specific moisture content levels, and temperature .t l
levels, shall be specified and provided. The following charges may be made against this criterion.: ! O The ,1censee failed to establish methods to control the handling, storage, shipping, cleaning and preservation of material and equipment in accordance with work and inspection instructions to prevent damage or deterioration. l The licensee failed to specify and provide special protective environments, s'ach as inert gas atmosphere, specific moisture content levels, and tecoerature levels, when such environments were necessary forlparticular , proocets. Using this attachment, Appendix B, and relevant inspection findings, an inspector may construct a citation against Criterion XIII. 30 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XIII, as implemented by the licensee's approved QA program (ref.) requires the licensee to establish methods to-control shipping of material and equipment in-accordance with work and inspection instructions to prevent damage. Contrary to the above, the licensee failed to establish al method to control shipment of (identify the safety related component) on June 16, 1983. The work and inspection instruction (identify the document) intended'to establish this control made inadequate provision for blocking and bracing.of a device of its size and weight. In consequence the device was damaged in shipment. O
~ ._ _ _ _ _ _
r i i O . VALIO CHARGES
'I Following is a list of charges that may be eade.against, Appendix;B criteria.
I. Organization
. The licensee failed to establish or execute a quality assurance
. program.
. The licensee failed to clearly:establ.ish and delineate'in writing the authority and duties.of persons and organizations performing' quality assurance functions;
. The licensee failed.to delegate to persons and organizations, performing quality assurance functions sufficient authority and ,
organizational freedom to: (1) identify quality problems; (2) l initiate, recommend, or provide solutions, and (3) to verify- ] implementation of solutions. II. Quality Assurance Program
. The licensee failed to establish a quality assorance' program that complies with the requirements of Appendix B.
. The licensee failed to document the program by written policies, procedures, or instructions.
. Thelicenseefailedtocarryoutthequalityassuranceprogramlin-accordance with the written policies, procedures or instructions.
. The licensee failed to identify the structures,' systems, and.
components covered by the QA program. i I
. The licensee failed to identify the major organizations partici- .
pating in the program or their designated functions. .l l
. The licensee failed to provide control over activities.affecting i the quality of identified structures, systems, or components to an extent consistent with their importance to safety.
. The licensee failed to accomplish activities affecting qual'ity' under suitably controlled conditions (as defined).
. The licensee failed to establish a program having the following ,
attributes: ! O - the need for spec 4ai controls, processes, test equ4pment, tools, and skills to attain the required quality, 1
e. l 2 O LJ - the need for verification of quality by inspection and test. provision for indoctrination and training of personnel performing activities affecting quality as necessary to ] assure that suitable proficiency is achieved and maintained. J
. The licensee failed to regularly review the status and adequacy of the QA program.
. The licensee failed to ensure that management of other organiza-tions participating in the QA program regularly reviewed the .
status and adequacy of that part of the QA program which they were [ executing. j i III. Design Control )
. The licensee failed to establish measures to assure that appli-cable regulatory requirements and the design basis (as defined in j 10 CFR 50.2 and as specified in the license application) for those ;
structures, systems, and components to which. Appendix B applies i were correctly translated into specifications, drawings, pro-cedures, and instru'ctions. () The licensee failed to ensure that the specifications, drawings, procedures, and instructions included provisions to assure that appropriate quality standards were specified and included in i design documents and that deviations from such standards were controlled. The licensee failed to establish measures for selection and review for suitability of application of materials, parts, equipment, and j processes that were essential to the safety-related functions of the structures, systems, and components.
. The licensee failed to establish measures for identification and control of design interfaces.
l . The 11'censee failed to establish measures for coordinating among participating design organizations.
. The licensee failed to establish procedures for participating design organizations to review, approve, release, distribute, and revise documents involving design interfaces.
. The licensee failed to ensure that design control measures provided for verifying or checking the adequacy of design (e.g.,
by performance of design reviews, by use of alternate or simpli-l fied calculational methods, or by performance of a nuitable l O testing program). l V l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .__- _a
.3 Q .
. The licensee failed to ensure that the verifying or checking process was performed by individuals or groups'other than those who performed the original _ design.
. The licensee failed.to ensure that a test program used toLverify.
the adequacy of.a specific design featu're in lieu of other verifying or checking processes included suitable qualification. testing.of a prototype under the most adverse. design conditions.
. Thelicenseefailedtoapplydesigncontrolmeasurestofitemssuch as.the following: reactor physics, stress, thermal,. hydraulic, and accident analyses; compatibility of. materials; accessibility for inservice ' inspection, maintenance, and repairs; 'and'delinea-tion of acceptance criteria for inspections and tests;
~
. The licensee failed to subject design changes, including field ..
changes, to design control measures commensurate'with'those-applied to the original design.
. The licensee failed to ensure that the organization that approved. ,
an original design also approved changes in.the original design (including field changes); another responsible organization had' not been assigned this. responsibility.
~
IV. Procurement Document Control
. The licensee failed to establish measures to assure th' at appli-cable regulatory requirements, design bases, and other require-L ments which were necessary to assure adequate quality were suit-~
ably included or referenced in documents for. procurement of .. material, equipment, or services purchased'by'the licensee or by its contractors or subcontractors.
. The licensee failed to require contractors or subcontractors to provide a quality assurance program consistent with the provisions of Appendix B.
V. Instruction, Procedures, and Drawings
. The licensee failed to prescribe activities affecting. quality by documented instructions, procedures, or drawings of a type appro-priate to the circumstances.
. The ifcensee failed to accomplish activities affecting quality in accordance with prescribed instructions, procedures, or drawings.
. The licensee failed to ensure that instructions, procedures,'or drawings included appropriate quantitative or qualitative accept-ance criteria for determining that important activities had been O satisfactorily accomplished.
4 <
.- 1 1
VI. Document Control !
. The licensee failed to establis'h~ measures to control issuance of i such documents as instructions,. procedures, and_ drawings,-includ- 'I ing changes thereto,_which prescribed a'ctivities._affecting quality.
. The licensee failed to prescribe that these documents,11nclu' ding changes,'were reviewed for adequacy and approved for release by. j; authorized personnel and were distributed to and used at the H location where the prescribed activity wasiperformed.
. The licensee failed to unsttre that changes to-documents were reviewed and approved by the'same organization that performed the original review;.another responsible organization-had not been-assigned this responsibility.
VII. Control of Purchase Material, Equipment, on Services
. The licensee failed to establish measures to assure,that-purchased' material, equipment, and services, purchased directly=or indirect-ly or through contractors or subcontractors, conformed _to_-the i procurement documents. '
i O . The licensee failed to include in the established measures provisions, as appropriate, _for source . evaluation and selection, objective evidence of' quality furnished by the' contractor or, ] subcontractor, inspection at the contractor or subcontractor _ > ; source,.and examination of products upon delivery. The licensee failed to have documentary evidence, that material,
~
'j and equipment conformed to the procurement requirements, available J at the nuclear power' plant site prior to installation or use of such material and equipment.
. The. licensee failed to retain this documentary evidence.at the nuclear power plant site, q
. The licensee failed to have evidence sufficiently documented to identify specific requirements, such as codes, standards, or~ :
specifications, met by the purchased material and equipment.
. The' licensee failed to assess the' effectiveness of the' control of quality by contractors and subcontractors at intervals consistent with the importance, complexity, and quantity of the product or services.
O a
- \
j () . VIII. Identification and Control of Materials, Parts, and Components
. The licensee failed to establish measures to identify and control materials, parts, and components' including partially fabricated assemblies.
The licensee failed to assure that identification and control. mea'sures maintained identification of the controlled items by. heat number, part number, serial number, or other appropriate means, either on the item or on records traceable to'the item, as required throughout fabrication, erection, installation,jand use of the item.
. The licensee failed to design these identification and control:
measures to prevent the use of incorrect or defective material, parts, and components. IX. Control of Special Processes The licensee failed to establish measures to assure that'special-processes, including welding, heat treating, and nondestructive testing, were controlled and accomplished by qualified personnel Q using qualified procedures in accordance with applicable codes, standards, specifications, criteria, and other special-require-ments. X. Inspection The licensee failed to establish a program for inspection of activities affecting quality to verify conformance with documented instructions, procedures, and drawings for accomplishing the activity. 1 The licensee failed to execute a program for inspection.of activities affecting quality to verify conformance with documented l instructions, procedures, and drawings for accomplishing the activity. l . The licensee failed to ensure that such inspections were performed by individuals other than those who performed-the activity being' inspected. The licensee failed to perform examinations, measurements, or-tests of material or products processed for each work operation where necessary to assure quality. The licensee failed to provide indirect inspection control, by l p V monitoring processing methods, equipment, or personnel, when inspection of processed material or products was impossible or disadvantageous.
6 A V - l
. The licensee failed to provide both inspection and process monitoring when control was inadequate without both.
. The licensee failed to indicate in appropriate documents mandatory inspection hold points which required witnessing or inspecting by the licensee's designated representative and beyond which work should not have proceeded without the consent of the licensee's designated representative. .
I XI. Test Control ;
. The licensee failed to establish a test program to assure that all i testing, required to demonstrate that structures, systems and components would perform satisfactorily in service, _ was identified and performed in accordance with written procedures which incorporated the requirements and acceptance limits contained in applicable design documents. l The licensee failed to include in the test program proof tests prior to installation, preoperational tests, and operational tests during nuclear power plant operation, of structures, systems, and components.
/7 The licensee failed to include in test procedures provisions for assuring that all prerequisites for the given test were met, that adequate test instrumentation was available ana used, and that the test was performed under suitable environmental conditions.
. The licensee failed to document and evaluate test results to assure that test requirements were satisfied.
XII. Control of Measuring and Test Equipment
. The licensee failed to establish measures to assure that tools, gages, instruments, and other measuring and testing devices used in activities affecting quality were properly controlled, cali-brated, and adjusted at specified periods to maintain accuracy within necessary limits.
XIII. Handling, Storage and Shipping
. The licensee failed to establish methods to control the handling, storage, shipping, cleaning and preservation of material and equipment in accordance with work and inspection instructions to prevent damage or deterioration.
. The licensee failed to specify and provide special protective environments, such as inert gas atmosphere, specific moisture content levels, and temperature levels, when such environments p/
t were necessary for particular products.
i i J 7 , O - l XIV. Inspection, Test, and Operating Status '
. The licensee failed to establish measures to indicate, by the use.
of markings such as stamps,. tags, labels', routing cards, or other . suitable:means, the status of inspections and tests performed upon. individual items of the nuclear power plant. 1
. The licensee failed, in its established measures,.to provide:for '
the identification of items'which hav.e satisfactorily passed required inspections.and tests, where.necessary to preclude. inadvqrtant bypassin'g of such inspections and tests. i
~
)
. The l!censee failed to.establisn' measures for indicating the operating status of structures, systems, and components-of the nuclear power.. plant, such'as by tagging valves and switches.to prevent inadvertent operation.
1 XV. Nonconforming Materials, Parts or Components )i
. -The licensee failed to establish measures to control. materia'Is,- [
parts, or components which did not conform to requirements in l I order to prevent their inadvertent 'use or installation. l 1 Q l
. The licensee failed to establish appropriate procedures ~for . "
identification, documentation, segregation, disposition, and notification to affected organizations.
. The licensee failed.to review nonconforming items for'their acceptance, rejections, repair,:or rework in accordance with documented procedures.
XVI. Corrective Action The licensee failed to establi'sh measures-to assure that condi-tions adverse to quality, such as failures, malfunctions, deficiencies, deviations, defective material and equipment, and nonconformances were promptly identified and corrected. l . The licensee failed to establish measures to assure that signif1- ! cant conditions adverse to quality were-promptly_-identified, corrected, their causes determined, and. corrective: action taken-to-preclude their repetition.
. The licensee failed to document und report to' appropriate levels ~
of management the identification of a significant condition i adverse to quality, the cause of the condition,-and the corrective action taken. XVII. Quality Assurance Records The licensee failed to maintain sufficient records to furnish 9
'l i
8 Oi - evidence of activities affecting quality. The licensee failed to include in its quality assurance records
~
qualifications of personnel, procedures and equipment.
. The. licensee failed to include in' inspection and test records identification of the inspector or data recorder,- the type..of-l . observation, the results,'the acceptability, and'the action'taken-i in' connection with deficiencies noted.
. The licensee failed to have identifiableLand? retrievable quality. ;
assurance records. .)
. The.licenseefailedto'establishrequirementsconcerning. record l i
retention-(such as. duration, location, and assigned responsi- i
.bility). I XVIIJ. ' Audits l
. The 'icensee failed to carry out a' comprehensive system of plannedf :)
and periodic audits to' verify compliance-with all aspects of the i quality assurance program and to determine the eff.ectiveness of'. the program. , q O$ .
~
The licensee faile'd to perform audits in accordance with written procedures or check lists.
. The licensee failed to ensure that audits were performed by ti appropriately trained personnel not having direct responsibilities, in the area being audited.
The licensee failed to document. audit"results. 'I i
. The licensee failed to ensure that audit results were reviewed by-management having responsibility in the area-audited.
~
. The licensee failed to take fol.lowup action,'includ'ing.reaudit'of' defictent areas, where indicated, j 1
l O
OCT s 1 teal Enclosure 2 to Supplement 1 of Region II Enforcement Manual ' SAMPLE CITATIONS FOR TITLE 10 AND MATERIALS LICENSE CONDITION VIOLATIONS U 1 (. i e e
. di
~
1 q 10 CFR 19.11 Posting of Notices to Workers
'1
, I :10 CFR 19.11 requires a licensee to post current copies; of certain. .
. documents in a . sufficient number = of placas to permit individuals engaged in licensed activities to observe the documents on their way to
'or from the particujar licensed . activity location to which the documents apply. These documents include 10 CFR' 19,10' CFR 20, the license complete with amendments and documents incorporated,into the license by reference, 'and operating procedures applicable to -licensed-activities. If- posting of these documents is not practicable, .the licensee may. post a notice that describes the documents- and - states where they may be examined.
Contrary to the above, on (date), the licensee had posted =neither the-documents nor the notice of where the documents might be examined. This is a Sev'erity Level V ' violation (Supplement VI). II. 10 CFR 19.11 requires a licensee to post Forms NRC-3, " Notice to , Employees", in a sufficient number of places to permit individuals who 1 work in or frequent ariy portion of .a restricted area to observe the form on their way to or from the restricted area.
\ Contrary to the above, on (date), the -licensee 'had not posted Forms. / NRC-3 as prescribed in or near (identify the applicable restricted area), a restricted area.
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI)'. III . 10 CFR 19.11 requires a licensee to post any notice of' violation involving radiological working conditions issued by'the NRC pursuant to 10 CFR 2 Subpart 8, and the licensee responses thereto, in a sufficient number of places to permit individuals engaged in licensed activities to observe the documents- on their way to- or from the .particular licensed activity location to which the documents apply.. The licensee is required to post any notice of violation within 2 days of .its receipt and to post its response to the notice within 2 days .of-its dispatch. It requires the licensee tc ensure that . such documents
. remain poste<l for a minimum of five working days' or until action- >
correcting the violation has been completed, whichever is later., Contrary to the above, the licensee did not post the NRC' Notice of Violation dated , nor the response to the NRC dated , in a sufficient number of places to permit individuals engaged in licensed activities to observe the documents on their way to and from the particular licensed activity location (i .e. , the Radiobiology O Department, School of Medicine) to which the documents applied.. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI).
# 4
E
} . (
IV 10 CFR 19.11 requires a licensee to post current copies of 'certain
. documents in a sufficient number of places to permit individuals- !
j engaged in licensed activities to observe the documents on their way to ' or from the particular licensed activity location to which . the. , documents apply. These documents include 10 CFR 19, 10 CFR 20, the license complete with amendments and documents incorporated into the' i license by reference, and operating procedures applicable to licensed i activities. If posting of these documents is not practicable, the l licensee may post a notice that describes the documents and states where they may be examined. With respect to restricted areas, the l licensee is required to post Forms NRC-3, " Notice to Employees" in a-sufficient number of places to permit individuals who work in or frequent any portion of a restricted area to observe the form on their way to or from the restricted area. Contrary to the above, on (date) the licensee had not posted the documents or the notice of where the documents might be examined, nor had the licensee posted Forms NRC-3 in or near (identify the applicable < restricted area), a restricted area. l This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI-). G l 1 0 - C .
0 3 10 CFR 19.12 Instruction to Worker-I. 10 CFR 19.12 requires a licensee to inform, advise or instruct: all. individuals working in or frequenting any portion of a restricted area as follows: (1) inform them of the storage, transfer, or use of radioactive materials or of. radiation within the ' restricted area; i (2) instruct them in the health protection programs- associated with exposure to such. radioactive materials or radiation, in precautions or-procedures to minimize exposure, and in the purposes and functions of~ protective devices employed; (3) instruct them in, and instruct them to observe, to the extent within their control, the applicable provisions ' of NRC regulations and licenses for. the protection of personnel from exposures to radiation or radioactive material occurring 'in :such areas; (4) instruct them concerning their responsibility to report promptly to
~
the licensee any condition.which may lead. to or cause a- . violation of. NRC regulations and licenses or ' unnecessary exposure.to radiation or.to - radioactive material; (5) instruct them in the appropriate response to warnings made in the event of 'any unusual ' occurrence or malfunction that may involve exposure to radiation. or radioactive material; and (6) advise them as to the radiation exposure reports which workers'may i request pursuant to 10 CFR 19.13. It also requires a -licensee .to I ensure that the extent of these instructions is commensurate with , potential radiological health protection problemis in .the restricted
, area.
Contrary to the above, the licensee did not provide the required -l information and instruction to two individuals who were regularly
. employed as nuclear medicine technician's in the . Nuclear Medicine Clinic, a restricted area. .
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). II. 10 CFR 19.12 requires a licensee to provide certain specified. information and instructions to indviduals who work in or frequent any portion of. a restricted area. Contrary to the above, the l'icensee did not provide the required information and instruction to two individuals who s were regularly employed as nuclear medicine technicians in the Nuclear Medicine Clinic, a restricted area. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). t
4 III . 10 CFR 19.12 requires a licensee to instruct individuals, who work.in or frequent any portions of a restricted . area, in the applicable 1 provisions of NRC regulations and licenses for the protection of - personnel from exposure to radiation or radioactive materials occurring' . ] in such areas, and to observe these regulations and. license conditions to the extent within their ete trol. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not.so instruct one individual: who routinely delivered radioactively contaminated refuse to .the Radioactive Waste Holding Area, a restricted area. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). ; IV. 10 CFR 19.12 requires a licensee to instruct individuals, who work in or frequent any portion of a restricted area, in precautions .and procedures to minimize exposure to radioactive materials or _ radiation- i and in the applicable provisions of NRC regulations and licenses for the protection of personnel from exposures occurring in such areas. -] 4 Contrary to the above, the licensee did not so instruct the individuals- I who worked in Restricted Area A nor the janitorial staff members who frequented that area.
- j This is a' Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).
V. 10 CFR 19.12 requires a licensee to instruct individuals, who work in'- or frequent .any portion of a restricted area, .in precaution and procedures to minimize exposure to radioactive materials and in the purposes and functions of protective devices employed to minimize such exposure. . . 1
- Contrary to the above, the licensee did not so instruct a technician l regularly engaged in activities within the Nuclear Medicine Laboratory,.
l a restricted area. The technician had not. been instructed -in the l. proper' use of a survey meter (a protective device) and:was thus ! incompetent in the execution of the licensee's procedure for safely opening packages containing radioactive materials. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). I i O ( .
m l l 5 10 CFR 20.101 Radiation Dose Standards for Individuals in' Restricted Areas I. 10 CFR 20.101(a) requires a licensee to possess, use, and transfer its- - licensed material' in a manner which precludes whole body occupational-exposure of any individual in.a restricted area of more than 1.25 rems -in any period of one calendar quarter except as provided in 10 CFR 20.101(b). Contrary to the above, the . licensee possessed and used its licensed material in a manner that resulted in the whole body occupational exposure of an i individual, engaged in activities within its restricted areas, to 2.4 rems during the third calendar quarter of 1981. The licensee did not. meet the i provisions of 10 CFR 20.101(b). This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). II. 10 CFR 20.101(b) requires a licensee to possess, use-, and transfer.its ; licensed material in a manner which precludes whole body. occupational - 1 exposure of any individual.in a restricted area of more than 3 rems in any. j period of one calendar quarter. , Contrary to the above, the licensee possessed and used 'its 11cented' material-in a manner that resulted in the whole body occupational exposure of an (gs individual, engaged in activities within its restricted. areas, to about 7 rems during the third calendar quarter of 1981. This is a Severity Level II violation (Supplement IV). ' i 9 6 f 4
~
O b . ___________________.__.__.____.__._.___t_._.__._,.____._. _ _ . _
i 6
~
10 CFR 20.103 Exposure of Individuals to Concentrations of Radioactive Materials in Air in Restricted Areas I.10 CFR 20.103(a)(1) forbids a. licensee to possess, use, or transfer its licensed material in such a manner as to permit any individual in a restricted area to incur an uptake of the material by- any bodily organ during any calendar quarter in excess of that which would have resulted from inhaling the material for. 40 hours per: week for 13 weeks at the' uniform concentrations specified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix 8, Table I, Column 1; Contrary to the above, . the licensee possessed, used or. transferred iodine-125 in such a manner as to permit one ' individual,.who was employed _ in the Radioisotope Laboratory, a. restricted area, to incur a thyroid uptake of iodine-125 during the first calendar quarters of 1981 in excess (about three times) of that which would have resulted from his inhaling such material for - 40 hours per week.' for 13 weeks at the uniform concentration specified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table I', Column 1. This is a Severity-Level III violation (Supplement IV). II. 10 CFR 20.103(b)(2) requires a licensee,.whenever the intake of. radioactive l material by any individual exceeds that which would have resulted from ' inhalation of such material for 40 hours at the unifona concentration specified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table I, Column 1, to make such-i (, evaluations and take such actions as necessary to assure against recurrence. Contrary to the above, on January 29, 1981, the licensee did not evaluate and take necessary action to assure against . recurrence of an incident in which two employees were determined to have received an intake of cesium-137 exceeding that.which would have resulted from inhalation of such' material for 40 hours at the uniform concentration specified in '10 CFR 20, Appendix 8 Table I, Column 1.
. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).
l 4 0 m t
7 III.10 CFR.20.103(b)(2) requires a licensee, whenever the intake of radioactive material by any individual exceeds that which would have resulted from inhalation of such material for 40 hours at the uniform concentrations specified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table I, Column 1, to make such. evaluations and take such actions as are necessary to assure against recurrence. It also requires the licensee to maintain records of such occurrences, evaluations, and actions taken in a clear and readily identifiable form suitable for summary review and evaluation. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not maintain records of an occurrence of July 5,1981 in which one employee was determined to have received an intake of iodine-131 exceeding that which would have resulted l i from inhalation of such material for 40 hours at the uniform concentrations specified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table I, Column 1; nor did the licensee 1 record its evaluation of the occurrence, or the actions taken .to prevent recurrence of the incident. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement IV). i 4 l - 1 a 9 H k . O .
. _ . . _ _ _ .__ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ . ________.______m_
1 l
'8 i 10 CFR 20.105 Permissible Levels of Radiation in Unrestricted Areas ..
I. 10 CFR 20.105(b)(2)' requires a licensee to ensure that its licensed , material is not possessed, used or transferred in such a manner as to create, in any unrestricted area and from radioactive material and ' other sources of radiation in its possession, radiation-levels which, if an individual were continuously present in the area', could result in his receiving a dose in excess .of 100 millirems in any l . seven - consecutive days.
~
Contrary to the above, the licensee possessed its licensed material .in such a manner as to create, in an office area adjacent to the glass rod ~ storage area .and adjacent to ' waste . drums, radiation levels .of 1 millirem per hour. These radiation levels existed for at'least seven consecutive days. Had an individual been continuously present .in the . area during these seven days he could have received a dose in' excess of-100 millirems. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).- I II. 10 CFR 20.105(b)(1) requires a licensee to ensure that its licensed material is not possessed, used or transferred in such a manner as to create,. in 'any unrestricted . area and from radioactive material ' and other sources of radiation in its possession,.-radiation levels:which, b, if an individual were continuously present in the area, could result in. his receiving a dose in excess of 2 millirems in any one hour. ' An
" unrestricted area" is defined in 10 CFR 20.3(a)(17) as any area access.
to which is not controlled by the~ licensee for purposes of protection of individuals from exposure to radiation. Contrary to the above, the licensee - possessed licensed' material ! contained in its level management gauges, mounted on #3 and #5 ' furnaces, in a manner that resulted in a radiation level- in the adjacent unrestricted area such that if an individual had been. continuously present in the area he could have received. atdose in excess of 3 millirens in any one hour. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). 9 O O s. 6
9-
-O 10 CFR 20.201 Surveys I. 10 CER 20.201(b) requires a licensee to make such surveys as - may be' necessary to comply with the regulations in each section of 10 CFR 20. A
" survey" is defined in 10 CFR 20.201(b) as an evaluation of the radiation hazards incident to the production, use, release, disposal, or presence 'of radioactive materials or other sources-of radiation under a specific set of circumstances.
A. _ Contrary to the above, the licensee' did not make such surveys as:were necessary to ensure that the radiation hazards incident to the use, disposal, and presence of- radioactive materials in the Nuclear MedicineT Hot Laboratory did not result in radiation doses to the' occupants of the area in' excess of the limits specified in 10 CFR 20.101(a). This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). B. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not make such surveys as were necessary to ensure that the radiation hazards incident to the use, disposal, and presence of radioactive implants in patients did not result in radiation doses to the attendant nurses in excess of the limits specified in 10 CFR 20.101(a)'. This is a Severity Level'IV violation '(Supplement IV). C. Contrary to the above, during July 1982. the licensee did not make such surveys as were necessary to ensure that the radiation hazards incident to the use, disposal, and presence of radioactive materials were sufficiently controlled to prevent' the exposure' of ant employee whose ' film badge registered an exposure (3.5 rems)'in excess of the limit for whole body exposure specified in 10 CFR 20.101(b); nor did the licensee evaluate the circumstances of exposure,= after receiving the film badge report, to ensure future compliance with 10 CFR 20.101(b). This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). D. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not conduct such surveys as. were necessary to determine whether or not an., employee. had been j
- exposed, during' January and February 1980, in excess of the radiation. ]
dose limits specified in 10 CFR 20.101. The film badge vendor failed to process the employee's film badge during these months. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement'IV). .
)
)
i
.O 1 1
\ ( .
' 8 :
q n. 10 E. Contrary to the above, the licensee did .not conduct such. surveys as i were necessary to ensure that the employees, who routinely had direct, hand contact with unshielded ' vials containing .up_ to , mil 11 curies of technetium-99m, were not receiving radiation doses }s excess of the limit specified for the hand in'10 CFR 20:101(a). L
/;
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). F. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not make such surveys'as were necessary to ensure that the radiation levels in thetconference. room,- , an unrestricted area contiguous to the Nuclear Medicine Hot-Lab, were d not, as a result ~of the presence of radioactive materials in the-Hot Lab, in excess of the limiting levels specified in 10 CFR 20.105(b). i NOTE: If the charge against the . licensee is " inadequate survey", phrase it as above, and add text such as follows: _g.,
"The licensee did conduct surveys in the conference room, but these f surveys predated the installation of the laboratory fume hood on ;
, the east wall of the Hot Lab and the-practice'of storing incoming j radiophramaceutical shipments against the east' wall." j Provide the reader with a basis]or: concurrence. Do not leave the h charge of inadequacy unsubstantiated._ ,
J This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). G. Contrary to the above, on' June 20, 1982, at the Mason ~ Mfg. Company. 3 field site, the licensee did not make such surveys as were necessary to 7 ensure that the radiation levels beyond the- perimeter of 'its radio-graphy restricted area were within the unrestricted area radiation level limits specified in 10 CFR 20.105(b). This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). ; H. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not make such surfehs as were necessary to ensure that the yearly average concentration of airborne thorium. discharged from Building 201 to the unrestricted areafbetween June 1,1979 and June 1,1980 did not exceed the limit speci fied 'in 10 CFR 20.106. Approximately five curies of thorfum were processed in. Building 201 during the interval. NOTE: If the licensee's survey was inadequate, proceed as follbws: .
"The licensee did filter and assay :amples of the effluent, but did /lj not determine the efficiency of either the sample collection or assay proconure " l O This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).
~
1 i s' . . i Y
a I. Contrary to the above, between -June- 1, 1979 and . June 1, 1980, the 1 licensee did not make such surveys as were necessary to ensure that the composite yearly average concentration of x airborne radioactivity- 1 discharged. to the unrestricted . area; from ~ buildings within .its . . restricted. area, did not exceed the-limit specified in 10 CFR 20.106~. i This is a Severity Level IV(Niciation (Supplement IV). n" J. Co'ntrary to the above, the bicensee did not make such surveys as .were; required to ensure -that licensed ~ material released to the sanitary !
.. sewerage system. from Laboratory A met the requirements of .10 CFR 20.303. Approximately '100 m1111 curies of . tritium were ' handled each.
week in Laboratory A. I This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). 1 II. 10 CFR 20.201(b) requires a licensee to make 'such surveys as '(1) may be i necessary for the licensee to comply with the regulations of 10 CFR 20, and (2) are reasonable under the circumstanets' to evaluate the - extent? of. ; radiation hazards that may be present. - .) 10 CFR ' 20.103('a)(3) requires a licensee, for purposes .of determining = compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 20.103, to -use suitable .. measurements of concentrations of radioactive materials in' air for detecting and evaluating airborne radioactivity in. restricted areas and.inEaddition,. as appropriate, to use measurements of radioactivity in the body, measure-ments of radioactivity excreted from the body,:or any combination 'of- such measurements as may be'necessaryf for timely detection and assessment of: individual intakes of radioactivity by exposed individuals. l A. Contrary to the above, between January 3 and 10, .1982, the licensee did not make such surveys as were necessary to evaluate the radiation hazards that may have been presented to two employees who.~ handled-j mil 11 curie quantities of unsealed iodine-131 in Laboratory A, ' a ; restricted area.
' ~
- 1. The ' licensee neither fueasured the concentrations of radioactive materials in the breathing -zones ~of the workers nor measured the ,
radioactivity in, or' excreted from, the workers' bodies. This is a Severity Level IV violation.(Supplement:IV)'.
- 2. The licensee measured the concentrations of radioactive materials in the breathing zones of the workers but"did not measure the, !
radioactivity in, or excreted ~ from, the workers' bodies and was thus unable to assess the increment of intake that may have resulted from the bare-handed washing of radiciodine contaminated f, g glasswear. ; i , ( / This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).'
) e
. e-
I 12 B. Contrary to the abo _ve, between January 3 and 10,1982, .the licensee did not make such surveys as were necessary to ensure that the' exposures incurred by two employees who handled mil 11 curie quantities of unsealed ^ L iodine-131 in Laboratory A, a restricted area, were in compliance with . the requirements of 10 CFR 20.103(a). The licensee measured .the concentration of radioactive materials in the breathing zones . of the , workers but 'did not evaluate the measurements with respect ' to the exposure limits specified in 10 CFR 20.103(a). This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). I III.10 CFR 20.201(b) requires a licensee to make. such ' surveys as may be necessary to comply with ~.the regulations in each section of 10 CFR 20. A-
~
" survey" is defined in 10 CFR 20.201(b). as an evaluation 'of the radiation ;
hazards incident to the' production, use, release, disposal, or presence of l radioactive materials or other sources of radiation 'under a. specific' set of - ! circumstances. i 10 CFR 20.301 forbids a licensee to dispose of licensed material as waste L except by certain specified procedures. Contrary to.the above, the licensee didL not make such surveys as were necessary to ensure that -licensed material was not disposed' of as waste . ' except as a111 owed by 10 CFR 20.301.
- 1. Waste collected from areas where unsealed licensed material .was used or stored was not surveyed to ensure that it contained no detectable '
radioactivity prior to its release to the unrestricted area as general refuse. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). '
- 2. Shipping containers, in which licensed material had been contained, were not surveyed to ensure that they contained no detectable l
radioactive contamination prior to their release to the unrestricted area as general refuso. This is a Severity Level' IV violation (Supplement IV).
- 3. Waste collected from areas where unsealed. tritius'was used or stored.
l was surveyed with the intent to ensure that.it contained no detectable-activity prior to . its' release to the unrestricted area as general i refuse . but the survey meter used was : incapable of detecting ' the presence of tritium. ~ l This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). L -
?
4 g I O f'
~yg + -
ac ~; vn ,( f, 3 - y f\; y ~ 'm[.y . q[ ; 1 5;,<r.g lyy[ d; + 3 ;
,(
3 f .5 ,
'r' 1:l . j.
) >
' ;]>.
;t
.. ~,. ..
\
is {f r
)je .; 9
, 3 ii ,
7 l 4
~(ut b x .
t , 10 CN.lb.203 Cautioi:: Sips 1 Labels, Signtjs ahti Controls l
.e. .
qr -
,1 ',f ,y 4 e .. 4 e
,l ?, w-
]
*A
/
?
a o
'\
y s
'- 6 s .I.- A 10 CFR 20.203(b)' requires a licenste to post each radiation area with C -
a i/ conspicuous if,gn or. sigtiss bearingo the radiation caution symbol and the s I a wo is: . Cretion Radiat1on Area. ' A " radiation area" is . defined. . in 10p!CFR 20.202(b)(2), Wtancoarea, accessiblef to personnel, in which .. H jL / ' 4.ha're exists . radiation oridnating-in whole car in ~ part, within licensed - J:! Y material',*at' n:h leve'Is mit a major po0ttre of the body could receive J n Lin ,any omthdure a dose L im enen of 5 mM4 t ress,g or in any1 fivei ' ' j i 3' c, coissecutive' days a dose it.2 excessbf 100:st11freds. ' ~ 3 l .? 2- ,
'5 ,
Contrary to the -above, the ycansee did 'no't post;the radiation . area in -l
. the nuclear medicine rtos 74ge o j rean as required. ),
m i ,. This is e Severlts Level d violation (SupplemenOf,V). ,
.3 1
n J
'l II. 10 CFR 20.203(c)(1) requires a licensee to post each high radiation.
- g j area with a conspicuous sign or 11gns ' bearing the radiation . caution t
, symbol and the words: Caution High;Raciation3 Area. . . A "high' radiation.
"( ,,
*' area" is defined, in 10 CFR. 20.202(b)(3), as any af ea,' accessible to' l I personnel, in which there mtists%diation, originating inTwhole or. in- l
' part within licensed material,lat .such levels that a major.. portion-of - ]
1 the body could . receive ' W.any, cna" hour a dose ' in excess' of-100 mil 11 rems. /.! q w 4 Contrary to the above, ths iteer,see did not post jits calibration' room-l, with the specified 'stgn. . 'llbtf licensee . posted a sign but it ' was , o inconspicuously located beMrta an obsceneipIcture of:the laboratory administrator. ,< . 1 s..;
- 1
.J
, This S ~a .Saverity Level IVJviolation (Supplement TV)..
" s j ,
, l2l l
'> 's :( .; ,
; j u !
+\l
}> .%'
i '
'e
* .j s
j ( '! 9
'I s l.
}
, , i-s r f'. , ?
1
~ '
j <
. O : ,
I e a :f a , , ,
- 4 3 8
4 4. , 'I h# s 'u '
, . t' f '
- e. :: f \s ,
' '* :t I 5" ' " ...L_______ El d b _. i ' '
, \. - ,)
s' 14 III. 10 CFR 20.203(c)(2) requires a licensee, who establishes a high radiation area for 30 days or more, to control each entrance or access to the area by one of the following methods: (1) equip it with a i
; control device which shall cause the level of radiation to be reduced below that at which an individual might receive a dose of 100 millirems 1 in one hour upon entry into the area'; or (2) equip it with a control
' device which shall energize a conspicuous visible or audible alarm signal in such a manner that the individual entering the high radiation I area and the licensee or a supervisor of the activity are made aware of the entry; or (3) keep it locked except during periods _ when access to the area is required, with positive control over each individual entry. i 1
; Contrary to the above, the licensee, having established a permanent !
facility for the calibration of radiation survey meters where high . radiation areas were routinely generated, did not control the entrance I l to the high radiation area by any of. the specified methods. The licensee provided direct surveillance to prevent unauthorized entry of l the high radiation area; but this control measure is authorized (10 CFR 20.203(c)(4)) only in the case of a high radiation area establi_shed for i a period of 30 days or less. 1 This is a Seve.rity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). , IV. 10 CFR 20.203(c)(2) requires a licensee, who establishes a high
, radiation area for 30 days or more, to control each entrance or access
(, to the area by certain specified means. One of these means is a control device that energizes a conspicuous visible or audible alarm signal in such a manner that the individual entering the high radiation area ,and the licensee or a supervisor of the activity are made aware of the entry. , Contrary to the above, the licensee did not control each entrance or access to the high radiation area in the northern enclosure of Area A by any of the specified means. The licensee had installed a control device that energized a visible signal as described above, but the signal was not conspicuous to an inattentive individual entering the area. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). V. 10 CFR 20.203(c)(3) reqyires a licensee, 'who establishes a high radiation area and chooses tc control each entrance or access point by maintaining the entrances or access points locked, to ensure that no individual will be prevented from leaving the high radiaition area. Contrary to the above, the licensee maintained control of the entrance to the high radiation area. enclosing its Gamma Pit by a locked door O that precluded entrance to', or egress from, the high radiation area when the source was in the IRRADIATE po.sition. ( This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).
1- . 15 b VI. 10- CFR 20.203(e) requires a licensee to post each area or room, in c which licensed material i s used or stored and: which ~ contains any radioactive material (other than natural uranium or thorium) in an amount exceeding 10 times the' quantity of such material specified .in . Appendix C of.10 CFR 20, with a conspicuous sign or signs bearing.the radiation caution symbol and the words: Caution. Radioactive Materials. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not post the area or room (Room No. 210, Physics Building), in which 10 m1111 curies of osmium-193 was used and . stored, with the required sign. . Ten times - the quantity of osmium-193 specified in Appendix C of 10 CFR 20 is l.millicurie. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). NOTE: In instances of low potential risk, assign a Severity Level V. VII. 10 CFR 20.203(f)(1) requires a licensee, except as' provided in 10.CFR. 20.203(f)(3), to affix to each container of licensed material a durable and clearly visible label identifying'the licensed material within the container. - Contrary to the above, the licensee did not label ' a container to n identify its contents _as being cobalt-60. The 10 curie' sealed source A.) did not come within the exemptions of 10 CFR 20.203(f)(3). s This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). VIII. 10 CFR 20.203(f)(1) and (2) require a licensee, except as provided by 10 CFR 20.203(f)(3), to affix to each container of . licensed material a durable and clearly visible label bearing: the radiation caution symbol; the words: Caution Radioactive Material; identification of the radioactive contents; and sufficient information to permit. individuals handling or using the container, or working in the vicinity thereof, to take precautions to avoid or minimize exposures. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not label a container holding approxima'tely 23 mil 11 curies (on- July 2, 1981) of . iodine-131. The iodine-131 was assigned to Dr. J. P. O'Reilly. _ It was located in the fume hood on the west wall of Room 203 in Building L No. 301. The licensed material did not come within the exemptions of 10,CFR 20.203(f)(3). This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).
~
O
/
[k .
16 1 IX. 10 CFR 20,203(f)(4) requires a licensee, prior to disposal of an empty )' uncontaminated contairier to an unrestricted area, to remove or deface the radioactive material label or otherwise clearly indicate that the container no longer contains radioactive material. . . . Contrary to the above, the licensee did not take the required actions ' prior to disposal of empty uncontaminated boxes as general refuse. The boxes were labeled to indicate that they contained radioactive material. ] This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). l l l l t 1 4 l g
\.
O g
17
~
10 CFR 20.205 Procedures for Picking Up, Receiving, and Opening Packages I. 10 CFR.20.205(b)(2) requires a licensee, who, upon receipt of a package of - .i radioactive material, finds the external surfaces of the package to have l removable radioactive contamination in excess of 0.01 microcurie (22,000 disintegrations per minute) per 100 square centimeters of package surface, to immediately notify the final delivering carrier and, by telephone and telegraph, mailgram, or facsimile, the appropriate NRC Regional Office shown , in 10 CFR 20, Appendix 0. Contrary to the above, on May 2,1980, the licensee upon receipt of a package containing 30 millicuries of fodine-131, did not notify the final delivering carrier or the NRC, although his survey of the package showed it to be contaminated by approximately 200,000 disintegrations per minute per 100 square centimeters of package surface. His survey also showed that the contamination did not result from a breach of package integrity. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). NOTE: In the instance above, the shipper may have iricurred a Severity Level III violation (Supplement V).
, II. 10 CFR 20.205(b)(1) requires a licensee, upon receipt of a package of .- radioactive material not exempted by the provisions of 10 CFR 20.205(b)(1)(1) through (v), to monitor the external surfaces of the package for radioactive contamination caused by. leakage of the radioactive contents.-
It also requires that the monitoring be performed as soon as practicable after receipt but no later than three hours after the package is received at the licensee's facility, if received during the licensee's normal working hours, or eighteen hours if received after normal working hours. Contrary to the above, on June 13, 1982, the licensee, upon receipt of a package containing a 15 millicuries solution of cesium-137 (radioactive material not exempted by the provisions of 10 CFR 20.205(b)(1)(1) through (v)), received,at its facility at 4:00 p.m., did not monitor the package until June 16,1982 at 9:00 a.m. , 'an interval of 65 hours. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). ! I O i l 9
J
, 18 l III.10 CFR 20.205(c)(1) requires a licensee, upon receipt' of a package '
containing quantities of radioactive material in excess of the Type A quantities specified in 10 CFR 20.205(b) and other than those transported by . exclusive use vehicle, to monitor the radiation levels of the package._ . It. . I requires the licensee to monitor the package as soon as practicable after receipt, but no later than three hours after the package is received at the i licensee's facility if received during the-licensee's normal working hours, I or eighteen hours if received after normal working f.ours. Contrary to the above, on May 3,1981', the licensee, upon. receipt of a - , package containing 500 ' curies of cesium-137. (the Type A ' quantity for cesium-137 specified in 10 CFR 20.205(b) is 3 curies) and not delivered by. l exclusive use vehicle, did not monitor the radiation-levels of the package until approximately one week after receipt of the package. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement IV). l IV. 10 CFR 20.205(c)(2) requires a licensee, who finds radiation levels on the i external surface of a consigned package of radioactive material in excess of 200 millirems per hour, or at three feet from the ' external surface 'of the package in excess of 10 millirems per hour, to notify immediately, by telephone and telegraph, mailgram, or' facsimile, the director' of: the-appropriate NRC Regional Office listed in 10_ CFR; 20, Appendix .D, . and the final delivering carrier. , b Contrary the above, on May 3,1981,' the licensee, having found radiation levels on the external surface of a consigned packageEof. radioactive to material (BL #19143766) to have been 350 millirems per hour, did not notify the NRC or the final delivering carrier until May 5,1982. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). ) V. 10 CFR 20.205(d) requires a licensee to e:itablish, maintain and follow 4 procedures for safely opening packages in which licensed material are . received at its facility. . Paragraph 4 of'the licensee's established procedure requires the licensee, prior to opening a consigned package containing radioactive material, .to perform a wipe test of the package and to report to the Radiation Safety < Officer immediately any wipeable contamination in excess of 0.01 microcurie. Contrary to the above, on May 3,1981, the licensee, prior to opening a consigned package containing radiopharmaceuticals, did not perform a wipe test of the package. The licensee wiped the. surface of the package but.did not evaluate the results of the wipe before opening the package.. l This is a Severity Level V- violation (Supplement IV). f k
. g
_ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . 1
19 9 - 10 CFR 20.207 Storage and Control of Licensed Materials in Unrestricted Areas 10 CFR 20.207 requires a licensee who possesses licensed material in an ' unrestricted area to ensure that the material is either secured from unauthorized removal from a place of storage or tended under his constant surveillance and immediate control. An " unrestricted area" is defined, in 10 CFR 20.3(a)(17), as any area access to which is not controlled by the licensee for purposes of protection of individuals from exposure to radiation and radioactive materials. A. Contrary to the above, the licensee, possessing mil 11 curie quantities of-licensed materials in its Nuclear Medicine Laboratory, an unrestricted area, did not ensure that the material was always secured from unauthorized removal from the laboratory (e.g., by locking the door when the laboratory was unattended). On the occasions when the laboratory was unlocked and i unattended, the licensed material could have been removed by visitors, l unauthorized employees, or ambulatory patients. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). . L B. Contrary to the above, the licensee. . stored depleted technetium-99m generators containing m1111 curie residual quantities of licensed material in an unlocked and unattended utility room. The door to the utility room
. opened into an unrestricted hallway.
l This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). i i i , 6
~
O L , t e
9 20 10 CFR 20.301 General Requirements (for waste disposal) I. 10 CFR 20.301 forbids a licensee to dispose of licensed material as wasta except (1) by transfer to an authorized recipient as provided in the applicable parts of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, (2) by relea'se into sanitary sewerage systems in accordance with 10 CFR 20.303, (3) . for specified quantities of hydrogen-3 or carbon-14 in accordance with 10 CFR 20.306, and (4) as effluents to the unrestricted area in accordance with 10 CFR 20.106. Contrary to the above, between May 3, 1978 and August 1, 1982, the licensee disposed of licensed material in an unexcepted manner. He discarded radioactively contaminated absorbent paper, test tubes, and other glasswear as common waste to an unrestricted area (a land-fill dump). i This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). - l NOTE: The Severity Level of this type violation should be judged on the degree of the resultant hazard to health and safety. II. 10 CFR 20.303 forbids a lii:ensee to discharge licensed material into a_ i A sanitary sewerage system unless the licensed material is readily_ soluble or L/ dispensable in water. 1 Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the licensee discharged approximately - j 10 gallons of sludge, containing approximately 100 m1111 curies of cobalt-60, 1 into the sanitary sewerage system. The sludge was oil-based and neither i
. soluble nor dispensable in water, , ,
l This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). III.10 CFR 20.303 forbids a licensee to discharge, in any one day, a quantity of , licensed or other radioactive material into a sanitary sewerage system which I exceeds the larger of the following limits: (1) a quantity which, if diluted by the average daily quantity of sewerage released inte the sewer by , the licensee, will result in an average concentration equal to the limits specified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table I, Column 2; or (2) ten times the quantity of such material specified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix C. Contrary to the above, the licensee discharged a quantity (7 m1111 curies) of soluble cesium-137, which exceeded both limits, into its sanitary sewerage system. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).
~
O Y
a i l IV. 10 CFR 20.203 forbids a licensee to dfscharge, in any one month, a quantity of licensed or other radioactive material which, if diluted by the average monthly quantity of water released by the licensee, exceeds the 1imits specified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table I, Column 2. - . . j Contrary to.the above, during May 1980, the licensee discharged a quantity l (50 mil 11 curies) of soluble iodine-131 into its sanitary sewerage system. The average monthly quantity of water released by the licensee (4,000,000 gallons) permitted him to discharge only 4.5 mil 11 curies of soluble iodine-131 per month. :3 This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). -l 1 9 i d l l I 4 O x
# 4
h 22 , 4 10 CFR 20.401 Records of Surveys, Radiation Monitoring, and Disposal 1
' ~
I. 10 CFR 20.401(a) requires a licensee to maintain records showing the radiation exposures of all individuals for whom personnel monitoring is requi' red under 10 CFR 20.202. It requires that such records be kept on Form NRC-5 in accordance with the instructions' contained in that form or on clear and legible records containing all the information recuired by Form NRC-5. It also requires that the doses entered on the forms or records be for periods of time not exceeding one calendar quarter. , J Contrary to the above, the licensee did r ot maintain the required records in accordance with the instructions contained in Form NRC-5. Although Item 4 of the form requires an entry under "Name of Licensee", the licensee made no such entry on any of its Forms NRC-5. . This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement IV). NOTE: The previous citation is presented as a convenient reference. In the example used, the last sentence of the first paragraph should . be deleted. ! II. 10 CFR 20.401(b) requires a licensee to maintain records in the same units used in 10 CFR 20 showing the results of monitoring required by 10 CFR ; 20.205(b). i Contrary to the above, the licensee did not maintain recoros of monitoring i required by 10 CFR 20.205(b) in the same units (microcuries or disinte- ! grations per minute) as those used in 10 CFR 20.205(b). in specifying Jimits of contamination on consigned packages of radioactive materials. The licensee used such words and phrases as "OK", " Clean", and "No Detectable Activity" on its monitoring records for consigned shipments of packages ! containing radioactive materials. , i This is a Sever.ity Level V violation (Supplement (IV). 1 III.10 CFR 20.401(b) requires a license's to maintain records showing the results of surveys required by 10 CFR 20.201(b). 10 CFR 20.201(b) requires a l licensee to make ,such s.urveys as may be necessary for the licensee to comply l with the regulations of 10 CFR 20. l l Contrary to the above, the licensee did not maintain records (required by 10 CFR 20.201(b)) of surveys made to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 20.301 regarding waste disposal. This is a Severity Level V. violatsion (Supplement IV). L .
]
G
. 23 IV. 10 CFR 20.401(b) requires a licensee, who disposes of licenset. material by its release into a sanitary sewerage system in accordance w;th the provisions of 1r ':7R 20.303, to maintain records of such disposals.
Contrary to the above, between May 3,1979 and' August 17, 1982, the licensee routinely disposed of licensed material by releasing it to the sanitary sewerage system in accordance with the provisions of 10.CFR 20.203 but did not maintain records of the disposals. This-is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement IV). ( - t 6 4 4 T
. u g 9
- 8 o____~__.______.. _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _
0 24
~
10 CFR 20.402 Reports of Theft or Loss of Licensed Material 10 CFR 20.402(a) requires a licensee to report immediately by telephone to th Director of the appropriate NRC Regional Office listed in 10 CFR 20, A ndix D when he knows of a loss or theft of licensed material in such quantities and under such circumstances that it appears to him that a substantial hazard maY result to persons in unrestricted areas. l Contrary to the above, on May 3, 1980, the licensee knew of the loss of seven of its strontium-90 activated luminous markers on the road between Scylla and Charybdis in Confusion County, Maryland and, believing that a substantial hazard l might result to persons in the unrestricted area, conducted an extensive and successful search of the markers before notifying the NRC of the loss. l This is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement IV). l 6 6 i
O 25 10 CFR 20.403 Notification of Incidents 10 CFR 20.403(b)(1) requires a licensee to notify within 24 hours, by telephone and telegraph, mailgram, or fascimile, the Director of the appropriate NRC Regional Office listed in 10 CFR 20, Appendix 0, of any incident involving licensed material possessed by him which may have caused or threatened to cause exposure of the whole body of any individual to 5 rems or more of radiation. Contrary to the above, on May 3, 1980, the licensee, having been informed that a personnel dosimeter assigned to one of his employees indicated that the wearer might have received a whole body dose of 7 rems of radiation while using iridium-192 radiographic sources, did not inform the NRC of the incident until May 7, 1981, when he had completed an investigation of the circumstances surrounding the incident. This is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement IV). ( l l l l O L . 6 6
})
26
. J l _.
f ( 10 CFR 20.405 Reports of Overexposure and Excessive Levels and Concentrations i y 10 CFR 20.405(a) requires a licensee to make a written report within 30 'days to l the appropriate NRC Regional Office listed in 10 CFR 20, Appendix D,:and:to the-Director of Inspection and Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory . Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, of each exposure of an individual to radiation in excess of the applicable limits of its NRC license, or the limits of 10 CFR 20.101 or 3
.W 20.104(a). 4 10 CFR 19.13(d) requires a licensee, who is required pursuant to 10 CFR 20.405 to report to the NRC any exposure of an individual to radiation, to also provide the individual a report on his exposure data included in the NRC report. It:also requires the licensee to transmit the report.to the individual not later than the.
transmittal to the NRC. Contrary to the above, the licensee did'not submit the required reports to the . NRC or to an employee (employee ID No. 739) who was exposed to radiation (whole l body' dose of '1.5 rems) in excess of the lim'its of 10 CFR 20.101(a) during the forth calendar quarter of 1979. O Thi= is sev rity ' vei tv vio1 tioa (suaai at tv)-
\ .
( 1 4 o (. . -- _-_____--.___._-_____--___________________________.gt_
s 27 ( 10 CFR 20.407 Personnel Monitoring Reports 10 CFR 20.407(b) requires a radiography licensee to submit, to the Director of Management and Program Analysis, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,. 0.C. 20555, within the first quarter of each calendar year, a statistical summary report of personnel monitoring information recorded by the licensee during the preceding calendar year. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not submit the required report for the calendar year 1979 until July 1980. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement IV). P L t e e o e
- - - - - _ _ - - - _ - - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Q
e l l 28
~
10 CFR 20.408 Reports of Personnel Monitoring on Termination of Employment or Work 10 CFR 20.408(b) requires a person who is licensed to use byproduct material for purposes of radiography to submit a report to the Director of -Management and Program Analysis, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission each time a radiographer or radiographer's assistant leaves its employ, or, if he is not in its employ, completes the radiographic work assignment covered by its license. It requires that the report disclose the individual's exposure to radiation incurred during the period of employment or work assignment; and .that the report be submitted within 30 days after the exposure of the individual has been determined or 90 days after the date of termination of employment or work assignment, whichever is I earlier. O L d N 6 l I ( . l . i O
29
~
10 CFR 20.409 Notifications and Reports to Individuals 10 CFR 20.409 requires a licensee, who submits a report to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 20.408, to notify the individual, whose employment or work assignment has been terminated, of his incurred exposure. It requires that the notice to the individual be transmitted at a time not later than the transmittal to the NRC. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not report to the NRC or .to a radio- l grapher's assistant, who completed his work assignment on May 3, 1980, the i individual's exposure to radiation incurred during his period of work assignment. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). P L t 0 5 m O t 9 e g
e 30 I 10 CFR 30.'3 Activities Requiring License l 10 CFR 30.3 forbids a person to manufacture, produce, transfer, receive, acquire, , own, possess, or use byproduct material except as authorized by (1) a specific or j general license issued pursuant to the regulations of 10 CFR 30, (2) an exemption l provided by 10 CFR 30, or (3) an exemption provided by 10 CFR 150. l Contrary to the above, on May 3, 1980, John Smith acquired - an irradiator containing 60 curies of cesium-137 and owned, possessed, and used this byproduct material until July 5, 1982. The material was ' not covered by any of the authorized exceptions. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). (O L 8 Y
~
O
= 3
G 31 - 10 CFR 30.34 Terms and Conditions of Licenses 10 CFR 30.34(c) requires a person, licensed by the NRC pursuant to the regulations of 10 CFR 30 through 10 CFR 35, to confine his possession and use of-licensed material to the locations and purposes authorized in the license. l Condition 10 of NRC Byproduct License No, specifies that licensed d material may only be used at 97 Broad Street, Newark, New Jersey. Contrary to the above, between May 1980 and July.1982, the licensee possessed and used a licensed cobalt-60 source at 101 Marietta Street, N.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30303, a location not authorized by the license. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). 10 CFR 30.41(c) requires a licensee, prior to transferring licensed material, to verify that the transferee's license authorizes the receipt of the type, form, and quantity of material to be transferred. 1 I
/^s !J \
(.
. . l l
l
~-
O . 1 f
- 32 l 10 CFR 30.41 Transfer of Byproduct Material 10 CFR 30.41(d) specifies acceptable methods for the verification required b9 10 CFR 30.41(c).
Contrary to the above, on May 3,19'80, the licensee tranferred 10 m1111 curies of iodine-131 to the Blank Hospital without having determined by an acceptacle method of verification that the transferee was authorized to receive the material. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV). 1 1 0 l t l 6 6 0 , f e
'e e e O
I
I 1 s 10 CFR 30.51 Records 1 1. I 10 CFR 30.51(a) requires a licensee to keep records showing disposal of. licensed material. Contrary to the above, the licensee has not kept records showing disposal of licensed material since the date of issuance of its license. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement IV). l l l l l o P . t 4 l l 4 !O . L .
f 34
~
10 CFR 32.12 Introduction of Byproduct Material in Exempt Concentrations into Products or Materials, and Transfers of Ownership or Possession: Material Transfer Reports . . 10 CFR 32.12 requires a licensee, who is authorized pursuant to 10 CFR 32.11 to h introduce byproduct material in exempt concentrations into a product or material, to file an annual report with the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D' C. 20555, with a copy to the appropriate NRC Regional Office listed in 10 CFR 20, Appendix 0. It i also specifies the content of the report and its required time of submittal. Contrary to the above, the licensee, who is authorized pursuant to -10 CFR 32.11 to introduce exempt quantitier of hydrogen-3, carbon-14, and krypton-85 into natural gas, did not submit the required annual reports to the NRC for the years 1979 and 1980. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). Note: The severity of the previous violation should be judged on the relevant
- f circumstances. j O -
1 i
~
9
35 10 CFR 32.16 Certain Items Containing Byproduct Material: Reports of Transfer I, 10 CFR 32.16 reouires a person licensed under 10 CFR 32.14 to file an annual report with the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, with a copy to the appropriate NRC Regional Office listed in 10 CFR 20, Appendix 0. It also specifies the content of the report and its required time of submittal. . l Contrary to the above, the licensee did not file an annual report- for the ] year 1979, showing a transfer of 125 watches containing 911 millicuries of i tritium. l l This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). II. 10 CFR 32.16 requires each person, who is licensed under 10 CFR 32.14 to transfer watches containing tritium for sale to'the general public, to file an annual report.with the NRC, within 30 days following the year -ending June 30, stating the number of watches and the total quantity of tritium i transferred. ' 1 I Contrary to the above, the licensee report for 1979 did not state the d n v quantity of tritium in the 750 watches transferred.
. i
(, This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). l
?
I 1 j t l k i
. J 4
i 36 10 CFR 32.30 Manufacture, Distribution and Transfer of Exempt Quantities of l Byproduct Material: Records and Ma:.erial Transfer Reports l 10 CFR 32.20 requires a person, who is licensed pursuant to 10 CFR 32.18 to manufacture, distribute and transfer exempt quantities of byproduct material, to maintain records of transfer of material for a period of two years after such , transfer, identifying by'name and address each person to whom byproduct material l was transferred for use under 10 CFR 30.18, and stating the kinds and quantities { of byproduct material transferred. It also requires the filing of an annual { summary report stating the total quantity of each isotope transferred under the j license. It requires the report to be filed with the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, with a copy to the appropriate NRC Regional Office listed in 10 CFR 20, Appendix 0. Each report is required to cover the year ending June 30, and shall be filed within 30 days thereafter. If no transfers of byproduct material have been made pursuant to 10 CFR 32.18 during the reporting period, the report shall so indicate. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not maintain its records of transfer of material for the years 1979 and 1980, nor did it file an annual report for 1981 j q with the NRC. The licensee discarded its records at the close of each business l year. Those records on file identified the transferees by' name but provided h) incomplete addresses in most instances. I J l This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). I n t l
. l
, 37 q
'10 CFR 34.22 Locking of Radiographic Exposure Devices, Storage Containers, and Source Changers I. 10 CFR 34.22 requires a licensee to keep each exposure device 'or its container locked when it is not (1) under. the direct surveillance ' of a-radiographer or a radiographer's assistant, (2) within a high radiation area equipped with a control device or an alarm system as described in ,10 CFR 20.203(c)(2), or (3) within an area that is locked to protect against a unauthorized or accidental entry.
Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the licensee left exposure ' device - No. 9978 unlocked at a field site near Atlanta, Georgia.while the radio-grapher and radiographer's assistant were processing film and incapable of. exercising direct surveillance of the device. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). II. 10 CFR'34.22 requires a licensee, during radiographic pperations, to secure the sealed source assembly in its shielded position each time the source is returned to that position.- Contrary to the. above, on May 3,1980, the licensee, during . radiographic ! operations at Brand Foundry, did not secure -the' sealed source assembly in I its shielded position after retracting the source to that position'. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV), l NOTE: If the preceeding violation resulted in personnel overexposure, the two violations should be grouped (cause and effect) a'nd assigned a 5'everity Level in accordance with the magnitude of the overexposure. l l ' l O " l 9 i _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . . . I
38 <
/
l J ' 10 CFR 34.23 Storage Precautions.. 10 CFR 34.23 requires a licensee to physically secure locked radiographic exposure devices and storage containers to prevent tampering or removal by-unauthorized personnel. Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the licensee left an unsecured, locked radiographic exposure device in its unlocked truck parked in front of 87 Broad Street, Newark, New Jersey. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). I i l
}
i r . l f f 9 9 b I O e -
# 0
{ ., ] i I
, 39 .j e - :
- i 10 CFR'34.24 Radiation Survey Instruments 10 CFR 34.24 requires a licensee to calibrate each radiation survey meter,.used to conduct physical radiation surveys, at intervals not to exceed three months.
Contrary to the above, the licensee did not calibrate radiation' survey meter k No. 3766, a meter used to conduct physical radiation surveys, between May 3,1980 - and September 17, 1980, an interval in excess of three months. q l This is a Severity Level IV violation,(Supplement VI).
, 1 g .
, l 1
i i i 0 7, ; e O,
- 4
5 40 10 CFR 34.25 Leak Testing, Repair, Tagging, Opening, Modification and Replacement of Sealed Sources 10 CFR 34.25(b) requires a licensee to test each sealed source, fastened to or contained in a radiographic exposure device, for leakage at intervals not to exceed 6 months. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not test sealed source No. 3766, contained-in radiographic exposure device No. C-110, for leakage between May 3, 1980 and December 24, 1980, an interval in excess of 6 months. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). 6
+
4 t S O C____________________________. _____.m_______.__________.__.m. _ _ _ _ _ __._-_U__m m_
T, e my
= t, t ,4
,) g l 3,,
j x ,43 ,
, ,y i - i, 10 CFR 3c/26 Quarterly I,s,iEnt,ory
<. l I' t
r) -
; ',- (,
- ) 3 1 ,
'l I. 10 CR; 34.26 requires a licensse to conducts.) quarterly physical inventory lo acepunt for all utded sources recetyed and,n., possessed under its license.
t ,. p , , m l Contr;ary to the above, the licenswa .did not. tenduct? ( May 3,1980 and November 3,1963. in interval of in 3inced; months.an inventory be l l l This is a beverity Level V violation (Sunplement VI).' l l., .
~>
II. 10 CFR 34.26 requires a licensee 2to conduct A quarterly physical. inventory
< to account for all suled sot.eces received and possessed under its license.
It also v'equires thai.' records of 'these inventories be . maintained for two yeary from the date of the inventory for inspct' ton by theJCommission.
;;, .)
^
3 e4 Contrary to the above, 'the' licensee did not main +iafn his . inventory records, i for the first calendar' q'uarter of 1930, for twd. ye Ars 'from the date of !, inventory. ,; ; This is a Sevdity 1.etel V tiolation (kp;ilement VI).
- s
. ,-Q , ,
* {d L,
I ll ' 9 j j i a i ,1 , 4 ,1
) r , ')
T i
\
i
\ [l \)', '
4 ( c }, ,
; ,x .
, e ,
j - - 4
/
l' '
<-/, .
t , , . l i .
. 't j
T '4', '
',) ,y i .
,j
's
,\
j .,
* . j f \
y '
/ '; '
L
>E,, ). '.?
f JS.. t .
;' ;,) ' c.
1 , ,T , 'd i
42 10 CFR 34.27 Utilization Logs 10 CFR 34.27 requires a licensee to maintain logs, for each sealed source, showing the following information: (1) a description (or make and model number) of the radiographic exposure device or storage container in which the sealed source is located; (2) the identity of the radiographer to whom assigned; and (3) the plant or site where used and the date of use. It also requires the licensee to maintain these logs for two years from the date 'of the recorded event, for inspection by the Commission, at the address specified in the license. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not record in its utilization log a series of radiographic exposures, made on May 3, 1980, using camera No. C-11, of pipe welds at the Bland Steel Works. I This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). d ( O k e O
r - - , . - . - - - _ - _ , _ _ , , _. _ 43 0- it 10 CFR 34.28 Inspection and Maintenance of Radiographic Exposure Devices, Storage Containers, and Source Changers I. 10 CFR 34.28(a) requires a licensee to check'., radiographic exposure devices, storage containers and source changers for obvious defects prior to use each day the equipment is used. . Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the licensee did not . check camera No. C-11 for obvious defects prior to using the equipment at a field site two miles north of Macon, Georgia. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). l II. 10 CFR 34.28(b) requires a licensee to conduct a program for inspection and maintenance of radiographic exposure devices, storage containers, and source l ! changers, at intervals not to exceed three months or prior to the'first use thereafter, to assure proper functioning of components important to safety. It also, requires the licensee to maintain records of these inspections and I maintenance activities for two " ears. , Contrary to the a'bove, the licensee did not maintain records of -these inspections since the date of license issue. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). l 1 I S 9 3 0 &
y 1 44 . O' - Y 10 CFR 34.29 Permanent Radiographic Installations l 10 CFR 34.29 requires a licensee, who maintains a permanent radiographic installation (as defined in 10 CFR 34.2(h)), to meet the following special requirements: (1) each entrance that is used for personnel access to the high radiation area shall have both visible and audible warning signals to warn of the presence of radiation; (2) the visible signal shall be actuated by radiation whenever the source is exposed; (3) the audible signal shall be actuated when an attempt is made to enter the installation while the source is exposed; (4) the . alarm system shall be tested at intervals ~not to exceed three months or prior >to the first use thereafter of the source in the installation; and (5) records of-the tests shall be kept for two years. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not have the required warning signals at' its permanent radiographic installation (Cell B), located at 97 Broad Street, Newark, New Jersey, while radiography was being conducted on May 3,1980. The signals were in place but they were inoperative due to a power outage. 1 This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). ' Q t t 9 e , O 1
' ~
3
45 0.5 - 10 CFR 34.31 Training l 10 CFR 34.31(b)(3) forbids a licensee to permit any individual to act as a radiographer's assistant until such individual has demonstrated un'ir estanding of the instructions in 10 CFR 34.31(b) by successfully completing a wr.tten or oral test and a field examination on the subjects covered. Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, thc iicensee permitted an individual to act as a radiographer's assistant although his qualification examination was not completed until May 5,1980. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). O~ 6 i 4 e s. I d .
. ,}
I 1
. y l
{
l O- _
< 1 i
10 CFR 34.32 Operating and Emergency Procedures 1
-10 CFR 34.32 requires a licensee to establish operating and emergency procedures that include certain specified instructions. One of these instructions,10 CFR l 34.32(g), covers steps to be taken to minimize exposure of persons in the event I of an accident. .l
)
Contrary to the above, the licensee's operating and emergency procedures did not cover steps to be taken to minimize exposure to persons in the event of a fire - involving licensed material, l This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). 1 l 1 1 O ! (..
-l 8
9
~
O
- e
47 O(\ 10 CFR 34.33 personnel Monitoring I. 10 CFR 34.33(a) forbids a licensee to permit any individual to act ' as a radiographer unless, at'all times during radiographic operations, each .such individual wears a direct reading pocket dosimeter. Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the licensee permitted the radio-grapher who conducted radiographic operations at the Bland Mfg. Company to continue his operations despite the loss of his pocket dosimeter. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). II, 10 CFR 34.33(b) requires a licensee to ensure that pocket dosimeters worn during radiographic operations are ' read and the exposures are recorded daily. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not ensure that the exposure measured by a pocket dosimeter, worn by a radiographer o,n May 3,1980 during radiography of pipe hanger welds at Plant Hatch, was recorded. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement IV). (g/ III.10 CFR 34.33(c) requires a licensee to check. pocket dosimeters, at least k once each year, for correct response to radiation. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not check pocket dosimeters, worn by
, individuals conducting radiographic operations between June 1979 and May 1981, for coirect response to radiation. .
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). O m____.__________.. _ _ . _ _ _ _ _
O , 10 CFR 34.41 Security , 10 CFR 34.41 requires a licensee to ensure, during each radiographic operation, that a radiographer or radiographer's assistant maintains direct surveillance of the operation to protect against unauthorized entry into a high radiation area except (a) where the high radiation area is equipped with a control device or an alarm system as described in 10 CFR 20.203(c)(2), or (b) where the high radiation area is locked to protect against unauthorized or accidental entry. Contrary to the above, the license did not ensure that a radiographer or l' radiographer's assistant maintained direct surveillance - of. a radiographic operation conducted on May 3,1980 at a field site 2 miles north of Athens,- Georgia. The high radiation area was .not protected against unauthorized or i accidental entry by a control device or an alarm system, nor was it locked. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). l i O . i 9 i 4 O t O e
49 10 CFR 34.43 Radiation Surveys
- l 10 CFR 34.43 requires a licensee to have a calibrated and operable radiation. 1 survey instrument available at the location of radiographic operations whenever-radiographic coarations are being performed.
Contrary to the above, the licensee did not have a radiation survey instrument available on May 3,1980 at the field site 2 miles north of Athens, Georgia where oil line welds were being radiographer. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). II. 10 CFR 34.43(b) requires a licensee to make a survey 'with a radiation survey-l instrument after each radiographic exposure to determine that the sealed ! source has been returned to its shielded position. It requires the -licensee .; to survey the entire circumference of the exposure device; and, if the device has a source guide tube, the guide tube as well. Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the licensee did not survey to determine that the sealed source in Camera No.-C-11 had been returned to its shielded position following radiographic' exposure A/S/K-101. O' This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). ! ( III.10 CFR 34.43(b) and (c) requires a licensee to make a survey -with a . ' radiation survey instrument after each radiographic exposure. It also requires the licensee to' maintain records, for two years, of those surveys that are conducted prior to locking the radiographic exposure device and ending direct surveillance of the operation. , Contrary to the above, the licensee did not maintain a record of a survey l conducted on May 3,1980 prior to locking Camera C-11 and ending direct-surveillance of the operation at Bland Mfg. Company. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). 9 Ot m 9
50 O' - 10 CFR 35.14 Specific Licenses for Certain Groups of Medical Uses of Byproduct Material 4 10 CFR 35.14(b)(1) requires a licensee, who is authorized to use I.
' byproduct materials in the forms and for the purposes specified in Groups I, II, IV and V of 10 CFR 35.100, to confine its receipt, ~
possession, and use of these byproduct materials to radiopharma-cauticals that are manufactured in the form to be administered. to a patient, and are labeled, packaged, and distributed in accordance with , a specific license issued to a. radiopharmaceutical vendor by the NRC i pursuant. to.10 CFR 32.72 or pursuant to a specific license issued to s the manufacturer by an Agreement State. Contrary to the above, on May 3,.1980, the licensee did not confine its use of a byproduct material (selenium-75) to a radiopharmaceutical manufactured in the fom to be administered to a patient in accordance with a specific license issued to the radiopharamaceutical manu-facturer. The licensee administered'a dose of selenium-75 as selenious acid, a compound not manufactured by a licensed radiopharmaceutical vendor. . l O This is a Sever 4ty Levei III v4eiat4ea (Suppiement'vI). II. 10 CFR 35.14(b)(4)(ii) requires a licensee, before administration to patients, to cause each elution or extraction of technetium-99m from a , i molybdenum-99/ technetium-99m generator to be tested to determine either the total molybdenum-99 uctivity or the concentration of molybdenum-99. Contrary to the above, the licensee administered doses of tech-natium-99m to, patients without having conducted tests that' could ; l determine either the total molybdeum-99 activity or its concentration. The licensee's dose calibrator was set incorrectly (Note: Specify wherein the setting was incorrect). This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). III. 10 CFR 35.14(b)(4)(ii) requires a licensee to ensure that the individual who performs tests of total activity'or concentration of molybdenum-99 in elutions or extractions from molybdenum-99/ I I technetium-99m generators is specifically trained to perform these tests. l Contrary to the above, the licensee did not ensure that the individual who performed these tests on May 3,1980 was specifically trained in the required technique. . l O This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). ( l
51 O* 4
~
IV. 10 CFR 35.14(b)(4)(ii) forbids a licensee to administer to a patient technetium-99m containing more than 1 microcurie of molybdenum-99 per millicurie of tecnnetium-99m, or more 'than 5 microcuries of ~ molybdenum-99 per administered dose, at the time of administration. Contrary to the above, between May 3,- 1980 and . July 7, 1980, the'- licensee administered doses'of technetium-99m to five patients and each dose contained 10 microcuries of molybdenum-99. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). V. 10 CFR 35.14(b)(6) requires a' licensee, who is authorized to use byproduct materials in the forms and for the purposes specified in Groups I, II, and III of 10 CFR 35.100, and who uses the-. byproduct material for clinical ~ procedures other than those specified in the product labeling-(package insert) to comply with the product labeling regarding: (1) chemical and physical . ' form; (2) route ' of L admini-stration; and (3) dosage range. Contrary to the above, the licensee used technetium-99m labeled surfur colloid to study gastro-esophageal reflux, a clinical procedure not specified in the. product labeling, and administered the dose orally, s. route of administration not described in the product labeling. O This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). VI. 10 CFR 35.14(b)(5)(i) requires a licensee, who is authorized _to use sources and devices described in Group VI of 10 CFR .35.100, to cause each source or device containing more than 100 microcuries of byproduct-material with a half-life greater than 30 days, except iridium-192-seeds encased in nylon ribbon, to be tested for contamination. or leakage at intervals not to exceed six ' months or at such other intervals as are approved by . the NRC or an Agreement State and described by the manufacturer on the label attached to the source, device or permanent container thereof, or in the leaflet' or brochure which accompanies the source or device.
~
Contrary' to the above, the licensee, being . authorized to - use a strontium-90 eye applicator, a device described in Group.VI of 10 CFR 35.100, did not cause the device, which contained more. than 100' microcuries of strontium-90, a material having a half-life greater than . 30 days, to be tested for contamination or leakage at intervals not to exceed six months. The device was not leak tested between May 3, 1980 and July 5, 1982. No other leak test interval was approved by..the NRC or an Agreement State. This is a Severity Level IV, violation (Supplement VI). O t
'4 5 -__----.--_-_--_-_-..-----.--___-=__.-__.____A__--_-__..--.-
_. ._ -_ - . _ _ _ . = _ _ -- - _ _ . - - . _ - - - . . -
d j 52 ' 4 VII. 10 CFR 35.14(b)(5)(ii) requires s licensee to keep records of leak tests, required by 10 CFR 35.14(b)(5)(1), in units of microcuries. l Contrary to the above, the licensee records were nbt kept in' units of' ! microcuries. The records were marked "OK" and " Undetectable". VIII 10 CFR 35.14(b)(5)(v) requires a licensee, who is authorized to use l sources and devices described in Group VI of 10 CFR 35.100, to conduct a quarterly physical inventory to account for all sources and devices. received and possessed. I Contrary to the above, the licensee-did not conduct an-inventory of its eye applicator between May 3,.1980 and June 4, =1982. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). ; IX. 10 CFR 35.14(b)(5)(v11) requires a licensee, who is authorized to use l sources and devices described in Group VI of 10 CFR 35.100, to assure that patients treated with cesium-137 implants remain hospitalized-until a source count and a radiation- survey of. the patient confirm' that all implants have been removed. . ( ' n Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the licensee released a patient, (./ who had been treated with a cesium-137 implant, from .the hospital without having conducted a radiation survey.of the patient to confirm , that all implants had been removed. i This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). X. 10 CFR 35.14(e)(1) requires a licensee, who possesses sealed sources as calibration or reference sources pursuant to 10 CFR 35.14(d), to cause each sealed source containing, byproduct material, other than hydrogen-3, with a half-life greater than 30 days, in any form other than gas, to be tested for leakage'and contamination at intervals not to exceed 6 months. It provides, however, that no leak test ' is required when: (1) the source contains 100 microcuries or less of beta and/or gamma emitting material or 10 microcuries or less of alpha I emitting material; or (2) the sealed source is stored and is not being L used; such source shall, however, be tested for leakage prior to any I use or transfer unless it has been leak tested within 6 months prior to the date of use or transfer. - Con'rary to the above, the licensee did not cause a 200 microcurie cesium-137 sealed source to'be tested for leakage .and contamination between May 3, 1980 and June 14, 1981. During this period of time-the source was used at least once each week. This is a Severity i.evel VMolation (Supplement VI). l l O 1 % . l .
-)
A XI. 10 CFR 35.14(e)(1-) requires a licensee, who possesses sealed sources as calibration or reference sources pursuant to 10'CFR 35.14(d), to cause each sealed source containing byproduct material, other than hydrogen-3, with a half-life greater than 30 days, in any form 'othe'r-than gas, to be tested for leakage and contamination at intervals not to exceed 6-months. It requires, in the absence of a certificate from a transferror indicating that a test has been made within 6 months prior to transfer,-that the. sealed source not be used until tested. It provides, however,.that no leak test is required when: -(1) the source-contains 100 microcuries or less of beta and/or gamma emitting material or.10 microcuries or less of alpha emitting material; or (2) the sealed source is' stored and is not being used; such source shall, however, be tested for leakage prior to any use or transfer unless it has been leak tested within 6 months prior to the date of use or transfer. l Contrary to the above, the licensee 'placed .a - reference source containing more than 100 microcuries of cesium-137 into use without causing the source to be tested for leakage and contamination, and in the absence of a certificate from the transferror indicating that a leak test had been made within 6 months prior to its transfer. This is a Severity Level V vi.olation (Supplement VI). XII. 10 CFR 35.14(e)(2) requires a licensee, who possess sealed sources _as l . calibration or reference sources pursuant to 10 CFR 35.14(d) and is i required by 10 CFR 35.14(e)(1) to test these sources, to keep records (- of the leak test results in units of microcuries and maintain - the-records for inspection by the NRC. Contrary to the above, the licensee, who possessed a 200 microcurie . cesium-137 sealed source pursuant to 10 CFR 35.14(d) and was required by 10 CFR 35.14(e)(1) to test the source, did not maintain a record of-the results of the leak test conducted on May 3,1980. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). l l ' O t
54 O~ t
~
10 CFR 35.21 Requirement to Perform Full Calibration Measurements of ! Teletherapy Units I. 10 CFR 35.21(a-) requires a licensee, who is authorized under 10 CFR 35.13 to use ' teletherapy units for treating humans, to -cause full calibration measurements to be performed on each teletherapy _ unit, prior to' treating humans, at intervals not exceeding one year and under .the following circumstances: (1) whenever spot-check measurements " Indicate' that the output value differs more than 5 percent from the value~obtained at the last full calibration corrected mathematically for. physical decay; (2) .following replacement of the radiation source or following reinstallation ' of the teletherapy unit in a new location; or (3) following any repair of the - teletherapy unit that includes removal' of the source or major repair of the
- components associated with the source exposure assembly.
Contrary to the above, between May 3,1980 and July 6,1980, the licensee _ treated patients on Teletherapy Unit 3 without having ' performed a full calibration of the unit following its reinstallation in Room B-103. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). ; The previous citation is presented.as a convenient reference. Q NOTE: the example used, it would be better written as follows: In 1 1 10 CFR 35.21(a) requires a licensee, who is authorized under 10 CFR 35.13 to use teletherapy units for treating humans, to cause full calibration measurements to be performed on each teletherapy unit that has been reinstalled in a new location. The licensee may not resume treatment of patients with the relocated unit until completion of the calibration measure-- ments. II. 10 CFR 35.21 requires a licensee, who is authorized under 10 CFR 35.13 to use teletherapy units for treating humans, to cause full calibration measurements to be performed on each teletherapy unit, prior to treating humans, at intervals not exceeding one year. It requires- that full calibration measurements include certain. specified determinations; two of-which are as follows: (a) the congruence between the
- radiation field and the field indicated by the light beam localizing device; and1(b) the uniformity of the radiation field and its dependence upon the orientation of the useful beam.
Contrary to the above, between May 3,1980 and May 6,1981, the licensee
. treated patients on Teletherapy Unit 3 without having made the two _ required * '
determinations within the past year. The annual calibrations conducted in May 1979 and May 1981 included all' the determinations required by 10 CFR 35.21. ( This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI).
, ,. : s
55 O* 4 III.10 CFR 35.21 requires a licensee, who is authorized under 10 CFR 35.13 to use teletherapy units for treating humans, 'to' cause full calibration measurements to be performed on each teletherapy unit,- prior to treating ~ humans, at intervals not exceerding ; one year. It requires that the calibration measurements include determination of the exposure rate or dose rate and that 'the exposun s.te' or dose rate be corrected mathe-matica11y for physical decay for intervals not exceeding one month. Contrary to the above, the licensee corrected its. determination of the dose rate,. to account for physical decay, for intervals of three months rather than for intervals of one month. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). 1 IV. 10 CFR 35.21(e) requires a licensee, who is authorized under 10 CFR 35.13 to . use teletherapy units for treating humans, to cause full calibration ; measurements to be performed on each teletherapy unit, prior to- treating- ~ humans, at intervals not exceeding one year. It requires that - the calibration measurements include a determination of the exposure rate. or dose rate and that the exposure rate or dose rate be corrected mathe-matica11y for physical decay for intervals not exceeding one month. .It also , requires the licensee to ensure, that the calibration measurements and , physical decay corrections are performed by an expert qualified by training- ' O and experience in accordance with 10 CFR 35.24. 10 CFR 35.24 faentifies the following minimum training and experience for a qualified expert: (1)'a ( Master's or Doctor's degree in physics, . biophysics,' radiological physics, or health physics; (2) one year of full-time training in therapeutic radio- , logical physics; and (3) one year of full-time experience in a radiotherapy facility including personal calibration and spot-check of at 'least one teletherapy unit. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not ensure that the calibration measurements and physical decay corrections required for its teletherapy '
- unit were performed by an expert qualified by training and experience in accordance with 10 CFR 35.24. The individual met- all the training and experience criteria except with regard to educational certification;-he did not have a Master's or Doctor's degree.
This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). t
. _ _ - - - - _ _ _ - . - . _ _ - - - - - - _ . _ - _ . . _ _ _ . _ . - - - _ ----..u-. - . - . - - . - - - . - - . - . _ _ - -
- CI
, 1 l
56 O< . ( 10 CFR 35.22 Requirement to Perform Periodic Sp'ot-Check Measurements of Teletherapy Units 4 10 CFR 35.22 requires a licensee, who is authorized under 10 CFR 35.13 to use teletherapy units for treating humans, to cause the following spot-check measurements to be- performed on each teletherapy unit, in ; accordance with procedures established by an expert qualified by trafning and experience. in accordance with 10 CFR 35.24, at intervals not exceeding one month: '(1) time accuracy; (2) the congruence between the radiation field and the field indicated. by the light beam localizing device; (3) the accuracy of all distance measuring devices used for treating humans; (4) the exposure rate, dose rate, or a quantity related in a known manner to these rates for one typical set of operating conditions; and (5) the difference between the measurement made in (4) and the anticipated output,' expressed as a' percentage of the anticipated output (i.e., the value obtained at last full calibration corrected mathematically for physical decay). A. Contrary.to the above, during the time intervals shown below,-the licensee. did not cause the required monthly spot-check measurements to be performed on its teletherapy unit. . The time intervals are as follows: May 3,1980 to June 25, 1980 August 25, 1980 to October 15, 1980 ' February 20, 1981 to April 15, 1981 This is a Severity Level V vic.lation (Supplement VI). B. Contrary to the above, between May 3, 1980 and July 15, 1982,'the licensee l did not include in its monthly spot-check measurements the difference J between the spot-check measured dose rate and the anticipated output, expressed as a percentage of the anticipated output. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). C. Contrary to the above, between May 3, 1980 and July 15, 1982, the. licensee did not perform its monthly spot-check measurements in accordance with procedures established by an expert qualified by training and experience in accordance with 10 CFR 35.24. The procedures were established by the resident radiation therapist, a physician whose trainirtg and experience did not meet the criteria of 10 CFR 35.24. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). O L . O I P L_________________-_____-. _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
0.S 4' 10 CFR 35.23 Requirement to Calibrate Instruments used for Full Calibration and Spot-Check Measurements I. 10 CFR 35.23(a) requires a licensee, who is authorized under 10 CFR 35.13 to use teletherapy units for treating humans, to perform the full calibration measurements required by 10 CFR 35.21 using a dosimetry system that has been calibrated by.the National Bureau of Standards or by a Regional Calibration Laboratory accredited by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine. It also requires this licensee to ensure that the dosimetry system has been. calibrated within the previous two years and after any servicing that may have affected system calibration. Contrary to the above, between May 3,1980 and April 1,1981, the licensee performed the full calibration measurements required by 10 CFR 35.21, using an instrument (Victoreen r-meter No. 411) that had not received the specified calibration after having been serviced by the vendor. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). II. 10 CFR 35.23(b) requires a lice'ns.ee, who is authorized under 10 CFR.35.13 to use teletherapy units for treating humans, to perform the' spot-check O measurements required by 10 CFR 35.22 using a dosimetry system that is either calibrated in accordance with 10 CFR 23(a) or calibrated by direct intercomparison with a system that has been calibrated in accordance with 10 CFR 35.23(a).. It requires, if the intercomparison method of calibration is used, that the calibration be performed annually and after each servicing that may have affected system calibration. Contrary to the above, between May 3, 1980 and July 15, 1982, the ifcensee performed the requires spot-check measurements using.a dosimetry system that was calibrated by direct intercomparison with a system that had been i calibrated in accordance with 10 CFR 35.23(a) but did not calibrate the dosimetry system annually. This is a 3ever.ity Level V violation (Supplement VI). O t
e Os s8 i ( 10 CFR 35.25 Records -l 10 CFR 35.25 requires a licensee, who is authorized under 10 CFR 35.13 to use teletherapy units for treating humans, to maintain its records of calibration of
~
instruments used to make the measurements required under 10 CFR 35.23. It requires the licensee to maintain these records for five years after completion of the full calibration measurements. Contrary to the above, on May 3, 1980, the licensee did not have records of the January 17, 1980 calibration of instruments used to make the measurements required under 10 CFR 35.23. I This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). l d O O i
~
O
- w. .
e
i 59 O' - ( TRANSPORTATION NOTE: Citations against 00T regulations should be prefaced by the following ' paragraph:
"10 CFR 71.5(a) requires a licensee, who transports any licensed material outside the confines of his plant or other place of use, or delivers any licensed material for transport, except where such transport is subject .to the regulations of the U.S. Postal Service, to comply with the applicable requirements of the Department of Transportation regulations presented in 49 CFR Parts 170 through 189 insofar as .such regulations relate to the packaging of byproduct, source, 'or special nuclear nterial, i
marking and labeling of the packages, loading' and storage of packages, placarding of the transportation vehicle, monitoring requirements, and accident reporting." e e O e 4 I o O - t l
,, . 1
60 0* Y 49 CFR 172.200 Applicability (Shipping Papers) i 49 CFR 172.200 requires a person, who offers hazardous material for transporta-tion, to describe the hazardous material on shipping papers. 49- CFR 172.101 defines radioactive material as a hazardous material. 49 CFR 172.202(a)(1) 14 quires that hazardous material shipping papers include the. proper shipping name prescribed for the material in 49 CFR 172.101. l Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the licensee delivered a 60 curie ! cobalt-60 sealed source for transport to a common carrier 'and described the ) material on its shipping papers as " Radioactive Material, Limited Quantity, N.O.S.", an improper shipping name. Metallic cobalt-60 comes within the i definition of "Special Form" in accordance with 49 CFR 173.389(g) and _49 CFR 173.398(a) and has a proper shipping name " Radioactive Material, Special. Form, N.O.S." This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI).
\
l O l l l - l O (
)
h _ l' 49 CFR 172.403 Radioactive Material (Labelling) . I. 49 CFR 172.403, 173.391, and 173.392 require the licensee to identify the contents of a package of licensed material by affixing the appropriate label, or marking the package as specified in these regulations. Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980,' the licensee shipped a package of licensed material without a label or marking to indicate its contents. I .This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). II. 49 CFR 172.403(d) requires the licensee to affix a RADIOACTIVE-YELLOW-III label to a package that contains a "large quantity" of radioactive material as defined in 49 CFR 173.389. 49 CFR 173.389 defines a "large quantity of radioactive materials" to ! include quantities of "Special Form" materials in excess of 5,000 curies. ( I 49 CFR 173.389(g) and 173.398(a) defines "Special Form" to include a , l cobalt-60 capsule having no overall dimension of less than 0.5 millimeter or l at least one dimension greater than five millimeters. j l Q Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the licensee shipped a 6,000 curie l cobalt-60 sealed source with a RADI0 ACTIVE-YELLOW-II (vs. RADI0 ACTIVE- ! YELLOW-III) label. The source had at least one dimension greater than five millimeters. l This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). I
. \
l N m 6 g O
OA A 49 CFR 173.393 General packaging and Shipment requirements I. 49 CFR 173.393(b) requires the licensee to incorporate, on the outside of each package, a feature such as a seal which is not readily breakable.and which, while intact, will be evidence that the package has not been illicitly opened. Contrary to the above, on May 3, 1980, the licensee shipped a package . containing 100 mil 11 curies of iodine-131 in a.carboard carton that could be easily opened without showing any apparent signs of tampering. This i.s a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). II, 49 CFR 173.393(n)(9) requires the licensee, prior to shipp.'ng a package, to insure by examination or appropriate test that the external contamination levels are within the allowable limits. Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the licensee, prior to shipping a package containing 100 millicuries of iodine-131, did not insure by appropriate test that the' contamination. on the exterior surface of the package was within the allowed limit.
- This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI).
b O s
d i Ok ( 49 CFR 178.350-3 Marking i l 49 CFR 178.350-3 requires the licensee, who meets the packaging requirements for shipment of radioactive material by the use of a Specification 7A package, to mark on the outside of the package " USA DOT 7A Type A". Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the li ensee used a Specification 7A i package, as required by 49 CFR 173.395, to ship eight mil 11 curies of califor- l nium-252, but did not mark on the outside of the package " USA DOT 7A Type A". i l This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). , l
. i o
O . 0 l O y (
0 l 64 . g Of i 10 CFR 150.20 Recognition of Agreement State Licenses' ) l l
- ~ l NOTE: Use- 10 CFR 150.20(a) as boiler plate. Structure 10 CFR 150.20(b) to fit the charge. .)
10 CFR 150.20(a) grants a general license to any person holding a specific license from an Agreement State where the licensee maintains an office for directing the licensed activity, and- at which radiation records are normally maintained, to conduct the same activity in non-Agreement' States, provided the i specific license does not limit the activity authorized by.the general license to-specified installations and' locations, and provided the licensee complies: with the requirements of 10 CFR 150.20(b). A. 10 CFR 150.20(b) requires a general licensee, as described in 10 CFR ) 150.20(a), to comply with the provisions of certain specified. regulations contained in Title 10 of. the Code of Federal Regulations. One of these regulations is Subpart B of part 34. 10 CFR 34.33(a) forbids a licensee to permit any individual to act as a i radiographer or a radiographer's assistant unless, at all times during radiographic operations, each such individual wears a direct reading j O pocket dosimeter and either 1 film badge or a thermoluminescent dosimeter. Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the . licensee while conducting - radiographic activities under an NRC general license .in' Virginia, a non-Agreement State, permitted an individual to act as a radiographer
, although this individual did not possess a direct reading pocket dosimeter. '
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). B. 10 CFR 150.26(b) requires a general licensee, ' as described in 10- CFR 150.20(a), at least three days before engaging in non-Agreement State activities, to file four copies of Form NRC-241 (revised), " Report of Proposed Activities in Non-Agreement States", .and four copies of its Agreement State specific license with .the Director of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional Office listed in Appendix D of 10 CFR 20 for the region in which the Agreement State that issued the license is located. Contrary to the above, between May 3, 1980 and ~ July 1, 1980, the licensee possessed and used licensed material under an NRC general license in Virginia, a non-Agreement State, without having submitted copies of form NRC-241 or copies of its Maryland license to the Digector of .NRC Region I.
~
O This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). e J
, ** =
's L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _
0 Citations - Agreement States 65 . O. -
- k. .
10 CFR 150.20(b) fequires a general licensee, as described in 10 CFR . C. 150.20(a), to comply with the terms and conditions of the specific license issued by an Agreement State, , ' Condition 10 of Maryland Byproduct Material License No. 79-406A requires the licensee to use material only in encapsulated form. Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, the licensee used unencapsulated iodine-131 under an NRC general license at 90 Front Street, Alexandria, l Virginia, a non-Agreement State location. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). I e 4 O I e 6 e 0 t . 9 9
+
7 66 b -. ( CITATIONS AGAINST LICENSE CONDITIONS 1 NOTE: .It is unnecessary to identify the License No. unless the NOV shows more
.than one liciase number k> AUTHORIZED USER-I. License Condition 10 requires the licensee .to ensure Lthat no' individual other than the individual named in Condition 10 uses,.or supervises the use-of, the licensed material .
Contrary to thie above, between May 3,1980 and June 10; 1981, the licensee, , permitted an individual other than the individual named in Condition 10-.to yy use and supervise the use of microcurie ' quantities of selenium for :r diagnostic procedures on Ward 10.- ,
, e "
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI).- II. License Condition 10 requires the licensee to ensure that .its licensed material is used by, or in phys,1 cal presence of the individuals named in License Condition 10. Contrary to the above, on May 3',- 1980, the licensee permittid an individ'ual
. not' named in License. condition 10 to inject mice with phosphorus-32 'in. room ' r . '
No.101 in the Biophysics Building when none of the individuals namedkin License Condition 10 were present. Th1s is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement V1). ,, I d 4 r 4 O 1 l.
** l 4
U_.Y_----._____.-_-.__-_-_-.___-__ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . t
' Y .
2 !, si
.v /, ,
I t r .i
}% _67 '
k.; .
' POSSESSION LIMIT . .;
(Also See ,la CFR 30.34(c)) , , l I. License Conditions 6 and 7 require the licensee to limit its possession.of. nickel-63 to three sources o.f 15 m'1111 curies each. Contrary to.the above, between May.3, 1980 and June. 14, 1981, the licensee possessed four nickel-63: sources of 15 m1111 curies each. This is a Severity Level III vioiation (Supplement VI). l l II. License Condition 10 ' requires the licensee ' to limits. its possession; of ' iodine-125 ' to . the amount specified in 10 CFR 33.100, Column II _ (1.e. , 1 millicu?ie). ~W p/ Contrary to the above, en May 3,' 1930,1 the ' licensee possessed 5 millicuries of iodine-125. e , This is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement VI). 4
. t l
O .
/
l . [ ,
.,i l
,i e e
e 4 O t ; L. n
a
)
- 8 68
]'
S BI0 ASSAY
^
License Condition 10 requires the licensee to perform a bicassay of each individual who is involved in an operation in which 100 mil 11 curies or more of hydrogen-3 is used. It requires that the bioassay be performed.within one week i following a single operation and at weekly intervals for continuing operations. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not perform a bioassay of each of four individuals who were involved (on May 3 and 4,1980) in an operation in 'the Tr.itium Laboratory in which 250 mil 11 curies of hydrogen-3 were used. Ten days after the operation, on May 14, 1980,. a urine .speciman was collected from one involved individual but its tritium assay was invalid because the counting efficiency of the liquid scintillation counter had not been established for other than colorless fluids. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). 1 1 5 O i 1 F s l O s e 4r
- _ _ _ . - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ . _ _ _ - _ _ - . . _ _ - _ _ _ - - _ _ _ . _ . - . - _ - . _ . . _ _ .A
_g. . .. .-_- 1, l_ h
,j ' -
1 ; e e t.. 1 .} ,
. i.
'69 4 /. < < f 1
- c. // >
7 l I j 'e s
). ,
, / .
j [ SEALED SOURCE RESTRICTIONS , , I. Lidense Condition 10 forbids the licensee to open a sealpd Yodrce containing. licensed materi&1 or t.o remove it from f ts holder. m _ ( ). ,1
<I , , Contrary to the above, the licensee removed the kryptor-d!i sealed sources
/
f ' from holders ros. 9701"and 8531.
, [ j/ ,
' This is a Severity Level IV violation (Iupplement VI). .
/
License Condition'10 forbid.< tha[ licensee to permit any person to install,
, JL I
s relocate, repair, nr perfo5n thtLinitial radiation survey of, a ' device s,. containing byproduct / rn.iterbl, unless that! person has been specifica11y'
' authorized by the NW orl APAgreemert Statae to;perfo~rm such services.
- 4 I Contrary to the above, 'the licensee / ,,pcmitted one of its employees, who wa not specifin J1y authorized b,g/tpVNRCl or an Agreement State, to install a device containing byproduct mateHa1.
i , 3 This is a Severity Level III viola. tion (Supplement VI). O i . .
.', -c,
..A A # / j i
i' '
;/ ,
e/;
, li ; .
r [ 6 /
/ ,
1 i, J 4 /
/ 8 ,i s
!/ .,
,E 3
/
1 O - r "
. 5 i t i ,. ..
, j
. u,r, U.-_____---_.____-___-_-________-_____-_____
- ay' ,
I 70 O' - k .) LEAK TEST OF SEALED SOURCE , 1 I. License Condition 10 requires the licensee to test each sealed. source l containing byproduct material for leakage or contamination 'at intervals not j to exceed six months. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not test a sealed source containing strontium-90 (serf al No. 907) between May 3,1980 and Groundhog's Day 1981, { an interval of more than six months. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). - { II. License Condition 10 requires the licensee to test each sealed source l containing byproduct material for leakage or contamination at intervals not to exceed six months. It also requires that the sealed source leak test be ! l capable of detecting the presence of 0.005 microcurie of the source ' activity. Contrary to the above, the. licensee did not employ a leak test procedure ) that was capable of detecting .0.005 microcurie of polonium-210, the byproduct material contained in Source No. PO-1. The gas flow proportional .I (qJ counter used by the licensee was not calibrated for alpha radiation measurement. This'is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). f i Q. ( .
i l' O[ PACEMAKER-PATIENT FOLLOWP License Conditions 20, 21, and 22 require the licensee to follow the medical progress of each patient in whom a nuclear pacemaker was implanted for the l remainder of the patient's life, and to report to the NRC: (1) any adverse i reaction or malfunction involving the pacemaker system; (2) loss of contact with i a r.uclear pacemaker patient; or (3) the death of the patient. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not- follow the medical progress of a ' patient in whom a. nuclear pacemaker was implanted on May 3, 1980. The licensee-had no knowledge of what followup may have been conducted by any member of the i hospital staff. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). 1
. 1 O
f i 4 i D IV l . . R._.._.__.____._.___._
O 72 1 , TELETHERAPY , , , i I. License Condition 14 requires the licensee to test each teletherapy source for leakage at intervals not to exceed six months. ! I Contrary to the above, the licensee did not tett its teletherapy source for leakage between May 3, 1980 and February 14, 1981, an interval in i excess of six months. j 1 This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). II. License Condition 15 requires the licensee, prior to initiation of a treatment program, to equip each teintherapy unit with electrical or mechanical stops limiting use of the primary beam of radiation so as to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 20.105(b), as evidenced by a radiation survey. Contrary to the above, .the licensee initiated its treatment program on q May 3,1980 without having equipped the teletherapy unit with stops j that prevented the primary beam from striking the ceiling .of the j t] teletherapy treatment room. The licensee did not conduct a radiation ' survey to ensure that if the primary beam were allowed to strike the' . (' ceiling, the radiation levels in the unrestricted areas above the treatment room would be in compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 20.105(b) . j This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). III. License Condition 17 requires the licensee to equip each entrance to l the teletherapy room with an electrical interlock system that will turn l the teletherapy machine's primary beam of radiation OFF immediately i upon opening of any entrance door. ; Contrary 'to the above, on May 3, 1980, the licensee's electrical interlock system was inoperative. This is a Severity Level IV viriation (Supplement VI). IV. License Condition 17 C reauires the licensee to test the electrical interlocks en the entrance door to the teletherapy room for proper operation at least every six months. Contrary to the above, between May 3,1980 and January 2,1981, an i interval of greater..than .six months, the licensee did not test the
~
,] electrical interlocks.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). . q
F i
- h. -
L V. License. Condition 17.C requires the licensee to maintain records, for inspection by. the NRC, of the results of -tests 'of the electrical interlocks' on the entrance door to the teletherapy room. . i Contrary to the above, the licensee did not maintain records of. tests conducted between May 3,'1980 and July 14, 1981. - 1 This is a Severity Level V violation (Suppl' ament VI). VI. License Condition 18 requires the licensee, subsequent' to the installation of a teletherapy. source, to' conduct a radiation. survey of. l
- all areas adjacent to the treatmen' room, with the teletherapy-source ,
I in the ON position, to clearly establish.that- quantities of: radiation.- 1 in unrestricted areas do not exceed the limits specified in 10 CFR ; 20.105(b). Contrary to the above, the licensee, 'having installed a replacement 4 teletherapy source, conducted the required radiation. survey but did 'not1 3 establish that the quantities of radiation on the roof and outside an. i exterior window did not exceed the limits: specified in 10 CFR ! 20.105(b). Measurements made on May 3, 1980,-by the NRC: inspector and: confirmed by the~ hospital Radiation Safety.-Officer, showed: radiation I n levels as high as 10 milliress per hour at-accessible locations on the ('_) roof and outside an exterior window.- These levels 'were five times (
; higher than those specified in 10,CFR 20.105(b).
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). VII. License Condition 18 requires a licensee who makes any changes in.
. (1) the treatment room shielding, (2) the location'-of. the unit within .
the treatment room, or (3) a use :of the teletherapy. unit that could result in increased radiation levels in areas outside the teletherapy treatment room, to evaluate the change by conducting a radiationLsurvey-made in accordance with Condition 17.and to report the'results of the-survey to the NRC within 30 days following completion of the change. Contrary to the above, on . May 3, 1980,: the licensee inoved the ! teletherapy unit 3' . closer to the west wall and did not report? the - results of its survey to the NRC. until July 5,1980, a period of more than 30 days following the completion of the change. The l teletherapy . , unit was removed from. a ' position directly under the center of L a roof-shield. The move could have resulted in excessive radiation levels on the roof. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). l
~
O i _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _....___a
74 O' - t VIII License Condition 20 requires the licensee to inspect and service its teletherapy machine during source replacement or at intervals not to exceed five years, whichever comes first. , Contrary to the above, the licensee did not inspect and service its - teletherapy machine between May 3,1977 and August 4,1982, an interval in excess of five years. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). l S 9 O ( O
~
O !
\ . ___._.____z____
75 O* 4L. HOSPITALIZATION OF PATIENTS , License Condition 21 forbids the licensee to discharge a patient who contains iodine-131 for treatment of thyroid carcinoma until the residual activity in thel patient is 30 m1111 curies or less. - Contrary to the above, May 3,1980, the licensee discharge'd a patient who had i been tretted for a thyroid carcinoma on that day with an administration of 150 mi111 curies of iodine-131. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). e 4 1 O e e w-_._-_---_ _ _ - _ _
76 o5 - 1 TELETHERAPY I I I. License Condition 14 requires the licensee to test each teletherapy source for leakage at intervals not to exceed six months. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not test its teletherapy source for leakage between May 3, 1980 and February 14, 1981, an interval in excess of six months. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). l' II. License Condition 15 requires the licensee, prior to initiation of a treatment program, to equip each teletherapy unit with electrical or mechanical stops limiting use of the primary beam of radiation so as to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 20.105(b), as evidenced by a radiation survey. Contrary to the above, the licensee initiated its t'reatment program on May 3,1980 without having . equipped the teletherapy unit with stops l that prevented the primary beam from striking the ceiling of the 3 ( teletherapy treatment room. The licensee did not conduct a radiation I sur'vey to ensure that if the primary beam were allowed to strike the - l ( ceiling, the radiation levels in the unrestricted areas above the treatment room would be in compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR i 20.105(b). This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). III. License Condition 17 requires the licensee to equip each entrance to l the teletherapy room with an electrical interlock system that will turn l the teletherapy machine's primary beam of radiation OFF immediately upon opening of any entrance door. l l Contrary to the above, on May 3, 1980, the licensee's electrical interlock system was inoperative. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI).. IV. License Condition 17.C requires the licensee to test the electrical interlocks on the entrance door to the teletherapy room for proper operation at least every six months. Contrary to the above, between May 3,1980 and January 2,1981, an interval of greater. than .six months, the licensee did not test the electrical interlocks. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). e
,I
1 h - l k V. License Condition 17.C requires the licensee to maintain records, for 1 inspection by the NRC, of the results of tests of the electrical i interlocks on the entrance door to the teletherapy room. , , Contrary to the above, the licensee' did not maintain records of tests j conducted between May 3,1980 and July 14, 1981. j This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). 1 VI. License Condition 18 requires the licensee, subsequent to. the f installation of a teletherapy source, to conduct a radiation survey of all areas adjacent to the treatment room, with the teletherapy source in the ON position, to clearly establish that quantities of radiation i in unrestricted areas do not exceed the limits specified in 10 CFR { I 20.105(b). Contrary to the above, the licensee, having installed a replacement teletherapy source, conducted the required radiation survey but did not establish that the quantities of radiation on the roof and outside an exterior window did not exceed the limits specified in 10 CFR 4 20.105(b). Measurements made on May 3, 1980, by the NRC inspector and ! confirmed by the hospital Radiation Safety Officer, showed radiation ( . levels as high as 10 millirems per hour at accessible locations on the ; roof and outside an exterior window. These levels were five times !
) higher than those specified in 10 CFR 20.105(b).
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). J VII. License Condition 18 requires a licensee who makes any changes in (1) the treatment room shielding, (2) the location of the unit wi, thin the treatment room, or (3) a use of the teletherapy unit that could result in increased radiation levels in areas outside the teletherapy , treatment room, to evaluate the change by conducting a radiation survey made in accordance with Condition 17 and to report the results of the survey to the NRC within 30 days following completion of the change. Contrary' to the above, on May 3, 1980, the licensee moved. the teletherapy unit 3' closer to the west wall and did not report the results of its survey to the NRC until July 5, 1980, a period of more than 30 days following the completion of the change. The teletherapy unit was removed from a position directly under the center of a roof-shield. The move could have resulted in excessive radiation levels on the roof. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI).
~
O s
78 . h .h . - L .VIII License Condition 20 requires the licensee to inspect and service its teletherapy machine during source replacement or at intervals not to exceed five years, whichever.comes first. , , Contrary to the above, the licensee did not inspect and service its teletherapy machine between May 3,1977 and August 4,1982, an interval in excess of five years. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). i O e O A 4 e j O t .
. 1
a O% -- 1 l HOSPITALIZATION OF PATIENTS License Condition 21' forbids the licensee to discharge a patient who contains iodine-131 for treatment of thyroid carcinoma until the residual activity in the patient is 30 millicuries or less. Contrary to the above, May 3,1980, the licensee discharged a patient who had been treated for a thyroid carcinoma on that day with an administration of 150 i millicuries of iodine-131. l l This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). 1 a 1 0 - 4 { l o O .
# $ g
?
=I l
80 l O' - 1 i PACEMAKER-PATIENT FOLLOWUP _ , License Conditions 20, 21, and 22 require the licensee to fo'11ow the medical progress of each patient in 'whom a nuclear pacemaker was implanted for the 3 remainder of the patient's life, and to report to the NRC: (1) any adverse- 1 reaction or malfunction involving the pacemaker system;. (2) loss of contact with l a nuclear pacemaker patient; or (3) the death of the patient. ] i Contrary to the above, the licensee did not follow the medical progress of a i patient in whom a nuclear pacemaker was implanted on May 3, 1980. The licensee had no knowledge of what followup may have been conducted by any member of the hospital staff. 1 This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). f f j j 0 l l ( .. e e
e 81 Q% - t CITATIONS AGAINST DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED INTO A ' LICENSE I. License Condition 10 requires the licensee to possess and use its lice'nsed material in accordance with statements, representations, and procedures. contained in license applications dated March 23, 1976 and Apr11!16,1979.
- 1. Item No.10 of license application dated March 23', 1978 requires ~the licensee to calibrate its dose calibrators -in .accordance ' with procedures contained in NUREG 0338, Rev.1,. Appendix D, Section 2.
Item 1 of Appendix D, Section 2 specifies that dose calibrators should' be checked for constancy each day, . at all appropr.iate instrument settings, with a cobalt-57 and a cesium-137 source. Contrary to the above, between May 3, 1981 and. July 14, '1982, the licensee did not check its dose .calibratn with a. cobalt-57. source. Between September 4, 1980 and July 14, 1982, the : licensee, using its - cesium-137. source, did not _ conduct the daily; constancy checks at ' appropriate instrument settings, other than the cesium-137 setting. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI). O 2. Item 51 of iicense appiscation dated Aprii- .16,41979, reauires the licensee to follow the ~ General . Rules for. Safe Use of Radioactive 'i
~
Materials contained in Regulatory Guide'10.8, Appendix. G.
- a. Item 4 of Appendix G specifies that .' syringe shields- be used for-the preparation and administration of patient doses.-
Contrary to the above, on May 3,.1980, the radioisotope technician did not use a syringe shield in the preparation of a patient' dose. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI).
- b. Item 5 of Appendix G prohibits eating, drinking, smoking, or the application of cosmetics at . 'any location where radioactive. '
material is used or stored. Contrary to the above, on May 3,1980, a radioisotope ' technician applied cosmetics in the Nuclear Medicine Laboratory, 'a place where radioactive material was used and stored. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). l
-. l O
O i L--_--_---------- -
l I . J 82 4 k 3. Item 9 of license ' application'. dated April 16, '1979,-: requires the 1 licensee to have a Victoreen Thyac III ~ survey meter- availabl.e .for measuring radioactive contamination and radiation levels. , , , , Contrary to the above, on 'May 3,1980, the licensee did not= have any..
~
survey meter !available that was suitable for measuring radioactive - contamination, i This is a Severity Level IV violation _(Supplement VI). Item 10 of license application dated. Ap*11 16.-- 1979, requires _the i 4. licensee to calibrate its dose calibrator in accordance with procedures i contained in Regulatory Guide 10.8,' Appendix D, Section 2. - .
- a. Item A.1 of Appendix D, Section 2 specifies that_the linearity of the dose calibrator be determined upon installation and quarterly- '
thereafter. i
. 1 Contrary to the above, between May 3,1980 'and June 14, 1981, the licensee did not determine the linearity of its dose calibrator.
2 This is a Severity Level. IV violation (Supplement VI).: O II. License Condition 17 requires the licensee to possess' and use. its licensed material in accordance with. statements and procedures contained in ' it's ( license application dated November 28, 1978.
- 1. Item 7 of the license application states that the survey meters will'be calibrated on an annual basis.
Contrary to the above, the licensee did not calibrate. its s' urvey meters . between February 27, 1981 and May 17, 1982, an interval in excess of cne year. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI).
- 2. Item 2 of the license application states that the address of Allegheny l Nuclear Surveys is 237 Mound Avenue, Weston, West Virginia.
4 Contrary to the above, during July 1980, the licensee . changed its-address to 777. North River Avenue, Weston, West Virginia,;without . requesting a license amendment. This is a Severity Level V (Supplement VI). a O
~
4l
8 Os \ ( Item 12 of the license application states that a certain named 3. individual will be the Radiation Protection Officer. Contrary to the above, since November 1980, an individual other than' the individual named in the license application has been acting as the. Radiation Protection Officer. This is a Severity Level V (Supplement VI). III. License Condition 17 requires the licensee to possess and use its licensed material in accordance with statements, presentations, and procedures contained in its license application dated October 7,'1977. The application incorporated a publication entitled " Instructions for the Handling and Use of Radioactive Sealed Sources for Well Logging of Mineral Exploration Bore Holes".
- 1. Item 1.0 of the publication specifies that trucks containing radio- l active sealed sources shall be posted (back, sides, and front) with a RADI0 ACTIVE sign.
Contrary to the above, on May 3, 1980, the licensee truck contained an americium-241 sealed source, but .the truck was not posted with O R^oICACTIve s19as. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI).
- 2. Item 1.E of this publication specifies that records of daily area surveys shall be maintained.
Contrary to the above, between May 3, 1980 .and July 14, 1982, the ' licensee did not maintain copies of its daily area surveys, This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). I I y O j U L y
l '! 84 Oi _ 1' IV. License Condition 10 requires the licensee to use its licensed material in'- accordance with statements, representations, and conditions contained in Sections II, III, and VI of its license application dated May 3,1980. ,
. t
- 1. Section II of the application requires the licensee - to ensure that appropriate technical, administrative, and operational personnel review changes in prccesses and equipment. It also requires the licensee to 1 ensure that the Nuclear Licensing Board: (1) considers the effect of l new and revised facilities, equipment, and processes . involving l radioactive materials; and (2) insures implementation of appropriate controls and safeguards. j Contrary to the above, the licensee did not ensure that appropriate technical and operational personnel and the Nuclear Licensing Board reviewed or considered the effect of the following changes in processes or facilities:
. Changes in the operating parameters of the Recovery Building stack '
scrubber Addition of a calcinator in the Waste Treatment Building 1 This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI).
- 2. Section VI of the application requires the licensee to ensure that
( employees who handle unclad uranium are retrained at least annually. Contrary to the above, between February 1980 and August 1982, a period in excess of one year, the licensee did not ensure that employees who handled unclad uranium were retrained. . This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI). V. License Condition 17 requires the licensee to possess and use its licensed ' i material in accordance with statements, representations, and procedures contained in its license application dated January 6,1978. The application stata that the licensee will concucts its program in accordance' with certain procedures, three of which are as follows: (1) the linearity of the dose calibrator will be checked at quarterly intervals; .(2) weekly - contamination surveys will be performed in the Auclear Medicine Department; and (3) radiation level surveys will be performed daily. Contrary to the above, the licensee has not possessed and used its licensed material in accordance with certain procedures of its. license application. The linearity of the dose calibrator has been checked annually vs. quarterly. Contamination surveys in the Nuclear Medicine Department ,have not been routinely performed. . Radiation level surveys have been performed weekly vs. daily. This is a Severity Level V violation (Supplement VI).
,. .c
.l 85 t
\
VI. License Condition 16 requires the licensee to possess and use-its licensed
-material in accordance with statements, representations, and procedures ;
contained in.its license application dated March 27.,. 1980, its ALARA Program dated. September 4, 1980, and its letters dated March 27 and November 10, - 1981. Contrary to the above, the licensee did not possess and- use its licensed material in accordance with all statements, representations, and procedures contained in these documents, as shown below- 1
- 1. Item 17 of Appendix B of the license application states that'linearity checks of the dose calibrator will be conducted each calendar quarter, i1 but such checks were not conducted during 1981.
- 2. Item 18 of Appendix B of the license application states that :linearity I checks of the dose calibrator will be conducted using a source having approximately the same activity as the maximum activity anticipated to be assayed in- the dose calibrator. The first elution from , a molybdenum-99/ technetium-99m generator typically assays at' 400 m1111 curies and would be ~ the maximum activity assayed in the dose.
calibrator. However the licensee conducted its linearity checks during 1982 with a source (63.4 mi.111 curies) of considerably less activity than 400 mil 11 curies.
~
- 3. In Item 27 of the ALARA Program the licensee stated. that calibration.
certificates affixed to radiation survey instruments would provide'~ a (' description of the source used in the calibration procedure. However,. no radiation survey instrument in use on' July 14,1982,' was labelled or tagged to show what source was used in.its calibration.
- 4. In its letter dated March 27, 1981, the licensee stated that it would-conduct a contamination survey of the outer surface of the final-source container of each package of radioactive material received. However, between August 2, 1981 and July 14,1982,Lthe licensee has not surveyed the final source . container of any package of radioactive material received by the Nuclear Medicine Department.
- 5. In its letter dated November 10, 1981, the licensee stated that weekly.
contamination' surveys of the Nuclear Medicine Department laboratory areas would be conducted. However, such surveys have not been-conducted since January 5,1982. - This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI).
. 1
O '
?
V a p
?
'e c
n e c i sdh hdi t pt l e t oe i v t a l t y r ut cs i n o
' r t n t ew al ch a ca t o n e e s i - - n op a e r r f or ct a 'n e ? 'l
' V m e e ol o en eo p V ne l o
" I e f f c- pe vi I oh e i c
r n o n o nsn sme it? l i t n v l oio ? t an i t a
'su l -
- e o c c i di ac y cl o v e an p
' v f t t V r t eoi i v l i
" e n t t at c O eo l rit c e oh t o L e n n l ne? N tf a rva L i t n if e e oeps an n o l a vi e v
" y o m m i ms r n re e cso y w m e
- t t e e vena a o p ui e t e e r
# i c c rie pe dov r i h e c p
' r r r r ai y e rh l l i a r t r r
~ e e o o ut u ot i uvs p e o o e v f f f sqs o s c v oei e v df f r e e n n aeaw s nn i h rh r e i e n e
" S R E E Wrl t I Ii C S pt P S Db E W
0 1 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 L A E U D N I A U " M G 4 5
' 0 1
T N 1 1 ' D N 2O G E I MT S ' EN I Ce C 0 E ' 1* %D
' D G
e F h l' t E 1s M D 5 1 E I N C R U 2 1 3 1 10 O O G 0 0 I F G N E E R M O I 10 S I D G C l' D S I 1 1 T N E $ M ' M C t l o S 7 8 9 F N \, M 1 O s t i 1 2 3 4 5 l
UNITED STATES
/ja 1800 'og NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[ o REGION ll 3 $ 101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
- 8 A o ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30303
%.....* APR 181984 Regional Office Notice No. 0902 REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL - SUPPLEMENTS 3 - 7 ,
A.
Purpose:
1 To transmit Supplements 3 - 7 of the Region II Enforcement Manual. l B. Discussion- i This Notice transmits the following documents: Region II Enforcement Manual Table of Contents
. Table of Contents for Supplement I l
. Supplement 3 - Format and Content of an Inspection Report j
. Supplement 4 - Format and Content of a Notice of Deviation i
. Supplement 5 - Nonstandard Acknowledgement Letters
. Supplement 6 - NRC Enforcement Policy
. Supplement 7 - Guidance on Application of 10 CFR 20.403 ,
Raporting Requirements ' Cover sheets and spines for 3" 3-ring binders O V Supplements 1 and 2 were transmitted by ROI 0914 on October-31, 1983. Unfortunately, they were not printed on 3-hole punched paper nor were they marked to indicate "Rev. 0 - 10/31/83." However, future revisions will be ; punched and marked, as Supplements 3-7 have been. ! C. Action: l Technical Staff members should: 1 Punch Supplements 1 and 2 for inclusion in a 3-ring binder. l
. Obtain a 3-ring binder from the Supply Room.
. Affix the enclosed cover and spine labels on the binder.
Assemble the enclosures to this Notice with Supplements 1 and~2 in~the binder. Technical Division Directors should establish divisional policies for maintenance of current copies of the Enforcement Manual. D.
Contact:
Comments regarding this Notice should be directed to the Deputy Regional Administrator at extension 5610.
APR 181984 Regional Office Notice No. 0902 2 V . E. Cancellation: This -Notice will be cancelled for administrative purposes on May 1,1984 or when the Supplements are inserted in the Er.forceaent Manual. i y 2 mes P. O'Reilly R ional Administrator
Enclosures:
i' Supplements 3 - 7 Distribution List B . l i O ; i l l l A
1 l O l USNRC REGION-II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL TABLE OF CONTENTS Supplement 1 - Format and Content of t. Notice of. Violation (Rev. 0 - 10/31/83) Enclosure 1 - Valid Charges Against' Criteria of Appendix B, 10 CFR 50 Enclosure 2 - Sample Citations.for Title 10 and. Material License Condition Violations (Limited Distribution) Supplement 2 - Enforcement Dec'ision Guide (Rev. 0 - 10/31/83) Supplement 3 - Format and Content of an Inspection' Report 1 (Rev. 0 - 4/17/84) ; Supplement 4 - Format and Content of a Notice of Deviation O (Rev. 0 - 4/17/84) Supplement 5 - Nonstandard Acknowledgement Letters (Rev. 0 - 4/17/84)' ,! Supplement 6 - NRC Enforcement Policy (Rev. O.- 4/17/84) Supplement 7 - Guidance on Application of 10 CFR 20.403 ' Reporting Requirements (Rev. 0 - 4/17/84) i O Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
_ _ - _ - -- - --- -=- -- .__ _ 1
)
i
- j
.O USNRC REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL .l 1
i SUPPLEMENT ~3' c FORMAT AND CONTENT OF AN-INSPECTION. REPORT- ;1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Purpose .......................................................u...........
;1 Purpose of an Inspection Report ...... ....................................
General Information ....................................................... 1: Definition of Inspection ............................................. 1 Timeliness of Issuance ................. ............................ 2L Disclosure to the Public .............. ............................. 2- n Cover Page ...................... ............................ '2 j Details - Nonexempt .............. .............................. 2 1 Details - Exempt ................................................ 2 i Information Prohibited from Reports .................................. 2 Safety and. Security Issue Communications .............................. 3-Briefing Notes ....................................................... 3 Disclosure of Preliminary Inspection Information Prohibited .......... 3 Release of Input for Investigation Reports ...... ................. .. 4" {) Format and Content of Inspection Report Cover Page ........................ 4 Y Summary............................................................. 5 q
.~1 I
Format and Content of Report Details ....................................... 6 Persons Contacted ..................................................... -6 ; Exit Interview ................................................ ...... 7 Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters ...................... '9 Unresolved Items ..................................................... 10 Modules or Inspection Procedures'..................................... 11 Violations and Deviations ..........................'................ 12 - Unresolved Items ................................................... 13 Acceptable Areas ................................................... 13 Licensee Identified Items ............................................- 14 Unresolved Items vs. Inspection Followup Items vs. Open Items ........ 14 Miscellaneous Guidance ............................................... ..... 15 Scope and Depth ......................................................- 15 Generic Problems ..................................................... 16 ' Avoid Present Tense ................................................... 16
. Paragraph Designation ................................................. 17.
Paragraph Titles ..................................................... 17 , Restrict Details to Compliance, Health, Safety, and Security.......... 17 Resolution of Disputable Subjects .................................... 17 Severity Levels ...................................................... 18' () Documentation of Violations .......................................... 18 Administrative Aspects of Report Writing .................................. 18 l Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
l ( J l
~~
/)
v -j USNRC REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL i SUPPLEMENT 3 FORMAT AND CONTENT OF AN INSPECTION REPORT I
- 1. Purpose )
I This supplement specifies a standard format for inspection reports and I instructs the technical staff in procedures to be followed in preparing a l report. It is based on MC 0610, MC 1005 (Rev. 3/77), and MC 1006 (Rev. i 6/79) of the Inspection and Enforcement Manual. l l
- 2. Purpose of an Inspection Report
]
( Inspection reports document inspection activities. The report serves j several purposes: (a) to provide the basis for enforcement action, (b) to convey the results of an inspection to the licensee, (c) to provide l information for management of the inspection program, and (d) to inform NRC officials and the general public of inspection results. '
- 3. General Information
- a. Definition of Inspection O For the purpose of this supplement, an inspection is defined as follows: q l
(1) A visit or series of visits to a licensee's facility (ies) or the j corporate headquarters, to satisfy an established inspection plan l or the reactive needs of the NRC. Normally, a single inspection may not be extended beyond a 30-day period. Certain inspections that are interrupted, but completed within 30 days, may be' construed as a single inspection upon approval by the inspector's supervisor. Return visits to complete the exit interview with licensee management need not be included in the 30-day limit. A resident inspection will normally cover a 30-day period but may be extended, in special circumstances with Regional approval, up to 60 days. Preparations for. inspections and travel time are not accounted for as inspection time. However, technical reviews of such documents as preoperational test reports that are conducted in the Regional Office are properly designated as inspection time. These latter activities should be documented in the next report covering the area relevant to the technical review. (2) The following NRC activities, although assigned inspection report numbers, are not literally inspection reports and are not covered by this supplement.
' (a) An enforcement conference arranged by Regional Office manage-ment (as opposed to a routine exit interview conducted by an inspector) to discuss with licensee management the status of Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
compliance with regulatory requirements, proposed corrective actions, implementing schedules, and enforcement options avai.lable to the Commission. Enforcement conferences may be: held at the licensee's facility, the Regional Office,' Head-cuarters, or any other agreed upon location. (b) SALP Board Assessments
- b. Timeliness of Issuance
, Inspection reports should be issued as soon as practicable. For' cases l where no escalated . action is taken, the reports should be sent to the licensee within '20 calendar days after completion of the inspection. For cases .sent to Headquarters for concurrence of enforcement action, the inspection report and associated enforcement action documentation. should be forwarded to Headquarters within 20 days'after' completion of. the inspection.
- c. Disclosure to the Public (1) Cover Page O The cover page of each NRC inspection report is,made..available for inspection and copying in the NRC Public Document Room. It must.
not contain information exempt from public. disclosure (see-Region II Security Plan, Section III', ROI 1200). (2) Details - Nonexempt The Details section of an NRC inspection. report, unless marked to-indicate that it is exempt from public disclosure, is also made available for inspection and copying in the NRC Public Document Room. Accordingly, an inspector should ensure that exempt informa-tion, as defined in ' ROI 1200, is not included in the. Details 'of the report. (3) Details - Exempt The generation, reproduction, control, and markings required -for documents containing National Security, Safeguards, and Propri-etary Information is specified in ROI 1200. When'it is impracti-cal to separate exempt from nonexempt findings, the: Details section of the report shall be marked to indicate that it is exempt from public disclosure,
- d. Information Prohibited from Reports q
L Other information, identified below, is prohibited from reports by NRC policy (MC 0610 and 0611), regional instructions (ROIs 0350 and 0351) L or the Privacy and Freedom of Information Acts. 2 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84 _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -- _______________a
l I
-)
O (n persone, preference < a the 4nspector- (e.g. . ,nspector,p4nionsr as - opposed to presentation of technical positions on items -and- ' areas inspected. 1
'1 (2) Identity of persons giving confidential information to the 1 inspector and any details of confidential information that.would; 1 reveal the identity of such persons. l j
l (3) Thel names or other identifying information of: individuals'who have. j received exposure to radiation, and other personal and medical information, the' di sclosure of_ which would constituted a ' clearly. ' unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. l (4) Excerpts from NRC or. other' government ' agency documents 'that' have ;i not been disclosed to the public. j q In _ general, information received from a' licensee'should'be attributed- J to "a licensee representative" without further identification 'of: the source, unless more specific identification is- required for. enforcement' - purposes. - 1
- e. Safety and Security Issue Communications If an inspector finds conditions that present a: threat.to safety or security, he must inform li censee ' management of: the L relevant :f acts h without delay. He must also promptly inform Regional management ^of his ,
and the licensee's actions. These communications- and the responsive actions taken by the licensee shall be . documented' in .the . report. If. the communication included written material *, a copy of- the written communication (e.g., a listing of out-of-date procedures or misaligned 1 valves) shall also be included in the report.
- f. Briefing Notes ,
If a licensee is provided- with a list
- of significant issues to be di'scussed in an exit interview or enforcement. conference, a copy;of_the list and an account of the circumstances' occasioning its transfer to the licensee shall be included in the inspection report. For example,-
in the Exit Interview paragraph or the' Enforcement Conference paragraph: ' the followi'ng statement might be appropriate: To facilitate discussions of the complex interaction of components involved in the event, the inspectors provided the . licensee with a. hand-written data sheet, a copy of which is enclosed with.this; report,
- g. Disclosure of Preliminary Inspection Information Prohibited Except for the written communications described in paragraph's 3.e and 3.f, or as expressly permitted by the Executive Director for Operations,
'l O *An inspector shall obtain verbal concurrence from Regional Management' before giving written communications to a licensee, its agents, or a member of.the ;
general public. Such concurrence will be granted only under unusual circum- ! stances
- l. 3 Rev.'O - 4/17/84 q
., a i
_; . a f' V (ED0), written disclosure of inspection findings, conclusions, recom-mendations, and details of enforcement actions, prior to official transmittal by the Regional Office or Headquarters, is prohibited. This prohibition is imposed to assure that a licensee shall not be afforded an opportunity to exert improper influence on the formulation I of an NRC regulatory position. Under no circumstances should. draf t inspection reports, either in their entirety or excerpts from them, be released to licensees or their agents, or to any source external to the , NRC without the express permi.ssion-of the E00. ' For the purposes of this policy, a draft inspection report is the preliminary draft of the document which will provide the account and ' conclusion of an official NRC inspection. It is to be considered a draft inspection report from its initial development, and throughout the period of supervisory and management review, until final- publica-tion and distribution in accordance with IE Manual Chapter 1025. If an NRC employee knows or suspects that a draft inspection report, in whole or in part, has been disclosed to a licensee, its agents, or members of the general public without the express permission of the EDO, the employee should promptly inform the Regional Administrator through his supervisor. O)
'~~
The prohibitions of this paragraph do not preclude inspectors or ) regional management from discussing inspection findings with licensee management or its agents for the purpose of effecting action before an inspection report is officially transmitted.
- h. Release of Input for Investigation Reports The guidance, requirements, and prohibition specified for inspectio'n information detailed in paragraphs 3.e, 3.f, and 3.g, apply equally to investigation information obtained by an inspector who may accompany an investigator from the Office of Investigation (01). In the case of l investigation information, disclosure to persons outside the NRC may not be made without specific approval of the Director, OI. Circulation of reports of investigation, while in preparation or review, may not be made outside the NRC without the express approval of the Chairman. OI policy further prohibits discussion of ongoing inquiries or investiga-tions with licensees or other non-NRC personnel in entrance or exit interviews, except for safety or security items requiring immediate corrective actions. (See paragraph 3.e)
- 4. Format and Content of Inspection Report Cover Page ,
An inspection report cover page is composed of identifying information and a summary of the scope and findings of the inspection. Enclosure 1 shows the format of a cover page. Most of the required information is obvious from p captions; however, some explanatory notes are added. The summary section is d described in the following paragraph. ' 4 Rev 0 - 4/17/84
O
- a. Summary The purpose of the summary. is to inform the reader of the type of inspection conducted, the ' time expended, when and where it was expended, the scope of the inspection, and the results achieved. The summary should be concise and accurate, and present a sense of propor-tion regarding the extent of the inspection effort and the findings related to that/ effort. See Enclosure 2 for examples of summaries that incorporate the following guidance:
(1) Inspection ' effort - Include a statement to show the amount of inspection time (inspector-hours) involved and a breakdown between time spent on site and at corporate headquarters (if any) and time spent during the regular shift and backshifts (if any). Inspec-tion time spent in the regional office or travel time should not be included. (2) Description of subjects or areas examined - Where modules are limited in scope, it may be appropriate to use the module -titles or shortened versions thereof to describe the scope of the inspec- 1 tion. For example, the following modules adequately describe the scope of. inspection effort: 61703B, Calibration of local power A range monitor system; 61704B, ApRM calibration; and procedures in i l U the 812000 series. Usually, the module titles are not. suffi- l ciently descriptive. In these cases, the inspector shouTd list in ! brief narrative form all of the areas inspected. If the inspec-l tion was limited to one or two modules, the principal line items l should be presented. Examples of mejor areas requiring more 1 l detaih of explanation are " radiation protection" and " opera-i tions". . (3) Results - Contrary to previous regional instructions, this para-graph will not provide a comparison of the number of areas in which no violations or deviations were found with the number of areas in which violations or deviations were found. Examples below illustrate the format (see also Enclosures 1 and 2). l l Results: Violations - Unauthorized local leak rate testing, 1 failure to perform inservice testing and inspection in accordance with procedure, and inadequate surveillar.ce procedure. Deviation - late issue of updated reports to NRC. Results: No violations or deviations Note that the report paragraph numbers (wh ue details of the violations or deviations may be found) are not presented here. As will be shown, they are presented in the Exit Interview paragraph. O (4) Safeguards 4nspect4 ens - Even though a safeguards 4nspec14on report is exempt from disclosure to the public, the summary should be written in a manner to exclude exempt information, since it 5 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
A b O ; J will be placed in the Public Document Room. The description of subjects examined should normally present no particular problem in the exclusion of. exempt information, but care.should be exercised; The descriptions of violations and deviations usually must be l rather. general to preclude disclosure of exempt.information. 1 (5) Enforcement conferences - The summary of an. enforcement conference consists of a statement describing the purpose' of the conference - and a statement of matters discussed.. It' is not necessary to
]
i report the results of the conference or~ the number. of man-hours ' j l devoted to it. An example of a summary statement is:shown below: j l The violations disclosed in this inspection were the subject ! of an Enforcement Conference, between licensee and NRC j management, held in the Region II office on January 29, 1982 ! (see paragraph.12). . l
- 5. Format and Content of Report Details 1
TSe format for the Details section of an inspection report is illustrated:in Enclosure 3. Details should be presented in the following sequence:- Q .
. Persons Contacted Exit Interview
'j
. Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters l
. Unresolved Items (if any) .
. Modules or Inspection Procedures
. IE Bulletins j
. Licensee Identified Items 'l Inspector Followup Items The format and content of certain paragraphs in the Details- are described below. (
- a. Persons Contacted (1) Li st i.he licensee representatives and otheh individuals not employed by the licensee who furnished information for the inspec-tion. Limit the list to those at the . technical and supervisory level (particularly in reports by resident inspectors) .and include .i the title of each individual. Indicate by.. an- asterisk those individuals who participated in the exit interview (unless- they-all attended the- exit interview). . List alphabetically. or by corporate rank.
(2) The inspector may summarize the number and type of. people inter ' viewed in. cases where the people were interviewed'or spoken to as i n V an incidental part of the inspection but did not provide substan-tive information. 1 s l l 6 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
e e#fE r ,hI. p a , f( .,)' 3
', (1 yr ,cy- * * ' '
g a .l p 8
,, Il.
, +j > , -
2< .Mr (%. s .C :i 'C
' \
(./ '
, 4
'1 gjr
- b. ExitInterv%ew .j The'foflowInginstructionsare)(11ustrated.insubparagraph(10)'.below:
(1) Identify the persons.present at'the' exit interview a'sLfollows: (a). Ih4 inspectitf4 oscope and' findings were: summarized on; ,
/ (dage[s])
with Ahose personslindicated in paragraph.I'abcye. Y l 1, q (b) The/], inspection.scopei.and-findings'.were summarizedE on. (dat [,s]).with (titlet .r (2) This section should identify each) enforcement': subjecti(i.e. ,
' violations ~,fdeviations and unresolved items).and:IFIs discussed atL -
the intervied. It_is not necessary,'s however,f tou describe' in; l detail- 'the specific . items idiscussed elsewhere ' in the report; a. brief summarizing statement should be- used. Tot the extent that
~
managementprvvidedaposition.(agreed, disagreed,$hadhocomment)?C i on enforcement matters disclosed during the" inspection,- - the ~~ ./ 'I position should be.factuall,y documented.' ' 1
/
f ,h '
/ (3) If licensee management l 1 h
- disagreement shall. sa/Eith be dh)iss[NRC; the appropriate Director to assure ' that y peeciseL statement -of the;: licensee red' on an enf Divisions i position is presented in the ,exjt interview paragraph hd 'appro- .
)
priate Regional review of phe }ssurjtakes place. j y (4) If the inspectio,1n disclosed violations or" deviations apd the .4 he inspection findings ; or reveal any l' licensee did not. relevaqt facts not previo dispute}ivly known to the' inspector, the licensee: posifion f may be summarized Lt'a statement such as- "Theilicensee , acknowledgydtheinspectionfind}gsandtookno_ exceptions!"'
! x . .
' J (5) If the , inspection disclosed n,o violatipns or deviations, the y'
,/
paragraph should ' sim;ily document the' picurrence of the- exit 3
, interview with a statement's '
subparagraph (10)('a) below,d $ch asa(.theAne. given:as- an Jexample in
;; i < ;
(6)) Licensee action to correct Mclations 'or ' eviations d should'not be o ;
' elicited during the exit interview;4 he will. be given an; oppor--
tunity to provide this informatici in writing', ' However, such proposed j actions as were .voluntari}y described to the inspector,x
, to. addrus t hues raised during tht{ inspection, 'should be reviewed ~
during the ekit interview and documented in-the letter transmit- '
-ting the rep 9rt using the standard text given-in paragraph 5.e.(1) below. f 4 (7) Any contact after the exit interview and prior to publication of O \ the report, regarding changes in~1icensee management's or NRC's position on an item, should be dn'cumen'ted in the exit interview paragraph.
u
> . , - o-1
'r
;- r 7 -
Rev. 0 - 4/17:% :
^ 'y 7 s iI - __ _ a
l
.\
1 l l l
- O !
i (8) Each violation, deviation, and unresolved item discussed during the interview should be identified by a brief description and the report paragraph number where details are presented. (9) If the status of inspector followup items is documented'in the report,- this fact should be included in ' the exit interview paragraph. However, identification of the paragraph number should l be restricted to those inspector followup items opened. during the. inspection. a l (10) The instructions presented .in the nine previous subparagraphs are j illustrated by the following examples of. exit interview para- ! graphs. (a) For a clear. inspection: The inspection scope, findings, and status of inspector followup items were summarized on June 1, 1984 with the p persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. ) 1 i 1 l (b) for an inspection involving enforcement issues: -! The inspection scope and . findings 'were summarized on O J ne 1, 1984, with the persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The following' issues were discussed in detail: i axial power shaping rods positioned outside allowable limits (para. 5.c); both trains of spent fuel pool ventilation inoperable during movement of fuel assemblies (para. 5.d); four examples of failure to follow safety procedures (para. 6.a); failure to submit a report committed to in an LER: (para. 6.d); an - Unresolved Item * (para. 7); and an Inspector Followup Item (para. 10). The licensee acknowledged the inspection findings. and took no exceptions. In a June 5,1984,- telephone discussion, the inspector: informed the plant- manager that a Region II review of-the report details presented in paragraph 7. below indicated that a violation (failure to: returr turbine. building sump to local manual control) had occurred. Regional review of paragraph 10 details resulted in the - withdrawal of the Inspector Followup Item.
*An unresolved item is a matter about which more informa-tion is required to determine whether it is acceptable or may involve a violation or deviation.
- O 8 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84 L._____m_-. - _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - - _ - - - - _ - - - _
i i l O !l I Notes: 3
- 1. The unresolved item and the. inspector followup item, having been discussed in the exit interview, must be documented in the exit interview paragraph.
ii. The. telephone discussion, in which the~ NRC position was- , modified, must also be documented. iii. The ' referenced paragraphs (7 and 10) must documentL the: , inspector's original positions with regard .to the withdrawn 1 items, and present statements _of the: regional evaluations. I that were the bases for modification of.these positions. ;
- c. Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters 4 (1) Enclosure 3 provides examples of the format- to be used for reporting'the status'of previous enforcement matters.
(2) If there were no licensee actions on previous enforcernent matters, or these actions were not inspected, so state. l (3) Inspection reports are not used to track all existing. "open" .! items, violations, or deviations. .If an item was not inspected, l it should not be listed. 1 1 (4) Previous inspector followup items shall not be' included :in this'. l paragraph; they are not enforcement matters. (5) With respect to previous violations - and deviations, .the report l should contain a statement explicitly affirming that the inspector R verified the licensee's implementation -of corrective actions described in his response to the Notice of Violation or Notice of. Deviation of a certain date. If the licensee did not implement these actions, the relevant' facts should be . reported. In either I case, it should be evident to the reader that the inspector's inquiry in this regard was directly related to the licensee's j written commitment as presented in his response letter. (6) With respect. to pra f ous inresolved items, the details should explicitly address -tra - iginal or latest - statement' of ' what ' information or action was required to determine whether the matter i. under consideration indicated compliance or supported a violation or deviation. In other words, in-tracking an unresolved item from. its origin to close-out, the reader should be clearly informed of what information or action is required; why it is required (if-this is not evident); who is required to supply the information or-take the action; and when it'may be reasonably anticipated that !Q the information will be forthcoming or the' action taken. i 9 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
l 1
)
1 D d i
- d. Unresolved Items (1) The first time the phrase " unresolved item" is used in the report, it should be annotated by an asterisk and its. definition given-as- ,
a footnote. Its first appearance may occur in'the Exit Interview paragraph, in the paragraph on previous enforcement matters,.or in another module paragraph in which the inspector - addresses a i previously identified unresolved item . whether in .a . title or text, the definition should be provided as a footnote. I 1
. (2) Contrary to previous Regional Office Instructions, reports will no longer contain a paragraph entitled Unresolved Items. Do not use-the following text: !
- 4. Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified - during' the inspection OR
- 4. Unresolved Items j
Unresolved items are matters about whicn more informa-tion is required to determine whether they are accept-able or may involve violations or deviations. Two new I unresolved items identified during this inspection 'are - discussed in paragraphs 5 and 9.c. (3) Three examples of how an unresolved item may be handled aref presented below. The first example illustrates an' instance . in which the inspector plans to resolve the matter. In the second, he awaits the licensee's evaluation. In the third . example, the- l matter is unresolved pending NRR review. 1 This item involved a misfit of a pump shaft to an impeller in a' reactor coolant pump and the manufacturer's failure to ! j identify this condition during. its inspection. The ! licensee's 10 CFR 50.55(e) report of August 16, 1983, informed Region II that the item had been . determined not reportable and indicated, with regard to - the inadequate i vendor inspection, that there were no safety implications to Bellefonte. The inspector informed the licensee he- ; considered this statement incorrect, as the vendor's inade- ; quate inspection had safety implications. The inspector noted, from a review of related licensee data, p) C associated with NCR 1596, that the licensee had taken actions , l to determine the cause of the occurrence and to prevent j recurrence. .The safety implications were, in fact, j addressed. l } } 10 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84-l
EITHER
- 1. The inspector identified aspects of this issue 'as an Unresolved Item (438, 439/83-24-03) - Possible Failure to Recognize P.rogram Deficiencies. The licensee's failure to consider programmatic system breakdown-during its review of safety implications of-NCRs is unresolved i
pending the inspector's. future review of other similar NCRs to determine whether the case discussed above was.a singular instance or indicative of 'a . broader problem covered by 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI.' This review is expected to be completed by August 1, 1983. OR:
- 2. The inspector identified aspects of the issue as in Unresolved Item (438, 439/83-24-03) - Possible Failure to Recognize Program Deficiencies. The licensee's failure to consider programmatic system breakdown during its review of safety implications of NCRs .is unresolved pending completion of a licensee' review.of NCRs prepared over the last 90 days' to determine: whether the case t
~
discussed above was a singular instance or indicative of l a broader problem covered by 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI. Results of the review, expected by August 1, 1983, will be discussed with. the . resident inspector.
, OR:
- 3. The inspector's review of similar NCRs prepared over the past 90 days revealed similar instances that appeared to warrant submission of 10 CFR 50.55(e) reports to NRC.
The licensee did not agree with the inspector's evalua-l tion of these NCRs. This matter is identified - as' an l Unresolved Item (438, 439/83-24-03) pending NRR review of the NCRs in question. Completion of NRR review is expected by August 1, 1983.
- e. Modules or Inspection Procedures This is the main body of the report; it is divided into paragraphs with titles of the inspection procedures or modules under which the inspection was performed. The paragraph order and titles should correspond to the order and titles presented in the summary paragraph.
The titles of procedures may be shortened or expanded to provide an adequate description of the information reported. Where the inspection was performed under one or two lengthy inspection modules, the details O should be divided into subparagraphs by line items, groups. of line items, or functional areas within the inspection module. For example, division by functional areas might be presented in paragraphs entitled,. j 11 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84 _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ ___ _ J
" Preparation for Activity," " Performance of Activity" and "Results-Achieved by Activity".
The depth of reporting for subjects inspected is related to the inspection findings as follows:
)
(1) Violations and -Deviations - It is necessary to provide full-substantiating information for ' violation or. deviation citations. For violations, the information required -is a clear statement.of' the requirement (referenced, paraphrased or. quoted) and a detailed description of the manner in which the licensee did not follow or-meet the requirement. The description should present the inspector's evaluation of the safety significance of the. viola-tion, how it came about, what its consequences were or might have-been under credible circumstances, . its duration, management's opportunities to have prevented the violation or to'have corrected- ! it at an earlier date, and such other information as may be useful in assessing the appropriate enforcement action. The extent of analysis should be commensurate with the Severity Level of the violation. The report should present a' sound basis for'the reader to concur with the Regional assignment of Severity Level .'in the Notice of Violation. O The eescr4pt4en of the v4 elation shouie 4eciude, as appropriate, the date(s) of the violation, the means of identification (e.g. , inspector observation, discussion, records, or reports from licensee), the specific procedures, operation, or location involved, and the event or circumstance: that occurred. If the requirement is conditional (or " dependent," as defined in Supple-ment 1, Region II Enforcement . Manual), the supporting information should describe the way in nich the conditions are. satisfied, so that it is clear that the requirement applies. The details should i n_ot o contain a repetition of.the violation in " citation" form, nor assignment of severity level. For deviations, the required substantiating information-is 'similar except, that instead of describing a requirement, the inspector must descr.ibe the appropriate licensee commitment. This should be followed by a detailed description of the action or lack of action constituting the deviation, similar to that for a-violation. A " licensee commitment" is defined as a written commitment to the NRC. It may have been: (1) presented in such documents as an. SAR, LER, or a response to a Notice of Violation;.(2) contained in a Confirmatory Action Letter; (2) an oral commitment made during an inspection, documented in the report, and confirmed in the letter transmitting the report. The last procedure would be suitably handled by adding a paragraph to the letter as follows: O Please note that the enclosed report documents an oral 4 commitment (see page _) made by a licensee representative ., 1 12 Rev. 0 .4/17/84 ____ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - - - - - - l
O and discussed in the exit interview. If your understanding of this commitment differs from the report statements, please inform this office promptly. i A deviation citation for failure to conform to the provisions of l applicable codes, standards, guides, or accepted industry s practices should be discussed with the Director of the Enforcement and Investigation Coordination Staff to ensure that its inclusion in the report is in accord with Regional Policy. (2) Unresolved Items - The inspector should describe an unresolved i item to the extent necessary for the licensee to fully understand I, the item. He should state clearly what action is required to resolve the item and who is to take the required action. It is not necessary to present the same degree of details as required for violations and deviations. (See also paragraph 5.d. above) i (3) Acceptable Areas - For subjects examined and found to be accept-able, the inspector should report, as a' minimum: (1) what was inspected; (2) dates covered by the examination or review; (3) the acceptance criteria (Give exact identification by code or standard number, date, and addenda number as applicable.) if other than A regulations, license conditions, or Technical Specifications; and V (4) the findings or conclusions of the inspector. With respect to item (4), Manual Chapter 1005 states:
.. for each subject area covered, the inspector should include a statement similar to one of the following:
No violations or deviarions were identified. , , This item will be examined during a subsequent inspec-tion. This matter is considered to be unresolved.* It is.not necessary to report all information gathered to support a conclusion of adequacy. Normally, the depth of reporting should be related directly to the significance of the subject examined and the information obtained. For example, examination of licensee logs and operating records for a specified period of time can be reported as a listing of the records examined and the dates covered. Similarly, the results of a tour of the licensee's facility can be reported as a brief series of observations or highlights of such observations. At the other end of the spectrum, followup of licensee reported events should be reported more fully, although it is not necessary to report all information obtained. Rather, the inspector should limit his reporting to the () basis for concluding adequacy or keeping the item open, whichever the case may be. The objective is to report substantive informa-j 4
*Also see paragraph 5.c.(6) and 5.e.(2) above.
I 13 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
/7 U tion and to minimize the reporting of information of lesser importance or interest. See also Enclosure 3 for example of report details.
- f. Licensee Identified Items The following procedure applies when the licensee has identified items needing corrective action, and has taken and documented such action (or has made commitments and initiated action for proper corrective action to be completed within a reasonable time), and, where necessary, has properly reported such items. In 'such cases, the inspection report should contain summary information regarding the fact that the licensee's internal audit system was inspected; that a certain number l of audits or that certain types of audits had been conducted during a l specified time period; that in the conduct of these audits, the l licensee identified (number) items needing corrective action; and that i corrective action had been accomplished or initiated. Do not describe l the specific items in the inspection report.
A licensee will not be cited for a licensee identified violation that I meets the five tests of Section IV. A of the NRC Enforcement Policy. l However, if the licensee's actions to correct or prevent recurrence p) ( have not been completed, the item should be tracked as an IFI. Within a reasonable time, if the violation has not been corrected and suitable j measures taken to prevent recurrence, a Notice of Violation should be issued. l
- g. Unresolved Items vs. Inspector Followup Items vs. Open Items j (1) An unresolved item should be identified in an inspection report, when: (1) information that supports a violation or deviation !
requires verification not feasible at the time of the inspection; ! (2) when the applicable regulatory requirements or relevant j sections of the NRC Enforcement Policy require interpretation; (3) ! when the safety significance of information requires evaluation by NRC management; or (4) when the licensee needs to provide additional clarification or perform evaluations to resolve an i issue. i The inspection report should contain clear documentation of what matter requires resolution and by whom it should be resolved. (See paragraph 5.d. above) (2) An inspector followup item (IFI) is a task that is either identified by an inspector or imposed by the Region or Head-quarters. When the task is identified during an inspection, it may arise from a temporary impediment to the completion of the O 4 aspect'oa, e9. "aava41ab'14tv or refere"ces. test eau 49= eat. records, personnel, or other items or circumstances needed to complete the inspection. Unlike an unresolved item, when an IFI 14 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
Jt O is identified there is no reason at the outset to believe that the information sought will lead to a violation or deviatiun. (3) An IFI may also be. used to track 'an unsafe practice or insecure condition not covered by' regulatory requirements'or commitments to the NRC. If an inspector encounters such a condition, and. he believes it tc ce. indisputedly significant and unsafe or insecure, he should immediately notify the licensee and Regional management so that mutually satisfactory corrective action may be initiated and documented by a Confirmatory Action Letter (CAL). The licensee's subsequent action related to the condition should then l be tracked as " Followup on CAL" during future inspections. However, in cases of less urgency the matter should be handled as an IFI. (4) Below the level of violations, deviations, and unsafe or insecure conditions covered in the previous paragraph, an inspector may encounter other conditions related to safety'or security which,.if uncorrected, may lead to additional NRC concern. These conditions should be tracked as IFIs. However, since .they are " judgement l ' calls", not directly based on regulatory requirements, they should be discussed with Regional managsment before they are documented in the report. This Regional review should assure that the ! (']~ conditions under consideration are worthy of documentation in the l report and followup action. l 1 a l (5) An Open Item is obliquely defined in' ROI 1320 'as one used for \ i i draft procedure followup. The distinction between an Open Item I and an Inspector Followup Item is not significant- and is a 1 potential source of confusion. Therefore, the phrase "Open Items"' l shall not be used as an OIL designator.
- 6. Miscellaneous Guidance i
a Scope and Depth The report ' detail s should address the line items of the modules l inspected so that the scope and depth of the inspection is apparent. < l This procedure is of particular importance when the module _ has been j incompletely inspected; it will allow the next inspector to address the' 1 remaining line items. However, the report should .not record the details of the procedures followed by- the. licensee to achieve l compliance. It is manifestly impractical and tedious to record all the facts supporting an inspector's evaluation of compliance. With respect to scope and depth, MC 2515 provides the following guidance: O Although each inspection procedure conta4ns many iine items, these. items are provided as guidance and the individual inspector is expected to apply professional judgment regarding the need for completing each specific item. For example, he may have assurance 15 Rev. L - 4/17/84
{^ . ( that the basic requirement has been satisfied via some other source, e.g., LER followup, independent inspection effort, or temporary instructions followup. In such. cases, he should not inspect these specific items.
- b. Generic Problems i
The following guidance is excerpted from MC 2515: As stated in 10 CFR and elsewhere in this Manual (MC 2500), NRC inspectors perform a basic mission in determining that a licensee meets current regulatory requirements and commitments. Identify-ing specific instances where a' licensee fails to men such requirements and commitments, although important, has frequently in the past resulted 'in correction of symptoms rather than correction of underlying causes of licensee problems. Because of the limited number of inspectors, the NRC inspection program covers only a very small sample of licensee actions in an area. Thus, it is important that an inspector evaluate whether a noted violation or deviation represents an isolated ca.se or may signify a broader, more serious problem in that area. To ' provide the perspective to perform this evaluation, the 1nspector should: l o V (1) Keep currently informed of deficiencies, audit findings, and plant problems identified by the licensee's own organization. . ) 1 (2) Ascertain whether additional personal inspection effort is ! merited in the area under consideration. Where the evidence indicates that a problem may exist, enforcement action should be employed to require the licensee to demonstrate to the NRC that he has not lost control of that area. Regional supervision should be consulted whenever such enforcement action appears appropriate to the inspector. .
}
- c. Avoid Present Tense "
A report is an account of conditions and practices that were observed by the inspector, or reported to him, during the inspection. These findings should be r.eported in the past tense. For example, we have no basis for repo'rting' that a licensee follows certain practices or ; procedures, that a procedure contains certain provisions, or one man reports to another man. We may say, with firm assurance, that the licensee followed certain practices or procedures, that a procedure ; contained certain provisions, or that a licensee representative stated ; that one man reports to another man.
~h (G
16 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
. . . . . , . ,o . . .
, d l3 v 1
- d. Paragraph Designation To facilitate reference to the contents of a report, each paragraph and subparagraph of a report should be designated numerically or alphabet-ically thus:
- 1. Design Control (38942) !
- a. Mechanical Systems (1) Main Coolant Loops l (a) Hangers and Restraints
- e. Paragraph Titles l
Each paragraph and subparagraph should be titled to show its content. Inspection procedure (module) numbers should be used in appropriate l paragraph and subparagraph headings. A subject important enough to ! warrant a new subparagraph should be titled, except in the case of j lists of items that do not have distinct designators such as procedure i numbers. J O V f. Restrict Details to Compliance, Health, Safety, and Security " Inspection details should be confined to matters directly related to. I compliance with regulatory requirements, written commitments to the ! NRC, and activities or conditions that may adversely affect health, safety, or security. When documenting details that do not clearly come within these categories, the inspector should establish the, relevance of the details to one or more of the categories. If a valid and evident relationship cannot be e:tablished, he should not discuss : the matter in the report. This restriction is ' necessary to restrain l inspectors who may be tempted to instruct a licensee in the " proper" l method of operation.
]
- g. Resolution of Disputable Subjects
)
Beyond details addressing regulatory requirements, an inspector will l occasionally be obliged to report conditions that could have a bearing on safety and security but are not explicitly covered by regulations. In this category are conditions such as management competence, atti-tudes towards safety and security, discipline, morale, and housekeep-ing. 1 When one of these conditions is perceived to be a cause of violations i' or deviations, it is a legitimate subject for discussion in a report. n However, it is a subject that should be handled with restraint since it V i may involve judgements beyond the professional expertise of the : inspector. When an inspector departs from objective facts that are j i indisputable, he should establish the legitimacy of his observations by 17 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
findings that relate the conditions under discussion to safety or securi ty . For example, poor housekeeping is often addressed in a report. It is an undefined and possibly undefinable phrase which, if casually reported, could be disputed and considered to be a subject beyond the purview of legitimate NRC concern. To avoid dispute, the inspector should describe the condition classified as poor housekeeping, illus-trate how this condition might adversely affect safety or security, document that the matter was discussed with the licensee, the licensee response, and the NRC position with regard to the matter. If the poor housekeeping had safety or security significance and was amenable to citation (i.e., the licensee had commited to a. certain standard of housekeeping), it should be documented as a deviation. If it was a matter that, if unattended, might develop into a condition warranting citation, it should be tracked as an IFI. If it did not come under the foregoing classification, it should not be addressed in the report.
- h. Severity Levels The Severity Level of a violation should not be disclosed in the details or summary of a report, f 1. Documentation of Viciations Findings that substantiate an NRC-identified violation must be reported and a NOV must be issued. This is not an inspector's option. Viola-
! tions " corrected" during an inspection must also be reported and cited. If a violation is worth citing, it requires a written response to ensure that the licensee's evaluation of the cause and generic aspects of the violation have been reasonably determined. Under certain-circumstances, a citation may be issued that does not require a licensee response provided the corrective and preventive action and dates of completion are acceptable to NRC, documented in the report, and the licensee commitment is documented in the letter transmitting the report (See standard text in paragraph 5.e.(1) above).
- 7. Administrative Aspects of Report Writing Adherence to the following guidance will facilitate word processing of reports, decrease requirements for corrections, and improve the quality of reports,
- a. Use appropriate forms for requesting word processing.
- b. Write legibly or print.
- c. Use a black or dark blue ball point pen.
- d. Double space drafts.
- e. Number pages of handwritten drafts.
OU
- f. Make corrections to typed drafts in red or green ink.
- g. Use inserts (e.g., Insert A, Insert B) as opposed to extensive marginal or between-the-lines additions or changes to text.
18 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
~
+
O h Specify rearrangement of text graphically on} existing format as opposed
- to cutting and pasting,
- i. Identify an abbreviation the first time it is used.
J. The writer, not the word processor, is responsible 1for correct punctu-ation, grammar, spelling, and layout of the report.
- k. Submit a word processing request form for the enforcement ietter and l the Notice of Violation (if any) and another. form ,for the . inspection repo rt'.
- 1. ' Corrections of typed material should- be resubmitted using the l originally submitted word processing request' form. i
Enclosures:
- 1. Sample Inspection Report Cover Page
- 2. Examples of Summary Secticn
- 3. Annotated Examples of Inspection Reports
- 4. Excerpts from NUREG-0650
() ) I \ 4 i O P9 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
Enclosure 1. Supplement 3 RII Enforcement Manual INSPECTION REPORT COVER PAGE (letterhead stationery) Report No(s).: Licensee: 1 1 j Docket No(s): ' License No(s): Facility Name: (If different from licensee address)' Inspection Date(s): Inspector (s): ! (Name) Date Signed. 1 (Name) Date Signed ~ i O Approved by: (Name)(Title) .Date Signed. SUMARY ' Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 207. inspector-hours ('169-hours at the site during normal duty hours,14 hours on backshift at the' site,- and 24 hours at the corporate office) in the areas.of, licensee action on previous enforcement matters; organization and administration; design changes.and modifi-cations; onsite review committee; procedures; surveil. lance; - QA ' program . annual-review; audits and ' audit implementation; training; requalificaticn. training program; tests and experiments; receipt, storage', and handling; records; document control; and review of previously identified inspection findings. Results: Three violations were identified - failure to provice general e:;ployee training and retraining; failure to provide indoctrination and training for QA personnel; and failure to maintain control. led documents. O
5 i l . O 1 Enclosure 2 Supplement 3 RII Enforcement Manual i EXAMPLES OF
SUMMARY
SECTION l POWER REACTORS - OPERATION I Scope: This routine, resident inspection entailed 168 inspector-hours on site (32 inspector-hours during backshifts) inspecting: operational staffing; fuel receipt and storage; plant tours; review of inspector followup items, unresolved items, and violations;- QA for the startup test program; fuel inspection, ; assembly, and storage; radioactive waste systems 'startup and power ascension; { information meeting with local officials; witnessing initial- fuel loading, i initial criticality, and power ascension and transient test; operational safety ) verification; and monthly maintenance observations. 1 4 Results: Two violations were identified - improperly approved procedures and failure to maintain records. O II l l Scope: This special, announced inspection entailed 32 inspection-hours on site l during regular hours inspecting: refueling outage operations, including pro- - cedures for core reload and related operations; maintenance procedures; mainten- ! ance activities; procedures for system restoration and core physics testing after refueling; Core VI beta effective error; leakage of tritiated water in the external containment sump; progress in augmenting plant fire protection prograin; and licensee action on previously identified enforcement and unresolved items. Results: One violation was identified - failure to adhere to procedures during plant cooldown. POWER REACTORS - CONS'TRUCTION Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 30 inspector-hours on site (4 hours on backshift) inspecting: containment structural steel welding; work performance and quality records concerning vent tube structure; soil placement. and compaction; work activities for reinforced concrete placement in containment wall and control building wall and associated quality records; QA manuals, including QC procedures for controlling quality of containment structural steel and supports; and Class I piping other than NSSS piping and containment penetra-tions. Results: No violations or deviations were identified. _ . _ _ _ _.__.___..___--_E
2 O' II Scope: This routine', unannounced inspection entailed 28 inspector-hours on site inspecting: pre placement of rebar installations; concrete pour quality records; review and observation relative to licensee commitments; field engineering procedures; engineering document control logging' system; observation of AE site l training activities;- and licensee action 'on previously identified violations, deviations, and unresolved items. Results: Two violations were identified - failure to provide reasonable assur-ance to prevent damage of post tensioning inbedments; and failure to adhere to procedures for calibration of test instruments. FUEL CYCLE FACILITIES - OPERATIONS I Scope: This~ routine, unannounced inspection entailed.40 inspector-hours (8 inspector-hours on backshif t) on site inspecting: criticality safety and engineered systems; scope of operations; organization; SNM handling procedures; examination of storage and operations, including backshift operations; liquid and solid waste handling; nuclear safety audits, nuclear safety committee annual O ve4t cr4t4cai4tx oa4torias tests ae c 148r 14oas evacu t4aa er411: training; and licensee action on previously identified violations. 91ove-Results: Two violations were identified - inadequate nuclear safety' posting; and storage of SNM in an unauthorized area. II Scope: This special, announced inspection entailed 40 inspector hours on site during regular hours inspecting: criticality safety and radiological safety, including shipping and receiving; criticality safety analyses; inspection-audit system; operating procedur as; respiratory protection program; air sampling; stack' effluents; and exposure of personnel to direct radiation and airborne activity. Results: No violations or deviations were identified. l RADIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION I Scope: This unannounced, routine inspection entailed 58 inspector-hours on site during regular ' hours inspecting: emergency planning and confirmatory measure-ments, including requirements, documentation, and procedures of the Emergency Plan; licensee reports on drills; equipment, instrumentation, and supplies specified in implementing emergency procedures; discussions with offsite support
~
agencies; results of comparative analyses of previous effluent and radiological samples; collected samples for subsequent comparative analyses; programs .for
a 3 0 - control of quality in laboratory radioanalyses;'and licensee corrective ac' tion on. violations noted in a previous emergency planning' inspection. Results: Two deviations were identified - failure to modify a licensee / hospital agreement and late submission of an analytic report. - II Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 40 inspector-hours on. site during regular hours inspecting: radiation protection program including materials inventory; receipt and transfer of materials; records of ' liquid and ga'seous affluents; release procedures; filter testing; effluent' control. instru - mentation and calibration; reactor coolant system activity; instruments and equipment used for radiation protection of personnel;' training; ' internal . audit - program; exposure of individuals; respiratory protection program; circumstances surrounding receipt of a contaminated shipping cask; and previously identified violations and unresolved items. Result: No violations or deviations were identified, t SAFEGUARDS O I Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 24 inspector-hours on site (two hours on backshift) inspecting: implementation' of ~ approved security plan relative to security organization; physical barriers; access controls; communica-tion control; detection aids; testing 'and maintenance of security equipment; response controls; and licensee action on previously identified security. viol'a-tiohs. Results: Three violations were identified - drills were not conducted, certain surveillance equipment was not operable, and lighting was inadequate'. II Scope: - This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 32 inspector-hours on sit'e' during regular hours inspecting: . nuclear material control and accounting includ-ing changes in organization; measurements and statistical controls;' observation of physical inventory; measured discards; material status reports; and records . and reports concerning SNM shipments and receipts. Results: Three violations were identified - isotopic content of two receipts were not measured, failure to acknowledge receipt within 10 days, and failure to correct measurements. O -
L u nieune
/ RUCLEA% EtiULATORY C00edteta006 f
, ies .An.em manu u
ATLAfrTA. esomede 1 ewe Enclosure 3A Note that title is " Report Nos." @'gl,3 ,,,, ,,,,,3 rather than
" Inspection Report Nos." Renn Nn. 50-33s/s3-09 ard 50 389/s3 22 Licensee: Florida Power and Lignt Company 9250 West Flagler Street Miami, FL 33101 Docket and license Nos* Dooet Nos. 50-335 and 50-389 License Nos. OPR*H and NPF-M on the same line Facility Name:
i
$t. Lucie 1 and 2 j Inspection Conducted: March 11 - April 10,1183 Inspectors:
H. E. BIDo . Date 5igned I
- 5. A Elrod Cate Signed 1 Approved by:
C. A. Julian, Section chief- Date 5igned .j Division of Project and Resident Programs !
. Centered I SUw3AY
'I Scope (not Areas Inspected) seo,e: ints routine ins,ection enuned 2s1 inspector-cours (20 inseector-nours with text continuing on the ca escunuu) on siu in tne enn of ninunano onnention, surn o im reservation, plant operstions, Unit 2 procedure reveiw, IE Bulletins Circulars, .
same line and Infomtion Notices. Unit 2 Itcense conditions, and Unit 2 SER confirmatory items. - No summation of areas in aesults: A vioiassoi .as identified - a io, pressure sarety injection fio. I which no violations were ""'"'"'"""'**"d'""- I n found vs. areas in which j L> violations were found 0 4
J
. - DETAIL $;
- 1. Liceesee Employees Contacted C. M. s t"y, Plait Manager J. H. Bar*ow. Doerattens Suoerieteadent-D. A.' Sager. Operations $woervisor
. N. G. Roos. Owslity Control $ucervisor All individuals.have titles C, r. tuoia. lastrumeat ud Control Sun visor -
P. L Finceer . Training Suce* visor R. R. Jennings, Technical Cecartment Supervisor J. G. West, security Suoervisor J. Barrow. Fire Prevenston Coordinator l K. Wiecet NWClea' ol:At $v $'viso* L. W. Pearce, Nuclear plant :uneevisor C. L Burton, Nuclear. Plant 5uceevisor No asterisk needed G. 1 Regal, As,sistant,, A, ain ,, , 4,, t,,, Plantoi,,, Superintend,ent -. Electrical so,er ,teneen . seen ,,,,, A, W. Bailey, Quality Assurance Supervisor Other licensee employees contacted included / construction craftsmen, enginee*s, technicians, operators,. shift technical advisors, security fo*ce memoers, and office personnel.
- 2. Entt Interview Paragraph where details of The inspection scoot and findings were summarized on May 20. 1983. witr the i
violation ma<v be found ' low pressure safety injection flow Cortfol valve ^"""c"i*"i""8'","7'*"v"**"'"",*- was discussed:in detail The licensee acknowledged the findings and took no enceptions. '
- 3. ucense. Anion on erevious wornment mauers !
'd This subject was not addressed in the intoection. l Definition is provided in 4. .un esolved Itw s-footnote One orevious un,esoiied ite. was addressed in inn inicection -
(paragra n :$). No new unresoived items were encountered. a O Moduie or tasPectioa - i t n e t' <e"C>>- Procedure No, is given $tation =intenance activit<es of selected safety related systees - ard parenthetically after the couanean were coior,ed/re wwed to ascertain inst sney were conductee in paragraph tit 1e ' " * " * " " " " " ' " " ' ' " " " ' '"""'"5""'"'"(""d"8""8
'An Unresolved hee 6: 4 mat *er acout wbCh more information is required to determine w, r ether it 1s acceptable or may involve a viol 4 tion or deviation.
a r i. 1 1 i, a _ . _ - _ - . _ - _ _ - _ . . - -- -_- - --
n l
' l 1'
2 this review: the limiting Conditions for operations were met; activities l This sC0pe of the inspection " caiter,tient werp"e r'f o rm,"e'"o ,"1 to o r retu
'"**""',"; '""**'"" '" ' ' " 8 ' " * * ' I s ning comeoaents or system to 1 activity is defined se vim coauty control enords were maiatained; uttvisi n we . accem-
)
piti ee ey ouatteied eeriennet: ea ts and mate tais uste we e o eperty i certif 4ee; and racioiogiesi cons li were tmoteme"te: as e u ed wo . recunes were reviewee to desee,ne stuus of ontnanei g ;oes anc to ass,,re tPat ortority was assigned to safety-related equipment mainte ance amicn might affect system performance, ho ylolations or Ceviations we*e j identifted.
- 6. Surveillance Observation (61726)
During the insooction period, the insoector verified tnat plant one attens l were in comoltance with at least Iti dif ferent Technical Specifications (TS) I requirements. Typical of tnese were confirmation of compliance witn tae 75 for reactor coolant chemistry, refueltog water tant, containment o essure, .
)
control room vent 11ation, and AC and DC electrical sources. Tne tesoector verified that testing was performed in accorcance with adequate procecures, test instrumentation was calierated, limiting conditions for operation we*e met, removal and restoration of the affected components were accomplished, test results met requirements and were reviewed ey personnel otner than the individual directing the test, and that any deficiencies identified during the testing were properly reviewed and resolved ey accropriate management , personnel. No violations or deviations were toentified.
- 7. Operational Safety verification (71707)
}
The inspector observed control room operations, reviewed applicaele logs and conducted discussions with control room operators during too recort period. ' i foe inspector ve ri fi ed the operability of selected emergency systems, General scope defined reviewed tesous records, and verified prooer return to service of affected components. Tours of the reactor, auxiliary, and ts re'ne evildings we*e l conducted to oCserve plant equipment conditions ?ncludiag potential fire nacards, fluid laats, and encessive vierations, and to verify tnat maie-tenance rea esis nad eeen initiated for cauipment in reed for ma ntenance. the insoector, ey reservation and direct interview. verified snas tre enysicai security pian was esing imeieme tee in accordance wit tne station .! suurity pian wn oeing impie,eeied in accoreance witn ene station suority ; plan. l n -
'd curing a routine wa ndown of sne unit 2 Safety injection Systei. te inspector noted that tnere was eo lock initalled on tre 29 low pressure i Particular problem described "x '"J "'"" N S U " "" * "' ' " ' " 'C V
- l - '"' "i " " ' " ' " '
correct (Ocen) position."inis valve is required to oe "lockee"" open t;y f eo I different procedures, AP 2-0410020, Rev. 4, Administrative Control of valves, Locks and 5=ttcmes, and OP 2-0410020. Rev. 5, HPSDLPSI - Normal Ope r a r.i o n . Pa*agrape 6.1.5 of AP 2-0010123 states: "A motor operat.ed valve under Administrative Control sea 11 be tagged or locked at cotn the local handwneel and control switc9," e l l 1 i y
) ,
i, 3 Although the Control switch was in the " locked open* Sosition and the key removed, there was no lect installed on the manual nandwneel at see valve. C V i Violation title should be Also, sne sucoly circuit cresur was acied out, removing power < om sne emphasized by initial caps. _ ~ valve n:,n,po,sition 1 o,i,indicator 119 ts.sosuch not i,3,eate t nacon
,, t,e t ifroi tes,co,.
valve re
.as, eo,os,ittered
,c, , ,.te, vio!ation: Failure to imolemeat a 0 ocedure as Recuired ey ca agrar 6.s er i OIL No. assigned e,e unit 2 recneical Soecin at4cas c (SC-3ms3-22-Oi).
An fespection of otBe* locked valves in t*is system revealed ao otFer This establishes the safety d4screoanc'ei. An in.estigat en could not cete m4ae ne. :eng tr+s condit ce ! Perspective of the violation "*"'"'8- '"'**""'" '"'d** 'oopen" 2-0010123 w> a. 1983) indicated that tee valve (eP*3301) e was ! o"c'ned l inis crocecure l is complete: cuarterly.
- 8. Unit 2 Procedure Review (424008)
During tee inspection period, t*e inspector continwed see oe going review o r Unit 2 coerating, of f-normal, acminist ative and surveillance procedures. The following proceoures were reviewed in cetall:
- a. Operattaa oacceduces l 1
CP2-0310020, Rev. 2 - Component Cooling Water Normal Operatice 1 09 2 0030151 Rev.1 - ORAFT - Remote Shutdown Monitoring Irstru-mentation Periodic Chaaeol Check and Selector Switen Position l Verification j l OP 2-0700050, Rev. 1 - Aut11ary Feed.ater Periodic fest
- 09 2-2000020, Rev. 1 - Containment Cooling System Coeration I 1
J Op 2-2200020 Rev. 2 - Emergeacy Diesel Generator Standey Lineuo 'l 1 OP 2-012002$ Rev. 1 - Osenen Tank Operation 1 OP 2-0700022, Aev. 2 - ausilia*y Feecwater Normal Coeratica j
- e. Of' u rmat ococedures )
CP 2*04}CO30 Rev. 1 - MP3!
- Of f-Normal Operation On 2-0640030, Rev. 1 - I;W Off-Nomal Operation I
- c. Administrative ococedsres .I 1
i AP 2-0010123, kev 1 - Administrative Control of valves, Locks. l and Snitcnas a AP 2 001025 Rev. 2 - Scredale of Periodic Tests. Checks, and a Caltorations l l l h a
-d
1 1 k 4 The majority of these procedures revealed no errors. Showing evidence of a
- j. -wT concerted effort on the licensee's part to upgrade the technical coatent of Vatt 2 procedures. However, two of tne procesures still contained n merous gd g tecnnical and typog*4phical e~o*s even af ter Rev. 2 and ladicated a aeec u
for continued oursuit of perfection of proofreading. A paoce:wre ee. 9w team will conowet a fwateer $n-cepta review during tne weet of 16 wa/- No violations or deviatican were identified.
- 9. It Buitettas (92703)
The following IE Bulletins were reviewed to easure rece10t. eva1watton, arc appropriate implementation,
- s. (Closed - Unit 2) IE Bulletin 80-06: Engineered safety Featu re neset Controls Tnis recort updates NRC Report Nos. 389/83-15 and 389/83-34. Duriag tne test of enginseced safety features on Feerwary 18, 1983, fow-
.11stici valves repositioned automatically upon safegwaeos reset.
Well written coverage of IEBs ,vdde", n o,, n ytwo, ,ai,e, o,ened woon ,,c,rewiation acte,tio, ,,,,ai ! reset- ' These additional two valve coitrol s were modified Dy I CCN 'a13.2628. Tee four ventilation valves were reevaluated Dy EBASCO
. Site support Engineers and were found to have reset cecause a fwel !
building hign radiation alarm was present during the ssfeguards test. ]j This condition was also evaluated by NRA as satisfactory and tne inspector was so informed via teleonone. The ventilation system was q retested without a vertflatton starm present on May 2, 1983. Tae l l report snowed test the valves rem 41aec in position upon safeguards :l l reses. l i D. (Closed - Unit 2) IE Bulletin 83-03: Cnect Valve Fallwees in Raw water - Cooling Systems of Otesel Geaerators. This IE Bulletin was sent to i Note reference is recorded C,o,nstruction perett holders for reformation - no action was reowired. L evaluated sne son etin en memo Pst-2 83 582 to Fi t e .-310. 4.1. St. Lucie 2 does not use a raw water cooling system for diesel i generators and the water system usec dces not contain eneck valves. l
- 10. IE Cirewlars (92703) 1 l
ine following IE Ctreuiars were reviewed to ensure tnetr receipt, review ey p approortate management, and tnat appropetate action was taten.
> t l V a. (Closed - Unit 2) !E Circular 80*12; Valve Shaf t to Actuater Aey "ay Fall Out of place. inis reco*t upcates NRC Report No. 38940-16.
Note that reference is made ESASCO Of fice Enginevus Menttfied sta valvn watch QC ee:s<d and - to prior report sairle subject documented in tne A,,ti 2s. 19e3. H eensee',s A.otro, Inspection vai e ,as staxed Report ME 83-1690, and documented cated _in se,o,t ; ME 83 1751, dated Apeti 28, 1983.
- b. (Closed - Unit 2) IE Cirewlar $1 Steam voiding in the Reactor i Coolant Systee Ouring Cecay Meat Removal Cooldown. Tnts report wodates l l
1 l V um.__.______________
5 NRC Report. No. 389/82-55. The remaining action was to include this item in normal cooldown procedures. Operating Procedu*e 2 - 0030127 ( Rev. 4, Reactor Plant Cooldown - Mot $tandey to Cold $nutoown, tecluded a precautton snowing waere to refer to if voldtag was suspected.
- 11. IE Information Notices (92717)
The following IE information Notices were reviewed to easure treir *ece*:t, review by appropriate management, and that ao9ecoriate action was taken.
- a. (Closed - Unit 2) !E Notice 79-33: Imoroper Closu er of naima ry Containment E.Jt pment Access Naten. Maintenance procedu*e M-0311.
Rev. 3 - Eouipment Access Match - Removal and Reo14 cement, was med+fied on Ao*11 28, 1983, to include Unit 2. Tne procedure accressed tne potets of torQwe valves and segeence, alignment, and air test aftee installation, e, (Closed - Unit 2) IE Notice 80-21: Anenorage and Suecort of safety Related Electrical Ecutoment. The inspector revtewed FDL memo PSL 2-82-703 to File L-310.4.3 responding to tnis Nottee. Also ! revie-ed were drawings of cable tray supports: 2998 G 791 Se*ies Sneets 1-11 and 2998 - As - 123 througn 125. These were all classified seismic Class I.
- 12. Followup of Unit 2 License Condtttons (927058) l i
These are 9ood examples of a. License Condition 17.b sad License Aooencia E: Control Room Oestga Review (NuREa 0737 item 1.0.13 Tnts 3teense condition reautres complete, concise documentation. 4 comolettoa of 11 items, listed in Aeoeneen E to the iscense. orior to ' It is clear what was done and " c "d ' "' 55 ""'" - '""'"c'*"'"*'8'"'"""'"""""' '" tnis area and discussed each item with NRC Region !! management and s j why. NRR-duman Factors Engineering Branen. Tre items discussed colow are i e numoered in accordance with License NOF-16 Accendia E. (- (1) (Closed - Unit 2) A.1.9: Remote Control Traesfer Panel Secu fty ' l Seal. This report updates NRC Report No. 389/82-63. int s item ead been open peading installation of seals and instituting a l routtne dany survemance to eneet sm condition. sase%enti,, the (pacea) seats were attached to the doors and a daily surveil-lance initiated. This sealing action was not very effective in it cove ed only a sm411 portion, acout 251,, of sne transfer O that r svitenes. The others were located on panel or switerocard fronts. V A recent increase in security classification of tre invoived si.nt area has eliminaten tne nued for seals. - NCC Region !! and I I l NRR NFEB agreed, on April 17, 1983, that this 11 cease condston should be constdered satisfied without further licensee action.. l (2) (Closed - Unit 2) A.1.3: Assessment of Multiple-Input Annunciator Windows fo* "Reflash" and " Readable" Functions. $trCe the time of tne original Human Factors Review (1981), wnen viatually no annunciator windows nad reflash cepability, this area has eeen l l l A 1 1 1 l l
l 6 reevaluated by tne liceasee and a substantial numbe* of "reflasn" ] functions installed. Oteer muittple-taput annunciators were
- specifically evaluated to not need reflasn. Ltsts of taese and
- the attendant reasoning have Deen informally suppited to NRC Evolutionary enaages to tne anaunciaters. continue even now.
Since; (a) tne coeditton of tne aanunciatoes was so ,tmocoved f rom ' tne original, (b) tne insoector dic not find ocvious cases e tren - more reflasm cacaDility was eeeded. and (c) tne liceasee -is
'i recuired to snortly conduct a furtner detailed control. room desiga ]
revtew wnich at11 tac 1.ude furtner reevaluation of tre annect- ; ators. NRC Regson-!! amd MAR-wFEB agreed, en Ace 1127,1983, snat. d tnis license condition smould ce considered satisfied, ] 1 (3) (Closed ? Unit 2) A.S.18: bek of Marking of Meter Scalks, - Te s , .I reDoet uDdates NRC Report No. 389/83-11. The scale coding , tast . appeared to ee complete in the costrol room.
~
- b. (Closed - Ur.it 2) License Attachment 1l Itemsito b'e Comple'ted prior to-' -
Enceeding $$ Power, Item IV: Proper Labeling and Accessibility Control of Motor OLerated Valve TPerma) Overload protection Bypass Switenes and ,
- Contro1,0.2m/ Remote Shutdenn Panel Cent o1 Diversion Switenes.
(1)> During NRC' Inspection No. 389/83-43, the proper lacettng of- j eentrol room / remote shutdown panel diversion :switenes was F
. inspected.' Accessl0111ty control has . Deen ' resolved by -ennanced j r secyrtgy. ,j (2).The thermal overload Dypass switches were previously j labeled .
"0FF-ON" with no ' unction label, These have been replaced Oy red . 1 tacets eno141 ming the function and identifying the normat/tycass d position and tne maintenance / test position, Accessf0t11ty control.. j is as (1) acove, j technical ' 5pecif f cation Table 3.81 was reviewed ' ie detail to I ensure all listed valves were laceled, The taele contains .tnree ;
categories of non-laceled salves;
- Vcives with oveeloads that are normally intervice .Dut a e -
Dynassed on Safety tisjection; V2553, -54, & -55 -Charging Pump Byoass Valves i !. V3614. -24, -34, & -44 117 Isolation valves . I V2504 RwT ! solation valves i l t
~
! - Valves presently manually operated which will be converth to , motor operated in the future: FCV 3301, 3306 ~5hutdown Cooling Valves. V 3432, 3444- .RWT ! solation Valves-l V 07 3, -a Containment Spray . Isolation l' Valves a e i. i I h
g _
,j i
7 j Valves wnien do not have thermal overloads -instailed: FCV 25 CRECS!solationValEe FCV 25-24, 25 CRECS ! solation valve ld' FCV 25 35'. Vent Isolation valve These' valves'do not *ecaire labeling at this time. 13,' Followup on Unit 2 Safety Evaluation Reoort Confirmatory Items (907058) i ai (Closed '- Unit 2) SER Item.13,4.3t : Provide independent Safety Evalua- l tion arouo. tne inspecto reviewed tne resumes for tne ove ee sens - .1 and tne lettee of evaluation for the one non degreed person. Att five persons were assigned full time
- b. (Closed - Unit 2) SER Item 13.2.2: Review Training program foe Modifi--
cations Based on !NoO Position Task Analysis Program. -- The operation .]e teatning program has been evaluated and a new tast-oriented program a GOOD examples inttiated. This new program incorporated several. levels of nonitesesed tratning snan license training. This tends to produce operatoes witn entensive plant wide experience, The licensee has indicated ' an irtterest .in task ' analysis evaluation of: other staf f traintag areas; .: however, it.is not apparent that INPO has done se yet.. Based on NRC -! Region !! management review of this area, this item is closed;
, c. (Closed - Unit 2) SER Item 6.3.2: Containment Inspection Procedure for Loose De9eis That Could Clog ECCS -Sump and ' Inspection Procedure for .c Sump suction Inlet Clogging and Sump Component Structural Distress or ;
Corrosion. These items were ' form'altred in Unit 2 Technical Spectf tcations 4.5.2.d and 4.5.2.e.2, , respectively. Tney were implemented by- tnree procedures: AP 0010125 Rev. 2'- Senedule of Periodic Tests and .Insooctions (18 montn. inspections); wol .Rediation Worn permits (Inspection af ter entry intr' containa ment); and OP 0030121. Rev. 3 Reactor Heatup - Cold ' to . Hot StandD/, parag-aphs 5*1: aMd 5*3 (prior to estabitshing 'contatement integrity).
- 14. Followuo of Licensee Identified items (Unit 2 Construction) (92700)' :J
- a. (Closed - Unit 2) Construction Deficiency Reoort 83-001-PORV, Solanoid ~
Long Term ReliaDtltty Ceficiency. As a result of a valve vendor's long-term test program, tne possibility of long-term inteenal galling was identified to , 455 vendors. St. Lucie 2 mad ten such valves: installed. A vendor representative replaced the . soienoids with
'l l
)
O h
4 e J!& ' */c py( i . kW " 8I 7' b qualified units.during the week of April 11,' 1983f./CC survelliance was . documented .on the IJcensee's Inspection ' Report ME 83-1676. ' wort was. '( accomplished under Re-entry 24$1. Retest was ' accomplished oy precoera-tional Test 2-0010080 for tne safety. injection tanks and 2 00120098 for tne PORVs. The final report to NRC was contained in Letter '.-83-144 e, (Closed - Unit 2); Construction Deficiency Resort 83 304, Groed Fault Reactor Protection System. An initial recort was mace to NRC ce
'a rc h 18, 1963. Tne final report was made on Accil 18, 1983 .'in fo> ,
Letter L-83-242. RPS/ESFS, instrumentation locos- funct %n as ungrounced, floating systems. . Tne instrumentation caninetwee of tae ; shields were grounced 'to a bus, wnich was in turn tied to tse oowee
- supply common ground. . As a result,'a geoved fault was devg)cgdd in tre measurement icop. :Teough FoL has cetermined tnat tnis.conditf fn,lef t a '
minimum of ' two other systems to function, the C4 Dins Detweei Dower
, sucoly common and shield bus have been re.noved ; under Cesign item Report DC-921. ,,l+- , JL *
- 15. Of f st te Revis. Committee (Units '1 and 2) (92706) . u Note comparf son'of license This . report como1*tes the review sad updates tae taformastoa in Insoectica Report hos. 335/83-05. 389/83-15. , Tne inspector ' reviewed tne recently Conditions.for tWo Units .' updated enarter (Rev. 7) and the Administrative Guide Uhes (March 1983) for tne Company Nuclear Review Board (CNRB)? The $t. Lucie Unit 1 and Unit 2 Tecnnical $oecifications were both used as a casts. Previousiv identified ' c.
potential differences between the documents and Unit 2: Tech.nt.tal' $pecifica* ' ' tion have been corrected. Specific items considered incluced;"
- membership .
' " " "*'"8 #'" "## 77 '4[
Good - items reviewed 'Ci6
- use of subcommittees '
CNR8 minutes were reviewed for Mee:1_ngs 202 (held January 4 An32) througn 219 (held February 14, 1983). 3 9committu minutes , f rom ' J6ne 15 J1981 :- througn August 13, 1982. were. reviewed.. CNR8 agenca material for Neetings 209 througn 221 was reviewedj J The scope of review accenced to ee: adecuate, as did thei me*eersdip and meeting frecueicy. Thougn.svecommittees are-not spectf f cally add *essed in the Technical Specifications,. NRC Region II management' advised tnat use of
~
subcommittees has been encouraged. In November and Decemoer 1960, the NRC Performance Acoratsal Team (pat) ' audited tne CNRB. PAT recommendations are. listed in hRC Report ' No. 335/81 08. The inspector reviewed outstanding CNRB items.
- -(Closed) IFI' 335/81-08-40 CNR8 Had . Not Reviewed Many Items..in a Timely Manner. Review of subcommittee ~ reports showed marked -
t mo ro v eme n t. . M o > r i- i j r-g t L
.. .j d' g - 1 y
.)'
i
\
d-P , .
, . l$
i
4 \ (l' s I . 1
/
I
+
,,' (Closed) !F1335/81-08 42
- h1 Written Program to Describe CNRB Track--
/ .ing System. Teere was no reoutrement for snis.
\
- Csen) Unresolved Item 389/83-15 Implementation of St.'Lwete 2 3>To:netcal Soectf tcations in .the Ch48 and Facility Review Grove (FR3)
Areal. CNRB imDIementation was clear; FRG implementation will De reviewed at anotner time. (Closes) IFI 335/81-09 17 - APs and 01s Implementing Safet, Reta m Maintenance Cid Not Reference the QP in All Celes. inis ' tem was act a requirement. 45 i I v , i i j e L
'(
e 3 m w______.__.____m__ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _
units: suris
/,pa meg %, wuci.s Ana ._ utarony comemstion
# e casea u
,e,nniem m ,r m
!. .eu m .oso .
i
*; Enclosure 38 L/ Swoolement 3 RI! Enforcen nt Manual Note that title is " Report Nos." Report aos. 50-438/83 19 and 50-439/83-19 rather than " Inspection Report tic,n,,e; 7,nne,,,, y,ne, 4,tn.,4t, Nos." 50cA Chestnut street Chattanooga, TN 37401 1 50-438 and 50-439 CppR-122 and CFPR-123 Docket and License Nos. Docket Nos. License Nos, on same line rae nity Naee: sen ,<onte i ,no 2 (
Date here, not in Summary inspection Conducted: Augwst 2-5, 1983 In50ector: , J.W. Yorn Date Signed i Approved by: J. J. Blate, Section Chief Qate Signed
- Engineering Progra. Branch Division of Engineering and Operational Program, I l Centered sumARY f Scope (Not Areas Inspected) Scop
- N o routiae wasaacuaced insoectica satailed 27 inspector-hours oa $lte d ,ing ,egoi.. .o n nour, in en. area, or u cen,ee action on ,,eviou, en< orca nt with text continuing on .atters, ,are.y.reisted pipe support ano restraint ,,ite..,
and iicen,ee same line i det " t ed i t** +s f No summation of areas in $'$'Je,"* 'd'"*"d l which no violations were found vs. areas in which 73 violations were found t ) v l l l l l l l l
%l
y .-. . . .y-. y - l , > ',. F , I l
' J. N l
- ll J
.\ )
4 DETAILS (y) .3 I persoes *ontacted
- 1. l 1
ficensee Employees r* l
*L Cos, peoject t'saager s
*B. TPomas. Qwality Maeager )
*D. Beteges, as sistant Owality "anager !
*T. Newton, Assistant Quality Manage'r i v' *D. Smitn, Assistaet Const*wetton Engineer )
*T, B'otPers. Assistant Construction Engt Mer l
'J. Barnes CA Suoervisor 1 e
ar. tao ent. crfice of cA r i If this man had a title e .M. noacion, z C ,f . I it should have been given *P " ann, "welea' Lic'" stas unit suo n' - i D. Mcope. Systems Engieser, "EU-E s
/ CU e r licensee ecDlhytes Contacted included Construction crafCJmap, i
',etnn'Ctans, and of f Ce personnel, .. ) I NRC Resident Instectors
/ .
1
*J. Wilcon, Senior Resident Inspector - Construction i
*M. Branen, Seflior Resident InsDeCtor - Operations
- Attended exit interview f 2. Enit Interview ! I h
The inspection scope and finctngs were summarized on August 5,1983, witn [ Paragraph where details of tese perseas laatcated in paeaorson 1 aeove. Tne violattoa, f a11wre to 1 f'11#" h'"I'" 1"#*' * "" #'#" 1D'd I" '''" 4 " ""# Violation may be found 4, eete,1. Tne 11censee ac"uowledg'eo'tne inspection fincing's and soon no f
) eatentions. !
, 3. Licensee Action on prer'92s Enforcement Matters (92702) i i
Status emphasized by (tiosea) vioiation 438. 439/s1-32.c1, r< tiore to foi:w.pege'eadre fora w eger ,
' I""'"
O parentheses , (Closed) vtolat'en 48, 439'82 18 01, railure to Maw proceawee for wanger l
, i lespection
/ . .. ')'
, Tne licensee was cited (438, 439/81-32-01) during an't.* s ection in Decemt v 1981. A repeat violation (438, 439/82 18-01) for w e same area of insoec-tion was (centified to the licensee during a Jc41982 inspection. The s licensee .as asned to give particular attention to the VJentification and l remedy of tne root cause of the repeat violation so snat *;s furtner ocewe- i rence signt me precluded. " '
i r; i
\ .
i 1 1
,f 5
O a /
,J L
9 L> / i#
/
I u____._
2 Refer to Licensee's response Tw s iette of r.s.onse eated Septemoer 13,.1982, for the second violation pI nas been reviewed and determined to De acceptable ey Regio-a II. Tae ( inspector held discussions witn nanQer CC inspection personnet 49d esamined the Corrective actions stated in tne letter of resDonse. The inspector Coacluded indt TVA med Cetermieed the full estent of-tne suCject vietation, performed t*e necessary survey and followup actions to correct tne cond*- tieas, and developed tac recessary correcttve actions to preclude reeserence of sim11er violettons. The correct i ve actions identified in the letter of response nad Deen t#Dlemented, ine inspector ooserved eetespection of five hangers from eacn of tre two units and fou nd no apoaeont missed inspection criteria. These mangers are taoulated in caragraon 5. Tae insoection reviewed tne training records for sneee of tee eaager OC inspectors. In addition to tne normal traintag sessions, t>e maager QC inspectors met with their suce* visors weesty fo* discussion cf hange* tespection and related ouestions or preolems. Tne hanger CC group med 20 inspectors who inspected approntmately 250 maagers see ween, Tne licensee stated that an audit of two naagers per inspector was conducted monthly, For audit purposes, the liceasee chose ninger types that were difficult to inspect. The supervisors discussed tne audit results with tne QC inspectors and the results of tnese audits and the Mignlights were posted in the hangee inspection group's area. Tne audit activities and results were reviewed by tne inspector. The inscoctor reviewed the following tw: memoranda from the 5teamfitter Superintendent to steam fitter personnel emphasizing the total commitment to l the QA/QC program: 1
- John porch, 5teamfitter Supertotendent to Assistant steamfttte*
Superintendents, dated April 15, 1983: sucject: Proolems with Instal-lation of Permanent Piping and Succorts.
- Jona Perch, Steamfitter Superintendent to Assistant Steamftttee Superintendents, dates! 5eptemoer 17, 1982: Subj ect: Rejection Rate of pipe Swooorts, Restraints, Snu ceers, Sway 5truts, Spring Cans, Etc., As
, a Result of Craft Oversigns. l Teese two items are closed as a result of these reviews and inspections. Module or Inspection 4. Sarety-Related Pipe Succort and Restraining Systems - Units 1 and 2 (50090) 1 Procedure No. is given 5"""t D ' "" " ) ' " '"" ' * " $ ' ""*U "" t"' 00 Earentheticall/ after group and tne weld CC group. The hanger QC group 8 "'"s"r i
""S" e s p'o"n's t b'oe le .
the paragraph title tasaction of au sunoort coaf tguration with tae exceptica of verificatica , of size and acceptactIf ty of welds. The weld QC group is responsible for < Licensee Inspection Criteria t"' '"$""" "' ' c c i a * ""d * "c ' "' t" 8
- 0C'*7 5- " .I Examtnetton of weld Joints.'t'"5 .q The inspector. revtewed portions of the following documents pertaining to l safety-related pipe support and restraint systems to determine wnether '
1 i i l b)u
j
. 'l s ;
' "1 1
.)
appropriate proceQWrel had been ista311thed and whether they compljed with ' NRC reovirements and tee itceesee commitments.
- OCP 7.a. visal Esamina: ton e' Weld Joints Aev. 7'
- 00c 10.36, $ nance Cortro' :naet Rev.1 ..
.- 01 11 Cesign ; 5taccard D5-C6. . Concrete Ancno'a2es, A*v a 1
- Identi fiCation/0bservation 'o f Tne' insanor seiected sne' fonowing seven na,gers that rad seen peev. at, .
i . Work inspected 0; tuoned and anuud for nusonion; seactor Butiding $cray System j l
- kanger No.'1 N$ M9HG-0039,. Rev. 08 . ')
Manger No, 1 N$ MPnG-00al, Rev 901
-I
- Manger No, I N5-MPmG-0076, Aev. 902 1
- J Soeat Fuel' Cooling $ystem 1 i
- Hanger No ONM-McMG-0402, Rev. 0
- . Manger No. ONM-MDMG-0618, $neet 2, Rev ,J 01.,
- Manger Ns, ONM-MpHG-0513. RevJ 01
- H uger No, ONM-MPHG-0035. Rev, 901 Inspection results Tne aeove : hugen were impeted ' against their' detatt drawings for -
coaftguration, identtf tcation fastener /ancnor. Installation, clearanc u , l Clearly noted me.eer ,tge, weies,,ud anage/ protection . rowr of sne nuger, ese nog meeg : 1 l the inspection crtterta? Hanger No. I N$-MPWG-0039.had a cold lao and' slag ,
-j
. pocket tnat satended for accrontmately '. inenes, Manger No,1 N$-MPHG 0076 .
nad low leg site on the 0 and F welds. weld D teg stre was low ey .3/32" and F leg site was low by 1/16". Previous QC accootance of these welds is a-violation of Bellefonte CCP-7.5, Hanger No. ONM MGHG 0618 had dimensional-: reautrements on the detail orawing for 4 distance of 9* from sne centerline c
. of the pipe to toe, centerline of- the east supoort rod (the actual. .]
measurement was l' - 7"). Manger No, ONM MpHG-0035 ead 'an improper site i spacer for the pipe clamp, i .e. , drawieg reautred 1-7/16" and the actual ' stre of scacer installed was 1 1/8". Previous CC acceptanceof tnese dimeasions. is a violation of Bellefonte QOP-6.17, All of teese items comoined were identified to the licensee as violation' 438, a39/83-19-01, Failure to Follow Proceds res for Hanger Inspections.
- In this area, one violation was fcentified
.. 5. Licensee Event Followup - Unts 1 (92700)
-(Ocen) t!!, BLRD 50-a38/82-79, Citruction and Collaese of Sodium wyeroxide -
T a n t .- In a second interim report, cated June 20, 1983, the itcensee gave. tee following descriotton of the event: During a fillteg operation of the sodium myceostae storage tani, TVA site personnel afscovered the following damage: 1
~
1
;l .
l Y l
)
i
.l t
1
)
i 1 0 e : Q- - - _ _ - . _ - - - _ - - - - - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - - .
.' E Ji 4 I i
l
- a. The base plate for the supports was Ilfted from the ;
foundation. j
- b. Tne concrete foundation was eroken.
'I
- c. The sesy steuts at teree locaUons around the tana were ireared in naif. .
)
At tne time of these disco,tries, tne tank was full of watee acc ove*- flowtag, resulting en tne filling of the adjacent escansien loop with .; water. Tae taek was drained and aceittenal investigation . revealed the ' taan wad collapsed on tnree sides and the associateo piping was sprung l i The magnitude and' complexity in adeition, tre i,censee stated inas a site team was o,,anized to determine -
)
of Construction relating to the. tae no a'iu' car"niv' *ctica- It u found tan the uner ta$rd of t*e vessel was severly impiceed and snat tne lower two thirds was 'slig*tly CDR warranted-this unusually einerted. It wu decided to remove sne en nud and une, sn.n f,a tre comprehensive rePortin9 '""'" " " ' " ' '''''l""'""""t"$"'t'8""8-Trese su ru were en tu'I'in "tne uner sneli annituteiy three feet aeove < l Examples of more usual, routine sne aru wnere sne tant nu to be cut. rne test dau indicued tna sne j o f A5ME 5A 240 TY .304 -) handling 'of CORs are illustrated. $ Q , *,','lJ,'8 ** *"' ' ' "'t t"' "*ents in paragraph 14 of Enclosure 3A ; Duetag this inspection, the upper half shell courses were being replaced. 'l Before oeserving snis fabrication,' tne inspector reviewed the following
' _1 occuments: ~;
Repair plan for . Whitlock $ odium Hydroxide Storage Tank B&W Mark , No. 1-28$*T1.. Document No. 50 1139634-02 1 Quality Control Procedure BNp-QCP-10.39, Rev. O, Surveillance'of 51te Contractee -. The enate plan stated tnat Babcock and Wilcon was tne repair organization and Rf enmond Engineering Company Industries, Inc.. (RECO) was to perform the , repair. RKO was an ASME "N" certificate holder. TVA will supply the snell j material and tne welding rod. The repair plan also stated the following: The taak was designed and fabricated to the reautrements of ASME-!!!, ; Class 2, 1971. Editton, Winter 1972 Addenda. l Altnougn, this repair. ' program is Doing performed under the recutrements of ASME $ection XI, i { 1980 Edition. Winter 1981 Addenda, IWA-4120 of Section XI allows repairs under the origina) Section I!! requirement orflater code ecitions and this provisf on will . De used. Design, inspection, and j I materials shall be approved by 8&W and TVA and will be in accordance with ASME Section l'.1, class 2,1971 Editton, Wtotor 1g72 Addenda. 1 l 4 i :l l 1 I
?
t l l- i t h 9
i 5 i. Clear descriptions of what rne ins,ector o ser,ea .eieing of , arts of ,ertiesi eia ,eams sos.1, ,,
/^ Was ~ accomplished so followup *ad 10- f** *'id " audi Uicat'*a5 'or th' t o ele **s. Stamo humee's 392
- i. ane all. eee *evte.ec. welcing proceswre specif teation No. osenwa ane i inspector does not need to .eieing proceaue, o.aiirtcation No. 98-a-1.ere revie.eo. Tre faite.tes 1 re-do " ' " ' " ' " ' " " ' ' """""""'""#
{ E308-16. 1/8" diameter tot No. 00:19-4 { E308-16, 3J32 diametee lot No. IJ26E-26 i E Xa 16. 1/8" ciameter tot No. 1332E 32 ine epla:ement plate material for the wone* part of tme taat was AS"E SA i
'40 TP 316 festess of the ASME SA 240 77 304 tnat was used for constru ctico }
cf the ortgteal vessel. The mate *1al certifications for tee t.o aests of ! plate were revte.ed (heat hos. 39825 and K80826). f.o TVA eenly welcieg 00 j sur veillance reports of RECO .ere revie.co. j i Basis for current status. Tais item .it t remata ocea sniti sne reesir is comoieted ane a f ta41 eoo t
"'"*' }
What must be done to j complete close-out
)
I bm 4 I J l 1 i e
+
r N._
unnte)statte
/,M ***g\, NUCLEA2 K11ULATCHIV -' ;--
. . seeann u Te1 asaasetta efseef.352.
)- artaaria.esonesa seems Enclosure 3C'
-08
- suosiement 3 R11 Enforcement Manual Note that title is " Report Nos."
rather than neport No. 70-1151/sa-13
" Inspection Report Nos." ucensee: . eittninovie Electric Corocrauen huclear Fuel Divtston Columota, s; 29250 Docket and License Nos. occret ao. 70-11st ucense no. . suu-ite7 -
on the same line 'l Inspection Conducted: July 18 21, 1983 Insoector: G L. Troup Date Signed Approved by
- D. 86cntgomery. Chief Date Signed Operational Progrees Branch Division of Engineering and Operational Progrees suesuny Centered scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 25 inspector-hours on site Scope (not Areas Inspected) aur'as a****1 oruas acurs 'a ta' ar**$ of: radiological 'avirea**atal ==aitor-ing program; redicactive aste management ouality control and confirmatory with text continuing on the me.iure.ents program; and inipector foiio.up i. ems.
Results: No violations or deviations were identified. No summation of areas in which no violations were found. vs. areas in which violations were found O - I O
.f
'l i
I 4
-l l
l l CETAILS.
~O ]
U 1. Lteensee Emoloyees Contacted l
*n. w. Britten, olent Manager i
*E. F. Bsonanac. wa aager, wa nu' actse ing
'n. L. Gooewin, Manager, Regulatory Cocolisace {
All individuals have titles 0. g. Sanee,i, m een e,, Rae,oieg,cai and Enviroame. tai E g, eer,,, ' J. L. eeatnedore, Manager, esalth Pnysics Coerattoas !
*E, x. Reitler, Fellow Engineer R. E. Fiser.ee, Senior R & E Engineer ihree technicians were also contacted.
" Attended esit interview
- 2. Estt laterv'ew the insoection scope and hndings were summarized on July 21,19P3, with ]
tnose persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The licensee scanowiecged the ' findings and toca no esceptions.
- 3. LiCeasee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters i inis sueject .as net addressed in sne inspection. I y
Since unresolved items ,, 31,,,, ,, p,,,,3,,,,,i g,,,,,,,,,,,3 ,,,,,,,,,, p.,,,,, <,,,,W,, igg, . q were not addressed in this Jay 1983) (80818) report, there is no paragraph ,, ,,,y,,,,,e,,,,.,,, entitled Unresolved Items (1) the insoector reviewed tre management resoonstetiities sad coa-trols as they relatec to the environmental monitoring and tne j J radioactive waste management QC crogram. Plant procecure CPC 33 assigned overall responstettity for these programs to tre Maaager, Regulatory Comoliance. Responsieftfty for the operation and . i ' maintenance of tne radioactive waste management laceratory was I further delegated to tne Manager, 'healtn Physics Coeraticas. j Radiological and Environmental Engineering was assigned responsi- 1 jQ etlity for the environmental monitoring peogram. U Each paragraph in the Details (2) A Santor Radiological and Environmental Engineer was asstgaed
'"'"""# ' " ' * * '"'"""*"'*1?"* " "' " " 5 '" S * - ' * "
is individual 1M numbered respons1Dility incluced review of the contract laDoratory work and i j coordination with appropriate state agencies. , (3) Results of the progra,1, including identified problems and/or l deficiencies were recorted to management Dy means of tre Monthly
$wm mary Effluent and Environmental Monitoring Report. Additional- ]
ly, the Regulatory Compliance Committee reviewed affluent releases a
_ ~ . 1 i s 2 and evironmetal monitortag data as part: of sne' otet A;.AAA ., prog'am. U Each paragraph in the .. o- ' P '" '" I" 1 "" " ' ' " Details should describe: x c e u 1 eC d4tior 39~ n utr u Ji.cl e c tation - er a. radiotec cat.
- 1) what was inspected * """*""5'#"'** "" 5 "' " " 5 5 5' 4- 1 udtreet, vegatut oa c. ge: sed and "'
sur'*"* ace."a ter. s f a M*ous
- s5. e' ed "w " " !
- 2
- 2) acceptance Criteria dicus racinson. .N us:utor revie.ed samole colintion recores ed ' m
.*e e
. calyttcal gai,u esireswits re,,n , to vertfy tne 4tolectation of,s,ne c ogrw. 1 a ppl i ed ,. . and , ,,d not 3een co o isteo oy tre ,,,,,,,, co.....,.
'3) results of- findings taoorney. ee taunter evu ed oe unie countie ed smantas .
logs to verify tnat tne svol o nad eeen co11ected the t see:t:- also or 4 discussed tne senedule for collection of annuali fish ed udimeat . samDies wtEn Cogntlant licensee receelentattves. Tee f inspec*or . accoPoanied a Iicensee representative on a tour of i vacious sato1+ ag - J
- stat i ons specified in License Conditten 39 and ver1f ted tRat t"e 4 W 1a umplers'were functientng.
- c. Review of Procedures and Records The inuector reviewed the following procedures and records 'relat'ed to 'l tne rectological environmental monitoring program and tne .lacoratory OC Ll program, I
^
(1) HP-01-003,.- Rev ,. ' 2, Amo t ent Envi*onmental ' Air Monitoring; for', j- Radteactivity -1
~
(2) W9-06 006i Rev. 3. Collection of ' Rout ne Wenty . and Montnly . 5 : E1vironmental Samples
' 'l (3) RC-401, A e v . 1.- Enytronment ICortrol Aequire v u' Mandated
' by 10 CrR 20 (a) MortMy Summary Ef fluent ud Environmental Monitoef es Report -
August 1982 f May 1983 a No vloistions ce deviations .ees taentifin, - 3 Module or Inspection 5. Insensor renowuo (927c1)
' Procedure No. is given ]'
l.
~
.a. -(ciosed) in'ioec tor abne uo item (ur) s.a.-19-Otr condute of air:
- saanns statte saeltes ed the crow. tie cae sectes few acle l parenthetically after met weatner. Tne ins:n tor coserved snat new suelteg station.
the paragraph title sneite,s na eeen usuned, ,,o,, din, ,enne, ,,otecuo, . co, we sample media. . The status of the IFI is o. (coen) tri 82-is-01: n od for audits or otner eneext of sne contract emphasized by parentheses 'ic'"5 at**'" 5t*t'8 t"** t"' contractor - s'ubmitted1*o#r t ' a Qu r'**cne 'l acorato"ry '"a'lity. control. da ,
' a O-I i
i.
l 1 r; - 3 i
,2 1
periodtC reports of the samoling re: Wits. ' These data will be reytewed by toe licensee when they are received. Additionally, tee itceaste i tuDmitted 20 samples (inClwdtog sDited, duDlicate anc blans samoles) to ^I tre contract laboratory. . Based on the reported results of teese ,; samples, toe licensee will .cetermine wnetner to conduct a fo ma' asdtt , j or estaclism otner metnods of enecking tee contractor's per's mance, , j
- . (Closed) !FI 8218 02: reed . for documenting of investtgattag def *-
cteeces identified in the programs. The inspector eeviewed tee moataly il environmental monitorteg reports and Aegulatory Comp 1tance Committee ' reooets and deteamtred snat both eeooets provided a mecFarism for identifying and documenting corrective actions for deff eteactes, The
. inspector also determined trat tne laboratory procebres nas specific .
action levels on sample results,
- d. (Closed) IF! 82-18-03: Jiack of an operating procedure for tne Teanetec LB5100 Alona-Beta counters. The inspector reviewed procence 82 024 Rev ; 0, and the .eeferenced Tennelse technical manual, and y discussed the operatic's with sne cognizant supervtsor, j e, -(0 pen) IFI 82-18-04: evaluation of counting losses due'to self+aesorp-tton ta sampling medta and the resulting correction f actors. Tne Inspector discussed the evaluation with the cognitent individual, wno l esclateed that dt!fe ences in the self-absorption . factor had poen identified Desween dif ferent types of sample medf a;' Dut the final
'results of tee evaluation were rot completed.
.1
- f. (Closed) IFI 82-18 05: evaluation' at ' stack sampler ' flow ' mea su*ement j compensation.- Suen compensation was necessary because, although tee {
sameter and rotameter operated under ' vacuum condittens, the rotameters ~l nad been calierated foe atmosoneric pressure,. The licensee conducted .j an evaluation of the flow rates at operating conditions etco amoient j conditions and developed a flow rate correction . factor for toe *cta-meters. Separate correction factors were included in the calculations for. f eplant and stack samplees, , The f actors were incorporated in ococedure ao 06-002, Rev. 3, and in sne, Ef fluent Air Sampling Report Compster program. -I l
- g. (Closed) IF! 82-18-06: h4C/ licensee sample assay comparison, Due to- ]
nandlieg errors in tae preceration of the licensee's laboratory samoie. -! the results ce the two ia. oratories couid not me aaeouatei, evalwates. '! 6 .' Radioactive Waste Management hality Control and Confirmatory Measu ements e . program. (84844)
- 4. Management Controls Management Controls are described in paragraon 4.a. above 'I e i i
I w_--__--_-___.__.___-________._---__________.__ - _ . _ . _
I h 4 3
'I l
.:'- b; Progree laplementation
')
. (1) Program for Quality Conteel of " measurements -
Tre inspector reviewed enaeges in toe oregram and proceds res esce ' 'l since "e last tesoection and verif ted that tne caanges previcee tae de.' *ed f evel of controls to assure tee accuracy of taburato*y
~
measurements of radioactive materials. The tespecto* also ve*'- fled tnat tne program was operated in accordance witn procedures ' in sne: i type and numoe' of required enecks of esasurteents and ' the freoweney of maitng sne enecasc use of the ucensee s e tter,a 1
.,for accepting measurement results; and, followup on deficiencies i or discrepancies.
(2) Conf tematory Measurements The inspenor selected two stack particulate filters . and' a 'ltoute ) effluent sample. The filters and the lieutd samole were . analyzed oy the licensee in the nealtri onysics 1aboratory for gross alpha radio- .k acti.ity. Tn. iampies were snen anaiyted in tne negion.r! ta oratory, 1 Tne results of sne two laoorstories and a comparison of the results are snown in Table 1
?
After the. initial NRC analysis of ffiter Noi.15 showed only "cossiele ,
;I' agreement". . tne filter was counted several ' times over an eignt-day -
period. Int analysis snowed that a. snort-lived nuclide was present on the filter.i making a comparison of the licensee results and NRC results difficult. Mowever. based on acceptaele results (" agreement"). for filter 40. 24 and tne water sample, the inspector- nad no fu tner r ' . questions concerning the licensee's measurement program; . c, keview of Procedures and Records
.Tne inscoctor reviewed the following peccedures and records related to the radioactive waste management .auslity control and conftematory~ l measurements program. j
')
-(1) MP-01-024, Aev 0, Operatton of Teanelec Counter Model LB5100 (2) d#-01 025. Rev. Zi Tennelec LB5100 Calibration Procedure (3) HP 05-011, Rec. 2, preparation and Analysis of Inplant Air .Sarples
-(4) HP 06-002. Aev. 3. Asof Ef fluent Af r Sampling and Counting Environmental Samples
~
' ' ~ ^
)
'(5) Tennelec LoS100 Atena-Beta Counter CC Cata - Maren --June 1983 l
(6) Tennelee LB5100 Alpha-Beta Counter Voltage Plateau Curves :-- March.- June 1983 i A leo violations or deviations were isenstfied. , l-l '! 1 l J i i OL l
v I .r ; i l, ;I. s' s.I S 4 t a s DSS E 3* .: i 6 Ei s
~
i 3 e e e I - f! 1* a e 2: 2 i* El
'3 35 s' -4 3
1 !$ 4 ,' u , -z 3. i. I ,} ,1
- 2 ..
" !- ?
e
=. .-
a r
$. ?- 2 s s
C { U ! 1 -( -e e e.- - f-et :* i$ .. c : t 5i-3 . . .! gia: } j 5
- t. : 3 5* .
"a .: : . .! .I O
i i O V , i e ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ ___ _ .
' NUREG-0650o supplement 3 )
, , RII Enforcement Manual )
. 10. ': A rony.1 anc J r it it i t s. t List acronyms and initialisms in alphabetical order in tr.e abbre t tatiens and h# symbols list. An acronym is a pronounceable te rr f orced f rom the initial l 1etters or parts of a compound expressien, such as re- (Roentgen icuis aler.t j man), and FORTRAN (formula translation). An initialist is an unprencunceable '
abbreviation formed f rom the initial letters of a compound expression, such as FFTF (Fast Flux Test f acility) or ac (alternating current). To be sure that j readers will recognize the acronyn. or initialism, enclose it in parentheses ! after the expression to which it refers. Thereafter, use the acronyc or initialism only. Wnen it is first useo in the -docurent abstract, reidenti fy an acronym in its first appearance. Acronyms for computer programs and many acronyr.s not adopted into the language as words are written in full capitals. ! For a listing of acronyms und initialisrs common to nuclear engineering, see NRC's "A Handbook of Acronyms and Initialisms" (NUREG-0544). 3.10.4 Chemical Elements Spell out the names of elements used as modifiers, such as 'be rylliur spacers" and " copper coating." Do not capitalize the initial letter whEn spelling out the element nau. Use element symbols when giving an exact chemical forcula (H;50 4 ) or alloy , , composition. Use " Uranium-23E" at the beginning of a sentence; otheraise, use !
"2asu." Do not place a period after a symbol ur.less it appears at the end of ]
a sentence.
]
O indexes nleced eround tae svmeol iadicate mess number (vnner ief t). eto=4c number (lower left), state of ionization or nuclear excited state (upper 1 j right), and number of atoms (lower right). Usually the atomic number may be omitted; for example, llc may be written 80C. Indicate the ionic charge by a superscript plus or minus sign following the symbol of the ion. For multiple ; charges, a superscript Arabic numeral precedes the plus or minus sign, for i example, Co2 +, Hg +, Pu0+. Show a metastable state by the upper left index, for example, llo Ag. To show an electronic excited state, use an upper right asterisk He*. 4.4.5 Incorporating Quoted Material in the Text Material quoted word for word from another document can be incorporated into the text in one of two ways. To highlight quoted information because of its significance, set it off from the text by indenting five speces from the left margin and fives spaces from the right margins and by double spacing above and below the passage. Inset quoted passages are single spaced and are not enclosed in quotation marks. Quoted passages that do not require highlighting are "run in" to the text and are enclosed in quotation marks. Lacking other guidance, use the following rule of thumb for when to and when not to indent. Incorporate quotations of five lines or fewer into the text, enclosing them in quotation marks. Set off quotations longer than five lines; do not enclose them in quotation marks. O
- Technical Writing Style Guide ,
l l 1
- .jf APPENDIX C
-) MATHEMATICS IN A REPORT 1. ;[ INTRODUCTION
- . This appendix is an expansion of Section 7 of the style guide. It provides !
l guidance for the use of . numbers and metric units in a report.
- 2. WRITING NUMBERS 4-2.1 When to Use Numerals )
I 2.1.1 Units of Measure );
,)
Express units of measure or time in numerals. Never begin a sentence'with a numeral, however. .
- 1. Measure l
7m 3.5 t, 3.5 liters, or 3.5 L* 1.5 kg 10 A '~ 3 MeV 50 m/s 36 K 13.5*-(angle) 17.5 s 50 000 units (but 5000 or 5'000. units; see also Section 3.4.4.4 in this appendix) () 2. Mathematical expressions multiplied by 3 divided by 14 a factor of 5 i integrate'd from 0 to 1 l i-values of 1, 2, and 3 ,
- 3. Decimals Put a zero before the decimal point in numbers less than one, but omit zeros i and the decimal point unless there are significant digits to follow the decimal point.
0.25 mm, 1.25 mm specific gravity, 0.9547 gauge height, 10 m, but 10.25 m
*The National Bureau of Standards has adopted the capital L as the abbreviation for liter; NRC finds this usage acceptable.
1 0 34 b
- 4. Percentages Use a percent symbol only when it is preceded by a numeral.
-( )
- 5. Proportions .
1 to 4 1:62 500
.I 1/3/5 of powder / alcohol / water i .
- 6. Times 6h 3955 s 20 min 10 yr 90 days but: four centuries three decades statistics of any one year in a year or two
- 7. Clock times and dates 0800 1400 4: 30 p.m.
() v 10 o' clock or 10 p.m..(not 10 o' clock p.m.) 12 m. (noon), 12 p.m. (midnight) July 4,1976, not July 4th 1976 the 1st (day) of the month, but: the last of April or the first of May (not referring to specific days) ' January 31, 1976, but January 1976 (no comma) 31 January 1976 (also acceptable) 2.1.2 Sentence Containing Only One Number If a sentence contains only one number, one that is not discussed in Section 2.1.1, use a numeral if it is 10 or more; spell it out if it is less than 10. (EXCEPTION: l Always spell out a number when it is the first word of a sentence; see also
- Sections 2.1.3 and 2.1.4 in this appendix.)
...saw seven men...
... drove 24 horses...
but: Seventeen students took the test. Twelve 2-kg packages were stacked on each pallet. l (C i ' 35
- 1. - ._-
2.1.3 ~ . Sentences with Two or More Numbers O. If a sentence contains two or more numbers (not units of' mea Otherwise, at least one number is 10 or greater, use numerals for all of them.(N spell them all out. reconcile the conflicting rules for numbers as large as.and: sma For example: Each of 15 major commodities, 9 metal and 6 nonmetal, was available. 4 Each of nine major commodities,.five metal and four nonmetal, was available. Petroleum came from 16 fields, of which 3 were discovered in 1956. Petroleum came from nine fields, of which eight were discovered in 1956. 1 Numerals that express units of measurement or time do not affect the handling: (See preceding Section 2.1.1.) For of other numbers within a sentence. , example: .! j 75 miles, , Each of the five trucks traveled an average c Each of the 15 trucks traveled an average of 75 miles. 2.1.4 Ordinal Numbers "T Spell out ordinal numbers (first, second, third) if they are single words; (d
' write them as numerals if they are not.
He represented the second and nir.th wards. He served in the 95th congress. l Be consistent in expressing ordinal and cardinal numbers that appear together ; in a sentence. For example: l The fourth group contained three items. < The fourth group contained 12 items. The eighth and ninth groups contained 9 and 12 items, respectively. I 2.2 When to Spell Out Numbers Spell out any number that appears at the beginning of a' sentence or heading. If this causes conflict with other rules given here, rephrase'the sentence or heading to avoid beginning with a number. O 36
-______i__
Five years ago 1 five year plans are lagging. T Four hundred and fifty men are employed. Pl WA- (Consider changing to: Employees number 450.) Sixty-six horses, twenty-nine mr.n, and nine guns were captured. (Consider chrnging to: Losses were 66 horses, 29 men, and 9 guns.) Do not repeat a spelled-out number as a numeral in parentheses. Spell out numbers less than 100 that precede a compound modifier containing a numeral. twelve 2-kg packages 4 ninety-three 5-m-wide crates y
' five 2400-L/s pumps Spell out rounded and approximate numbers.
a hundred people
- less than a million about a million dollars (but 52 million) 2.3 Hyphenation of Numbers Hyphenate between numbers and words that combine to form a unit modifier preceding the word that is modified. (See also Section 7.1 of Appendix E.)
j (~)/
- s. 1-mm diam l 10-mm-diam rod (but a rod 10 mm in diameter) i 6-m-long board (but a board 6 m long) five-member panel 10-fold increase (but threefold, ninefold)
When two or more hyphenated compounds in series have a common base element that is omitted in all but the first or last one, retain the hyphen to indicate suspension. 2- to 5-mm-thick sheets 2- or 3-mm tubing, not 2 or 3-mm tubing 2- by 4-mm sheets, but sheets 2 by 4 mm in cross section 8 , 10- and 16-m beams Hyphenate between the elements of spelled-out compound numbers from 21 to 99. twenty-one thirty-seven eighty-two ninety-nine Hyphenate between the numerator and denominator of a spelled-out fraction, except when one or the other already contains a hyphen. s 37 i .
r' one-half
~
two-thirds one-hundredth two one-thousandths or two-thousandths In listings, reading backhyphenate, to the itemand use in the singular, unit modifiers following and modified, motor: ac, three phase, 60 cycle,115-V, not motor: ac, three phases, 60 cycles,115 V glass jars: 5-l, 2-L, 250-mL belts: 2-m, 30-mt, 40 mm I Do not hyphenate a modifier consisting of a number followed by a possessive noun such as 2 rionths' layoff, 1 day's. pay, or seven men's labor. 7.1 Compounding and Hyphenation l Compound words are combinations of two or more words that are written either i as one word or hyphenated: man year, greenhouse, light year.
. To determine whether a compound word should or should not be hyphenated, check a recent-
' edition of an of fice dictionary. For a concise discussion of general rules for compounding, see the GPO Style Manual, Chapters 6 and 7.
When applying the general rules for compoundir.; to nuclear engineering, the following terms are not usually hyphenated: critical heat flux, fast flux .; O test f acility, nuclear classification system.stearr supply system, or radioactive waste. disposal Ho,ever, chemical eierer,ts used in combination with numbers (uranium-235) or chemical formulas (Cr-hi-Mo) require hyphens. A hyphen is also required with elenents of tech-ical compound units of measure-- ment, such as kilowatt-hour, voit ampere, centi.eter grar.-second.
- Be careful to distinguish between compound.wcr: 5 and unit rodifers. Use ,
hyphens in unit modifiers: gas cooled reacter. full-scale test, loss-of-coolant accident.
- 7. 2 Word Usaoe This section provides guidance tc the correct use of f recuently misused words and expressions.
accuracy, precision 1 Accuracy is the agreement between the true value and t.he result obtained by measurement. i O 1
O erec4s4oe is the estee eat e oa9 reaeeted eesure eats of the se e aeeatitv. activate, actuate i Both words mean "to make active," although actuate is usually applied only to mechanical processes, ) Example: The relay actuates-the trip hammer. Activate has a wide range of applications to chemical processes,-'all of l' which apply.to nuclear science: ' to make (something) radioactive,' luminescent, photosensitive, photoconductive, more adsorptive, etc. affect, effect l l Affect is a verb that means to influence. Example: The Commission's decision affected all licensees. l Effect can function either as a verb that means.to. bring about or to- , cause, or as a noun that means a result. . . ) Examples: The Chief effected several changes in the Branch that had-- 1 a good effect on morale. , l A less pompous-sounding substitute, like
~
Avoid using effect.as a verb.
'Q made, 1s preferable.
alterne'e, alternative To alternate (verb) is to occur in successive turns.- An alternative (noun) is a choice among mutually exclusive objectives or - courses of action. analyze, determine, identify To analyze is to separate into parts so as to determine the nature of the whole. To determine is to ascertain definitely, as after an investigation or calculation. l-To identify is to name a thing, to ascertain its origin, nature, or characteristics. and/or Avoid this expression. State your meaning exactly. Change: Submit X and/or Y with your application, as appropriate. To: Submit X or Y or both with your application, as appropriate. l l 60 1 1
l l 1 i apt, liable, likely (3 V Af means exactly suitable, to the point, appropriate. ' Liable means " legally subject to" or " responsible for" and connotes legal responsibility. Likely means probable. as, like As (conjunction) means to the same degree or quantity that; it is of ten us'ed to indicate a correlative. Like (preposition) is used to mean possessing the characteristics of something or resembling closely. It is not appropriate to use like as a conjunction in formal language and especially written language. assure, ensure, insure Assure, ensure, and insure all mean "to make secure or certain." Assure refers to persons, and it alone has the sense of setting a person's l mind at rest. ~ Example: The health physicist assured the concerned public that there was no risk of exposure to radiation from the normal operation of the proposed plant. Both ensure and insure mean "to make secure from harm." However, only . l
~
insure has the connotation of guaranteeing life or property against risk ! and should be reserved for use only in this sense.
~
( Example: A closely followed inspection schedule will ensure proper -l operation of the monitoring instruments, balance, remainder
-Balance means both "a state of equilibrium" and "the amount remaining in !
a bank account after balancing deposits and withdrawals." Remainder always means "what is left over." Use remainder to mean "what ; is left over" outside of bookkeeping contexts. j because, since Because is the strongest and most specific connective used to s'.ata a , causal relationship. Example: He was kept under observation because his dosimeter indicated exposure to radiation. l O v Since is a weak substitute for because when expressing cause. It is, however, the appropriate connective when the emphasis is on circumstances l or conditions rather than on cause and effect. 61
Q
\/
Exan le: Since all c' , s inspections proved the plant toL be operable, the proposed startup schedule'was appro.'ed. compose, comprise, consist, incl :s Compose means "to create" or ' to make up the whole" of something. Parts compose (make up) a whole. Example: Cement, aggregate, and water _(the parts) compose concrete (the whole). Concrete is co cosed of cement, aggregate, and water. Comprise means "to embrace" cr to include." The whole comprises the_ ! parts. l Example: A botanical ga :en (the whole) comprises trees, flowers, and other pla ; life (the parts). Consist means that all parts eRing up a whole are listed, but include does not. 1 Exam::les : Concrete cens's s of cement, aggregate, and water. .. , Concrete incl :is cement and aggregate. conclude, decide, determine To conclude is to decide cr'j.:;e after careful consideration. To decide is to make up one's ~'nd, as after doubt or debate. To deterrine is to establisF : ascertain definitely, continual, continuous ' ' Co.tinual means intermittent c repeated at intervals. Ccr:inuous reans without inte- eption in time, or of u :roken' extent in space. data Although data is sometimes use: as a singular noun, the plural construction is the more appropriate in te: 9ical reports. Used as'a plural,= data l must be referred to.by plura onouns and modifiers: those, many,-few. Do not use data generically s a more specific term, such as. compilation, l_ist of values, physical dire sions, experimental observations, or l numerical results would be c: e precise. The singular form of data, ca:. , is seldom used except in surveyor's ! O terms iike eetum liae ene oe. niane. 62
definite, definitive = 0 Definite means unmistakable, pre'cise, or having certain limits. Definitive refers to something complete or authoritative. due to, because of l Oue to in the sense of " caused by" is acceptable in phrases lfollowing'a -] verb form of "to be." q H Example: His fall was due to carelessness. Due to is not acceptable when it follows other verbs and is'used'to mean: W Cause of." 1 Change: He'fe'll due to carelessness. 1 3: He fell because of carelessness. etc. ! A series introduced by the words " includes" or "such as" should no't be followed by etc. because the phrases, taken'together, are redundant. (Etc. , when used in text, is followed by a comma except when it ends a: , j sentence.) 'j O rector Factor has a precise mathemati~ cal meaning. Do not use it unnecessarily even in mathem.atical contexts, however. The expression "to increase.by a factor of 3" means simply to triple--use triple. farther, further Farther refers to distance. Furt'her indicates additional degree, time, or quantity. Example: As you go farther away, your ability to hear-is further decreased. fewer, less
. Fewer refers to units or individuals.
Less refers to mass of bulk. s . . Example: With the use of less powder, fewer particles result. O l 63 1 __ ___ _ __ _ _ _ _____-__ _ _ __ _____ ____ l
O rore ord. rorwere. nrerece Forward is very often confused with the word foreword. Even though forward describes a position of something located toward the front, it is not the correct word to describe introductory material in a ' report. -The term foreword usually applies to a statement about a book or report written by someone other than the author. A preface is usually a statement by the author that describes the purpose, background, or scope of a book' or report. (See the preface of this~ guide for an example.) The. terms'- foreword and preface are often used interchangeably, i.e., e.g. i.e. means "that is," e.g. means "for example." Note: Their English equivalents are preferable to avoid misuse, overuse, and pompousness. impact, impacted Impact used as a noun means the actual striking of one body against' another, or the impression of one thing on another. Impact used as a verb means to cause to strike forcefully. Impacted is an adjective that is often misused when the word impact should apply. imply, infer
.f I
Imply indicates by association or. consequence rather than by direct . statement. Example: The neatness of the report implies that the typist is proud of her work. Infer derives a conclusion from facts or premises, Example: We infer that the hyphenation is correct. interpolate, extrapolate You interpolate (meaning estimate) between two known values. You extrapolate (meaning infer or predict) from the values of a known series. I mutual, common { Mutual refers to two persons or things, and means reciprocally exchanged. 64 --- --- - - - - - - - - - - . - - - _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - _ _ - - - - - - - a
.t
, Common means shared by all.
O. on the order of Oo not'use on-the order of to mean about or approximately. .If you mean "within an order of magnitude," say so, only Place only immediately before the word or phrase it modifies. Note'the difference in meaning caused by the word's location in the following sentences: Examples: He was the only engineer. He was only the ergireer. opposed to, comoared to: Do not use ooposed to unless you mean in literal opposition; use compared to instead. Examples: Force a is opposed to force b, and is stronger, j Force a cc cared to force b is several times greater. order of magnitude O" i Use this phrase to express . measurements in powers of 10 only, not to mean-
"approximately."
Examole: The earth's ' ass is about-1024 kg; that of.the' sun, 1030 kg. Their asses dif fer by about six ceders of magnitude. f
]
.1 parameter, craperty 1 I
A parameter is an arbitrary constant or an independent' variable through functions of which other functions may be expressed. Examples: ,The parameters for the first test ~were 6 to 12 V. Four parameters, three in space and one in time, are needed to acecify an event. A property is an explicit value or characteristic. Example: One of the most important properties of iodine is its. low temperature of sublimation.
~
O l
1 O prect4c.e1. prect4cee,e Practical'means useful in' actual practice. ; Practicable means capable of being put into practice,
~
f presently, currently Presently means in a short~ time, soon, directly. It does not mean now or' at this time. To denote now, use currently. principal, principle i As a noun, principal means head or chief; as an adjective, it means highest or best. Principle means basic-truth, law, or assumption. prior, before
)
Prior is an adjective meaning earlier in time or order. - . 1 Before as an adverb means in advance; as a preposition it means in front of or pr,eceding. O Example: He was hired according to prior agreement, an agreement-reached before his arrival, , t I procure a Procure is an overworked word. We prefer buy, get, or purchase. j proved. proven , , I Proved is preferred as the past participle of the verb to prove. Example: He has proved his point. Proven is bet,ter used as an adjective. Example: He has a proven' record of achievement. providing, provided, if u Do not use providing in the place of provided or S , Example: Providing jobs is. difficult now, but will be easier. provided (if) next year's budget is adequate, that, which That is appropriate to restrictive'(defining) clauses that are not set E by commas. 66 ;
-_ -_= _ - -
Example: These frequencies, which increase exponentially with n voltage, can cause perturbations that are self propagating. V Which is appropriate to nonrestrictive (nondefining) clauses that are always set off by commas. v_Ja Via is Latin for "by way of." Restrict its use to routing instructions. Example: The package was sent to Bethesda via Region I. Do not use via to mean through or as the result of outside of such contexts. V.1Z. Use namely or that is instead of viz when introducing examples, lists, 'or items. - whether, if Whether implies a condition of doubt.- Example: He was not sure whether security was breached, j H implies no alternative. O Example: H it does not rain, we will move the equipment. while, although, whereas The noun while, when used in adverbial phrases, indicates a period of time (during, or at the same time as). When used as a conjunctiva, while means "as long as" in reference to time. While should not be used in the place of although, whereas, and or but. Although (conjunction) means regardless of the fact that or even though. Whereas (conjunction) means in view of the fact that and is commonly used to indicate a comparison or contradiction. 7.2.1 Deadwood The following unwieldy or repetitious word groups should be avoided. Deadwood Expression Clearer Substitute l as far as our own observations l are concerned, they show we observed i ! ascertain the location of find i 1 0 l v ; 67 u--.--_-_---- -- __
,m,.
Deadwood Expression ' Clearer Substitute 4 at that point in time then _1 1 at the present time now at this point in time now .l lack j be deficient in close proximity _ close (or proximate) , J come to a conclusion concluded concensus _of opinion concensus concerning this matter, it ; may be asserted that' we assert i conducted irradiation experiments on irradiated due to the fact that because during the time that while elongate in length elongate . . equally as well as well, e'qually well fewer _in number fewer :q for the purpose of for 1 for the reason that because .l y give indication of show, indicate j happen to be are -. ! i j if conditions are such that if in a manner similar to like { initial prototype (model). prototype /,~' :
- p, in the direction of toward 4
'd in the vicinity of .
near in view of the fact that because is in a position to can a it is our opinion that we think 1
')
it is possible that perhaps it was discovered I (we) discovered ! it would thus appear that .apparently lenticular in character lenticular: ^
. K necessitates the inclusion of needs,' requires, f i notwithstanding the fact that although ,
null and void null, void.(use one, not both) of such hardness that so hard that present in greater abundance r:re abundant red in color- red round in shape - round rules and regulations rules, regulations (use one, not both) serves'the function of being is/ functions es subsequent to after the' question as to whether there can be little doubt that probably l two equal halves halves l utilize or utilization use l with reference to about. with the exception that except that l )
,0 68 6
0 i
~s i \
V i USNRC REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL SUPPLEMENT 4 l FORMAT AND CONTENT OF A NOTICE. OF DEVIATION j n 1
< 1 8
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS j i Introduction .............................................................. 1 Definition . .. ..... ...... ............... ............................ 1 Structure and Esser.tial Elements of a Citation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I I 1 Structure .. ................... ..................................... 1 l Essential Elements ......., .............. ..... ........ ............ 2 ) The Commitment .. .................................................. 2 l The Charge and Basis ............................................... 5 (m)
Enclosures:
Thirteen Recently Issued Citations and Comments Thereon ...... 1 i l l l m i v) Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
s O(> USNRC REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL SUPPLEMENT 4 FORMAT AND CONTENT OF A NOTICE OF DEVIATION
- 1. INTRODUCTION The format of a Notice of Deviation, except for the citation, is standardized in the regional word processing system. Yhe citation, on the '
other hand, requires original composition by the inspector. In composing the citation, the inspector should be guided by the principles and practices presented in this supplement. His objective should be a clear and ' concise l statement of the licensee commitment and NRC finding of failure to meet the commitment. The supplement guidance is based on a review of Notices of Deviation issued by Region II during the past two years. Enclosed with the supplement are miscellaneous examples of Notices with comments and suggested revisions.
- 2. DEFINITION The General Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions (10 CFR 2, q Appendix C) defines a Notice of Deviation as follows:
Notices of Deviation are written notices describing a licensee's or a - vendor's failure to satisfy a commitment. The commitment involved has not been made a legally binding requirement. The Notice of Deviation requests a licensee or vendor to provide a written explanation or statement describing corrective staps taken (or planned), the results achieved, and the date when corrective action will be completed. , Note that the definition differs from that presented in the Interim Enforcement Policy (Federal Register, Vol . 45, No.196, October 7,1980). The latter document included f ailure to conform to the provisions of
. applicable codes, standards, guides, or accepted industry practices. In cases where a licensee has documented a commitment to follow an applicable code, standard, guide, or accepted industry practice, and has failed to do so, a Notice of Deviation may be issued. If a licensee who has not documented such a commitment should fail to conform to an applicable code, the matter should be discussed with the Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordination Staff so that appropriate enforcement actions may be determined.
- 3. THE STRUCTURE AND ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF A CITATION
- a. Structure
' 1 The citation consists of two parts: the first is a statement of the I
(] licensee commitment; the second contains the charge against the I Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
. .5
)
ji
, r' e
,- i licensee and the basis for the charge. A typical citation is illustrated below: '
*7 /
The licensee informed the NRC, in its response to FSAR question 421.77, that the QA program would be applied to the installation l , and preoperational testing of fire protection equipment.
~
Contrary to the ahve, tne QA program was not applied to 'the ' installstfon ar 9 testing of battery powered lighting units, required by the 1.icensee's Fire Protection Evaluation Report (July 1977) in areas containing safe shutdown equipment, as described in Rev 1-8, Section 5.0.5.(a).
- b. Essential Elements f 3, There are three essential elements in a citation: (1) a stat 4 ment of the licensee's commitment to the NRC (the commitment); (2) a statement of the charge against the licensee (the charge); and (3) a statement that substantiates the charge (the substantiation).
(1) TheComytment (a) The commitment is a written statement in which the licen:ee ,- informed the NRC that it would take certain actions, follow (~T certain codes, guides, or standards approved by the NRC, or V follow certain generally accepted industry practicas. j 1 (b) The commitment should be clearly stated by such introductory i phrases as: "The licensee informed the NRC, in its (date) ! p letter, .. or "The licensee informed the NRC, in its ) [ Licensee Event Report ?59/82-42, .... It should not be assumed that the reader knows that LERs, PSARs, FSARs, ang!
)
l similar documents are' addressed to the NRC, and as such constitute commitments. / (c) The commitment should be identified in sufficient detail to allow the licensee to retrieve the referenced document and locate the commitment with relative ease. However, as 1 illustrated below, it is unnecessary to place the commitment in the context of an exchange of correspondence. A recent Region II Notice of Deviation was written as follows:
)
4 In a letter dated December 30, 1981, NRC Region II issued a Notice of Violation to the Georgia Power Company. The Notice identified a violation of
, Environmental Technical Specification 5.3.2.2, disclosed during NRC Inspection Nos. 50-321/81-24 and 50-366/81-24, for having failed to conduct audits of its analytical program. Georgia Pcwer Company responded to 7, the NRC citation in a letter dated December 30, 1981
) (sic), describing certain corrective and preventive 2 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
1
}
d q action taken or planned. The~following statement was-included in this letter: ; By April 1,=1982, Georgia _ Power Company will. _ develop a -program to provide' for annual QA audits- 1 of' contractor activities related to the environ- .I mental monitoring. Implementation ~of: this program ~l will begin.in April 1982. Contrary to . the above, asi of- December;6', 1982, thei licensee had not. developed ~ a' program _to provide' for. annual QA audits of.~ contractor activities related to the l environmental monitoring. ' l- The citation could have'been more simply stated thus: The licensee informed the NRC,,in its January 29,.1982; j l' response to a Notice - of. Violation ' dated December 30, a 1981, that a program would . be developed by? April 2,. ! 1982, to provide for , annual cudits of contractor. activities related to environmental' monitoring. l] Contrary to the above, by December 6, 1982, tbe:11censee. had not developed the program.
- ]
h (d) Confine the statement of commitment' to facts ;that are relevant to the charge being made against the' lice'nsee. In: - the following citation, the writer presented ' excessive facts
~
unrelated to his charge .He charged;the licensee with having- ' failed to maintain separation of .'certain - rooms in ' this citation Appendix M, Response M5.33 of the' Final" Safety Analysi's ^i Report stated that complete isolation of each core spray. room exists up to Elevation _20';'that-pipe chases exist between core spray and residual. heat removal (RHR) pump- i rooms, however, the. pipe chases are sealed to prevent-flooding; that .the RHR and high . pressure ' . coolant ,
. injection (HPCI) pump rooms are separated by walls from 1
-17' up to Elevation +5'; and that no single, postulated event could occur which_would compromise this mechanical '
separation. Water tight bulk head- doors -are provided 1 for t.ccess to the HPCI room for each.RHR room, j i Contrary to the above, on December 22-23, 1981, . during i power operation a pipe chase between the north ~ core
~
spray and north residual heat removal rooms was opened' to allow pumping water'from th.e north RHR sump to the-north core spray s' ump. Additionally, on December _28-30,- 1981, both' water tight doors to the HPCI toom were.open Q during rea'ctor operation. With' both . HPCI room doors .
, 3 .Rev. 0.- 4/17/84:
h ___-m___.____a __ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ ___m_______ _ mw_ _ ._-m_... . _ _ _ _ _ _ - + , . - _ a -. _~a- - + __. - _ - - _ . __m____m.-m.__m._m.___--m___-
,/~\ V open, common mode flooding could occur between the north RHR, HPCI, and south RHR rooms. The citation may be improved by a more direct approach: The licensee informed the NRC, in its FSAR, Appendix M, response M5.33, that no single postulated event could occur during power operations which would compromise mechanical separation of core spray rooms, residual heat "i removal (RHR) pump rooms, and high pressure coolant injection (HPCI) pump rooms. Contrary to the above, during power operations on December 22 and 23, 1981, a pipe chase between the north core spray room and the north RHR pump room was opened, thus . compromising mechanical separation of the rooms. Additionally, during power operations from December 28 to 30, 1981, both watertight doors to the HPCI pump room were open, allowing a common mode flooding path from the north RHR pump room, through the HPCI pump room, to the south RHR pump room. (e) The reader should not be obliged to wace through a morass of details to discover the essential commitment; nor she. d multiple commitments be cited. The following citation (]. illustrates this fault: In Tennessee Valley Authority's letters dated December 2, 1977, September 1, 1978, and a TVA/NRC meeting of August 24, 1978, TVA committed to conduct an inservice test program to test for boral corrosion behavior. Boral test specimens were to be installed in the Unit 3 spent fuel pool and periodically removed arid ' examined to check long-term corrosion characteristics of boral sandwiched between type 304 stainless steel. The commitment was summarized in the Safety Evaluation to Amendment 42 of the Unit I license. High density fuel storage racks containing boral were initially installed in September 1978, with ongoing installations in all three units' spent fuel pools continuing in phases to
'the present time.
Contrary to the above, no spent fuel pool boral corrosion test program has been commenced as of the date of this report. The revised citation is briefer and perfectly adequate: The licensee informed the NRC, in its December 2,1977 letter that it would conduct an inservice test program for boral corrosion behavior. (] 4 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
l I l i l p d Contrary to the above, by August 10, 1983, the licensee I had not conducted this program. { i (f) Avoid confusion by stating the commitment clearly. In the following illustrative citation, the writer implies, but does not state, that storage and preventive maintenance instructions are properly classified under " periodic inspection and tests." PSAR Section 1.8.6.(2) states that periodic inspection and tests at the site of the fire protection program will be prescribed by documented instructions, procedures, and drawings and will be accomplished in accordance with these documents. These instructions for the storage and preventative maintenance of the fire protection equipment are included in licensee's procedures PGD-001 ( AP-XIII-05), Material and Equipment Storage Requirements and PGD-002 ( AP-XIII-07), Materials Maintenance Requirements During Storage. Contrary to the above, on April 16, 1982, portions of the fire protection equipment were not stored and maintained in accordance with procedures PGD-001 and PGD-002. The following are examples of this p discrepancy: G (NOTE: Five examples were presented.) In the revised citation presented below, the writer identifies the procedures as inspection and test procedures by the phrase "Two of these procedures ...." The licensee informed the NRC, in its PSAR Section 1.8.6.(2), that fire protection inspections and tests would be accomplished in accordance with its j prescribed and documented procedures. Two of these i procedures are: (1) PGD-001 (AP-XIII-05), Material and i Equipment Storage Requirements, and (2) PGD-002 l
. (AP-XIII-07), Materials Maintenance Requirements l During Storage. 1 Contrary to the above, ... etc., as in the original citation.
(2) The Charge and Basis (a) The charge should state clearly that the licensee failed to meet its commitment to the NRC. The following citation violates this guidance: (
"j Attachment 1 of Duke Power Company, Oconee Nuclear Station commitment letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 5 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
V Commission dated December 27, 1978, states that the quantity of radioctive material in the Chemical-Treatment Ponds shall be limited so that, ~ for all isotopes identified, excluding noble gases, the sum of the ratios of activity (in curies) to the limits in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table II, Column 2, shall not exceed 1.7 x 105 Contrary to the above, on Unit 2 a maisr tube leak in the "B" Steam Generator occurred on September 18, 1981, during which approximately 65,000 gallons of primary reactor coolant water leaked into the secondary system. This incident resulted in cross contaminating the Condensate Polishing Demineralized System. During subsequent backwashes of the Condensate Den @eralizer Filters, radioactive powdex resin was transferred to the ; Chemical Treatment Pond #2 (CTP). The sum of the ratios I of activity to the limits in 10 CFR 20 for all isotopes identified through September 21, 1981, was 5.19 x 10'. The long dissertation about how the deviation came about obscures the charge. These details should be confined to the report. In the revised citation, the charge is simplified. The licensee informed the NRC, in its December 27, 1978 O letter thet it oule 14 4t the quent4tv of ree4eect4ve material in its Chemical Treatment Ponds so that for all isotopes identified, ev.cluding noble gases, the sum of the ratios of activity (in curies) to the limits in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table II, Column 2, would not exceed 1.7 x 105 Contrary to the above, between September 18 and 21,' 1981, the sum of the ratios of activity to the limits in 10 CFR 20 for all isotopes identified in Chemical Treatment Pond #2 exceeded the stated limit by a factor of three. (b) Do not make the charge controversial by extending it beyond the statement of commitment. In the following citation, the writer extended the control room commitment to include the upper equipment room. This may be noncontroversial as far as the inspector and the licensee are concerned but it causes a I third party to wonder if it is a valid citation. I Mississippi Power and Light Company letter AECri-82/304, dated July 6, 1982, in response to a Notice of Violation stated that all control room cabinets would be locked and access controlled by the shift supervisor /superin-tendent. (3 L/ 6 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84 l i J
b Contrary to the above, on November 21, 1982, approximately 30 panels in the control room and upper equipmeat room were not locked and not attended. The citation could have been improved by changing the change to read, "... in the control room and upper equipment room (an integral part of the control room) were not locked and not attended." (c) Match the charge to the commitment. In the following citation the licensee committed to writing a procedure, but he was charged with having failed to generate a procedure. Licensee Event Report 259/81-07 dated March 10, 1981, which reported an inoperable fire damper due to paint . buildup on broken fuse link, stated a procedure would be ! written for inspection and preventive maintenance on all ' fire dampers. Contrary to the above, as of September 3, 1982, no procedure had been generated to perform the inspection of fire dampers; however, the licensee has closed out - Licensee Event Report 259/81-07 as having been completed. O ce) use the past tense in a charge. violates this guidance: The following citation FSAR Section 9.3.1.4 states .that preoperational testing of the compressed air system is to be performed as prescribed in Regulatory Guide 1.80, Preoperational g Testing of Instrument Air Systems. Regulatory Guide 1.80 states that a loss of instrument air supply test 6e conducted on all branches of the system simultaneously, if practicable, or on the largest number of branches of the system that can be adequately managed. Contrary to the above, a loss of instrument air supply , , test is being conducted on each valve of the system individually per preoperational test TVA-278, Auxiliary _ Control Air System. The citation may be improved as follows: l The licensee informed the NRC, in its FSAR Section , 9.3.14, that it would conduct preoperational testing of l the compressed air system in accordance with Regulatory l Guide 1.80. Section of the Guide recommends that a loss of instrument air supply test be conducted on all branches of the system simultaneously, if practicable, p V i 7 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
l n : Q' or on the largest number of branches on the system that
\
can be adequately managed. ' Contrary to the above, the licensee did not conduct all aspects of its preoperational testing of the compressed ; air systems in accordance with the Guide. Its loss of l instrument air supply test, described in preoperational test TVA-27B, specified that the test be conducted individually on each valve of the system. (e) A qualification of a commitment should be addressed by a l direct statement rather than by implication. For example, in the following citation, it is implied but not stated that the j splicing crews were engaged in splicing reinforcing bars of l Category I structures. Paragraphs 3.8.1.2 and 3.8.1.2.3 of the PSAR state that Regulatory Guide 1.10 is to be used as the basis for the , making of mechanical (Cadweld) splices in reinforcing j bars of Category I concrete structures. Regulatory position C.4 of Regulatory Guide 1.10 requires that separate tensile test cycles be established for mechanical splices in horizontal, vertical, and diagonal ) bars for each bar size and for each splicing crew. l O l () Contrary to the above, separate tensile test cycles have not been established for each splicing crew. As revised, the citation corrects this fault. It also I deletes the phrase " . . . mechanical splices in horizontal, i vertical, and diagonal bars for each bar size ..., " since the phrase is unrelated to the charge. , The licensee informed the NRC, in paragraph 3.8.1.2.3 of its PSAR, that Regulatory Guide 1.10 would be followed in the making of mechanical (cadweld) splices in reinforcing bars of Category I structures. Position C.4 of the Guide requires separate tensile test cycles be
- established for each splicing crew.
Contrary to the above, separate tensile test cycles were not established for each splicing crew making mechanical splices in reinforcing bars of Category I concrete structures.
Enclosures:
Thirteen Recently Issued Deviations and Comments Thereon Q U 8 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
~
T^ .l l I l 1 l (V3 l Enclosure 1 4 Supplement 4 ) RII Enforcement Manual Original Citation Licensee Event Report 259/82-42 dated July 14, 1982, which reported failure to test HPCI and RCIC vacuum relief valves as required by ASME Section XI, committed to issuing an update. report to the NRC by September 14, 1982. Contrary to the above, an updated report was not. issued until October 14, 1982, when identified by the resident inspector. . 1 Comments In this instance, since the point at issue is " failure to submit on updated report," the subject of the LER is immaterial. The LER number provides sufficient identificati)n of the commitment. The citation implies that if the resident inspector had not brought this p matter to the licensee's attention, the licensee might never have submitted d the update. If the inspector believed this to be so, he should have cited the licensee for having failed to follow its tracking procedures. Revised Citation-The licensee informed the NRC, in Licensee Event Report 259/82-42, that an. updated report would be submitted to the NRC by September 14, 1982. . l Contrary to the above, an updated report to the NRC was not issued until l October 14, 1982. : O
L I O Enclosure 2-l J
~ Supplement 4 RII Enforcement Manual-Original Citation '
1' Paragraph 13.2.1.2.10.d of the Final Safety Analysis Report states that the Shif t Technical Advisor Training Program will include, four weeks training -in Administrative Controls. j Contrary to the above, five _ days -of Administrative Controls training ' was conducted for personnel presently certified as-shift technical advisors. Revised Citation-The licensee informed the NRC, in FSAR paragraph 13.2.1.2.10.'
. d , that the Shift '
Technical Advisor Training Program. would include four weeks of training in Administrative Controls. Contrary to the above, personnel presently certified as shift technical advisors were given only five days of training in Administrative Controls. O A i t 1 O l
\
i Enclosure 3 Supplement 4 RII Enforcement Manual Original Citation Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) section 7.1.2.2.3 specifies _that the total 1 worst case error produced in the reactor outlet temperature trip channel, which includes sensor, processing equipment and trip bistable errors, will not exceed 9 1.0 F. Contrary to the above, the procedure' used to calibrate the reactor outlet temperature trip channel allows acceptance of a total error of 23.065*F. .This , I
- total includes a sensor error of 20.065*F, a process error of 22.5*F, : and a bistable error of 0.5 F. In addition, the 13.065*F does not include the read-ability error of the signal converter meter used to calibrate the process equipment.
Comments It is unlikely that the total error is simply the sum of the component. , i errors. The inspector would have been on firmer ground if he had stated that given a process error of 2.5*F, the total error must exceed 1.0 F. rh Revised Citation The licensee informed the NRC, in its FSAR section 7.1.2.2.3, that the total worst-case error produced in the reactor outlet temperature - trip channel (including sensor, processing equipment, and trip bistable errors) _ would not exceed 1.0*F. Contrary to the above, the procedure for calibrating the reactor outlet tempera-ture trip channel accepted a processing equipment error of 2.S*F. Given an error of this m.gnitude, the total error would exceed 1.0 F. , 1 i l O 1 C--_________.___._______1_ _ _
i I i i
)
O Enclosure 4 l Supplement 4 l RII Enforcement Manual i
'l l
1 Original Citation l l Paragraph 14.2.1 of the Final Safety Analysis Report states that assumptions used for a fuel handling accident in the spent fuel pit are conservative because the auxilitry building doors are closed during movement of spent fuel. Contrary to the- above, during fuel handling operations on No; ember 17, 1981, doors which lead from the spent fuel pit directly to the outside atmosphere were .] propped open.
'l Comments j Charge a licensee directly, using the converse of his commitment. In this I case, the licensee stated that the doors would be closed during movement of I' spent fuel; so, the charge should be that the doors were open during move-ment of spent fuel rather than "during fuel handling operations".
l Revised Citation The licensee informed the NRC, in paragraph 14.2.1 of it's FSAR, that the '4 auxiliary building doors would be closed during movement'of spent fuel. Contrary to the above, during the movement of spent fuel on November 17, 1981, , the auxiliary buil&,9 doors were open.
, ]
l l l 1 b V
O 1 Enclosure 5 Supplement 4 R I RII Enforcement Manual Original Citation (1) The Browns Ferry Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), Section:7.18.2, states , that the backup control system shall be designed to: l l "Have safety wires on the transfer switches that break whenever the switches
- ' are turned from their normal position."
Contrary to the above, the inspector noted that no safety wires t are' installed on the backup control system transfer switches for any. unit. I (2) The Browns Ferry FSAR, Section 7.18.6, states that the backup control center operability will be tested once per operating cycle. Contrary to the above, no operability test had been approved or ' conducted to date. This item is applicable to all units. O Comments Do not enclose the deviation numbers in parenthesis. The FSAR need not be quoted; but,.if it is, it should be quoted thus:
. ..shall be designed to "have safety wires on the transfer switches.
that break whenever the switches are turned from their normal position." The rule of thumb is: Incorporate quotations of five lines or fewer'into' the text, enclosing them in quotation marks. Set off quotation longer than five lines; do not enclose them in quotation marks. Do not switch tenses; state ".. . the inspector noted that no safety. wires. were installed..." The licensee should not be charged with the fact that the inspector noted . l that no safety wires were installed, but simply with the fact.that the' wires ! 1 were not. installed. He has no control over what the inspector noted; if he j' did, the inspector would note very little. The deviation was probably issued 20-30 days af ter completion of the ' l inspection. It is possible, and even likely, that- the licensee tested the backup control center operability after the exit interview and before he received the Notice. Therefore, the second deviation as written may not be true. It should have been phrased thus: " Contrary to-the above, by July 25, 1983, no operability test had been conducted."
i l O l Enclosure 6 , Supplement 4 J RII Enforcement Manual ! I l Original Citation : The Spent Fuel Pit Cooling System preoperational test listed in FSAR, table 14.2-1 states that drainage. of the transfer canal ~ to the Chemical and Volume Control System (CVCS) holdup tanks and refilling of the canal from the hold up tanks is- J l to be demonstrated. . Contrary to the above, the transfer canal was not drained to the CVCS holdup tanks and refilled during conduct of the three preoperational tests for the Spent Fuel Pit Cooling System. Comments This is a weak citation because the licensee commitment makes no reference to time. The citation implies,'not unreasonably, that the demonstration 1 i should have been conducted before completion of the third preoperational
~
test of the Spent Fuel Pit Cooling System. However, a recalcitrant licensee
"'S"' a"' "' " '"c" '" ' ""*a "-
O O : 1
__.._.m___________
O Enclosure 7 Supplement 4 RII Enforcement Manual Original . Citation Tennessee Valley Authority's letter dated November 27, 1981, in response to R. C. Lewis' letter. dated October. 30, 1981, which transmitted Inspection Report 50-259/260/296/81-28, stated that, in regard to Appendix A. Violation B, an inspection of residual heat removal serv. ice water air vacuum valves would. be conducted every operating cycle. Contrary to the above, a review of ~ records and discussion with plant staff ;
~
l indicated no inspection was conducted during the Unit 2 operating cycle ' completed-on March 20, 1983. . Comments Identify the licensee commitment exactly but briefly.
~
- It is unnecessary to state in the citation how the NRC became aware of the deviation; this information should be provided in the report.
Revised Citation The licensee informed the NRC, in a November 27, 1981 response to Notice of-Violation dated October 30, 1981, that an inspection of residual heat removal service water air vacuum valves would be conducted.during every operating cycle. Contrary to the above, no inspection of these valves was conducted during the Unit 2 operating cycle completed March 20, 1983. e LO 1 L________=_____.
O Enclosure 8 Supplement 4 RII Enforcement Manual Original Citation Mississippi Power and Light Company letter AECM B3/0013 dated January 6,1982, and supplemental letter AECM 83/0092 dated February 8,1983, stated that plant administrative procedure 01-S-06-1 would be revised by March 10, 1983 to define j what constitutes safety-related equipment and components. ' Contrary to the above, on June 13, 1983, this revision had not been issued. Comments It is unnecessary to identify duplicate commitments. Since the licensee committed to revising the procedure, he should not be charged with having failed to issue it. Revised Citation O The licensee informed the NRC, in its February 8,1983 letter (AECM 83/0092),
, that plant administrative procedure 01-5-06-1 would be revised by March 10, 1983 to define safety-related equipment and components.
Contrary to the above, by June 13, 1983, the procedure had not been revised. I
.E .
l LO i
1 1 I l l
\ l v
Enclosure 9 Supplement 4 i RII Enforcement Manual 1 i Original Citation I i CP&L letter dated December 31, 1979, to the NRC documenting licensee actions l taken in response to NUREG-0578 and NUREG-0737, stated that the three noble gas . effluent radiation monitors installed in shielded containers on the plant stack I and turbine building vents would be calibrated quarterly in accordance with the j manufacturers recommendations. ] l Contrary to the above, on February 9,1982, the three gas radiation monitors had I not been calibrated since April 1981. Comments This is not a deviation; it is a violation. Responses to NUREG 0737 were j imposed by an order and are, therefore, legally binding requirements. l
) <~ 1 \~) ^
l l O
~.
O Enclosure 10 Supplement 4 RII Enforcement Manual Original Citation In the licensee's letter to the Director, NRC Region II, dated April 29, 1982, l the licensee reported in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e), that the licensee would , ! take corrective actions on NCR M78-5E that other course descriptions would be developed and presented to the appropriate personnel by December 31, 1982. l l l l Contrary to the above, the other course descriptions have not been developed and l presented by December 31, 1982, and the licensee has failed to request the NRC , for approval of an extension of the time to complete the work committed. I Comments
* "In the licensee's letter... the licensee reported. . . that the licensee would..."- too many licensees.
Since the licensee is charged with having failed to present certain l O l instructions and not with having failed to "take corrective . actions on NCR 78-5E", it is confusing to include the latter phrase in the commitment-paragraph. j The licensee's failure to request an extension is irrelevant to the charge. j If the writer insisted upon addressing the extension, it might be handled as follows: I Contrary to the above, the licensee did not meet the December 31, 1982 commitment nor did he ask for an extension of time to complete the work. The involved personnel had not been trained by June 3, 1983. Revised Citation In accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55(e), the licensee reported to l the Director of . NRC Region II, in a letter dated April 29, 1982,- that , by December 31, 1982, certain instructional courses would be developed and presented to appropriate personnel. Contrary to the above, by June 3,1983, these courses had not been developed or presented. l O 1 l
1 O Enclosure'll Supplement 4 i RII Enforcement Manual Original Citation
~
I A. The FP&L letter L-81-382, dated September 4, 1981, in an attachment, commits to a program of crane inspection, testing and maintenance satisfying the i requirements of ANSI B30.2-1976. j Contrary to the above procedure, MP16701.1 describes rope inspection in a single line which does not implement the detailed inspection points or rejection criteria given in several paragraphs of the standard. No procedure implements the visual and physical measurements of hook conditions. required during frequent inspections under ANSI B30.2. B. Generic Letter 81-07 required that lit:ensees in responding to NUREG-0612 l describe all special lifting devices and operate, inspect and maintain them. 1 in accordance with ANSI N14.6-1978. 'j j i Contrary to the above, the licensee did not describe the lifting yoke for ' the spent fuel cask in its responses to the generic letter. Also, the yoke does not meet the standard requirements in that the load limit is not : (' ~ - clearly marked on the yoke. 4 l l Comments-A 4 i State clearly, in the first sentence of tne charge . paragraph, that the ' licensee did not meet the commitment to the NRC,. then substantiate the i charge. 1 l Change " contrary to the above procedure, ... " to " Contrary to the above, procedure...".
. Revised Citation ii The licensee informed the NRC, in a September 4,1981 letter (L-81-382), that inspection, testing, and maintenance of cranes would be accomplished in accordance with the specifications of ANSI B30.2-1976.
l Contrary to the above, prior to April 28, 1983, the procedure for inspection and testing crane ropes and hooks did not address many specifications of ANSI' B30.2-1976. For example, the standard presents a comprehensive description of rope inspection, including detailed inspection points and rejection criteria ~, but the licensee procedure covers rope inspection in a one-line entry. Again, the i Ticensee had no procedure for implementing visual and physical measurement of O moo' coaeit4oas euria9 the frequeat 1 aspect 4oas specif 4ed 4a the it ad re. l I
21 O Enclosure 11 (page-2) ! Supplement 4 j RII Enforcement' Manual'
-l Comments-B !
If the licensee, "in the response to This is not a valid citation. NUREG-0612, had agreed to operate, inspect, and maintain.all.special lifting devices in.accordance with the standard, he could have been validly charged j
.j with.not having done 50.
l a l i i O i 4 O. i-4 _-._._.___________-__m_m
I O ! Enclosure 12-Supplement 4 RII Enforcement Manual Original Citation-Section 6.2 of ANSI N509-1980, " Nuclear Power Plant ' Air ' Cleaning' Units and Components", provides the accepted industry standard .for ~ storage of HEPA and charcoal filters and states that HEPA filters must be stacked no more than' three cartons high unless intermediate bracing or flooring is provided to prevent the weight of the upper tier from bearing on the. lower tier. Contrary to the above, on December 15, approximately 240 HEPA filters we're - stacked five cartons high with obvious damage to lower tier cartons. No' inter- ..l mediate bracing or flooring was provided. A similar deviation was brought to j your. attention during Region II inspection 50-335/78-10'in April 1978. ' Comments This is an example of a citation that should be discussed with the. Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordinator staff since the licensee'had not-documented its commitment to conform to ANSI N509-1980. Although the similar deviation was brought .to the licensee's attention , during 50-335/78-10, the citation would have been improved by stating, "The oeviation is similar to one cited in Notice of Deviation. dated April- , i 1978". The licensee is formally notified of a deviation ,by a Noticecof I Deviation; an exit interview notification is informal and tentative. O
f *e V Enclesure 13 Supplement 4 RII Enforcement Manual Original Citation A. In response to a Region II letter dated May 30, 1982, the licensee committed in its letter dated June 25, 1982, to corrective action such that safety-related cables would be 100 percent inspected by signal tracing and relevant procedures would be revised to implement the requirement. Contrary to the above, the licensee issued Revision 14 to WBNP-QCP-3.05, on July 19, 1982, abrogating the requirement for 100 percent- inspection by signal tracing of sefety-related cables. ! 8. In the licensee's letter to the Director, NRC Region II, dated January 26, 1982, the licensee reported in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e), that the licensee would take corrective actions such that tamper-proof paint would be applied to junction boxes, condb lets, or other equipment access covers. l Contrary to the above, on July 19, 1982, the licensee made a general revision of procedures to exclude the requirement for application of () tamperproof paint to junction boxes, condulets, and other equipment access covers. Comment-A Identify the licensee commitment as a response to an NOV. Avoid cumbersome phrases such as, "the licensee committed.. . to correcti've action such that"; simply say, "the licensee stated". l Revised Citation-A The licensee stated, in a June 25, 1982 response to Notice of Violation dated May 30, 1982, that safety-related cables would be 100 percent inspected by signal tracing and relevant procedures would be revised to implement the requirement. l Contrary to the above, on July 19, 1982, the licensee revi sed WBNP-QCP-3.05 (Revision 14) removing (or excluding) the requirement for 100 percent inspection of safety-related cables by signal tracing. Comments-B g~~,
'"In the licensee's letter. . . the licensee reported... that the licensee
(_/ would take...". That's a lot of licensee.
l l l r
.td Enclosure 13 (page 2)
Supplement 4 RII Enforcement Manual-
- If the requirements addressed in these citations .were simply eliminated in -i J
the licensee's general revision of procedures, the charges should use the word " removed." On the other hand, if the revision explicitly addressed these requirements by such a statement as, "This requirement is no longer
. applicable", then the word " abrogate" or " exclude" would be appropriate, j Revised Citation-8 In accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55(e), the licensee reported to the Director of NRC Region II, in a letter dated January 26, 1982, that tamper-proof paint would be' applied to junction boxes, condulets, and other equipment access covers. l Contrary to the above, in a July 19, 1982 general ' revision of procedures., the licensee removed (or excluded) the requirement for tamper proof painting of.
junction boxes, condulets, and other equipment access covers. I l C) . l l l t A' l 1
l () USNRC REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL ; i SUPPLEMENT 5 l NONSTANDARD ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LETTERS I l I
- 1. Introduction Regional Office Instruction No. 0913, Standard Format for Acknowledgement Letter, specifies a standard format for letters acknowledging licensee responses to routine Notices of Violation and Deviation when (1) the licensee admitted the violation or deviation, (2) his response was satisfactory, and
! (3) he did not challenge the assigned severity level or other aspects of the l Notice. 1 Under less usual conditions, the standard letter requires modification to l address a licensee's objection to one or more positions taken by the NRC. ! The variety of objections expressed by licensees, as revealed in a survey of 30-40 letters, indicate the futility of classifying licensee responses in exact categories and providing a standard acknowledgement text for each j response. However, the writer may find that the general guidance presented i in this Supplement and the sample acknowledgement letters shown in the j enclosures will assist him in structuring his letter to address particular j l points raised by a licensee. The guidance and sample letters present and l (] illustrate the style and tone preferred by Region II management. m j The supplement provides guidance only. A licensee's objection must be ' carefully and exactly answered - by boiler plate sentences, if such sentences hit the nail squarely on the head, or by hand-crafted sentences, if they meet the objection more precisely. i
- 2. Prevention of Denials .
In many instances, an inspector may forestall a denial or objection by competent inspection technique or by careful wording of a citation. During the inspection, a competent inspector will " nail down" a violation with ample and irrefutable facts before leaving the area of corcern. He will notify the licensee promptly of his findings so that the licensee may present a rebuttal (if any) at or before the exit interview. At the exit interview, he will present clear and precise statements of the applicable I regulatory requirements, the charge, and his supporting facts.
- 3. Informal Handling of an Unsatisfactory Response Upon receipt of a response that is found to be unsatisfactory, the l responsible inspector should present to his Section Chief an evaluation of the response and a statement of what further commitments will be required from the licensee. The Section Chief should telephone the licensee and request a supplementary response that will meet the requirements of g 10 CFR 2.201; specifically, one containing the missing commitments.
O Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
l j
- 4. General Guidance
- a. To the extent that it is appropriate, use the boiler plate sentences given in ROI 0913.
- b. Even though the licensee denies a violation, his response still meets 1 the first requirement .of 10 CFR 2.201 (i.e. , admission of cenial of the
)
alleged violation). Therefore, the use the boiler plate sentence, "We have evaluated your response and found that it meets. the requirements , of 10 CFR 2.201," is appropriate in acknowledging a denial. The text l should . continue with a statement of our position.with respect to the denial.
- c. The foregoing boiler plate sentence may be modified to exclude unacceptable corrective action as shown in the following example: "We have evaluated your response with respect to Violations 2 and 3 and.
found that it meets the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201." -The paragraph should be continued: "We will' examine the implementation of your actions to correct these violations lduring future inspections." -In the next paragraph the writer should address Violation 1.
- d. Noncontroversial matters should be addressed in -the first paragraph, leaving the remainder of the letter focused on NRC's position with regard to matters in controversy and such further action (if any) as we expect from the licensee,
- e. If we accept a licensee denial or other contrary position, our accept-ance should be briefly stated without explanation.
- f. If we do not accept a licensee denial or other contrary' position'and the reasons for nonacceptance may be briefly and adequately' stated, our rebuttal should be stated in the letter; otherwise, the -letter shoul.d refer to an enclosure entitled, " Staff Assessment of Licensee l Response."
1
Enclosures:
Fourteen Acknowledgement Letters with Revisions l I O 2 Rev. 0 - 4/17/84
'l Enclosure 1 Supplement 5 :
RII Enforcement Manual ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT
'l This refers to your letter dated September 9, 1983, which provided a supplemental response to our Notice of Violation transmitted to you on February 11, 1983.
Your previous response dated March 11, 1983, was reviewed .and addressed by our letter of August 18, 1983. With regard to Violation A, we have reviewed your clarification of why'you feel' that this violation should be classified as licensee identified and that 'a citation is inappropriate. This additional information provides a basis for.us to conclude-that the previous audits by your staff and reviews by your. consultant. could.not have reasonably been expected to uncover the deficiency earlier than the time it was found by your staff on December .12,1983.- In : addition, the information you provided to explain why you feel. that the root cause of- two substantially from previous violations .(Report 81-19 and 82-21) differ Violation A is acceptable. We also note that you have undertaken an extensive effort to review the, technical )i adequacy of all surveillance procedures. Therefore, we conclude that Violation A meets the test for self-identification. The citation for Violation.A is O withdrawn. With regard to Violation B, we have evaluated your response and found that it. meets the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. We will examine the implementation of your corrective actions during future inspections. -l 4
-We appreciate your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely, REVISED TEXT , Thank you for your supplemental response to our Notice of Violation _ issued on ) February 11, 1983 concerning licensed activities conducted at your i facility. We have evaluated this response and your March 11, 1983 response and found that they meet the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. -We will examine the implementation of your actions to correct Violation B during future inspections. With regard to Violation A, we agree with your position and have deleted the violation from our records. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. s4ac reiv. O
Enclosure 2 O > Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT f Thank you for your response of September 2 and 16, .1983, to our Notice of Violation issued on August 5,1983, concerning activities , conducted under NRC Operating License No. OPR-72. We have evaluated your response and found that it-meets the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. We will examine the3 implementation of your corrective actions during future inspections. While your specific responses to the two violations are~ acceptable,lthe request; j made in your September 16, 1983 forwarding letter, to combine - the. violations is ' denied. You suggest that two violations;ure not Narranted,-since the similarity of these violations would indicate that they should be considered asLtwofexamples of one violation. The NRC Enforcement Policy, 10 CFR 2,. Appendix C,- in .! Section B, Civil Penalty, discusses the philosopher of ^ combining violations. } Although this discussion concerns.itself with theiassessment'of civil-penalties, q the principles described therein may be reasonably extended to the combination.or evaluation of violations considered by this letter. The. policy states that-if an evaluation of multiple violations shows that more than ones fundamental problem is, ., involved, each of which, if viewed independently, could(lead to civil, penahy - action by itself, then separate civil penalties.may be~ assessed for each"such-i
]
k fundamental problem. It is clear that the causes of the two violations are 'not similar. ..The two. events which led to the violations occurred approximately eighteen months apart. Violation A deals with f ailure to meet 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, requirements with regard to local leak rate testing of containment isolation valves. .. ' Violation B deals with failure to identify the need to make' a prompt report and 'a-written followup when a procedural inadequacy. is discovered. In"this case,'the l FPC Local Leak Rate report identified certain containment isolation valves that t were tested incorrectly. .Yet, a prompt report was not filed in accordance with Technical Specification 6.9.1.8.f. yj, U b, l REVISED TEXT I
,; l Thank you for your responses of September 2 'and 16, 1983 to our Notice off W Violation issued on August 5,1983 concerning licensed activities conducted at j
- . your facility. We have evaluated your responses and found that they meet
! the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. We will examine the implementation. of your corrective actions during future inspections. After careful consideration of the bases 'for your_ request that the two violations c be combined as examples of a single violation, we have concluded, for the reasons , presented in the enclosure to this letter, that the violations should remain as- cj l !. presented in the Notice of Violation. , j r I,
'h I U--__.____________._____.__'_________..
I () ' Wriclosure 2 (page 2) Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. )
'bincerely, I'
Enclosure:
Staff Assessment of Licensee i
Response
l Note: To avoid controversy about the strength or weakness of the position taken i by the Region in any one instance, enclosures to the revised letters are not l presented in this Supplement. 1 v l i i l 1+ 1 s i l l 1 i i 73 ; V i 1
- _ _ _ _ . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ i
l l saciosure 3 O Supplement 5 ,
.RII Enforcement Manual ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT Thank you for your supplemental response of December 9,1983, to our Notice of Deviation issued on August 27, 1982, concerning activities conducted under NRC Based .on the telephone Construction Permit Nos. CPPR-91 and- CPPR-92.H. J. Fisher of your staff and -
i conversation of December 27, 1983, betwee- i. Mr. T. E. Conlon of .this of fice, it is our understanding that TVA's quality l assurance. program procedures are to .be revised to require documentation . of the construction inspection and tests conducted on the fire protection systems. The j3 revision to Procedure WBN-QCI 1.39, Fire Protection Quality Assurance Program, will require documentation of the independent verification inspections and tests which are to be conducted by representatives of the responsible engineering. unit. Attachments J and K to Procedure WBN-QCI 1.39 are to be revised to document the electrical overload protection and splicing inspections and Attachment J is to .) d provide documentation of the internal wiring inspection. . We will examine the implementation of your corrective actions during future inspections. l i We appreciate your cooperation in this matter, 1 O REVISED TEXT' Thank you for your December 9,1983 response supplementing your (date) response to our Notice of Deviation issued on August 27, 1982 concerning -licensed activities conducted at your facility. We have evaluated your responses and the commitment described below and found that they constitute a satisfactory 1 response. We will examine the implementation of your corrective actions' during' future inspections. Based on a telephone conversation on December 27, .1983, between .your Mr. H. J. Fisher and Mr. T. E. Conlon of this office, it. is our understanding that the following actions will be accomplished by (date): TVA's quality assurance program procedures will be revised to require. j documentation of construction inspections. and tests conducted on fire protection systems; Procedure WBN-QCI 1.39 (Fire Protection Quality Assurance Program).will be revised to require documentation of independent verification inspections ~and tests conducted by representatives'of the responsible. engineering unit; Attachments J and K to WBN-QCI 1.39 will be revised to~ require documentation l of electrical overload protection and splicing inspections; and O Attachment J to wen-QC1 1.39 .ill be rev4,ed to require docum.ntation of internal wiring inspections. l w____________-________
I i I. . f '
. "l 'e,
~s
.l. -
s .s.' O' - Enciosure 3-(pase 2) Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual If your understanding of our December 27, 1983 discussion is'different from that. stated above, please inform this office promptly. We appreciate you cooperation..in this matter. Sincerely, l
+ J. , "
/
U] - O
.l
) !
l
.i s
s 1 !O l l
3 Enclosure 4 (V Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual , ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT .' This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter of March 14, 1983, informing us of steps you have taken .to correct the violation concern;ng activities under NRC License No. 52-19377-01 brought to your attention in our letter of February 23, i
)
1983. Your letter stated the reason for the violation was due to excessive use of your equipment. However, based on known exposure rates exhibited by this type of equipment, it is unlikely that excessive usage would cause an exposure of the magnitude recorded by your film badge. The high exposure more likely resulted i from either mishandling of the equipment or improper use of the film badge. In response to this letter, please advise us if you have investigated the possibility of mishandling or improper use and if so, what results were obtained. l Also, it appears that your license should be issued to your employer, even though I they may have previously directed you to apply for and maintain an NRC license. l If you are an " independent contractor" and not an " employee," then the license f3 will remain in your name, otherwise we will unilatercily act to reissue the l
'V license in the name of your empicyer, with you as the authorized user. Please clarify this matter in your response to this letter.
Should you have any questions concerning this letter, we will be glad to discuss them with you. Sincerely, REVISED TEXT Thank you for your response of March 14, 1983 to our Notice of Violation issued on February 23, 1983 concerning licensed activities conducted at your facility. We have evaluated your response and found that it does not meet the g requirements of 10 CFR 2.201 for the reasons presented in the enclosure to this letter. In accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201, please reevaluate the reason for the violation to determine if it may have resulted from mishandling the equipment or misust of the film badge. Please submit the results of your evaluation to this office within 30 days of the date of this letter. Also, in your response to this letter, please inform us whether you are an
" independent contractor" or an " employee." If you are an employee, we will 7,
j reissue the license in the name of your employer with you as the authorized user.
- m. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ -
.j l
1 Enclosure 4 (page 2) !
-O . Supplement 5-RII Enforcement Manual The responses directed by this letter are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget issued under the Paperwork Reduction Act-of 1980, PL 96-511. {
t If you have any questions, concerning this matter, please contact us. f Sincerely,
Enclosure:
- l. Staff Assessment'of Licensee l Response l 1 I
i l O ; I l 1 1 > 1 1 t O :
i (')
'~
Enclosure 5 Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual 4 1 ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT l 1 Thank you for your response of October 7,1983, to our Notice of Violation issued on September 7, 1983, concerning activities conducted under NRC Construction Permit Nos. CPPR-116 and CPPR-117. i We have reviewed your response to Violation A and have concluded, for the reasons l presented in the enclosure to this letter, that the violation occurred as stated l in 'the Notice of Violation. Therefore, in accordance with the- requirements of 10 CFR 2.201, and within 30 days of the date of this letter, please resubmit your response to the Notice. We have examined your response to Violation B and found that it meets the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. We will examine the implementation of your corrective actions during future inspections. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter, i Sincerely, j > O(_/ REVISED TEXT Thank you for your response of October 7,1983 to our Notice of Violation issued on September 7, 1983 concerning licensed activities conducted at your facility. We have examined your response and found that it meets the' requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. We will examine the implementation of your actions to correct Violation B during future inspections. After careful consideration of the bases for your denial of Violation A, we have concluded, for the reasons presented in the enclosure to the letter, that the violation occurred as stated in the Notice of Violation. Therefore, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.201(a), please submit to this office within 30 days of the date of this letter a written statement describing steps which have been taken to correct Violation A and the results achieved, corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations, and the date when full compliance will be achieved. The response directed by this letter is not subject to the clearance procedure of the Office of Management and Budget issued under the Paperwork Reduction Act, PL 96-511.
/~T U
O Enclosure 5 (page 2) Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely,
Enclosure:
Staff Assessment of Licensee
Response
d
O Enclosure 6 Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT Thank you for your response of September 30, 1983, to our Notice of Violation issued on August 31, 1983, concerning activities conducted under NRC Construction Permit Nos. CPPR-108 and CPPR-109. We have evaluated your response and found that it meets the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. We have elected to withdraw the violation and correct our records accordingly, but not for the reasons cited in your response. The violation is withdrawn. We have subsequently learned that the area in question has been removed to allow for the installation of a penetration assembly; therefore, there is no longer a safety concern about the uninspected heat affected zone (HAZ). This coupled with the fact that it took a particular repair sequence to cause the thickness conditions which resulted in the unacceptable radiograph, gives us reasonable assurance that the finding was an isolated instance. About your response, - interpretations of the code by " Code Experts" make your (~3 response appear to set aside engineering reason when you consider that, based on
\/ failure analysis experience, the technical world realizes that the heat affected After you have zone of a weld is the most critical area of the weldment.
received a response to your question regarding the extent of radiographic area coverage of welds from the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Committee for Section VIII, we would appreciate receiving a letter giving your reassessment of your technical position. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. , Sincerely, REVISED TEXT Thank you for your response of September 30, 1983 to our Notice of Violation issued on August 31, 1983 concerning licensed activities conducted at your facility. We have examined your response and found that it meets the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. For the reasons presented in the enclosure to this letter, we have deleted the violation from our records. Our decision was based on reasons other than those contained in your September 30, 1983 letter. () We would appreciate receiving a letter giving your reassessment of your technical position based on the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Committee response to your inquiry. f I 1 1
i e I. ' l' Enclosure 6 (page'2)l .i Supplement'5 1 RII Enforcement = Manual
% 8t We appreciate your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Enclosure:
Staff Assessment of.' Licensee
Response
-4 q
O i 1 1
)
4 J
& . k' I
.s O
a l Enclosure 7 Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual , ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT i
SUBJECT:
REPORT NOS. 50-390/83-32 ANO 50-391/83-21 This refers to our letter of November 7,1983, acknowledging receipt of your response dated October 24, 1983, to our Notice of Violation issued on September 22, 1983. In our November 7,1983 letter, we informed you that your response met the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. However, our letter did not address the portion of your response in which you disagreed with one of the findings identified in Inspection Report 50-390/83-38 and 50-391/83-27 as additional examples of the violation 50-390/83-32-01. As stated in our letter to you dated October 12, 1983, acknowledging receipt of your response to our Notice of Deviation issued in Inspection Report 50-390/83-26, the question of whether , changing the test method also changed the intent of preoperational test TVA-27B has been forwarded to NRR for evaluation. Pending the results of NRR's l evaluation, the additional example of violation 50-390/83-32-01 which you l di sagree wi ch, remains open as stated in Inspection Report 50-390/83-38 and 50-391/83-27. l !3 l () We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, l l REVISED TEXT l . l l
SUBJECT:
REPORT NOS: 50-390/83-26, . 50-390/83-32 AND 50-391/83-21 l 4 50-390/83-38 AND 50-391/83-27 This refers to your October 24, 1983 letter and our November 7,1983 response. In your October 24 . letter, you stated that your review of Change Notice 14 to procedure TVA-27B was proper in that the relevant change was not safety related. For this reason, you denied that your actions should be identified (as they were in NRC Inspection Report 50-390/83-38 and 50-391/83-27), as an additional example of Violation 50-390/83-32-01. The differences in our positions with regard to this matter are a continuation of l earlier discussions regarding the validity of a deviation relating to j l procedure TVA-27B disclosed during NRC Inspection 50-390/83-26 (see your letter l l dated September 22, 1983 and NRC response dated October 12, 1983). As we stated j l in our October 12 letter, we have referred this matter to NRR for further evalua- j l tion. Upon receipt of the evaluation, we will inform you of our position with ! (3 regard to identification of your review of Change Notice 14 as an additional
example of Violation 50-390/83-32-01.
I j i
I l l O emciosure 7 (,a,e 23 Supplement 5 l RII Enforcement Manual j l i We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. ! Sincerely, ( O l I I i O
l q i l C Enclosure 8 Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT
.l I
Thank you for your response of December 23, 1983, to our. Notice of Violation I 1983, issued on October 19, concerning activities conducted under NRC
. Construction Permit Nos. CPPR-91 and CPPR-92. We have evaluated your response and found that it meets the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. We concur with your i denial of items C and D of the Notice of Violation and will adjust our records l accordingly. We also agree with your. actions proposed for correcting problems t related to item C. These actions and your actions to correct items A and B will be examined during future. inspections.
We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. 1
?
Sincerely, REVISED TEXT th Thank you for your response of December 23,'1983 to our Notice of Violation i i issued on October 19, 1983 concerning licensed activities conducted at your facility. We have evaluated your response and found that it meets the l requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. We will examine the implementation:of your actions to correct Violations A and B during future inspections. After careful review of the bases for your denial of Violations C and D, we agree with your position and have deleted the violations from our records. We also 1 agree with your proposed actions for correcting problems related to Violation C 1 and will examine them during future inspections. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, l h l 1 l l
O Enclosure 9 Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT This is in response to your letters dated June 1 and 25,1982 in which you discussed certain violations brought to your attention in the Notice of Violation with our letter of April 20, 1982. Your actions to correct Violation A and to prevent its recurrence will be 1' examined during future inspec+1ons of your program. Your denials of Violations B and C have been evaluated by our staff as shown in the enclosure to this letter. For 'the reasons presented in the enclosure, we. l have concluded that Violation B should be withdrawn and designated an unresolved item pending further NRC inspection. However, we have also concluded that Violation C is valid as stated in the Notice of Violation enclosed with our j l letter of April 20, 1982. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 2.201, please submit ' to this office, within twenty days of the date of this letter, a written response including corrective steps which have been taken for Violation C, corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations, and the date when full compliance will be achieved.
/]
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(a), a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. The response directed by this letter is not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511. Should you have any questions concerning this letter, we will be glad to discuss them with you. Sincerely, REVISE 0 TEXT Thank you for your responses of June 1 and 25,1982 to our Notice of Violation issued on April 20, 1982 concerning licensed activities conducted at your facility. We have evaluated your responses and found that they meet the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. We will examine the implementation of your actions to correct Violation A during future' inspections. p After careful review of the bases for your denial of Violations B and C, we agree d with your position with respect to Violation B and have deleted it from our records as a violation; but, have designated it as an unresolved item pending further NRC inspection.
1 i l l l
.)
I
/ - Enclosure 9 (page 2) )
Supplement 5 1 RII Enforcement Manual j I With respect to Violation C, we have concluded, for the reasons presented in the I enclosure to this letter, that the violation or urred as stated in _ the Notice of Violation. Therefore, in accordance with 10 t' n 2.201(a), please submit to this ; office within 30 days of the date of this letter a written statement that, for i Violation C, describe the corrective steps which have been taken and the results ; achieved, the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations, i and the date when full compliance will be achieved. The response directed by this letter is not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget issued under the Paperwork Reduction Act of'1980, PL 96-511. i Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact us. l Sincerely,
Enclosure:
Staff Assessment of Licensee i Response ; l (_- l u i e O
i o I ("3 Enclosure 10 V Supplement 5 1 RII Enforcement Manual ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT Thank you for your supplemental response of September 7,1983, to our Notice of. Violation issued on March 21, 1983, concerning' activities conducted under NRC License Nos. DPR-33, DPR-52 and DpR-68. For Item A, your supplemental respo'nse ~ l reiterates your contention that there was no violation of 10. CFR 20 but provides l information regarding your corrective actions. We continue to regard your failure to evaluate. significant differences between TLD and pocket dosimeter . results as a violation of 30 CFR 20.201(b) for the reasons stated in our original inspection report and affirmed in our letter of August 2,1983. Your corrective i action commitments have been evaluated and found to meet the requirements of l 10 CFR 2.201. These actions will be examined during future inspections. ) i ! The information contained in your . letter regarding Item B - . (259, 260, 1 269/83-03-03) is not consistent with the direct observations of the inspector. Specifically, your response identifies the inspector' and the engineers in i locations other than those identified by the inspector. The inspector was j located such that if the engineers in question were within 5 feet of ' the instruments, they would have been in his field of view. We continue to believe the violation occurred as originally cited. Since your original and supplemental l 1 O responses associated with this denial do not address all the aspects of the - Notice of Violation as' required by 10 CFR 2.201, you should provide a' 1 supplemental response dealing with those items within thirty days of the date of this letter. j We want to assure you that your origina'l and supplemental responses, as well as the information provided by NRC inspectors, has been thoroughly reviewed by' senior Regional and Headquarters management. to ensure an independent anil objective evaluation of these matters has occurred. 1 We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. i Sincerely, 1 REVISED TEXT Thank you for your supplemental response of September 7,1983 to our Notice of Violation issued on March 21, 1983 concerning licensed activities conducted at ' your facility. We have evaluated your response to Violation A and found that it meets the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. We will examine the. implementation of your actions to correct Violation A during future inspections. O Senior Regional and Headquarters managers have given careful consideration to your original and supplerrental responses as well as the information provided'by
1 l l l I l I
-1 O Eaciosure to (nese 2)-
Supplement 5 i RII Enforcement Manual the NRC inspectors. We have concluded, for the reasons given in the enclosure to this letter, that the violation occurred as stated in the Notice of Violation. l Therefore, in accordance- with 10 CFR 2.201(a), please submit to this office l within 30 days of' the date of this letter a written statement that, for l Violation B, describes: (1) corrective steps which have been = taken and the I results achieved; (2) corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further j violations; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved. 1 The. response directed by this letters is not subject to the clearance procedure of the Office of Management and Budget issued under the Paperwork Reduction Act i of'1980, PL 96-511. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. ) Sincerely,
Enclosure:
Staff Assessment of Licensee Response O l e O
l l l l T'> kl Enclosure 11 Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT Thank you for your response of December 9,1983, to our Notice of Violation issued on November 9,1983, concerning activities conducted under NRC License [ Nos. OPR-33, DPR-52 and OPR-62. f In Item A of your response, you admitted the incident occurred as stated in our i Notice of Violation but because of extenuating circumstances, you requested us to reconsider issuance of the violation and the severity level. You identified the exemption provided by 10 CFR 20.203(f)(3)(iv) and your use of administrative exposure limits as providing justification for not labeling the 55-gallon drum. we In reviewing the regulations and the circumstances surrounding this event,While continue to believe the violation and severity level to be appropriate. the regulation does provide an exemption for not labeling containers, you failed to meet the requirements of having an individual in attendance at the location of As for the use of your the drum to prevent exposure to other individuals. administrative limits, we view those self-imposed limits as beneficial to you and a means of avoiding personnel overexposure due to unforeseen circumstances and we
<-)
(_, encourage their use. However, in this case, we feel their existence is not i relevant because you failed to meet the requirements to have an individual in attendance at the drum location, j l Your response further indicates that this event is considered to be random and that no further corrective steps are planned to preclude further violations. Inspection Report 259/83-25, 260/83-25 and 296/83-25 dated August 19, 1983, f I identified unlabeled 55 gallon drums containing licensed material outside the regulated area. Immediate action was taken to provide proper posting although inspection report 259/83-30, 260/83-30 and 296/83-30 dated October 3, 1983, identified the storage area of these drums as not being properly identified in accordance with 10 CFR 20.203(e). We, therefore, believe that this event is not random since similar events have been identified during recent prior inspections. Since your response does not adequately address further corrective actions as . required by 10 CFR 2.201, you should provide a supplemental response dealing with l this item within 30 days of the date of this letter. l l Regarding the other items contained in your responses, we have evaluated them and found that they meet the requirement of 10 CFR 2.201. We will examine the i I implementation of your corrective actions during future inspections. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. l Sincerely, ' (~T
\_)
l
O Enclosure 11 (page 2) Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual REVISED TEXT Thank you for your response of December 9,1983 to our Notice of Violation issued on November 9, 1983 concerning licensed activities conducted at your facility. We have evaluated your response and found that it meets the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201, except with regard to Violation A. We will examine the implementation of your actions to correct Violations 8 through F during future inspections. After careful consideration of your request that Violation A be withdrawn or its severity level modified, we have concluded, for the reasons presented in the enclosure to this letter, that the violation and assigned severity level should ! stand as stated in the Notice of Violation. Also for the reasons presented in the enclosure, we request that you submit to l l this office within 30 days of the date this letter a written statement describing corrective steps which will be taken to avoid violations similar to Violation A, and the date when full compliance will be achieved.
- i m
(_) The response directed by this letter is not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget issued under the Paperwork Reduction , Act of 1980, PL 96-511. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely,
Enclosure:
Staff Assessment of Licensee
Response
I I l ($) I n
Enclosure 12 Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT Thank you for your letter of June 27, 1983, informing us of steps yo'u have taken to correct Violations B and C concerning activities under NRC Construction Permit Nos. CPP-122 and CPPR-123 brought to your attention in our. letter of May 27, 1983. We will examine your corrective actions and plans concerning these items during subsequent inspections. With regard to Violation A, you provided the basis for your denial of the citation. Your response to NRR Generic Letter 81-01 on Regulatory Position C.6 states, "Our current program is in compliance." We disagree that TVA took exception to the education and experience requirements addressed in Regulatory Position C 6 even though your statement on . Regul atory Position .C.10 is also related to this subject. We acknowledge that Revision 4 of Bellefonte procedure BNP-QCP-10.29 (effective January 17, 1983) complies with the educational requirements stated in position C.6 of Regulatory Guide 1.58, Revision 1, and that it specifies minimum construction work time experience required for certification. However, Revision 3 to this procedure did not address any minimum education or work experience requirements necessary for inspector certification. O- Revision 3 (effective March 9, 1981 - January 16, 1983) was the controlling ' procedure at the time this problem was first identified by the Construction Appraisal Team during their inspection of Bellefonte Nuclear Plant conducted September - October 1982. Af ter careful consideration of ' the basis for your denial, we have concluded that the violation as stated in our. letter dated May 27, 1983, was a valid finding and therefore will not be withdrawn. It appears that the current Revision 4 to procedure BNP-QCP-10.29 meets the intent of your response (dated August 28, 1981) to NRR Generic Letter. 81-01 regarding education and experience requirements. Therefore, no further response to this matter is requested. Should you have any questions concerning this letter please contact us. j Sincerely, i i REVISED TEXT Thank you for your response of June 27, 1982 to our Notice of Violation issued on May 27,1983 concerning licensed activities conducted at your facility. We have evaluated your response and found it meets the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. We will examine the implementation of your corrective actions during future inspections. ] 1 I _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ i
O E"cio=#r 22 (nas 2) Supple:nent 5 RII Enforcement Manual l After careful consideration of the bases for your denial of Violation A, we have l concluded, for the reasons given in the enclosure to this letter, that 'the I violation occurred as stated in the Notice of Violation. i l ! We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. -] Sincerely, i l ' l James P. O'Reilly Regional Administrator
~
Enclosure:
Staff Assessment of Licensee Response i O { 4 I l e l l _l ' l O l u _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
O (_/ Enclosure 13-Supplement 5
.RII Enforcement Manual ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT Thank you for response of August 26, 1983,-to our Notice of Deviation issued on May 23, 1983, concerning activities conducted under NRC Construction Permit Nos. CPPR-122. and CPPR-123. We have evaluated your response and found that the-corrective action proposed for Deviation Items A .(438, 439/83-10-03), B.1.(b)
(438, 439/83-10-01) and C (438, 439/83-10-05) is satisfactory. We will examine the implementation of your corrective actions during future inspections. Your denial and comments on Deviation Items B.1;(a) and B.2.(a) (438,- 439/83-10-01) are being forwarded to NRR for evaluation. We will. advise you as to the results of this evaluation. Your response to Deviation Item B.2.(b) (438, 439/83-10-01) concerning the: supervision of the automatic sprinkler system piping is not acceptable. The requirement for air supervision of sprinkler system piping has previously been established with your staff for tie Watts Bar facility. . This~ information was. I forwarded to you by NRC's letter of - August 31, 1983, from Thomas M. - Novak, - regarding fire protection issues at Watts Bar. Therefore, the sprinkler-piping O at Beliefonte shouie be prov4eee w4th air superv4sion. be operational prior to fuel load for the applicable unit. Th4, supervision should - We appreciate your cooperation with us and if you have any questions concerning this letter, we will be glad to discuss them with you. Sincerely, REVISED TEXT Thank you for your response of August 26, 1983 to our Notice of Deviation issued' on May 23, 1983 concerning licensed activities conducted at your facility. We have evaluated your response and found that it is satisf actory. During future inspections, we will examine the implementation'of your actions to correct Deviations A, B.1.(b) and C. Your denial of Deviations B.1.(a) and B.2.(a) will be evaluated by NRR and you will be informed of the results. We have concluded that your denial of Deviation B.2.(b) is unacceptable for the l reasons stated in NRC's letter of August 31, 1983 from Thomes M. Novak. This ! letter,.regarding fire protection issues at Watts Bar, presented the NRC position . on air supervision of sprinkler system piping. k] This position is applicable to Bellefonte as well as Watts Bar. Therefore, air . supervision of sprinkler piping 1 i should be operational before fuel load for the applicable' unit.
~
____-__-_____ _ - _ A
1 s
'Q Esclosure 13 (,page 2) i SuppTement 5 RII Enforcement Manual Please submit to this office in writing, within 30 days of the' date of this letter, a description of corrective actions regarding Deviation B.2.(b), actions l
taken to avoid further deviations, and the dates when these actions will be
. completed.
The response requested by this letter is not subject to the cl_earance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget issued under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Comments . a T. Novak may present NIC's position with regard to a matter, but a'" requirement"- is imposed by a more formal mechanism, p' If air supervision of sprinkler system piping should be established at Watts Bar- ) and Bellefonte (two dissimilar units), why is the. matter not handled generically- ' throughout the U. S.? What in tarnation is " air supervision of sprinkler system piping"? i 4 O I _______m_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _
C (Q_/ Enclosure 14 Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TEXT l This refers to your letter dated March 11, 1983, in response to a Notice of , Violation sent to you by our letter dated February 11, 1983. In our letter of 1 April 13, 1983, we acknowledged receipt of your response and informed you that we g are evaluating the response for acceptability. We have evaluated your response j and do not agree with you that the issuance of these violations is inappropriate. i With regard tc "iolation A, we do not agree that this violation be classified as licensee identified and that a citation is not appropriate. As stated in the details of NRC Report 82-29, the deficiency was first identified by your own l Quality Programs audit on April 9, 1982. On April 15, 1982, your technical staff l issued and the Plant Review Committee (PRC) approved a change to procedure SP-355 l which added Technical Specification (TS) 4.3.2.1.1(5.a) and (5.d) to section 1.2. This change demonstrated that the staff and the PRC had performed a review and had presumed that these TS requirements were being accomplished while in fact l they had not been accomplished. When, on October 6, the TERA Corporation made a similar finding that TS requirements 4.3.2.1.1(5.a) and (5.d) were not covered by (7 SP-355, the staff responded that these requirements were addressed by procedure () sections 1.1 and 1.2. It appears that the staff had sufficient notification that a deficiency existed and that the staff did not perform an adequate technical review when the procedure change was made on April 15. Your response that the corrective actions for the previous two violations (Reports Ci-19 and 81-23) could not have prevented this deficiency is not" correct. These reports identified inadequate testing of TS mandated surveillance requirements. Your failure to identify the root cause of these violations (i.e., an inadequate review of all TS surveillance requirements) has resulted in this violation. We believe that to prevent further violations of this type an ambitious review of the technical adequacy of all your surveillance procedures as they relate to TS surveillance requirements will have to be undertaken. l We, therefore, conclude the issuance of a citation for Violation A is appropriate since enforcement policy does not permit credit for self-identified noncompliance when the corrective action is inadequate to prevent recurrence. With regard to Violation B, we do not concur with your response to this violation. You stated that the Operations Section Implementation Manual (OSIM) I does not require logging of " repeat routine items which have no safety significance or little operational importance." While we do not disagree with the intent of this statement, we cannot agree that entry into a Technical Specification (TS) action statement is a " routine" event that has "no safety (n) significance." Entry into TS action statements are significant safety events which must be logged to ensure that members of that shift and subsequent shifts are aware of plant status.
Enclosure 14 (page 2) Supplement 5 RII Enforcement Manual You further stated "that the Shift Supervisors Log is a redundant log of other operational logs" and that the Equipment Out-of-Service (EOS) Log indicated that the equipment required by Specification 3.1.2.1 was out-of-service. While the (EOS) log did indicate that. both BAST's were out of service, the log did not indicate that valves OHV-34 and DHV-35 were isolated, nor that the BWST was out of service; therefore this log, by itself, would not have alerted operators to the fact that they were in an Action Statement. l We do not agree with your position that the OSIM is not subject to audit. ' Regulatory Guide 1.33 requires an administrative procedure that delineates log entry practice. Your procedure AI-500 makes the following statement regarding log entries: "Two logs are to be kept: the Shift Supervisors' Log, a narrative I log of significant plant events; and the Operator's Log, a chronological account of plant manipulations." This statement, by itself,. provides insufficient direction for making log entries. Your procedure then goes on to say "Each shift will comply with log entry and review practices detailed in the OSIM." Since the .j OSIM becomes the document that provides the necessary direction for making log entries, it is considered to be an auditable and enforceable document under the 1 regulations. l Your letter of February 10, 1983, does not provide the information required by 10 CFR 2.201. Accordingly, please submit a written re'sponse to this office . within 20 days of your receipt of this letter which provides the information required by 10 CFR 2.201. Should you have any questions concerning this letter, we will be glad to discuss i them with you. . Sincerely, REVISED TEXT This refers to your March 11, 1983 response to our Notice of Viol _ation issued on February 11, 1983, (concerning licensed activities conducted at your facility) and our April 13, 1983 acknowledgement of your response.. Our evaluation, which was in progress on April 13, has since been completed and is enclosed with this letter. Af ter careful consideration of the bases for your denial of Violations A and B, we have concluded, for the reasons given in the enclosure, that the violations as stated in the Notice are valid (or did occur as stated in the Notice). O Q In accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201(a), please provide us, within 30 days of the date of this letter, with written statements of the actions you have taken or plan to take to correct and prevent recurrence of these violations and the date when full compliance will be achieved.
'O l
0 enciosure 14 (pase u Supplement 5 ; RII Enforcement Manual. -i The responses directed by this letter are not subject to the clearance procedures of this Office of Management and Budget issued under the Paperwork l Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511. 1 We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, l
Enclosure:
Staff Assessment of Licensee
Response
1 1 l l l i O l l0
- - - - - - -o
ll l USNRC REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL SUPPLEMENT 6 NRC ENFORCEMENT POLICY l Introduction This' double spaced copy of the NRC Enforcement Policy (published in the Federal I Register, March 8, 1984) is provided as reference for the technical- staff. Implementation-of enforcement actions should be'as follows: 1
. This policy (as opposed to the March 9,1982 Policy). l should be used for all violations occurring after i March 8, 1984.
. For violations occurring prior to March 8, 1984, the 1982 Policy should be used except in circumstances where the 1982 Policy is stricter than this Policy. LIn ,
such cases, the less strict Policy should be used. -
Enclosure:
Appendix ( - General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions O v l l I i i O Rev..0 - 4/17/84'.
Enclosure to Supplement 6, RIl Enforcement Manual APPENDIX C - GENERAL STATEMENT OF POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR NRC' ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
~1 The following statement of general policy and procedure explains the l enforcement policy and precedures of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and its staff in initiating enforcement actions, and of presiding officers, the I
Atomic Safety and Licensing-Appeal Boards, and the Commission in reviewing these actions. This statement is applicable to enforcement in matters j involving the public health and safety, the common defense and security, and- ) the environment.1 1 I 1 I. INTRODUCTION AND PURp0SE
]
l The purpose of the NRC enforcement program is to promote and. protect the. O radi logical health and safety of the public, including employees' health-' and safety, the common defense and security, and the environment by: $ I
. Ensuring compliance with NRC regulations and license conditions;
. Obtaining prompt correction of violations;
. Deterring future violations; and
. Encouraging improvement of licensee performance, and by example, that of' industry, including the prompt identification and reporting '
of potential safety problems. 1#A ntitrust enforcement matters will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. O 19
Ti
- f. . ,
{ 3 { Consistent with'.the purpose'of this: program, prompt!and vigorousL O.- enforcement'actionwillbetakenwhen[ dealing'with1icenseeswhodo-not'
' achieve the necessary meticulous attention.to detailland'the high' standard of compliance which the NRC expects of3 ts. licensees'. It is the Commission's intent that sanctions should be designsd'to-ensure that'a~ 'I l
licensee does not deliberately profit from violations of.NRC requirements. . , .1 q I
~
Each enforcement action is dependent on the circumstances of the caseband n 97 l requiresthe'exerciseofdiscretionafterconsiderationofLthesepdffeissN q
~,, % i and procedures. In no case, however, will licensees who'cannot achieve '
I and maintain adequate levels of protection'.be permitted'to conduct'li'- I 1 censed activities, i o
, 3,3 ', . L II. STATUTORY AUTHORITY.AND PROCEDURAL FRAMEWORK O A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY jom.,
s
.h A. N.
'n The NRC's enforcement jurisdiction-.is drawn-from the' Atomic Energy X1 .q Act of 1954, as amended, and the Energy Reorganization Act of'1974,- j as amended. 4S Section 161 of the Atomic Energy Act. authorizes NRC to-conduct -
inspections and investigations and to issue orders'as may be necessary or desirable to promote the common defense and security or to protect.hea'lth or to' minimize danger to life'or i
, property. Section 186 authorizes NRC to revoke licenses-under. i i
certain circumstances (e.g., for material' false' statements,.in.. " O : t x 4 r 20
-i
+.
> j f'
-i
,, response to conditions that would have warranted refusal of a-license V
on an original application, for a licensee's failure to build or operate a fa,cility in accordance alth the terms of the permit or license, and fy violation of a NRC regulation). Section-234 autho-7 rizes NRC to typose civil penalties not to exceed $100,000 per
,!, a violation per' cay for the violation of certain specified licensing provisions of'the'Nct,, rales, orders, and license terms implementing these provisions, and for violations for which licenses can be I revoked. In addition to the enumerated, provisions in section 234,.
sections 84 and 147 authorize the imposition of chil penalties for violations of regulationsLimplementing those provisions. Section 232 j 1 authorizes NRC to seek injunctive or other equitable relief for j i violation of regulatory requirements. ; f O 1 Section 206 of the Energy, Reorganization Act authorizes NRC to' impose l I civil penalties for knowing and cpnscious-failures to provide certain- ! ! safety information to the NRC. ' l 1 : . Chapter 18 of +he Atomic Energy Act provides for varying levels ~of-L criminal penalties (i .e. , monetary fines 'and imprisonment) for willful ' violations of the Act and regulations or orders issued under l Sections 65, 161(b), 161(i), or 161(o) of the Act. rSection-223 (< provides that criminal penalties may be imposed on certain individ-ualsemployedbyfirmsconstructingcesupplying$asiccomponentsof any utilization f acility if the' individual knowinsNv, and willfully violates NRC requirements such that a #asic component could be j significantly impaired. Section 235 provides that criminal penalties may be imposed on persons who interfere with inspctors. E 21
.] 4
< e
-~
Section 236 provides that criminal oenalties.may be imposed on persons
~ 'O who attempt to or caust sabotage at a nuclear. facility or to nuclear j fuel. Alleged or suspected. criminal violations of the Atomic Energy-Act are referred to the Department of Justice for appropriate action.
- 8. PROCEDURAL FRAMEWORK 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart B, of NRC's regulations sets forth the procedures the NRC uses in exercising its enforcement authority.
10 CFR 2.201 sets forth the procedures for issuing notices of violation. I The procedure to be used in assessing civil penalties is set forth in h 10 CFR 2.205. This regulation provides that the appropriate NRC Office Director initiates the civil penalty process by _ issuing a notice of violation and proposed imposition of 'a civil penalty. The licensee is provided an opportunity to-contest in writing the ! proposed imposition of a civil penalty. After evaluation of the-1 licensee's response, the Director may mitigate, remit, or impose the
~
civil penalty. An opportunity is provided for a hearing if a civil ( penalty is imposed. 1 The procedure for issuing an order to show cause M y,a license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked or why such other action should not be taken is set forth in 10 CFR 2~202.
. The mechanism for .,
modifying a license by order is set forth in 10 CFR 2.204. These tC sections of Part 2 provide an opportunity for a hearing to the affected licensee. However, the NRC is authorized to make orders 22 u---- - - - - - - - - . - -
1
];
l
'immediately effective if the public health, safety or interest so )
requires or, in the case of an order to show cause, if the alleged violation is willful. "- 4 1 1 i III. SEVERITY OF VIOLATIONS i l' ' 2 Regulatory requirements / have varying degrees of safety, safeguards', or environmental significance. Therefore, the relative importance ofseach l-violation must be identified as the first step in the enforcement process. j l Consequently, violations are categorized in terms of five levels of severity to show their relative importance within each of the following. eight activity areas: 1 Reactor Operations; ,
- )
l Facility Construction-;
.I Safeguards; i
Health Physics; i l; l- Transportation; - i 2/
- The term " requirement" as used in this policy means a legally binding .
I requirement such as a statute, regulation, license condition, technical specification, or order. 1 H O 23 - - - _ _ _ _ _ - m
Fuel Cycle and Materials Operations; O- ! Miscellaneous Matters; and Emergency Preparedness. Licensed activities not directly covered by one of the above listed areas, e.g., export license activities, will be placed in the' activity area most suitable in light of the'particular. violation involved. Within each activity area, Severity Level I has been assigned to violations that are , the most significant and Severity Level V violations are the leastL l significant. Severity Level I and II violations are of.very significant I regulatory concern. In general, violations that are included in these O severity categories involve actual or high potential impact on the public. Severity Level III violations are cause for significant concern. Severity Level IV violations are less serious but are'of more than minor concern;- i.e. , if lef t uncorrected, they could lead to a more serious concern. Severity Level V violations are of minor safety or environmental concern. Comparisons of significance between activity arets are inappropriate. For example, the immediacy of any hazard to the public associated with Severity Level I violations 'in Reactor Operations is not directly comparable to that associated with Severity Level I violations in Reactor-Construction.
'While examples are provided in Supplements I through VIII for determining:
the appropriate severity level for violations in each of the eight activity areas, the examples are neither exhaustive nor controlling. ' 24
._ ___- - ___a
)
1
. These examples do not create new requirements. Each is designed to (s) illustrate the significance which the NRC places on a particular type of violation of NRC requirements. Each of the examples in the supplements is predicated on a violation of a regulatory requirement. I In each case, the severity of a violation will be characterized at the level best suited to the significance of the particular violation.
In some cases, violations may be evaluated in the aggregate and a single severity level assigned for a group of violations. .. I The severity level of a violation may be increased if the circumstances j l surrounding the matter involve careless disregard of requirements, deception, 1 or other indications of willfulness. The term " willfulness" as used here 1 (7 embraces a spectrum of violations ranging from deliberate intent to v violate or falsify to and including careless disregard for requirements. Willfulness does not include acts which do not rise to the level of l I careless disregard, e.g., inadvertent clerical errors in a document submitted to the NRC. In determining the specific severity level of a j l violation involving willfulness, consideration will be given to such factors as the position of the person involved in the violation (e.g., first-line supervisor or senior manager), the significance of any underlying violation, the intent of the violator (i.e., negligence not amounting to careless disregard, careless disregard, or deliberateness), and the economic advantage, if any, gained as a result of the violation. The relative weight given to each of these factors in arriving at the appropriate severity level will be dependent on the circumstances of the O vioiat4on. 25
=
.i i
q The NRC 6xpects licensees to provide full, complete, timely, and accurate. O information and reports. Accordingly, unless otherwise categorized in the-Supplements, the-severity level of a violation involving'the failure to make a. required report to the NRC will be based upon the Significance of) i and the circumstances surrounding the matter that should have been I 1 l l reported. A licensee will not norfrally te cited for a failure to report a condition or event unless the licensee was actually aware of the condition or event which it failed to report. However, the severity' level of an untimely report, in contrast to no report, may be reduced depending on'the circumstances surrounding the matter. L IV. ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCES Q Whenever the NRC has learned of the existence of a potential violation for which a civil penalty or other escalated enforcement action may l be warranted, the NRC will normally hold an enforcement.confere'nce with the licensee prior to taking enforcement action. The NRC may also elect to hold an enforcement conference for other violations, e.g., 1 Severity. Level IV violation which, if repeated, could lead to escalated enforcement action. The purpose of the enforcement conference is to
- 1) discuss the violations, their significance and causes,-and-the l licensee's corrective actions, 2) determine whether there are any .
aggravating or mitigating circumstances, and 3) obtain other.informa-'- tion which will help determine the appropriate enforcement action. O L l l 26 l
In addition, during the enforcement conference, the licensee will be given an opportunity to explain to the NRC what corrective actions (if any) were taken or will be taken following discovery of. the potential violation. Licensees will be told when a meeting is an enforcement conference. Enforcement conferences will not normally be open to the public. When needed to protect the public valth and safety or common defense and security, escalated enforcement action. such as the 1ssuance of an-immediately effective order modifying, suspending, or revoking a' license, will be taken prior to the enforcement conference. In such cases, an enforcement conference may be held after the escalated enforcement action is taken. O v. ENFORCEMENT ACTtoNs l This section describes the enforcement sanctions available to NRC and specifies the conditions under which each may be used. The basic sanctions are notices of violation, civil penalties, and orders of various types. Additionally, related administrative mechanisms such as ' bulletins and confirmatory action letters are used to- supplement the enforcement program. In ' selecting the enforcement sanctions to be applied, NRC will consider enforcement actions taken by other Federal or State regulatory' bodies having concur ent jurisdiction, such as in transportation matters. With very limited exceptions, whenever a violation of. NRC requirements is identified, enforcement action is taken. The nature and extent of~the-- enforcement action is intended to reflect the seriousness of the violation involved. For the vast majority of violations, action by an NRC regional. office is appropriate in the form of a Notice of Violation requiring aL ; 27 ' -2____-___:___2_'i-- .
l fs formal response from the recipient describing its corrective actions. The { (_) { relatively small number of cases involving elevated enforcement action { 1 receives substantial attention by the public, and may have significant impact on the licensee's operation. These elevated enforcement actions include civil penalties; orders modifying, suspending or revoking f licenses; or orders to cease and desist from designated activities. A. NOTICE OF VIOLATION I 1 i I A notice of violation is a written notice setting forth one or more { 1 violations of a legally binding requirement. The notice normally. requires the recipient to provide a written statement describing (1) corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved; (2) 1 ([]) corrective steps which will be taken to prevent recurrence; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved. NRC may require responses to notices of violation to be under oath. Normally, responses under oath will be required only in connection with civil ; penalties and orders. 1 1 NRC uses the notice of violation as the standard method for formalizing the existence of a violation. A notice of violation is normally the only enforcement action taken, except in cases where the criteria for civil penalties and orders, as set forth in Sections IV.B and IV.C, respectively, are met. In such cases, the notice of violation will be issued in conjunction with the elevated actions. O V 28
l l l Because the NRC wants to encourage and support licensee initiative W ('] I U for self-identification and correction of problems, NRC will not { generally issue a notice of violation for a violation that meets all I i of the following tests: I l (1) It was identified by the licensee;
)
(2) It fits in Severity Level IV or V; I (3) It was reported, if required: (4) It was or will be corrected, including measures to prevent recurrence. within a reasonable time; and [ (5) It was not a violation that could reasonably be expected to have been prevented by the licensee's corrective action for a 1 previous violation. Licensees are not ordinarily cited for violations resulting from ; I g matters not within their control, such as equipment failures that d were not avoidable by reasonable licensee quality assurance measures j or management controls. Generally, however, licensees are held responsible for the acts of their employees. Accordingly, this policy should not be construed to excuse personnel errors. Enforce-I ment actions involving individuals, including licensed operators, i 1 will be determined on a case-by-case basis and must be approved by I the Director of the responsible Program Office.S E! Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act gives the Commission authority to impose l Civil penalties for v'olations on "any person." " Person" is-broadly defined l in Section 11.s of the AEA to include individuals, a variety of organizations, l and any representatives Jr agents. This gives the Commission authority to impose civil penalties on employees of licensees or on separate entities when a violation of a requirement directly imposed on them is committed, o b 29
i
- 8. CIVIL PENALTY l
l A civil penalty is a monetary penalty that may be imposed for 1 violation of (a) certain specified licensing provisions of the Atomic I Energy Act or supplementary NRC rules or orders, (b) any requirement for which a license may be revoked, or (c) reporting requirements under Section 206 of the Energy Reorganization Act. Civil penalties are designed to emphasize the need for lasting remedial action and to deter future violations. 1 Generally, civil penalties are imposed for Severity Level I violations, 4 are imposed absent mitigating circumstances for Severity Level II ' violations, are considered for Severity Level III violations, and may be imposed for Severity Level IV violations that are similar$ to G,o l previous violations for which the licensee did not take effective corrective action, j l l In applying this guidance for Sever.ity Level IV violations, NRC nor- l l mally considers civil penalties only for similar Severity Level IV violations that occur after the date of the last in:;ection or within twn years, whichever period is greater. S/The word "similar," as used in this policy, refers to those violations which could have been reasonably expected to have been prevented by the licensee's corrective action for the previous violation. 0+ v 30
I 1 l Civil penalties will normally be assessed for knowing and conscious violations of the reporting requirements of Section 206 of the Energy. Reorganization Act, and for any willful violation of.any Commission. requirement including those at any severity level. NRC imposes different levels of penalties for different severity; level violations and different classes of licensees. Tables IA and 18 show the base civil penalties for various reactor, fuel cycle, an'd. materials programs. The structure of these tables generally takes. into account the gravity of.the violation as a primary consideration and the ability to pay as a secondary consideration. Generally,. operations involving greater nuclear material ~ inventories and greater potential consequences to the public and licensee employees receive higher civil penalties. Regarding the secondary factor'of ability of various classes of licensees to pay the civil penalties, it is'not the NRC's intention that the economic impact of a civil penalty be such that it puts a licensee out of business (orders, rather than civil penalties, are used when the intent is to terminate l'icensed activities) or adversely affects a licensee's ability to. safely conduct licensed activities. The deterrent effect of civil penalties is best served when the amounts of such penalties take into account a licensee's " ability to pay." In determining.the amounts.of civil penalties for licensees for whom the tables do not reflect-the ability to pay, NRC will consider as necessary an. increase or decrease on a case-by-case basis. O NRC ttaches great importance to comprehensive licensee programs for detection, correction, and reporting of problems that may constitute, 31 ____ _a _ _ _ _ _
1 or lead to, violation of regulatory requirements. .This'is emphasized l O.. by giving credit for effective licensee audit programs when licensees find, correct, and report problems expeditiously and effectively. To 1 encourage licensee self-identification and correction of violations ! and to avoid potential concealment of problems of_ safety significance, application of the adjustment factors set forth below-may result in no civil penalty being assessed.for violations which are identified, reported (if required), and effectively corrected by.
]
the licensee. On the other hand, ineffective licensee programs *for problem-identific nion er correction are unacceptable. In cases involving. willfulness, flagt.,nt NRC-identified violations, repeated poor O nerfor=> ace 4a ea rea of coacera or ser4ous breakdo a ia =aa se eat controls, NRC intends to apply its full enforcement authority where such action is warranted, including issuing appropriate orders and assessing civil penalties for continuing violations on a per day , basis, up to the statutory limit of $100,000 per violation, per day. In this regard, while management involvement, direct or indirect, in a violation may lead to an increase in the civil penalty, the lack of such' involvement may not be used to mitigate a civil penalty. Allowance of mitigation could encourage lack of management.. involvement in licensed activities and a decrease in protection of the public health ~ and safety. O 32
NRC reviews each preposed civil penalty case on its own merits and adjusts the base civil penalty values upward or downward appropriately. Tables 1A and IB identify the base civil penalty. values for different severity levels, activity areas, and classes of licensees. After considering all relevant circumstances, adjustments to these values may be made for the factors described below:
- 1. Prompt Identification and Reporting Reduction of up to 50% of the base civil penalty may be given when a licensee identifies the violation and promptly reports j the violation to the NRC. In weighing this factor, consider-ation will be given to, among other things, the l'ength of. time the violation existed prior to discovery, the opportunity O evaileble to discover the v4oiet4en, the eese of discovery and the promptness and completeness of any required report. No consideration will be given to this factor if the licensee does not take immediate action to correct the problem upon discovery.
- 2. Corrective Action to Prevent Recurrence
,,, Recognizing that corrective action is always required to meet reg'ulatory requirements, the promptness and extent to which the licensee takes corrective action, including' actions to prevent recurrence, may be considered in modifying the civil penalty to be assessed. Unusually prompt and extensive corrective-action may result in reducing the proposed civil penalty as much as 50% of the base value shown in Table 1. On the other hand, the O civil penalty may be increased as much as 50% of'the base value 33
if initiation of corrective action is not prompt or if- the O corrective action is only. minimally acceptable. In weighing this factor, consideration will be given to, among other tnings, the timeliness of the corrective action, degree of licensee q initiative, and comprehensiveness of the corrective action--such as whether the action is focused narrowly to'_the specific violation'or crcadly to the general area of concern. l
- 3. P ut Performance. .
1 Recuction by as much as 100* of the base. civil penalty snown in-Taole 1 may be given for-prior good performance in the general area of concern. On the other nand, the base cNil penalty may' ! be increased as much as 100*. for prior poor performance.in the Q general area of concern. l l In weighing this factor, consideration will be given to,'among otner things, the effectiveness of previous corrective action for-
^
similar problems, overall performance such as Systematic Assess-ment of Licensee Performance (SALP) evaluations for power reactors,, and prior enforcement h4 tory including Severity Level IV and V violations in the area of concern. For example, failure to-implement previous corrective actios for prior similar problems-may result in an increase in the civil penalty. 4 Prior Notice of Similar Events The base civil penalty may be increased as much as 50% for cases-O . where the iicensee nad pr4or xnewiedge of a ,cosiem as a resuit 34
I I of a licensee audit,<or ' specific NRC or-industry notification,
.O and had failed to take effective preventive steps. I i
l
- 5. Multiple Occurrences j l~ The base civil' penalty may be increased as much as 50*.' where-l multiple examples.of a particular violation are identified f during the inspection period. ]
l. l l The above' factors are additive. However, in no instance will.a civil penalty for any one violation exceed $100,000 per day. >I J
'l The duration of a violation may also be considered in assessing-a civil penalty. A greater civil. penalty may be. imposed if a O viol tion continues for more than.a day. For example:
(1) If a licensee is aware of the existence of a condition which results in an ongoing violation and fails to initiate corrective i action, each day the condition. existed may be considered'as.a. separate violation and, as such, subject to a' separate additional ll civil penalty.
-(2) If a licensee is unaware of a condition resulting in a l continuing violation, but clearly should have been aware of the l-condition or had en opportunity to. correct the condition but
~
l i i failed to do so, a separate violation and attendant civil-penalty may be considered for each day that the. licensee clearly should have been aware of the condition or had an opportunity to correct the condition, but failed to'do so. 35
(3) Alternatively, whether or not a licensee is aware or shoul'd have been aware of a violation that continues for'more than one day, the civil penalty imposed for one violation may be increased
*o reflect the added significance resulting from the duration of the violation.
The Tables and the mitigating factors determine the civil- ;q penalties which may be assessed for each violation. However, to i focus on the fundamental underlying causes of a problem for 1 l which ' enforcement action appears to be warranted, the cumulative i total for all violations which contributed to or were unavoid-able consequences of that problem may be based on the' amount' shown in the table for a problem of that Severity Level, as adjusted. If an evaluation of such multiple violations shows that more than one fundamental problem is involved, each of~ which, if viewed independent y, could lead to civil penalty action by itself, then separate civil penalties may be assessed. j
~
for each such fundamentsi problem. In addition, the failure to make a required report of an event requiring such reporting is considered.a separate problem and will normally be' asses ed a separate civil penalty, if the licensee is aware of the matter that should have been reported. O 36
TABLE 1A C BASE CIVIL PENALTIES l Transportation Plant Oper, . Type _A Const, Health Greater.than Quantity' Physics and EP Safeguards Type A' Quantity 1/ or less 2/-
- a. Power Reactors $100,000 $100,000 5100,000' 55,000
- b. Test Reactors 10,000 '10,000 10,000 2,000
- c. Research Reactors & 5,000 5,000 5,000 1,000 Critical Facilities
- d. Fuel Fabricators 25,000 100,000 4/ 25,000 5,000 and Industrial
Processors 3/
- e. Mills and Uranium 30,000 --
.5,000- 2,000 l Conversion Facilities i
- f. Industrial Users 10,000 --
5,000 2,000 of Material. }/ n U
- g. Waste Dispcsal Licensees 10,000 --
5,000 2 ,~ 0 0 0 ..
- h. Academic or Medical 5,000 --
2,500 1,000 Institutions {/ ..
- 1. Other Material 1,000 --
2,500 1,000 Licensees ,
-1/ Includes irradiated fue1~, high level waste, unieradiated fissile material, and any other quantities requiring Type B packaging.
2/ Includes . low specific activity waste (LSA), low level waste, Type A packages, and excepted quantities and articles. 3/ Large firms engaged in manufacturing or distribution of byproduct, source,. or special: nuclear material. 4/ This amount refers to ' Category 1 licensees (as defined in 10 CFR .3.2 (bb)). l Licensed fuel fabricators not authorized to possess Category 1 material have-a base penalty amount of $50,000. L
}/ Includes industrial radiographer, nuclear pharmacies, 'and other industrial i users.
O s/ This ennlies to nonprof 4t 4nst4 tut 4on, not otherw4se categor4 zed uneer sections "a" through "g"'in this table.
?
TABLE IB g BASE CIVIL PENALTIES BASE CIVIL PENALTY AMOUNT SEVERITY LEVEL ('.' of Amount Listed in Table 1A) I 10 G*.' II 80*4 III 5 0*.' IV 15*.' V 5% I l l O e l l .j I O l
'l i
j
C. ORDERS O-An order is a written NRC directive to modify, suspend, or revoke a licensa; to cease and desist from a given practice or activity; or to' cake such other action as may be proper (sg 10 CFR 2,202 and 2.204). Orders may be issued as set forth below. Orders may also'be issued in lieu of, or in~ addition to, civil penalties, as appropriate. (1) License Modification Orders are issued when'some change ini licensee equipment, procedures, or management controls.is necessary. l 1 (2) Suspension Orders may be used: ~ O (a) To remove a threat to the public health and. safety, common I defense and security, or the environment; (b) To stop facility construction when (i) further work could preclude or significantly hinder the identification _or correction of an improperly constructed safety-related system or component, or (ii) the licensee's quality assurance program implementation is not adequate to provideo confidence that construction activities are being properly. carried out; O 39
a
.-lj (c) When the licensee has not responded adequately to other O enforcement action; (d) When.the licensee interferes with'the conduct of an inspec-
]1' tion or investigation;.or r
(e) For any reason not mentioned above. for which license-revocation is legally authorized. Suspensions may apply to all or part of the licensed' activity. Ordinarily, a licensed activity is'not suspended.(nor is a suspension prolonged) for failure to comply with' requirements i-where such failure is not willful and adequate corrective action l has been taken. Q i (3) Revocation Orders may be used:
;i (a) When a licensee is unable or unwilling to comply,with NRC' requirements, (b)' When a licensee refuses to correct a violation, (c) When a licensee does not respond to a notice of violation where a' response was required, (d) When a licensee refuses'to pay a fee ' required by 10 CFR-O gart 170, or 40-
(e) For any other reason for'which revocation is authorized O under Section 186 of the Atomic Energy Act (e.g., any condition which would warrant refusal of a license on an 1 I original application). 1 (4) Cease and Desist Orders are typically used to stop an 1 unauthorized activity that has continued after notification by 1 NRC that such activity is unauthorized. 1 Orders are made effective immediately, without prior opportunity for hearing, whenever it is determined that the pubite health,~ interest, i or safety so requires, or when the order is responding to a violation ! q involving willfulness. Otherwise, a prior opportunity for a hearing 'l on the order is afforded. For cases in which the NRC believes a ' O basis could reasonably exist for not taking the action'as proposed,. the licensee will ordinarily be afforded an opportunity to show cause { why the order should not be issued in the proposed manner. l ' O. ESCALATION OF ENFORCEMENT SANCTIONS NRC considers violations of Severity Levels I, II, or III to be serious. If serious violations occur, NRC will, where necessary, issue orders in conjunction with civil penalties to achieve immediate corrective actions and to deter further recurrence.of' serious. violations. NRC carefully considers the circumstances of each case in selecting and applying the sanction (s) appropriate to the case in accordance with the criteria described in Sections V.B and V.C, above. 41
Examples of enforcement actions that could be taken for similar O Severity Level I, II, or III violations are. set forth in Table 2. The actual progression to be used in a particular case will depend on the circumstances. However, enforcement sanctions will normally.- escalate for recurring similar violations. Normally the progression.of enforcement actions for simil.ar- ) violations will be based on violations under a single 1icense. :When more than one facility is covered by a single license, the normal
'l l
j progression will be based on similar violations at an individual facility and not on similar violations under the same license. However, it should be noted that under some circumstances, e.g.,. where there is common control over some facet of' facility operations, similar violations may be charged even though the second violation occurred at a different facility or under a different license. For example, a physical security violation at Unit 2 of a dual unit plant that repeats an earlier violation at Unit 1 might be considered similar. o 1 0 42
I TABLE 2 th
\-)
EXAMPLES OF PROGRESSION OF ESCALATED ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS FOR SIMILAR VIOLATIONS IN THE SAME ACTIVITY AREA UNDER THE SAME LICENSE Number of similar violations from the date Severity of the last inspection or within the previous of two years (whichever period is greater) ' Violation 1st 2nd 3rd l I a+b a+b+c d II a a+b a+b+c-III a- 'a+b
- a. Civil penalty
- b. Suspension of affected operations until the Office Director is satis-fied that there is reasonable assurance that the licensee can operate in compliance with the applicable requirements; or modification of the license, as appropriate,
- c. Show cause for modification or revocation of the license, as appro-priate.
- d. Further action, as appropriate.
4 O __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ =>
E. RELATED ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS O - In addition to the formal enforcement mechanisms of notices of viola-tion, civil penalties, and orders, NRC also uses administrative mechanisms, such as bulletins, circulars, information notices, generic letters, notices of deviation, and confirmatory action letters to supplement its enforcement program. NRC expects licensees q to adhere to any obligations and commitments resulting from these
.i processes and will not hesitate to issue appropriate orders ~to make sure that such commitments are met.
(1) Bulletins, Circulars, Information Notices and Generic Letters are written notifications to groups of licensees' identifying specific problems and recommending specific actions. (2) Notices of Deviation are written notices describing a licensee's or a vendor's failure to satisfy a' commitment whera.the. commit-ment involved has not been made a legally binding requirement. A notice of deviation requests a licensee or. vendor to provide a , written explanation or statement describing corrective stape taken (or planned), the results achieved, and the date when .; l corrective action will be completed. (3) Confirmatory Action Letters are letters confirming.a licensee is.
~
agreement to take certain actions to ~ remove significant concerns
~
about health and. safety, safeguards,-or-the-environment. 3 44 y ( .
F. REFERRALS TO DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE O Alleged or suspected criminal violations of the Atomic. Energy Act (and of other relevant Federal laws) are referred to the Department of Justice for investigation. Referral to the Department' of Justice l does'not preclude the NRC from taking other enforcement action under this General Statement of Policy. However, such actions will be-coordinated with the Department of Justice to the extent practicable. VI. PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790, all. enforcement actions and licensees' responses are publicly available for. inspection. In addi ion, press releases are generally issued for civil penalties and orders. .In the case of orders and civil penalties related to violations at Severity Levels I, II, or III, press releases are issued at the time of the order or the proposed imposition of the civil penalty. Press releases are not normally issued for Notices of Violation.
.VII. RESPONSIBILITIES The Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, as.the principal enforcement officer of the NRC, has been delegated- the ~ authority to_ issue .O-45 L -_--_--_--_ _ ---_---___--___---.----------------- ----_ _--- - .- - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - -
1 l l l p notices of violations, civil penalties, and orcers.5 Regional Adminis-V trators may also issue notices of violation for Severity Level IV and V l violations and may sign notices of violation for Severity Level III l 1 violations with no proposed civil penalty and proposed civil penalty actions with the concurrence of the Director, IE. In recognition that the i regulation of nuclear activities in many cases does not lend itself to a l mechanistic treatment, the Director, IE or the Regional Administrator must l exercise judgment and discretion in determining the severity levels of the violations and the appropriate enforcement sanctions, including the l l l decision to impose a civil penalty and the amount of such penalty, after ; considering the general principles of this statement of policy and the f 1 technical significance of the violations and the surrounding circumstances. l Q The Commission will be provided written notification of all enforcement i actions involving civil penalties or orders. The Commission will be 1 1 l consulted prior to taking enforcement action in the following situations l l (unless the urgency of the situation dictates immediate action): 1 i
}
5/ Th e Directors of the Offices of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards have also been delegated similar authority, but it is expected that normal use of this authority by NRR and NMSS will be confined to actions necessary in the interest of public health and safety. The Director, Office of Administration, has been delegated the authority to issue orders where licensees violate Commission regulations by nonpaymerit of license fees. It is planned to consider redelegation of some or all of these authorities to j the Administrators of the NRC Regional Offices over the next several years. i 46
)
1
(1) An action affecting a licensee's operation that requires balancing
/],,
the public health and safety or common defense and security impli-cations of not operating with the potential radiological or other hazards associated with continued operation. (2) Proposals to impose civil penalties in amounts greater than 3 times the Severity Level I values shown in Table 1A; l l l (3) Any proposed enforcement action that involves a Severity Level I l violation; (4) Any enforcement action that involves a finding of a material false statement; t O (5) Any action the Office Director believes warrants Commission involve-ment; or l (6) Any proposed enforcement action on which the' Commission asks to be" consulted. l 47
l Q SUPPLEMENT I - SEVERITY CATEGORIES REACTOR OPERATIONS 1 A. Severity I - Violations involving for example: *
- 1. A Safety Limit, as defined in 10 CFR 50.36 and the Technical ^ 56ecifi-
% JiL (
' l cations, being exceeded, ,
a 1,
- 2. A system 5 designed to prevent or mitigate.a serious safety event'not ..I l
being able to perform its intended safety function when'actually called upon to work; .
~
- 3. An accidental criticality; or
- 4. Release of radioactivity offsite greater than ten (10) times the Technical Specifications limit.S
$ " System" as.used in these supplements, includes administrative and managerial control systems, as well as physical systems.
E" Intended safety function" means the total safety function, and'is not directed toward a loss.of redundancy. For example, considering a BWR's high pressure' ECCS capability, the violation must result in complete invalidation of both HPCI-and ADS subsystems. A loss'of one subsystem does not defeat the intended
~
safety function as long as.the other subsystem is operable.
~
8/ The Technical Specification limit as used in this Supplement (Items A.4, 8,2' ' and C.5) does not apply to the instantaneous release limit. 48
.. r B. Severity II - Violations involving for example; O :
.i- 1. 'A system designed to prevent or mitigate serious safety events not-being able to cerform its intended safety function; or
- 2. Release of radioactivity offsite greater than five (5) times the Technical Specifications limit. /
'l C. Lhverity III - Violations involving for example:
- 1. ,A significant violation of a Technical Specification Limiting Condition,for Operation where the appropriate Action Statement was' not satisfied within the time allotted by the Action Statement,
, such as:
- a. In a pressurized water reactor, in the applicable modes, having one-high pressure safety injection pump inoperable for a per.iod in ,
1 i excess of that allowed by the action statement; or -
- b. In a boiling water reactor, one primary containment isolation valve inoperable for a period in excess of that allowed by the: action L
statement.
- 2. A system designed to prevent or mitigate'a serious-safety. event not being able to perform its intended function under certain conditions (e.g., safety system not' operable:unless offsite power.is available;.
Q materials .or components not environmental 1.y qualified); 49
.i
- 3. Dereliction of duty on the part of personnel involved in licensed'-
O activities; s
- 4. Changes in reactor parameters which cause unanticipated reductions in;-
margins of safety; p i
- 5. Release of radioactivity offsite greater than the Technical 'l Specifications limit; or l l
1
- 6. Failure to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59 such that a required ,
license amendment was not sought. [ .. O. ' Severity IV - Violations involving for example: O
- 1. A less significant violation of a . Technical Specification' Limiting .
Condition for Operation where the appropriate Action Statement'was j not satisfied within the time alloted by the Action Statement, such as:
- a. In a pressurized water reactor, a 57. deficiency in-the. required volume of the condensate' storage tank; or b In a boiling water reactor, one subsystem of the two independent.
a MSIV leakage control: subsystems' inoperable.
- 2. Failure to meet the requirements of 10 CFR-50.59 that does.not result in a Severity Level I, II, or III violation; O
50
- 3. Failure to meet regulatory requirements that have.more.than' minor
.]',- -
safety or environmental sign'ificance; or.
- 4. Failure to make a required Licensee Event Report.
E. Severity Level V . Violations that have minor safety or environmental significance. SUPPLEMENT II - SEVERITY. CATEGORIES PART 50 FACILITY CONSTRUCTION A. SeveriyI-Violationsinvolvingastructureorsystemthatis' t completed in such a manner that it would not have satisfied its intended safety- . related purpose. B. Severi;y II - Violations involving for example:
- 1. A breakdown in the quality assurance program as exemplified by deficiencies in construction QA related to more than one work act1vity (e.g... structural, piping, electrical, foundations). Such deficiencies normally involve the' licensee's failure to cenduct adequate audits or-to take prompt corrective action on the basis'of such audits and normally involve multiple examples'of O 2'"co ai t 6" #s co a'et4oa er comstr#cs4oa 4ac'#d'as revi
- me c'c at "c--
by the construction QA organization. 51
. - _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - -m___ _ _ _ . _ _
~
4
; .. 1 deficient construction or construction of. unknown quality due to LO~ . inadequate program implementation; or 1
- 2. A structure or system that is completed in such a manner that it-could have an adverse effect on the safety of operations, j 1
i" C. Severity'III.- Violations involving for example:
- 1. A deficiency in a licensee quality assurance program for construction--
related to a. single work activity-(0.g., structural, piping, elec- =j l < trical or foundations). Such significant deficiency normal'ly involve; the licensee's failure to conduct adequate audits or to take-prompt corrective action on the basis of such audits, and normally- i involves multiple examples of deficient construction or construction of unknown quality due to inadequate program implementation; [} l 1
- 2. Failure to confirm the design safety requirements of a structure I or system as a result of inadequate preoperational test program l implementation; or s
- 3. Failure to make a required 10 CFR 50.55(e) report.
I D. Severity IV - Violations invoTving failure to meet regulatory requirements including one or more Quality Assurance Criteria not amounting.to Severity l Level I,,II, or III violations that have more'than minor safety or- ! environmental significance. () E. ' Severity V - Violations that have minor. safety or environmental signi ficance'. l l ? 52 =_-__1--------- - _ . - -
. +
q SUPPLEMENT II: - SEVERITY CATEGORIES l
%):
SAFEGUARDS 1 A. Severity I - Violations involving for example: )
- 1. An'act of radiological sabotage or actual' theft, loss, or diversion-cf a formula quantity of strategic special nuclear' materialE-(SSNM); _
i
- 2. Actual entry of an unauthorized individual into a vital area or * ,
J material access area from outside the protected' area (i.e., penetration of both barriers) that was not detected at the time of: entry; or O
- 3. Failure to promptly report knowledge of an actual or attempted theft or diversion of SSNM or an act of radiological sabotage.
- 8. Severity'II - Violations involving for exampl'e:
')
- 1. Actual theft, loss or diversion of ;pecial nuclear material (SNM) of moderate' strategic significance;E
- 2. Failure to control access such that all three elements of access ,
control (barrier, monitoring, and response) at the protected 1 a; E See_10 CFR 73.2(bb) E ee S 10"CFR 73.2'(x) u ' 53 L . .
area or vital area are inadequate or two of three elements are I (1 U inadequate in both the protected and vital area;
- 3. Failure to implement approved compensatory measures when the central j and secondary. alarm stations are inoperable; 4, Failure to establish'or maintain safeguards systems' designed.or used to prevent or rietect the unauthorized removal of a. formula quantity- q l of.SNM from areas'of authorized use or storage; or
- 5. Failure to use established transportation security systems' designed- .
1 ' or used to prevent the theft, loss, or diversion of a formula. quantity of SNM or acts of radiological sabotage. l O 1 C. Severity .III - Violations involving for example: ] f
- 1. Failure to control access such that two of the three elements of- ;
access control at the vital area or protected area. barrier are. i inadequate; d
- 2. Failure to control access to a transport vehicle or.the SNM being-i transported that does not constitute a Severity:I:or II violation;
- 3. Failure to establish or'maintainLsafeguards systems designed.or used l to prevent or detect the unauthorized removal;ofLSNM of moderate-strategic significance from areas of a'uthorized use'or ~ storage; .
O . 54. w___- - _ _ . . _ _ . - - _
- 4. Failure to implement approved compensatory measures when the central'- '
.O; (or. secondary) alarm station is -inoperablei 1
- 5. Failure to conduct a proper search at the~ access-cont'rol point that results in introduction to the site of . firearms, explosives, incendiary devices, or other items which could be used for industrial' sabotage;.or
- 6. Failure to ' properly secure or protect classified or other Lsensitive safeguards information which would significantly assist'an individual-in an act of radiological sabotage.or theft of special nuclear material.
D. Severity IV - Violationi involving for example:
- 1. Failure to establish or maintain. safeguards systems designed or. used to prevent or detect the unauthorized removal of SNM of low strategic significance f rom areas of authorized use. o.r storage -
- 2. Failure to implement 10 CFR Parts 25 and 95 and information addressed under Section 142:of the Act, and the NRC approved security plan 1
relevant to those parts; l
- 3. Failure to control access to a vital area or material access area 4
from inside the protected area or failure to control access to the. protected area in that one of the three elements of access control , i is-inadequate; -i O *seetoCFR73.2cy> , i " 55 4 1
l 1
- 4. Failure t'o properly secure or protect classified or. other sensitive safeguards information which would not significantly assist:an indi- i j
vidual in an act of radiological-sabotage or theft of special nuclear' material; or
- 5. Other violations, such as failure to follow an approved security -j plan, that have more than minor safeguards significance.
a E. Severity V - Violations that have minor safeguards significance. l l SUPPLEMENT IV - SEVERITY CATEGORIES 1 i HEALTH PHYSICS 10 CFR PART 20E 1 0 j A. Severity I - Violations involving for example: [ i
- 1. Single exposure of a worker in excess of 25 rems of radiation to the whole body, 150 rems to the skin of the whole body, or 375 rems to the feet, ankles, hands, or forearms; l-
- 2. Annual whole body exposure of a member of the public in excess of 2.5 rems of radiation;
- 3. Release of radioactive material to an unrestricted area in excess of ten times the limits of 10 CFR 20.106; O w eersonnei overex,osures ane assoc 4ated v4eiat4ons, 4ncurred during a 14fe-saving effort, will be treated on a case-by-case basis, c
56 m - - - _ . _ _ - - _ - - _ - -
i
, _ 4. Disposal of licensed material in quantities or concentrations in excess of ten times the limits of 10 CFR 20.303; or
- 5. Exposure of a worker in restricted areas of ten times the limits of 10 CFR 20.103.
B. Severity II - Violations involving for example: 1
- 1. Single exposure of a worker in excess of 5 rems of radiation to the I whole body, 30 rems to the skin of the whole body, or 75 rems to the feet, ankles, hands or forearms; l 4
i l
- 2. Annual whole body exposure of a member of the public in excess of 0.5 )
j , OV rems of radiation; 1 i 3. Release of radioactive material to an unrestricted area in excess of. j five times the limits of 10 CFR 20.106; I 1 1 1
- 4. Failure to make an immediate notification as required by 10 CFR 20.403(a)(1) and 10 CFR 20.403(a)(2);
- 5. Disposal of licensed material in quantities or concentrations in excess of five times the limits of 10 CFR 2C.303; or
- 6. Exposure of a worker in restricted areas in excess of 'five times the limits of 10 CFR 20.103.
k/'. . 57
r
- C. Severity III - Violations' involving for example:
- 1. Single exposure of a worker in excess of 3 rems of' radiation to the -
whole body, 7.5 rems to the skin of the whole body, or 18.75 rems to-
,the feet, ankles, hands.or. forearms;
- 2. A radiation level in an unrestricted area such that'an individual could j receive greater than 100 millirem in a one hour period or_500 millirem.
in any seven consecutive days,
- 3. Failure to make a 24-hour notification as required by.10 CFR j 1
20.403(b) or an immediate notification required by 10 CFR 20.402(a); l i O 4 Suestant4ai potent 4ai for an exposure or release 4n excess of :) 1 10 CFR 20 whether or not such .xposure or. release occurs (e.g... entry
]
into high radiation areas, such as under reactor. vessels or in the l vicinity of exposed radiographic sources, without having performed an adequate survey, operation of a radiation facility with a j i nonfunctioning interlock system);.
- 5. Release of radioactive material to an unrestricted area in excess of the limits of 10 CFR 20.106; E
- 6. Improper disposal of lic:r. sed material not covered in Severity.
Levels I or II; . O
- 7. Exposure of a worker in restricted areas in excess of the limits of'-
10 CFR 20.103; , , L 3 58
.__m mm __m_.- . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . - _ . - -
- , i I
- 8. Release 'for unrestricted use of contaminated or radioactive material or equipment which poses a realistic potential for significant l
exposure to members of the public, or.which reflects a programmatic- U i (rather than isolated) weakness in the radiation control' program; l
, 1
- 9. Cumulative worker exposure above regulatory limits when such' cumu- l 1
lative exposure reflects a programmatic, rather than an isolated weakness in radiation protection;
.i
- 10. Conduct of licensee activities by a technically unqualified' person; or '
- 11. Significant failure to control licensed material.
D. Severity IV - Violations involving for example:
- 1. Exposures in excest 'f the limits of 10 CFR 20.101 not constituting Severity Level I, II, or III violations;
- 2. A radiation level in an unrestricted area such that an individual could receive greater than 2 millirem in a one hour' period or 100 millirem in any seven consecutive days;
- 3. Failure to make a 30-day notification required by 10 CFR 20.405;
- 4. Failure to make a followup written report as required by 10 CFR'
-( )' 20.402(b), 20.408, and 20.409; or 59
l
'i l
- 5. Any other matter that has more than minor safety or environmental i r')
k significance. j l 3 E. Severity V - Violations that have minor safety or environmental signif-l l icance. . l l SUPPLEMENT V - SEVERITY CATEGORIES j 1 a l I TRANSPORTATION -) A. Severity I - Violations of NRC transportation. requirements involving for example: ,Q LJ
- 1. Annual whole body radiation exposure of a member of the public in excess of 0.5 rems of radiation; or
- 2. Breach of package integrity resulting in surface contamination or' external radiation levels in excess of ten times the NRC limits.
E me So transportation requirements are applied to more than one licensee involved in the same activity such as a shipper (10 CFR 73.20) and a carrier (10 CFR 70.20a). Wnen a violation of such a requirement occurs, enforcement action will be directed against the responsible licensee which, under the circumstances of the case, may be one or more of the licensees involved. (3 m) 60 _ _A
.1 l
I B. Severity II - Violations of NRC transportation requirements involving for (). example: 1 i l
- 1. Breach of package integrity resulting in surface contamination or external radiation levels in excess of NRC requirements;
- 2. Surface contamination or external radiation levels in excess of five- )
times NRC limits that did not result from a breach of package integrity; or , H l i
- 3. Failure to make required initial notifications associated with 1 Severity Level I or II violations.
(]} C. Severity III - Violations of NRC transportal'on requirements involving for-example: 1 l 1
- 1. Breach of package integrity;
- 2. Surface contamination or external radiation levels in excess of, but L less than a factor of five above NRC requirements, that- did. not result from a breach of package integrity;
- 3. Any noncompliance with labelling, placarding, shipping paper, l
I packaging, loading, or other requirements that could reasonably. result in the following: h 61
-(
q l
- a. Improper identification.'of__the type, quantity, or form'of
-O- material; 'i l 1
- b. Failure of.the carrier or recipient to exercise' adequate _-
controls; or
- c. Substantial potential for personnel exposure or contamination,
- or improper transfer of material; or. 'l
- 4. Failure to make required initial' notification associated with.
Severity Level III violations. j D. Severity IV - Violations of NRC transportation requirements involving j for example:
- 1. Package selection or preparation requirements which do not result in a breach of package integrity or-surface contamination or external' -
radiation levels in excess of NRC' requirements; or 1
- 2. Other violations that have more than minor safety or environmental significance.
E. Severity V - Violations that'have minor safety or environmental ! significance. l o 1 l
'62
SUPPLEMENT VI - SEVERITY: CATEGORIES- 4 , O 1 FUEL CYCLE AND MATERIALS OPERATIONS A. Severity I - Violations involving for example:
- 1. Radiation levels, contamination levels, or releases that exceed ten times.the limits specified in the license;
- 2. A system designed to prevent or mitigate a s'erious. safety event not being operable when actually required to perform its design function _;
or
- 3. A nuclear criticality accident.
l I i B. Severity-II - Violations involvi.ng for example: l
- 1. Radiation levels, contamination levels, or releases that exceed five times the limits specified in the license; or
- 2. A system designed to prevent or mitigate a serious safety event being inoperable. .
C. Severity III - Violations involving for example:
- 1. ' Failure to control access to licensed materials for radfation LO auraoses > spec 4fied ex "ac reau4r #tsi 1
-63
____a_.._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ______.m_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
1
.r l
- 2. Possession or use of unauthorized equipment or materials in'the I O' conduct of licensee activities which degrades safety; 1 '
- 3. Use of radioactive material on' humans where such use is not authorized;
- 4. Conduct of licensed activities by a technically unqualified person;
- 5. Radiation levels, contamination. levels, or releases that exceed the'.
limit.s specified in the license; or J
- 6. Medical therapeutic misadministration.
Q 0. Severity IV - Violations involving for example: l
- 1. Failure to maintain patients hospitalized'who have cobalt-60, cestuni-137, or iridium-192 implants or to conduct required leakage or contamination tests, or to use properly calibrated equipment;
- 2. Other violations that have more than minor safety or environmental ,
signific'ance; or
- 3. Failure to' report medical diagnostic misadministration.
E. Severity V - Violatiotis that have minor safety or environmental ' significance. ' O l ~64 l
i SUPPLEMENT VII - SEVERITY CATEGORIES ! O l i MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS I A.. Severity I - Violations involving for example:
- 1. A Material False Statement (MFS)N in which the statement made
- was deliberately falso;
- 2. Falsification of records which NRC requires be kept of 1 l significant information in which the records were deliberately ..
falsified by or with the knowledge of management;'
- 3. A knowing and intentional failure to provide the notice required by I
Part 21; or j 9
- 4. Action by senior corporate management in violation of Section 210 q of the ERA against an employee.
1 i
- 8. Severity II - Violations involving for example: 1
)
'1
- 1. A MFS or a reporting failure, involving information whicu, had it j been available to the NRC and accurate at the time the information 1
1 E In essence, a Material False Statement is a statement'that is false by omission or. commission and is relevant to the regulatory process. As can be seen in the examples, in determining the specific severity level of a violation involving. material false statements or falsification of records', consideration will be given to suen factors as the position of the person. involved in the violation (e.g., first line supervisor'or senior. manager), the significance 'of the information involved, and the intent of the violator (i.e., negligence not' amounting to careless disregard, careless .l disregard, or deliberateness). The relative weight given:to each of.these factors in arriving at the appropriate severity level will be dependent on h the circumstances of the vio'ation. 4 65- a i
should have been submitted,.would have' result'ed:in regulatory O action or would likely have resulted.in NRC seeking further information;
- 2. A MFS in which the false statement was made with. careless disregard;.
l
- 3. Deliberate falsification of records which NRC requires be kept involving significant information; l l
- 4. Action by plant management above'first-line supervision in violation i I
of section 210 of the ERA against an employee; or i
- 5. A failure to provide the notice requ4 red by Part 21. 1 d
l Q C. Severity III - Violations involving for example: 1 i
- 1. A MFS not amounting to a Severity Level I or II violation. ]
- 2. Deliberate falsification, or falsification by or with the knowledge of management, of records which the NRC requires be kept that did not
- involve significant information.
l l 3. Action by first-line supervision in violation of section 210 of the ERA against an employee; or 4.. Inadequate review or failure to review su-h that, if an appropriate' review had been made as required, a Part 21 report would have been made. ' A ' V l. T 66 , i __._._?__'___E._
a l 3 ( D. Severity IV - Violations involving for example:
- 1. Inadequate review or failure to review under Part 21'or other procedural violations associated with Part 21 with more than minor .
safety significance;
- 2. A false statement caused by an inadvertent clerical or similar error j t
involving information which, had it been available to NRC and accurate
-at the time the information should have been submitted, would probably not have resulted in regulatory action .or NRC seeking ' )
additional information; or 1 1 j E. Severity V - Violations of minor procedural requirements of'Part 21. 'l l O 1 SUPPLEMENT VITI - SEVERITY CATEGORIES' 'l 1 l EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS j j l A. Severity I - Violations involving for example: , j l i In a general emergency, licensee failure to promptly 1) correctly classify the event, 2) make required notifications to responsible Federal, State, and local agencies, or 3) respond to the evemt (e.g., assess actual or potential offsite consequences, activate emer.jency
.q response facilities, and augment shift staff).
I ci ; O a. Severity II - v4elas4 ens invoivine for examnie: - 1 a 67 l R
.t 1
- 1. In a site area emergency, licensee. failure to promptly 1) correctly
(~]- L classify the event, 2) make required notifications to responsible Federal, State, and local agencies, or 3) respond to the event (e.g., assess actual or potential offsite consequences, activate emergency response facilities, and augment shift staff); or- .
- 2. Licensee failure to meet er implement more than one emergency planning standard involving assessment or notification.
C. Severity III - Violations involving for example:
- 1. In an alert, licensee failure to promptly 1) correctly classify the.
1 event, 2) make required notifications to responsible Federal, State, l 1 O and local agencies, or 3) respond to the event (e.g., assess actual or potential offsite consequences, activate emergency response faci- l lities, and augment shift staff); or
- 2. Licensee failure to meet or implement one emergency planning standard l involving assessment or notification.
l l D. Severity IV 4 Violations involving for example: , 1 r% J l l 68
- _ - - _ . _ . _---m
l Licensee failure to ' meet or. implement any emergency planning: standard ~
- O-'
or requirement not directly related to assessment and' notification.- i
]
1 E. Severity V - Violations that have minor safety or environmental significance. 1 Dated at Washington 0.C., this' day of , 1984. FOR-THE NUCLEAR REGULATOP.Y COMMISSION 1 Samuel J. Chil k, ) 1 Secretary of the Commission O q l
. 1 1
I
'f
.O , 4
'i J
t- . - - - . -- - - - - - -
D - USNRC REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL SUPPLEMENT 7
. GUIDANCE ON APPLICATION OF 10 CFR 20.403 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
- 1. . Introduction l.
l 10 CFR 20.403 (a) reads, "Each licensee shall immediately report any events involving byproduct, source, or special nuclear ~ material ' possessed. by. the licensee that may have caused or threatens to cause: . . .(4) . Damage > to - property in excess o' $200,000." 10 CFR 20.403 (b) reads, "Each licensee shall within 24 hours .of-discovery of the event, report any event involving licensed material' possessed byLthe licensee that may have caused or threatens to cause: . . .(4) Damage :to property in excess of $2,000." In de'termining whether an event is reportable under 10 CFR 20.403, when the monetary amount of damage specified in the regulation was exceeded, the-essential question is: Was the licensed material " involved"Ein the event? Q 2. Involvement of Licensed Material An event involves licensed material if (1) the material caused the' event, (2) the' material, as a result of the event, caused a portion .of the damage, or (3) the event resulted in the licensed material being possessed.or used in violation of applicable regulatory requirements. Note that the mere . presence of the licensed material is not sufficient to ' trigger report-ability. - j
- 3. Illustrative Examples The application of the regulation can be illustrated by the following events involving the pumping of highly radioactive liquid,
- a. Radiation' embrittlement of a plastic component of a-pump caused damage exceeding the applicable sum. This is- reportable. (The licensed ' !
material caused the event and the damage.)
- b. Malfunction of the pump 'resulted in- release of liquid. Cost of pump repair and cleanup exceeded the : applicable _ sum. This is reportable. ,
.(The licensed material caused at least part-of the damage.); l
- c. Malfunction of the pump, due solely to mechanical. defect, caused damage' !
to' the pump in excer.s of _ the applicable sum. No 'other : damage . was -
.present. This is not reportabie. (Mere presence of licensed material.
f is not enough to trigger reporting.) . , i l.
.--l_--__.
m --- - l i 2 . l
-O _
1
- d. Malfunction of the pump, due to mechanical defect, caused damage to the i pump in excess of applicable sum. As a result of pump failure, liquid I was released .in a quantity which violated a - technical specification i
-requirement. This is reportable even if the release caused no damage.
(The event resulted in licensed material being possessed or used under - conditions in violation of a regulatory-requirement), I k l I i l l i 1 1 l l 4 O i f l N_ -_-__ ___ -
3- ,1 n o UNITED STATES
./ [a Cfo o
" g^
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
# - CEGloN ll j* . 101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
J t ATLANTA, GEORGI A 3o323
%..Y..*/ MAY 0 2 G86 I
'i Regional Office Instruction No. 0915, Revision 2 u
)
STANDARD PARAGRAPHS FOR ENFORCEMENT LETTERS l A.
Purpose:
]
~
The purpose of this Regional Office Instruction (ROI) is to establish standard text for Region II enforcement letters that transmit Inspection j Reports, Notices of Deviation, Notices of Violation, and Notices of i Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty. Forms for their preparation are also incorporated. B. Discussion: Since this Instruction was last revised in 1983, several changes have ! occurred that necessitate this revision. The most significant development ! was issuance in 1985 of OIE Manual Chapter 0400, " Enforcement ' Program," which includeo standard formats for. enforcement letters and notices. ! Heretofore, this Instruction did not include detailed guidance for escalated enforcement correspondence. In order to accommodate the wide range of enforcement correspondence, the Instruction and associated forms' are much more lengthy than before; that problem is offset by now having all standard . paragraphs for enforcement letters in one document. Many of the other- - changes have been made in response to comments by inspectors and ' super-visors, such as again identifying the lead inspector by name in the letter, providing the mechanism to refer to violations as-singular or plural (as the case may be), and resolution of the conflicting guidance regarding whether , or not a statement that the letter will be placed in the Public Document ! Room should be in each letter (the answer is yes). - ' The revisions have been reviewed by each Division Director and by other staff members who have expertise in documentation of regulatory correspond- i ence. Their suggestions have been incorporated into the revised text. l The changes incorporated in this Instruction include:
- 1. provision of standard paragraphs for escalated enforcement letters l based on OIE Manual Chapter 0400, 1
- 2. provision of minor options such as singular versus plural (i.e.,
" violation (s) is (are)"),
- 3. addition of a standard paragraph for a letter transmitting an Inspection Report prior to the issuance of a Notice when the violations are under consideration for escalated enforcement, ;
- 4. addition of a standard paragraph to document an " oral licensee commit-ment" based on the Region II Enforcement Manual,
;978-87 WD -b 24 l
E_________- '
T t' .1 ( ll q Regional Office Instruction No. 0915, i Revision 2. 2 MAY 0 21986 j
.{ i
- 5. addition of. lead inspector's name in the first paragraph, 1 I
- 6. clarification of the Proprietary Review /Public Disclosure paragraph, j i
- 7. incorporation of Paperwork Reduction Act for all letters requiring a .
f response, j
- 8. specification of Signature Blocks for enforcement letters (previously. ~!
included in ROI No. 0274), , j
- 9. deletion of Mobile Laboratory standard paragraph, and 1
- 10 . deletion of Inspection Report Number in the list of enclosures because the numbertis already listed in the subject.
1 C. Action:
- 1. Technical Staff Enclosure 1 (Standard Paragraphs for Nonescalated Enforcement Letters) J and Enclosure 3 (Standard Paragraphs for Escalated Enforcement Letters) will be retained and consulted by staff members who have responsibility- 8 for preparing enforcement letters. Enclosure 2 (Request for Nonescalated Enforcement ietter Form with Attachment) and Enclosure 4 (Request for Escalated Enforcement Letter Form - Attachment) will be completed and submitted to the word processing staff when a standard enforcement letter is required.
l Deviation from the text of a standard paragraph may be requested with 1 the concurrence of a Branch Chief. ]
>* l
- 2. Administrative Staff --
l l l The Director, Division of Resource Management and Administration, will l take necessary action (e.g., training, issuance of Instructions,. revision of ROI No. 0281 and reproduction of Enclosures 2 and 4) to
- administratively implement this Instruction.
l l 0.
Contact:
Comments concerning this Instruction should be directed to the Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordination Staff at extension 5505. s 1 I l
.a- _ - _ _ . . _ _ .. _ - _ _ _ _ _
r 3 0't l
~
Regional Office Instruction No. 0915, Revision 2 3 MAY 0 21986 l E. Effective Date: l This Instruction supersedes ROI No. 0915, Revision 1, and will become effective on May 15, 1986. ROI No. 0916, " Standard Paragraph for Enforce- i ment Notices," is to be used in conjunction with this Instruction. G4
, n . /W \
i J. Nelson Grace Regional Administrator l
Enclosures:
- 1. Standard Paragraphs for Nonescalated Enforcement Letters
- 2. Request for Nonescalated Enforcement Letter Form with Attachment i
- 3. Standard Paragraphs for Escalated ;
Enforcement Letters j
- 4. Request for Escalated Enforcement )
Letter Form with Attachment i 1 Distribution list A j l l \ l I O e 6 C______
t t
.. MAY 0 2 586 ENCLOSURE 1 .
STANDARD PARAGRAPHS FOR NONESCALATED ENFORCEMENT LETTERS (Clear Letters, Oeviations, or Severity Level IV or V Citations)' j TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE-
'I. Heading 4 II. Address 4 III. Subject 4 .
l l' A. " Clear Letters" or Transmission of an-Inspection-Report 4 Prior to Issuance of the Notice B. Transmission of a Notice of Deviation Without a Notice 4 of Violation C. Tran'smission of a Notice of Violation Involving No Civil 4L Penalty Action Cases Involving Both a Notice of Violation With No. Civil-D. 4 , Action and a Notice of. Deviation IV. Introductory Paragraph 4 A. To Reactor or Fuel Facility Licensees 4 B. To Materials Licensees 5 C. Documentation of Previously Issued Inspection Report 5 D. Documentation of Enforcement Conference . 5-V. Second Paragraph 5, i 1 A. Reactor or Fuel Facility Licensees 5' B. Materials Licenses '5 C. Sanagement and QA Team Inspection 5 VI. Third Paragraph 6 A. Clear 6 B. Violation (s) Only - 6 C. Deviation (s) Only 6 D. Violation (s) and Deviation (s) 6 VII. Fourth Paragraph (if appropriate) 6
. A. Request for Additional Response 6 B. Similar Violations -
7- ' C. Unresolved Items *
.7-D. Documentation of " Oral Licensee Commitment" 7 l
1
s; 1 Enclosure 1 2 PAGE VIII. Proprietary Review /Public Disclosure 7 A. If the Licensee Did Not Identify as Proprietary Any 7 of the Materials Provided to or Reviewed By the ' Inspector (s) During the Inspection B. If, After Proprietary Review By the Re'gional Staff, 7 There is Significant Doubts as to Whether or Not the Material is Proprietary , C. Safeguards /10 CFR 2.790 Exempt 7 D. National Security Information 8 E. Long Form 8 l IX. Paperwork Reduction Act 8 I l- X. Closing Paragraph 8 l XI. Signature Block 8 I i A. Reaional Administrator 8 B. Division Director . 9
- 1. Reactor Lfcensees (DRP) 9 i
- 2. Fuel Faciiities and Materials Licensees (DRSS) 9 l C. Branch Chief .9 1 ~. Reactor Licensees (DRP) 9
- a. Projects Branch 1 9 l b. Projects Branch 2 10
- c. Projects Branch 3 10
- 2. Fuel Facilities and Material Licensees (DRSS) 10 )
}
XII. Enclosure (s) 10 l A. Notice of Violation 10 B. Notice of Deviation 10 C. ' Inspection Report 10 i D. Other 10 l XIII. Distribution 11 A. General cc and bec lists 11 B. Additions to Genert1 cc and bec Lists 11
- 1. To cc w/ encl (s) 11 1 2. To bec w/ enc 1(s) 11 C. Special Distribution for Packages Containing 2.790, .11 i Confidential, Safeguards, and Classified Information j
- 1. For 50 Docket Numbers 11 i
- a. Safeguards Information - PSS Correspondence 11 .1
- b. Classified Information - PSS Correspondence 12
- c. 2.790 Information 12 l
- .; :~ ;, .
enciosure 1 3 MAY 0 2 E86 PAGE
- 2. For'70 Docket Numbers . 12
- a. 2.790 Information - MC&A Correspondence 12
- b. 2.790 Information - PSS Correspondence' 13
- c. Classified Information - MC&A Correspondence -13
- d. Classified Information - PSS Correspondence. 13 D. Additions to special distribution 1-4
- 1. .To cc w/ enc 1(s) 14 2.- To bec _w/ enc 1(s)- 14
- 3. 'To bec w/ Inspection Summary 14
- 4. To'bec w/o Enc 1(s) 14 XIV. Concurrences (list with bec)- 14' l
l 6 4 L l I
-----m---_-.__.___ .m__ _,_ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
, I Enclosure 1 4 MAY 0 21986 i I. HEADING Occket No(s).
License No(s). II. ADDRESS (name of licensee) ATTN: (recipient name) (recipient title) (licensee mailing address) Gentlemen: III. SUBJECT A. " Clear Letter" or Transmission of an Inspection Report Prior To Issuance of the Notice:
\
\
SUBJECT:
INSPECTION REPORT N0(S). ) B. Transmission of a Notice of Deviation Without a Notice of Violation:
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF DEVIATION (INSPECTION REPORT N0(S). ) l C. Transmission of a Notice of Violation Involving No Civil Penalty Action: l
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF VIOLATION ! (INSPECTION REPORT N0(S). ) D. Cases Involving Both a Notice of Violation With No Civil Penalty Action ; and a Notice of Deviation- ' l SJBJECT: NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND NOTICE Or DEVIATION (INSPECTION REPORT N0(S). ) IV. INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH l A. To Reactor or Fuel Facility Licensees: This refers to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection , conducted by (inspector-in-charge) on (date(s)). The inspection l included a review of activities authorized for your (name) facility. At the conclusion of the inspection, the findings were discussed with those members of your staff identified in the enclosed inspection report. i l l
Enclosure 1 5 NLAY 0 2 t)86
- 8. To Materials Licensees:
This refers to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted by (inspector-in-charge} on (date(s)). At the conclusion of the inspection, the findings were discussed with (name of licensee representative), (title). C. Documentation of Previously Issued Inspection Report: NOTE: If the Inspection Report is issued prior to the issuance of the Notice, the following sentence will be added to the Introductory Paragraph of a letter transmitting a Notice. The report documenting this inspection was sent to you with a letter dated (date). D. Documentation of Enforcement Conference: NOTE: When appropriate, the following sentence will be added as the last sentence in the Introductory Paragraph. NRC concerns relative to the inspection findings were discussed by (principal NRC attendee name), (title), NRC, Region II, with (you and your staff or (principal licensee attendee name), (title), (facility),) in an Enforcement Conference held on (date). V. SECOND PARAGRAPH A. Reactor or Fuel Facility Licensees: Areas examined during the inspection are identified. in the report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observation of activities in progress. B. Materials Licensees: The i spection was an examination of activities conducted under your license with respect to radiation safety and compliance with NRC regulations and the conditions o' your license. It included selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and direct observations by the inspector. C. Management and QA Team Inspection: The inspection was a comprehensive examination of your management and , quality assurance controls related to licensed activities. The ' inspection was conducted in selected key areas of responsibility at both the giant site and your corporate offices. Areas examined during the inspection and our findings are discussed in the enclosed inspection report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and direct observations by the inspector.
Enclosure 1 6 . VI. THIRO PARAGRAPH A. Clear Within the scope of the inspection, no violations or deviations-were identified. B. Violation (s) Only: The inspection findings indicate that certain activities appeared to - violate NRC requirements. The violation (s), -eferences to pertinent requirements, and elements to be included in your response are described in the enclosed Notice of Violation. 1 C. Deviation (s) Only: The inspection revealed no violation (s) of NRC requirements. However, certain activities having safety significance appeared to' deviate from. (fill in)*. The deviation (s) and elements 'to be included in your-response are described in the enclosed Notice of Deviation. D. Violation (s) and Deviation (s): The inspection findings indicate that certain activities appeared to violate NRC requirements and other' activities appeared to deviate from (fill in)*. The violation (s) and deviation (s), with pertinent references and elements to be included in your response,-are described in the enclosed Notices.
*1. a commitment (s) to the NRC
- 2. applicable codes, guides, or standards approved by the NRC. ..
- 3. generally accepted industry practices VII. FOURTH PARAGRAPH (If Appropriate)
A. Request for Additional Response: In addition to the need for corrective action regarding the specific matters identified in the enclosed Notice, we are concerned about the implementation of your (fill in)* that permitted this situation to j i l develop. Consequently, your response should describe those particular I actions taken or planned to improve the effectiveness of your program. !
*1. management control systems
- 2. quality assurance program
- 3. security program-
- 4. radiation protection program
- 5. radioactive waste management system
- 6. (other)
- f I Enclosure 1 7 MAY 0 21986 B. Similar Violations:
The violation described in the enclosed Notice (or the -- first, second, l etc. -- violation described in the enclosed Notice) is similar to a ! violation contained in the Notice sent to'you by our letter dated (date). I Because "similar violations," as described in the NRC Enforcement Policy, l are of significant concern to the NRC, please give particular attention l in your response to the identification of the root cause of this problem and your corrective action to prevent recurrence. C. Unresolved Items: i Your attention is invited to unresolved item (s) identified in the inspection eport. This(These) matter (s) will be pursued during future inspections. D. Documentation of " Oral Licensee Commitment": l The enclosed Inspection Report documents an oral commitment (see l page _) made by a licensee representative and discussed in the exit ! interview. If your understanding of this commitment differs from the report statements, please inform this office promptly. VIII. PROPRIETARY REVIEW /PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION A. If the Licensee Did Not Identify as Proprietary Any of the Materials Provided To or Reviewed By the Inspector (s) During the Inspection: In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosure (s) will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. . I B. If, After Proprietary Reviaw By the Regional Staff, There is Signifi-cant Doubts as to Whether or Not the Material is Proprietary: In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(a), a copy of this letter, its i enclosure (s), and any reply will be placed in the NRC Public Document l Room. If you wish to withhold information contained therein, please notify this office by telephone within ten days of the date of this letter and submit a written application to withhold information contained therein promptly thereafter. Such application must be consistent with the requirement of 10 CFR 2.790(b)(1). If we do not l hear from you in this regard within the period specified above, this letter, its enclosures (s), and any reply will be made available to the public and be pi ned in the NRC Public Document Room. C. Safeguards /10 CFR 2.790 Exempt: In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(d) and 10 CFR 73.21, safeguards activities and security measures are exempt from public disclosure; therefore, the enclosure (s) to this letter, with the exception of the report cover page which presents a nonexempt summary, will not be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
Enclosure 1 8 MAY 0 21966 D. National Security Information: ; The (enclosure contains or enclosures contain) National Security. 'I Information as defined in 10 CFR 95. Its disclosure to unauthorized individuals is prohibited by E.O. 12065. Therefore, the enclosure (s), 1 with the exception of its cover page which presents an unclassified summary, will not be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. E. Long Form: NOTE: Use this form when the licensee is likely. to be unfamiliar with the NRC's Rules and Regulations. l in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of NRC regulations, a copy of this letter, its enclosure (s), and any reply will be ' placed - in the NRC Public Document Room. If the report contains any information that you (. consider to be exempt from disclosure under 10'CFR 9.5(a)(4), you must:' ! l (a) notify this office by telephone within ten days from the date of ! I this letter of your intention to file a request for withholding and (b) ! in your reply to this letter, include a written application to withhold such information. Consistent with Section 10 CFR 2.790(b)(1), such application -must be accompanied by an affidavit executed by the owner 1 of the information which identifies the document or part thereof sought to be withheld and a full statement of the reasons why the information , should be withheld from public disclosure. This section further requires the statement to address with specificity each consideration listed in 10 CFR 2.790(b)(4). The information sought to be withheld shall be incorporated as far as possible into a separate part of the affidavit. If we do not hear from you.in this regard ~within the period specified above, t.his letter, its encloure(s), and .tny reply will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. . .. IX. PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT I NOTE: This paragraph is required for all letters requiring a response (i.e., letters transmitting Notices or requesting additional reply or clarification of previously identified problems). The responses directed by this letter and its enclosure (s) are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,- PL 96-511. r X. CLOSING PARAGRAPH Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact us. I XI. SIGNATURE BLOCK A. All letters that deviate significantly from the standard paragraphs are to be prepared for the Regional Administrator's signature. Letters must also be prepared for the Regional Administrator's signature if an Enforcement Conference was held. l
MAY.0 2 $66 ' Enclosu're 1 9 Sincerely, (name) l Regional Administrator l B. All letters transmitting Notices that contain Severity. Level IV violations o.Lr letters containing the extra paragraph expressing concern , about the adequacy of management controls that do not require the ] Regional Administrator's signature are to be prepared for the signature of the appropriate DRP or DRSS Division Director.
- 1. Reactor Licensees (DRP):
Sincerely, (name) , Director Division of Reactor Projects
- 2. Fuel Facilities and Materials Licensees (DRSS):
1 i Sincerely, (name) , Director l Division of Radiation Safety - ! and Safeguards C. All " clear letters" or letters transmitting Notices of Deviations or Notices of Violation containing Severity Level V violations that utilize standard paragraphs are to be prepared for the signature of the respon'sible DRP or DRSS Branch Chief.
- 1. Reactor Licensees (DRP):
- a. Projects Bran,ch 1:
Sincerely, (name) , Chief Reactor Project Branch 1 Division of Reactor Projects
~
. , p I
Enclosure 1 10 MAY 0 2 t986 (
- b. Projects Branch 2:
Sincerely, (name) , Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 Division of Reactor Projects
- c. Projects Branch 3:
Sincerely, j l (name) , Chief Reactor Projects Branch 3 Division of Reactor Projects
- 2. Fuel Facilities and Materials Licensees (DR'S):
Sincerely, , 1 (name) , Chief i Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Branch l Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards. .. XII. ENCLOSURE (S) NOTE: Numerically list enclosures only if there is more than one. A. Notice of Violation B. Notice of Deviation C. Inspection Report D. Other Enclosure (s): (list other enclosure (s)) l
l Enclosure 1-MAY 0 21986 l 1 XIII. DISTRIBUTION:
'A. General cc and bec Lists:
cc w/ enc 1(s): l bec w/ enc 1(s): 1 NRC Resident Inspector i Document' Control Desk t- State (Commonwealth) of B. Additions to General cc and bec Lists:
- 1. To cc w/ enc 1(s): (list additions)
- 2. To bec w/ enc 1(s): '(list additions) l C. Special Distribution For Packages Containing 2.790, Confidential,.
Safeguards, and Classified Information. NOTE: The following distributions are only used by personnel . from the Material Control & Accountability Section. (MC&A) and the Physical Security Section (PSS).
- 1. For 50 Docket Numbers:
- a. Safeguards Information - PSS Correspondence:- - l cc w/ enc 1(s):
4 bec w/ encl (s): IE File '
/ NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB NRR/DL/SSPB bec w/ Inspection Summary:
Document Contfoi Desk, 016 NRC Resident Inspector State (Commonwealth) of , f I
T liId Enclosure 1 12 MAY 0 21986 1 l
\
- b. Classified Information - PSS Correspondence:
]
cc w/ encl (s): bec w/ enc 1(s): NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB l 1 bec w/ Inspection Summary: IE File
' Document Control Desk,.016 ,1 NRC Resident Inspector State (Commonwealth) of
- c. 2.790 Information:
cc w/ enc 1(s): bec w/ enc 1(s): l IE File i NMSS/SGPL l l NRR/DL/SSPB Document Control Desk, 016 NRC Resident In.spector ; bec w/ Inspection Summary: State (Commonwealth) of
- 2. For 70 Docket Numbers:
- a. 2.790 Information - MC&A Correspondence: *
cc w/ enc 1(s): l bec w/ enc 1(s): Document Control Desk Safeguards and Materials Program Branch, EW-359 Fuel Facility Safeguards Licensing Branch, 881-S5 NRC Resident Inspector (for NFS only) bec w/ Inspection Summary: State (Commonwealth) of bec w/o enc 1(s): < License Fee Management Bu nch l i
Enclosure 1 13 MAY 0 2.1986 1 j i 2 790 Information - PSS Correspondence * ! b. cc w/ encl (s): { bec w/ encl (s): l Document Control Desk, 016
- IE/DFFMS/SG NMSS/SG NMSS File NRC Resident Inspector (for NFS only) l 'l l bec w/ Inspection Summary: -
State (Commonwealth) of bec w/o encl (s): License Fee Management Branch l
- c. Classified Information - MC&A Correspondence.
-l cc w/ encl (s):
bec w/ encl (s): l Safeguards and Materials Program i Branch, EW-359 ' Fuel Facility Safeguards Licensing Branch, 881-SS NRC Resident Inspector (for NFS only) bec.w/ Inspection Summary: Document Control Desk State (Commonwealth) of. bec w/o encl (s): License Fee Management Branch
- d. Classified Information - PSS Correspondence:
cc w/ enc 1(s): bec w/ encl (s): NMSS/SG NMSS File - NRC Resident Inspector (for NFS only) bec w/ Inspection Summary: IE/DFFMS/SG Document Control Desk, 016 State (Commonwealth) of bec w/c encl (s): License Fee Management Branch l l
~
1 MAY 0 21986-Enclosure 1 14 D. Additions to Special Distribution j
- 1. To ec w/ enc 1(s): (list additions) )
(list additions)'
~
- 2. To bec w/ enc 1(s):
I 3, To bec w/ Inspection Summary: (list additions)
- 4. To bec w/o enc 1(s): (list additions)
XIV. CONCURRENCES l NOTE: The Director, Enforcement and- Investigation. Coordination Staff l (EICS) should be on the concurrence list for letters to the licensee addressing similar violations, denials, or deviations and for letters addressing. inspection reports where findings.are being. considered for escalateo enforcement actions. The - individual signing the enforcement action should not be listed. 4 l 1
.i 1
1
.'. .o
. Q Q ENCLOSURE 2 REQUEST'FOR NONESCALATED ENFORCEMENT LETTER FORM (Clear Letters, Oeviations or Severity-Level IV or V Citations)
~
Check appropriate boxes, fill in blanks, and circle appropriate answers. I. HEADING: DOCKET N0(S): _ ~~ LICENSE N0(S): II. ADOF95S: l NAME OF LICENSEE: III.
SUBJECT:
(Check with appropr'iate box below.) i l
/ / A. " CLEAR LETTER" OR TRANSMISSION OF INSPECTION REPORT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE
/ / B. NOTICE OF DEVIATION WITHOUT A NOTICE OF VIOLATION'
/ / C. NOTICE OF VIOLATION INVOLVING NO CIVIL PENALTY ACTION
/ / 0. CASES INVOLVING BOTH A NOTICE OF VIOLATION WITH NO CIVIL PENALTY ACTION AND A NOTICE OF OEVIATION ,
~~
(Circle appropriate answer below.) REPORT NO. or REPORT NOS. INSPECTION REPORT N0(S) , 4 w___________.__________.________________.._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. MAY 0 2 $66 Enclosure 2 2 i
IV. INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH:
~
(Check appropriate boxes below.)
/ / A. TO REACTOR OR FUEL FACILITY LICENSEES
/ / B. TO MATERIALS LICENSEES
/ / C. DOCUMENTATION OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED INSPECTION REPORT (Optional) ,
.)
NOTE: When the Inspection Report is issued prior to'the issuance of the ' Notice and the Notice will be transmitted by this let W , item C should be selected in addition to items A and B.
/ / 0. DOCUMENTATION OF ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE (Optional) :
NOTE: When an Enforcement Conference is held, this item should be selected in addition to items A, B, and/or C. (Circle appropriate answer below if box IV.D has.been checked.) YOU AND YOUR or PRINCIPAL LICENSEE ATTENDEE YOUR STAFF (if not addressee) r (Provide requested information if applicable.) INSPECTOR-IN-CHARGE (reference IV.A and IV.8): ; DATES (S) 0F INSPECTION (reference IV.A. and IV.8): FACILITY NAME (reference IV. A, IV.B, and IV.D): - MATERIALS LICENSEE REPRESENTATIVE NAME (reference IV.8): MATERIALS LICENSEE REPRESENTATIVE TITLE-(reference IV.8): DATE INSPEb6 FED REPORT WAS ISSUED IF PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE (reference IV.C): PRINCIPAL NRC CONFERENCE ATTENDEE NAME (reference IV.0): PRINCIPAL NRC CONFERENCE -ATTENDEE TITLE (reference IV.D): PRINCIPAL LICENSEE CONFERENCE ATTENDEE NAME (if not addressee) (reference IV.0): PRINCIPAL. LICENSEE CONFERENCE ATTENDEE TITLE (if not addressee) (reference. IV.0): ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE DATE (reference IV.0): SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT ACTION (reference IV.0):
1 Enclosure 2 ~3 MAY 0 2 586 g
.I j
V. SECOND PARAGRAPH-(Check appropriate box below.)
/ / A. REACTOR OR FUEL FACILITY LICENSEES j
/ / B. MATERIAL LICENSEES .)
/ / C. MANAGEMENT AND QA TEAM INSPECTION VI. THIRD PARAGRAPH:
(Check' appropriate boxes below.)
~
q
/ / A. CLEAR q
/ / B. VIOLATION (S) ONLY
/ / C. DEVIATION (S) ONLY DEVIATE FROM:
/ / 1. A COMMITMENT (5) TO THE NRC
/ / 2. APPLICABLE CODES,. GUIDES,'0R STANDARDS APPROVED BY THE NRC
/ / 3. GENERALLY ACCEPTED INDUSTRY PRACTICES 1
/ / D. VIOLATION (S) AND DEVIATION (S)-
DEVIATE FROM:
/ / 1. A COMMITMEtlT(S).TO THE NRC
/ / 2. APPLICABLE CODES, GUIDES, OR. STANDARDS
.. APPROVED BY THE NRC
/ / 3. GENERALLY ACCEPTED INDUSTRY PRACTICES (Circle appropriate answers below if applicable.)
VIOLATION IS/HAS or VIOLATIONS ARE/HAVE (reference VI.B through VI.0) DEVIATION or DEVIATIONS (reference VI.C and VI.0) A COMMITMENT or COMMITMENTS (reference VI.C.1 and 'VI.D.'1) l i i _ ___a
' Enclosure 2- 4- MAY 0 2 G86 VII. FOURTH PARAGRAPH (IF APPROPRIATE): YES or NO (Check appropriate boxes below if applicable.)
/ / A. REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL RESPONSE CONCERNED ABOUT IMPLEMENTATION OF:
/ / 1. MANAGEMENT CCNTROL SYSTEMS l / / 2. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGPAM
/ / 3. SECURITY PROGRAM i
/ / 4. RADIATION CONTROL PROGRAM
/ / 5. RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
{ / / 6. OTHER:
/ / B. SIMILAR VIOLATIONS
/ / C. UNRESOLVED ITEMS
/ / D. DOCUMENTATION OF "0RAL LICENSEE COMMITMENT" (Circle appropriate answers below for if boxes VII.B or VII.C are checked.)
THE VIOLATION (S) DESCRIBED or THE FIRST, SECOND, ETC. (reference VII.B)
... VIOLATION (S) DESCRIBED
~
UNRESOLVED ITEM or UNRESOLVED ITEMS (reference VII.C) THIS MATTER or THESE MATTERS (reference VII.C) (Provide requested information if box VII.B is checked.) DATE OF N0'T ICE CONTAINING SIMILAR VIOLATION: l i
l 1 Enclosure 2 5 MAY 0 21986 l 1 VIII. PROPRIETARY REVIEW /PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION: I
)
NOTE: Use the long form when the licensee is likely to be unfamiliar with . the NRC's Rules and Regulations. 1 (Check appropriate box below.)
/ / A. IF THE LICENSEE DIO NOT IDENTIFY AS. PROPRIETA'RY ANY: 0F THE - I MATERIALS PROVIDED TO OR REVIEWED BY THE INSPECTOR (S) DURING THE INSPECTION. l
/ / B. IF, AFTER PROPRIETARY REVIEW BY THE REGIONAL STAFF, THERE IS !
SIGNIFICANT DOUBT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE MATERIAL IS PROPRIETARY.
/ / C. SAFEGUARDS /10 CFR 2.790 EXEMPT
/ / 0. NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION
/ / E. LONG FORM !
(Circle appropriate answer below.) J ENCLOSURE CONTAINS or ENCLOSURES CONTAIN IX. PAPERWORK REOUCTION ACT: (Circle appropriate answer.) YES or NO NOTE: This paragraph is reouired for all letters. requiring a response (i.e., letters transmitting Notices or requesting additional reply or clarification of previously identified problems.) (Circle appropriate answer below if "YES" is circled above). ENCLOSURE or ENCLOSURES I l X. CLOSING PARAGRAPH: 4
=
_. ___.m__
Enclosure 2 6 XI. SIGNATURE BLOCK: (Check appropriate boxes below.)
/ / A. ALL LETTERS THAT DEVIATE SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THE STANDAR0 ..
PARAGRAPHS OR IF AN ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE WAS HELO (Regional Asinistrator).
/ / B. ALL LETTERS TRANSMITTING NOTICES THAT CONTAIN SEVERITY LEVEL IV VIOLATIONS OR LETTERS CONTAINING THE EXTRA PARAGRAPH 1 EXPRESSING CONCE N ABOUT THE ADEQUACY OF MANAGEMENT CONTROLS l THAT 00 NOT REQUIRE THE REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR'S SIGNATURE '
i (appropriate Division Director)
/ / 1. REACTOR LICENSEES (ORP)
/ / 2. FUEL FACILITIES AND MATERIALS LICENSEES (ORSS) l / / C. ALL " CLEAR LETTERS" OR LETTERS TRANSMITTING NOTICES OR l l OEVIATIONS OR NOTICES .0F VIOLATION ' CONTAINING .. SEVERITY UTILIZE stall 0ARO PARAGRAPHS LEVEL V VIOLATIONS THAT (responsible ORP or DRSS Branch Chief)
/ / 1. REACTOR LICENSEES (ORP)
/ / a. PROJECTS BRANCH 1 l
/ / b. PROJECTS BRANCH 2
/ / c. PROJECTS BRANCH 3
/ / 2. FUELFACILITIESAND,MATERIALSLICENSEES(ORIS)
XII. ENCLOSURE (S): NOTE: Numerically list enclosures only if there is more than one. (Checkapp[opriateboxesbelow.)
/ / A. NOTICE OF VIOLATION
/ / B. NOTICE OF DEVJATION
/' / C. INSPECTION REPORT l / / 0. OTHER ENCLOSURE (S) (List):
(Circle appropriate answer below). l ENCLOSURE or ENCLOSURES
Enclosure 2 7 ' MAY 0 21986 XIII. DISTRIBUTION: (Check appropriate boxes below.) I / / A. GENERAL _cc AND bec LISTS: 1
/ / B. ADDITIONS
/ /' 1. T0 cc w/ encl (s) ,
LIST ADDITIONS: 1
/ / 2. TO bec w/ enc 1(s)
LIST ADDITIONS: 1
/ / C. SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION FOR PACKAGES CONTAINING 2.790, CON-FIDENTIAL, SAFEGUARDS, AND CLASSIFIED INFORMATION (This_ box-may only be' checked by personnel from the Material Control'&
Accountability Section (MC&A) . and the Physical Security ., j Section (PSS). Please r'efer to the attachment to this form i f item XIII.C'was selected.) (Circle appropriate answers below.) ENCL or ENCLS STATE or- COMMONWEALTH NAME OF STATE OF COMMONWEALTH: XIV. CONCURRENCES (list with bec): NOTE: The Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordination Staff , (EICS) should be on the concurrence list for letters to the 1.4censee addressing similar violations, denials, or deviations,and for letters addressing inspection reports where findings are being considered for escalated enforcement actions. The individual signing the enforcement action should not be listed. (List names of appropriate individuals): O ,
ATTACHMENT MAY 02 si XIII.C. SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION FOR PACKAGES ' CONTAINING 2.790, CONFIDENTIAL, SAFEGUARDS, AND CLASSIFIED INFORMATION NOTE: The following distributions are only used by personnel from the Material Control & Accountability Section (MC&A)'and the Physical Security Section (PSS) if item XIII.C was selected. (Check appropriate boxes below.)
/ / 1. FOR 50 DOCKET NUMBERS
/ / a. SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION (PSS)
(add ce list page 66)
/ / b. CLASSIFIED-INFORMATION (PSS) l (add cc list -.page 67)
/ / c. 2,790 INFORMATION (add cc list page 68)
/ / 2. FOR 70 DOCKET NUMBERS
/ / a. 2.790 iNFORMATION (MC&A)
(add cc list Page 62)
/ / b. 2.790 INFORMATION (PSS)
(add cc list - Page 64)
/ / c. CLASSIFIED INFORMATION (MC&A)
(add cc list page 63)
/ / d. CLASSIFIED INFORMATION (PSS)
(add cc list - Page 65)
/ / D. ADDITIONS TO SPECIAL DISTRIBUTIONS
/ / 1. TO cc w/ enc 1(s)
LIST ADDITIONS:
/ / 2. TO bec w/ enc 1(s)
LIST ADDITIONS:
/ / 3.- T0 bec Summary w/ Inspection LIST ADDITIONS:
, / '7 4. TO bec w/o enc 1(s) l LIST ADDITIONS: l IS NFS THE' RECIPIENT OF THE ENFORCEMENT LETTER (reference XIII.C.2)? YES NO (add Resident Inspector (delete Resident Inspector to bec w/ enc 1(s)) from bec w/ enc 1(s))'
J MAY 0 21986 ENCLOSURE 3 STANDARD PARAGRAPHS FOR ESCALATED ENFORCEMENT LETTERS (Civil Penalty or Severity Level I, II, or III Citations) TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. Heading 3 i II. Address 3 III. Subject 3 1 A. Transmission of a Notice of. Violation Involving No 3 Civil Penalty Action B. Transmission of Notice of Violation Involving Civil 3 ( Penalty Action C. Cases Involving Both a Notice of Violation With No 3 l Civil Actior and a Notice of Deviation 'i D. Cases Involving Both a Notice of. Violation and -3 i Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty and a Notice ; of Deviation ; IV. Intr'oductory Paragraph -3 ' V. Second Paragraph 4. VI. Third Paragraph 4 - A, Paragraph for Transmission of the Inspection Report. 4 Prior to Issuance of the Notice B. Notice of Violation (without civil penalty action) 4
- 1. Standard Notice of Violation 4
- 2. Shipment Violation (s) Where Enforcement Action 5 Has Been Taken by the State C. Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of. Civil 5 Penalty
- 1. Base Civil Penalty 5
- 2. Mitigated Base Civil Penalty 5
- 3. Escalated Base Civil Penalty 6 VII. Special Paragraphs (if appropriate) 6.
A. Request for Additional Response 6 B. Similar Violations 6 C. Unresolved Items 6 D. Documentation of " Oral Licensee Commitment" 7 l l 1 E_____________.____.. __
l Enclosure 3 2 MAY 0 21986 VIII. Required Response Paragraph 7 IX. Proprietary Review /Public Disclosure 7 A. If the Licensee'Did Not Identify as Proprietary Any 7 of the Materials Provided to or Reviewed By the Inspector (s) During the Inspection B. If, After Proprietary Review By the Regional Staff, 7-There is Significant Doubts as to Whether or Not the Material is Proprietary 1 C. Safeguards /10 CFR 2.790 Exempt 7 ! l D. National Security Information 8 ! E. Long Form 8 i i X. Paperwork Reduction Act 8
]
XI. Closing Paragraph -8 I XII. Signature Block 9 4 XIII. Enclosure (s) 9 A. Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition o'f- 9 Civil Penalty B. Notice of Violation 9 , C. Notice of Deviation 9
- 0. Inspection Report 9 E. Other 9 l XIV. Distribution 9-
? .- A. General cc and bec lists 9 i B. Additions to General cc and bec Lists 9
- 1. To cc w/ enc 1(s) 9
- 2. To bec w/ encl (s) .
9 C. Special Distribution for Packages Containing 2.790,- 10
' Confidential, Safeguards, and Classified Information
- 1. For 50 Docket Numbers 10-
- a. Safeguards Information - PSS Correspondence 10
- b. Classified Information - PSS Correspor.dence 10
- c. 2.790 Information 10
- 2. For 70 Docket Numbers 11
- a. 2.790 Information - MC&A Correspondence- .11
- b. 2.790 Information - PSS Correspondence. 11
- c. Classified Information - MC&A Correspondence 11
- d. Classified Information - PSS Correspondence' 12 l
- 0. Additions to special distribution 12
- 1. To cc w/ encl (s) 12
- 2. To bec w/ enc 1(s) 12
- 3. To bec w/ Inspection Summary 12-
- 4. To bec w/o Encl (s) 12 XV. Concurrences (list with bec) 12
i i Enclosure 3 3 l l I. HEADING Occket No(s). , License No(s). j EA XX-XX ; II. ADDRESS s (name of licensee) ATTN: (recipient name) i (recipient title) (licensee mailing address) ! Gentlemen: III. SUBJECT A. Transmission of a Notice of Violation Involving No Civil Penalty Action:
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF VIOLATION (INSPECTION REPORT N0(S). )
- 8. Transmission of a Notice of Vicistion Involving Civil Penalty Action:
l
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY ! (INSPECTION REPORT N0(S). ) C. Cases Involving Both a Notice of Violation With No Civil Penalty Action j a_nd n a Notice of Deviation: j
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND NOTICE OF DEVIATION. - l i (INSPECTION REPORT N0(S). ) D. Cases involving Both a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of , Civil Penalty and a Notice of Deviation: ) l SUBJEOT: NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY NOTICE OF DEVIATION ! (INSPECTION REPORT N0(S). ) I IV. INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH j This refers to the Nuclear kegulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted l by (inspector-in-charge) at the (facility name) on (date). The inspection { included a review of the circumstances surrounding (the subject of the ; enforcement action). As a result of this inspection, significant failures j to comply with NRC regulatory requirements were identified *, and accordingly, l NRC concerns relative to the inspection findings were discussed by (principal ! NRC attendee name), (title), NRC, Region II, with (you and your staff or ] (principal licensee attendee name), (title), (facility),) in an Enforcement Conference held on (date), i
- NOTE: If the violation (s) was(were) identified by the licensee, add a I l statement to so indicate. j 1
l
. i i
Enclosure 3 4 m 02 5 j I NOTE: If the Inspection Report is issued prior to the issuance of the i Notice, the following sentence will be added to the Introductory l Paragraph. The report documenting this inspection was sent to you with a letter dated i (date). ) i V. SECOND PARAGRAPH l The violations (s) described in the enclosed Notice of Violation (and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty) involved a failure to (insert failure). The events that resulted in this(these) violation (s) included (describe the events that resulted in the violation (s) including the length of time the violation (s) e"isted, when it(they) was(were) identified, the mode the plant { was operating in (if applicable), and the root cause(s) of this(these) j event ( s)) . j VI. THIRD PARAGRAPH l A. Paragraph for the Transmission of the Inspection Report Prior to l Issuance of the Notice: l The violations (s) described in the enclosed Inspection Report is(are) I l under consideration for escalated enforcement action. Accordingly, no l Notice of Violation is being issued at this timie, and no response to this letter is required. However, please be advised that the number l and characterization of violations described in the enclosed Inspection Report may change as a result o.f further NRC review. You will be advised by separate correspondence of the results of our deliberations on this matter. B. Notice of Violation (without civil penalty action):
- 1. Standard Notice of Violation:
In accordance with the " General Statement of ?olicy and Procedure f,er NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1985), the violation (s) described in the enclosed Notice has(have) been classified as (a Severity Level violation or (write in l respective Severity Levels if more than one violation exists)). Normally, a civil penalty is considered for a Severity Level violation. However, after consultation with the Director,. Office of Inspection and Enforcement, I have decided that a civil penalty will not be proposed in this case because (explanation based on mitigating factors in the enforcement policy).
Enclosure 3 5 MAY 0 2 G86
- 2. Shipment Violation Where Enforcement Action Has Been Taken By the State:
In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1985), the violation (s) described in the enclosed Notice has(have) been classified as (a Severity Level violation or (write in respective Severity Levels if more than one violation exists)). Normally, a civil penalty is considered for a Severity Level ) violation. However, (after consultation with the Director, Office ! of Inspection and Enforcement,) I have decided that a civil l l penalty will not be proposed in this case because enforcement action has already been taken by the state. C. Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty:
- 1. Base Civil Penalty:
To emphasize (state the area where improvement is needed), I have i been authorized, af ter consultation with the Director, Office of l Inspection and Enforcement, to issue tha enclosed Notice of l Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount .. ! of (written value) Dollars (5XXX,XXX) for the violation (s) ! described in the enclosed Notice. In accordance with the " General l Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Action," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1985) (Enforcement Policy), the l violation (s) described in the enclosed Notice has(have) been i categorized as (a Severity Level violation or (write in i respective Severity Levels if more than one violation exists)). l The escalation and mitigation factors in the enforcement Policy were considered, and no adjustment of the base civil penalty. amount has been deemed appropriate. I
- 2. Mitigated Base Civil Penalty:
l To emphasize (state the area where improvement is needed), I have been authorized, af ter consultation with the Director, Office of l Inspection and Enforcement, to issue the enclosed Notice of I Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of (written value) Dollars ($XXX,XXX) for the violation (s) described in the enclosed Notice. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Action," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1985) (Enforcement Policy), the violation (s) described in the enclosed Notice has(have) been categorized as (a Severity Level violation or (write in respective Severity Levels if more than one violation exists)). The base value of a civil penalty for a Severity Level violation is $XXX,XXX. The NRC Enforcement Policy allows for reduction of a civil penalty under certain circumstances. In this case, the base civil penalty amount has been reduced by XX percent because (use mitigating factors in the enforcement policy). l
J Enclosure 3 6 02 M 1
- 3. Escalated Base Civil Penalty:
To emphasize Qtate the area where improvement is needed), I have been authorized, af ter consultation with the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, to issue the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty (ies) in the amount of (written value) Dollars (SXXX,XXX) for the violation (s) described in the enclosed Notice. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Action," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1985) (Enforcement Policy), the i violation (s) described in the enclosed Notice has(have) been I categorized as (a Severity Level violation or (write in resp-tive Severity Levels if more than one violation exists)). The b .se value of a civil penalty for a Severity Level violation is $XXX,XXX. The escalation and mitigation factors were considered, and the base civil penalty amount has been increased by XX percent because (use factors in enforcement policy). VII. SPECIAL PARAGRAPHS (If Appropriate A. Request for Additional Response: In addition to the need for corrective action regarding the specific l , matters identified in the enclosed Notice, we are concerned about the ! implementation of your (fill in)" that permitted this situation to develop. Consequently, your response should describe those particular actions taken or planned to improve the effectiveness of your program. B. Similar Violations: The violation described in the enclosed Notice (or , the -- f i r s t ,. - , second, etc. -- violation described in the enclosed Notice) is similar to a violation contained in the Notice sent to you by our letter dated (date). Because "similar violations," as described in the NRC Enforcement Policy, are of significant concern to the NRC, please give particular attention in your response to the identification of the root cause.cf this problem and your corrective action to prevent recurrence. C. Unresolved Items: Your attention is invited to unresolved item (s) identified in the inspection report. This(These) matter (s) will be pursued during future inspections.
*l. management control systems
- 2. quality assurance program
- 3. security program 4 radiation protection program
- 5. radioactive waste management system
- 6. (other)
Enclosure 3 7 ; MAY 0 2 886. 1 D. Documentation of " Oral Licensee Commitment": The enclosed Inspection Report documents an oral commitment (see ! page _) made by a licensee representative and discussed in the exit ; interview. If your understanding of this commitment differs from the report statements, please inform this office promptly. VIII. REQUIRED RESPONSE PARAGRAPH q You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specifled in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response. In your i response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional actions you plan to prevent recurrence. After reviewing your response to this Notice, including your proposed corrective actions, the NRC will determine whether further NRC enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements. IX. PR0pRIETARY REVIEW /PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION A. If the Licensee Did Not Identify as Proprietary Any of the' Materials Provided To or Reviewed By the Inspector (s) During the Inspection: j In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," ]' Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosure (s) will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. B. If, After Proprietary Review By the Regional Staff, There is Signifii-cant Doubts as to Whether or Not the Material is Proprietary: In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(a), a -copy of this letter, its enclosure (s), and any reply will be placed 'in the NRC Public Document Room. If you wish to withhold information contained -therein, please notify this office by telephone within ten days 'of the date.. of this letter and submit a written application to withhold information contained therein promptly thereafter. Such application must be consistent with the requirement cf 10 CFR 2.790(b)(1). If we do not. hear f. rom you in this regard within the period specified. above, this - letter, its enclosures (s), and any reply will be made available to the public and be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. C. Safeguards /10 CFR 2.790 Exempt: In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(d) and 10 CFR 73.21, safeguards activities and security measures are exempt .from public disclosure; therefore, the enclosure (s) to this letter, with the exception .of the report cover page which presents a nonexempt summary, will not be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
)
1
.. s . .
Enclosure 3 8 MAY 0 2 h)B6
- 0. National Security Information:
The (enclosure contains er enclosures contain) National Security Information as defined in 10 CFR 95. Its disclosure to unauthorized individuals is prohibited by E.O. 12065. Therefore, the enclosure (s), with the exception of its cover page which presents an unclassified summary, will not be placea in the NRC Public Document Room E. Long Form: NOTE: Use this form when the licensee is likely~to be unfamiliar with the NRC's Rules and Regulations. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of NRC regulations, a Sopy- of this letter, its enclosure (s), and any reply will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. If the report contains any information that you consider to be exempt from disclosure under:10 CFR 9.5(a)(4),,you must: (a) notify this office by telephone within ten days. from the date' of this letter of your intention to file a request for withholding'and (b) in your reply to this letter, include a written application to 3/ithhold such information. ' Consistent with Section 10 CFR 2.790(b)(1), such application must be accompanied by an affidavit executed by the owner of the information which identifies the document or part thereof' sought to be withheld and a full statement of the reasons why the information should be withheld from public disclosure. This section further requires the statement to address with specificity each consideration listed in 10 CFR 2.790(b)(4). The information sought to be withheld shall be incorporated as far as possible into a separate part of the , affidavit. If we do not hear from you in this regard within the period i specified above, this letter, its encloure(s), and any reply will be I placed in the NRC Public Document Room. . 1 X. PAPERWORK REOUCTION ACT NOTE: This paragraph is required for all letters requiring a response (i.e., letters transmitting Notices or requesting additional' reply or c, clarification of previously identified problems). The responses directed by this letter and its enclosure (s) are not' subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
~
XI. CLOSING PARAGRAPH > Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact us. W -- _-----------_----a----__ - - - - . - -
s Enclosure 3 9 MAY 0 2 GB6 i 1 XII. SIGNATURE BLOCK Note: All letters transmitting Notices that contain civil penalty action or. Severity Level I, II, or III violations of letters that deviate significantly from the' standard paragraphs are to be prepared for- i the Regional Administrator's signature. Letters must also be I prepared for the Regional Administrator's signature if.'an-Enforcement Conference was held. Sincerely', l (nama) Regional Administrator XIII. ENCLOSURE (S) NOTE: Numerically list enclosures'only if.there is more than one'. i A. Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty l B. Notice of Violation l C. Notice of Deviation ! D. Inspection Report E. Other Enclosure (s): (list other enclosure (s)) , 1 l XIV. DISTRIBUTION: A. General cc and bec Lists: ,, l cc w/ encl (s): 1 bec w/ encl (s): ) NRC Resident Inspector ^ Document, Control Desk ; State (Commonwealth) of
, . s . ,
B. Additions to General cc and bec Lists: o
- 1. To ec w/ encl (s); ,
(list additions) ls n , s' 2 c, To bec W/6ncl(s): ' a, 4' c (list additions): a 7 A 4 f 5 t h l '. . .
% 6 ?, .
lg s 'N ~
, s
5 Enclosure 3 10 h AY 0 2t1986 C. Special Distribution For Packages Containing 2.790,. Confidential, Safe- i guards, and Classified Information. J NOTE: The following distributions are only used by personnel from the Material Control & Accountability.Section (MC&A) and-the Ph/sical Security Section (PSS).
- 1. For 50 Docket Numbers:
- a. Safeguards Information - PSS Correspondence: q cc w/ encl (s):
bec w/ enc 1(s): IE File NMSS/SGPL 1 NRR/DL/SSPB l
-NRR/DL/SSPB ]
i bec w/ Inspection Summary: Document Control Desk, 016 1 NRC Resident Inspector State (Commonwealth) of j
- b. Classified Information - PSS Correspondence: j cc w/ encl (s): I bec w/ encl (s):
NMSS/SGPL 1 NRR/DL/SSPB 1 bec w/ Inspection. Summary: IE File Document Control Desk, 016 NRC Resident Inspector i State (Commonwealth) of
- c. 2.790 Information:
cc w/ enc 1(s): bec w/ encl (s): IE File NMSS/SGPL NRR/DL/SSPB Document Control Desk, 016 NRC Resident Inspector bcc w/ Inspection Summary: State (Commonwealth) of
1 Enclosure 02 M
- 2. For 70 Docket Numbers:
- a. 2.790 Information - MC&A Correspondence:
cc w/ encl (s): bec w/ encl (s): Document Control Desk Safeguards and Materials Program Branch, EWW-359 Fuel Facility. Safeguards Licensing Branch, 881-S5 i NRC Resident Inspector (for NFS only) bec w/ Inspection Summary: State (Commonwealth) of bec w/o enc 1(s): License Fee Management Branch
- b. 2.790 Information - PSS Correspondence: ,.
cc w/ encl (s): bec w/ enc 1(s): Document Control Desk, 016 IE/DFFMS/SG NMSS/SG NMSS File NRC Resident Inspector-(for NFS only) bec w/ Inspection Summary: State (Commonwealth) of bec w/o encl (s): License Fee Management Branch
- c. Classified Information - MC&A Correspondence:
cc w/ enc 1(s): bec w/ enc 1(s)* Safeguards and Materials Program Cranch, EWW-359 Fuel Facility Safeguards Licensing Branch, 881-SS NRC Resident Inspector (for NFS only) bec w/ Inspection Summary: Document Control Desk State (Commonwealth) of bec w/o enc 1(s): License Fee Management Branch
l Enclosure 3 12 MAY 0 2 586
- d. Classified Information - PSS Correspondence:
cc w/ encl (s): l bec w/ encl (s): l NMSS/SG NMSS File NRC Resident Inspector (for NFS only) bcc w/ Inspection Summary: IE/DFFMS/SG Document Control Desk, 016 State (Commonwealth) of bec w/o encl (s): License Fee Management Branch D. Additions to Special Distribution
- 1. To cc w/ encl (s): (list additions)
- 2. To bec w/ enc 1(s): (list additions)
- 3. To bec w/ Inspection Summary: (list additions) 1
- 4. To bec w/o encl (s): (list additions)
XV. CONCURRENCES, l NOTE: The Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordination Staff l (EICS) should be on the concurrence list (1) for letters to the l licensee addressing similar violations, denials, or deviations; (2) for letters enclosing Notices of Violation containing Severity. Level I, II, or III violations; .and '(3) for letters addressing-l inspection reports where findings are being considered for escalated enforcement actions. .The Regional Counsel should be on the concurrence list for letters enclosing Notice . of Violation' 4 containing Severity Level I, II, or III violations. The indivi-dual signing the enforcement action should not be listed.
i MAY 02 986 4 ENCLOSURE 4 REQUEST FOR ESCALATED ENFORCEMENT LETTER FORM (Civil Penalty or Several Level I, II, or III Citations) Check appropriate boxes, fill in blanks, and circle appropriate answers. j I. HEADING: DOCKET N0(S). LICENSE N0(S). II. ADDRESS: NAME OF LICENSEE: t III.
SUBJECT:
( l (Check appropriate box below.)
/ / A. NOTICE OF VIOLATION INVOLVING NO CIVIL PENALTY ACTION
/ / B. NOTICE OF VIOLATION INVOLVING CIVIL PENALTY ACTION
/ / C. CASES INVOLVING BOTH A NOTICE OF VIOLATION WITH NO CIVIL PENALTY ACTION AND A NOTICE OF DEVIATION
/ / 0. CASES INVOLVING BOTH A NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY AND A NOTICE OF DEVIATION ,
(Circle appropriate answer below.) REPORT NO. or REPORT NOS. INSPECTION REPORT N0(S) i s ~
7 Enclosure 4 2 MAY 0 2 886 IV. INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH: (Circle appropriate answers below.) , YOU AND YOUR or PRINCIPAL LICENSEE ATTENDEE YOUR STAFF (if not addressee) WAS INSPECTION REPORT ISSUED PRIOR TO NOTICE? YES or NO (Date: ) l (Provide requested information if applicable.) INSPECTOR-IN-CHARGE: DATES (S) 0F INSPECTION: FACILITY NAME: PRINCIPAL NRC CONFERENCE ATTENDEE NAME: PRINCIPA! NRC CONFERENCE ATTENDEE TITLE: PRINCIPAL LICENSEE CONFERENCE ATTENDEE NAME (if not addressee): PRINCIPAL LICENSEE CONFERENCE ATTENDEE TITLE (if not addressee): i ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE DATE: ) SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT ACTION: 1 i V. SECOND PARAGRAPH. (Circle appropriate answers below.) THIS VIOLATION or THESE VIOLATIONS NOTICE NOTICE OF VIOLATION . OF or AND VIOLATION PROPOSED IMPOSITION
. OF CIVIL PENALTY 9
(Pr{viderequestedinformation.) VIO'tATIONS(S) INVOLVED A FAILURE TO: DESCRIBE EVENTS THAT RESULTED IN VIOLATIONS INCLUDING THE LENGTH OF . TIME THE VIOLATION (S) EXISTED, WHEN IT(THEY) WAS(WERE) IDENTIFIED, THE MODE THE PLANT-g WAS OPERATING IN (if applicable), AND THE ROOT CAUSE(S)'0F THIS(THESE)
, EVENT (S):
Enclosure 4 3 gQgg VI. THIRD PARAGRAPH: (Check appropriate boxes below.)
/ / A. TRANSMISSION OF INSPECTION REPORT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE
/ / B. NOTICE OF VIOLATION (with no civil penalty action) l
/ __/ 1. STANDARD NOTICE OF VIOLATION.
! / / 2. SHIPMENT VIOLATION (S) WHERE ENFORCMENT ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE STATE' 1
/ / C. NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CI'!IL PENALTY
- / / 1. BASE CIVIL PENALTY
/ / 2. MITIGATED BASE CIVIL PENALTY
/ / 3. ESCALATED BASE CIVIL PENALTY (Circle appropriate answer below.)
VIOLATION IS/HAS or VIOLATIONS ARE/HAVE (Provide requested information below if appropriate.) AREA WHERE IMPROVEMENT IS NEEDED (reference VI.C): SEVERITY LEVEL OF VIOLATION (S) (If more than one violation exists, please-write in respective Severity Levels.)(reference VI.B AND VI.C): . NRC CIVIL PENALTY AMOUNT (reference VI.C): NRC CIVIL PENALTY AMOUNT (written value)(reference VI.C): l BASE CIVIL PENALTY AMOUNT ($XX,XXX) (reference VI.C.2 AND VI.C.3): PERCENT MI IGATION (XX)(reference VI.C.2): l PERCENT ESCALATION (XX)(reference VI.C.3): REASON FOR REDUCING CIVIL PENALTY BASED ON MITIGATING FACTORS IN ENFORCEMENT' POLICY (reference VI.B.1 and VI.C.2): REASONS FOR INCREASING CIVIL PENALTY BASED ON ESCALATION FACTORS. IN ENFORCEMENT POLICY (reference VI.C.3): l
. , c.
~~.7 Enclosure 4 4 MAY.0 2 586 VII. SPECIAL PARAGRAPHS (IF APPROPRIATE): YES or NJ (Check appropriate boxes below.)
/ / A. REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL RESPONSE CONCERNED ABOUT IMPLEMENTATION OF:
/ / 1. MANAGEMENT CONTROL SYSTEMS
/ / 2. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM
/ / 3. SECURITY PROGRAM
/ / 4. RADIATION CONTROL PROGRAM l / / 5. RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
/ / 6. OTHER:
/ / B. SIMILAR VIOLATIONS
/ / C. UNRESOLVED ITEMS
/ / D. DOCUMENTATION OF "0RAL LICENSEE COMMITMENT" (Circle appropriate answers below if boxes VII.B or VII.C are checked.)
THE VIOLATION (S) DESCRIBED or THE FIRST, SECOND, ETC. (reference VII.8) 1
. . . VIOLATION (S) DESCRIBED UNRESOLVED ITEM or UNRESOLVED. ITEMS (reference VII.C)
THIS MATTER or THESE MATTERS (reference VII.C) (Provide requested information if box VII.B is checked.) ] 1 l DATE OF NdTICE CONTAINING SIMILAR VIOLATION: VIII. REQUIRED RESPONSE PARAGRAPH: l
---._.-__.-----.._.-_____________2_ _
e a l' O Enclosure 4 5 MAY 0 21986 I X .- PROPRIETARY REVIEW /PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION: NOTE: Use the long form when the licensee is likely to be unfamiliar with the NRC's Rules and Regulations. (Check appropriate box below.) i
/- / A. IF THE LICENSEE DIO NOT. IDENTIFY AS PROPRIETARY ANY' 0F THE MATERIALS PROVIDED TO OR REVIEWED BY THE INSPECTOR (5) DURING THE INSPECTION. ,
l 1 ! / / B. IF, AFTER PROPRIETARY REVIEW BY'THE REGIONAL STAFF, THERE IS. l SIGNIFICANT DOUBT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE MATERIAL IS i PROPRIETARY. ; 1
/ / C. SAFEGUARDS /10 CFR 2.790 EXEMPT
/ / 0. NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION
/ / E. LONG FORM (Circle appropriate answer below.)
ENCLOSURE CONTAINS or ENCLOSURES CONTAIN X. PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: (Circle appropriate answer.) YES or NO l NOTE: This paragraph is required for all letters requiring a response 1 l (i.e., letters transmitting Notices or requesting additional.~ reply' ! or clarification of previously identified problems). ' (Circle appropriate answer below if "YES"'is circled above.) ENCLOSURE or ENCLOSURES XI. CLOSING PARAGRAPH: XII. SIGNATURE BLOCK:
.',, . j -r Enclosure 4 6 6AAY 0 2198fi j I
1 XIII. ENCLOSURE (S): J q I NOTE: Numerically list enclosures only if there is more than one. (Check appropriate boxes below.)
/ / A. NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY ]
/ / B. NOTICE OF VIOLATION
/ / C. NOTICE OF DEVIATION
/ / D. INSPECTION REPORT
/ / E. OTHER ENCLOSURE (S) (List):
(Circle appropriate answer below.) l ENCLOSURE or ENCLOSURES I XIV DISTRIBUTION: (Check appropriate boxes below.) '
/ / A. GENERAL cc AND bec LISTS:
/~ / B. ADDITIONS
/ / 1. T0 cc w/ enc 1(s) ~
LIST ADrITIONS:
/ / 2. TO bec w/ enc 1(s)
LIST ADDITIONS:
/ / C. SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION FOR PACKAGES CONTAINING 2.790, CON- ;
FIDENTIAL, SAFEGUARDS, AND CLASSIFIED INFORMATION (This box may only be checked by personnel from the Material Control & Accountability Section (MC&A) and the Physical Security Section (PSS). Please refer to the attachment to this form if item XIII.C was selected.) (Circle appropriate answers below.) ENCL or ENCLS STATE or COMMONWEALTH . NAME OF STATE OR COMMONWEALTH: l
. _ . _ . _ . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _
<a . 'l.
t s Enclosure 4 7 MAY 02 586 1 XV. CONCURRENCES (list with'bec): NOTE: The Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordination Staff (EICS) should be on the concurrence list' (1) for letters to the ^ j licensee addressing similar violations, denials, or deviations; ' (2) for letters enclosing Notices of Violation containing. Severity Level I, II, or III violations; and (3) for ~ 1etters addressing inspection reports where findings are being considered for-escalated enfo cernent actions. The Regional Counsel should be on the concurrence J .st for letters . enclosing ' Notice of Violation containing Severity Level I, II,-or III violations. The'indivi-dual signing the enforcement action should not be listed. (List names of appropriate individuals):
-{
J ! 1 1 1 4 1
.I l
i i
.y.
i ATTACHMENT MAY 0 21986 XIII.C. SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION FOR PACKAC'" CONTAINING 2.790, CONFIDENTIAL, SAFEGUARDS, AND CLASSIFIED INFORMATION NOTE: The following distributions are only used by personnel from the Material Control & Accountability Section (MC&A) and the Physical Security Section (PSS) if item XIII.C was selected. I (Check appropriate boxes below.)
/ / 1. FOR 50 DOCKET NUMBERS 4
/ / a. SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION (PSS)
(add cc-list page 66)
/ / b. CLASSIFIED INFORMATION (PSS)- l (add cc list page 67) l
/ / c. 2.790 INFORMATION 1 (add cc list -'page 68)'
/ / 2. FOR 70 DOCKET NUMBERS
( l
/- ~7 a. 2'790 INFORMATION (MC&A)
(add cc list - Page 62)
/ / b. 2.790 INFORMATION (PSS) !
(add cc list - Page 64)
/ / c. CLASSIFIED INFORMATION (MC&A)
(add'cc list page 63)
/ / d. CLASSIFIED INFORMATION-(PSS)
(add cc list
- Page 65)
/ / D. ADDITIONS TO SPECIAL DISTRIBUTIONS '
/ / 1. TO cc .w/e ncl(s)
LIST ADDITIONS:
/ / 2. TO bec w/ encl (s)
LIST ADDITIONS: ,_
/ / 3.
- TO bec Summary w/ Inspection LIST ADDITIONS:
/ / 4. TO bec w/o encl (s)
LIST ADDITIONS: IS NFS THE RECI'PIENT OF THE ENFORCEMENT LETTER (reference XIII.C.2)? YES NO (add Resident Inspector (delete Resident Inspector to bec w/ encl (s)) from bec w/ encl (s))
(_- - l' 6 i V l
'* UNITED STATES
- [@008cg o, NUCLEAR FEELATORY COMMISSION ,
.l* * $ REGloN ll
*# 8 101 MARIETTA STREET. N.W.
I f ATL ANTA. GEORGI A 3o323 l
\ .;',/ MAY 0 21986 l l
Regional Office Instruction No. 0916 i l STANDARD PARAGRAPHS FOR ENFORCEMENT NOTICES A.
Purpose:
l The purpose of this Regional Office Instruction (ROI) is to establish standard text for Region II enforcement Notices (i.e., Notice of Violation, ( Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty, and Notice of l Deviation) and to provide the forms for their preparation. B. Discussion: i Review of OIE Manual Chapter 0400, the Region II Enforcement Manual, and the attachment to the existing Standard Paragraphs for Enforcement Letters (ROI No. 0915, Revision 1) indicated that many paragraphs contain minor and unnecessary differences and that the potential for confusion could exist as-to which source to use under certain conditions. In order to correct these conditions, to simplify Notices, to add paragraphs not previously contained in the 5520 system, and to encompass all standard paragraphs for enforcement Notices in one document, this collection of standard paragraphs has been established. This Instruction provides formats for Notices of Violation and Notices of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in accordance with Manual ; Chapter 0400. It provides for all Notices-of Violation and Deviation to be I signed and dated as per Manual Chapter 0400, and it also provides minor. I options such as citation format and singular versus plural (i.e., " viola- i tion (s) is(are)"). .
)
These standard paragraphs have been reviewed by each Division Director and by other staff members who have expertise in documentati.on of regulatory correspondence. Their suggestions have been incorporated into.the text. C. Ac. tion: ,
- 1. Technical Staff nThe standard paragraphs for enforcement Notices (Enclosures 1,'3, and
- 15) will be retained and consulted by staff members who have responsi-bility for preparing enforcement Notices. The request for enforcement
' Notice forms (Enclosures 2, 4, and 6) will be completed and submitted
' to the word processing staff when a standard enforcement Notice is v required.
ppp-81 -WU S/3
' ~
MAY 0 2 S86
' ~
Regional Office Instruction No. 0916 2 2, Administrative Staff The Director, Division of Resource Management and Administration, will take necessary action (e.g. , issuance of instructions, revision of ROI 0281, and reproduction of Enclosures 2, 4, and 6) to administra-tively implement this Instruction. I D. Contact-i Comments concerning this Instruction should be directed to the Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordination Staff at extension 5505. E. Effective Date: This Instruction will become effective on May 15, 1986. It should be used in conjunction with ROI No. 0915, Revision 2, " Standard Paragraph for Enforcement Letters."
.Ds ? M J. Nelson Gra'ce
/RegionalAdministrator
Enclosures:
- 1. Standard Paragraphs for Notices of Violation (Involving No Civil Penalty Action) '
- 2. Request for Notice of Violation (Involving No Civil Penalty Action) Form ,
- 3. Standard Paragraphs for Notices of Violation (Involving civil Penalty Action) .
l 4. Request for Notice of Violation 4 ! (Involving Civil Penalty Action) ) Form ,
- 5. Standard Paragraphs for Notice of Deviation
- 6. Request for Notice of Deviation Form 1
Distribution List A - l L___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
p,... i MAY-02lges ENCLOSURE 1 , STANDARD PARAGRAPHS FOR NOTICES OF VIOLATION (Involving No Civil Penalty Action) TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Standard Paragraphs For a Notice of Violation (with no civil penalty action) 2 2 A. Title B. Heading 2 C. Introductory Paragraph 2 2 D. Citation (s) 3 E. Action Paragraph Optional Paragraph -3 F. . G. Signature Block '3
- 1. Regional Administrator 3
- 2. Division Director 4 I a. Reactor Licensees 4
- b. Fuel Facilities and Materials Licensees
- 3. Branch Chief 4
- a. Reactor Licensees 4 (1) Projects Branch 1 4 ,
(2) Projects Branch 2 5 (3) Projects Branch 3 5
- b. Fuel Facilities and Materials Licensees 5 H. Date 5 ,
II. Sample Notices of Violation (with no civil penalty action) 6 A. Separate Severity Levels for Each Violation 6 B. Multiple Violations Evaluated in the Aggregate As One Problem 8
)
4 l 4 p
p l , . , Enclosure 1 'i I. STANDARD PARAGRAPHS FOR A NOTICE OF VIOLATION (with no civil penalty action) A.
Title:
Notice of Violation B. Heading: NOTE: The facility name shall be used for power reactors or fuel facilities, and the city and state shall be used instead for non-power reactors or materials licensees. If Severity Level I, II, or III citation is involved, then EA XX-XX must be used. (name of licensee) Docket No(s). (facility name) (if power reactor License No(s). or fuel facility) EA XX-XX (if escalated) (city), (state) (if non power reactor or materials licensee) C. Introductory Paragraph: During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted on (date), a violation (violations) of NRC requirements was(were) identi-fied. The violation (s) involved (brief description 1 In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1985), the violation (s) is(are) listed below: j D. Citation (s): i l NOTE: Violations will be ALPHABETIZED, not numbered. Only alpha-l betize if there is more than one citation. Indent if there is only one citation. (State requirement that was violated.) i l i Contra,ry to the above, (date and description of how the requirement ) l was violated) l l l This is a Severity Level violation (Supplement ). i l NOTE: The categorization portion of the citation may vary. Examples involving (1) separate severity levels for each violation and (2) multiple violations evaluated in the aggregate as one problem may be found in the enclosed sample Notices of Violation (refer to Section II). The categorization may be revised to incorporate these modifications af ter the Final Enforcement Panel has been held. l 1 u______
t . , . . , q 1
~
Enclosure 1 9 MAY 0.21986 e E. Action Paragraph: Pursuant to the. provisions of '10 CFR 2.201, (name of licensee) is within 30 days of the date of hereby required to submit to this.0ffice,itten the letter transmitting this Notice a wr statement or explanat' ion i in reply including (for each violation): (1) admission or dental of -l the violation, (2) the reason for the violation- if admitted,: (3) the ' l corrective : steps which have lbeen taken , and the results achieved, (4) the corrective steps which will be- taken to avoid' further -viola-- tions, and (5) the 'date when full compliance will be achieved. ;Wherei good cause is shown,.. consideration will ,be given to extending. the 1 response time. ] l F. Optional Paragraph: NOTE: This paragraph should only be: used when security or' safe-guards information'is present, j Security or safeguards information should be submitted 'as an' enclosure j to facilitate withholding it from public disclosure as required by! j 10 CFR 2.790(d) or 10 CFR 73.21. ! G. Signature Block: NOTE: All Notices Violation shall be signed and dated by the signer l of the transmittal. letter.
- 1. Notices of Violation ' containing - Sev_erity Level I, II, or.III citations or Notices of Violation transmitted -by letters - which' deviate significantly from the standard paragraphs _are to ' be. -l prepared for the Regional Administrator's : signature.- The. R
! Notice of Violation must also be prepared for the Regi o'nal ' d Administrator's signature if an Enforcement Conference was held. FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION: l
'l
-i (name) ;
Regional Administrator i e i w_.---.-.---_--- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ . _ . _ _ _ -
l .- , 1
. MAY 0 21986
~
Enclosure 1 ' 'if
- 2. Notices of Violation containing Severity Level IV citations ;
without civil penalty action or Notices of Violation that are 4 transmitted by letters that contain the extra paragraph expressing-concern about the adequacy of managsment controls and that do not require the signature of the Regional Administrator are to be- l prepared for the signature of the appropriate Division Director. l i
- a. Reactor Licensees: .]
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (name)- , Director Division of Reactor Projects
- b. Fuel Facilities and Materials Licensees: g 1
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l \ 1 (name) .. Director Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards
- 3. Notices of Violation containing Severity. Level V citations are to be prepared for the signature of the respons.ible DRP' or DRSS Branch Chief.
- a. Reactor Licensees: ,
l (1) Projects Branch 1: FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION J t (name) , Chief Reactor Projects Branch 1 Division of Reactor Projects
*
- 1 l Enclosure 1 '9 MAY 0 2 seg.
(2) Projects Branch 2: FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (name) , Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 Division of Reactor Projects (3) Projects Branch 3: FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j i (name) , Chief 4 Reactor Projects Branch 3 Division of Reactor Projects
- b. Fuel Facilities and Materials Licensees:
.FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1
i (name) , Chief Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards H. Date: , Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this day of 19XX t
- l
F . Enclosure 1 4 AOhf986 II. SAMPLE NOTICES OF VIOLATION (with no' civil penalty action) L A. Separate Severity Levels For'Each Violation: NOTICE OF VIOLATION' L (name of licensee) Docket No(s). (facility name) (if power reactor or fuel facility) License No(s). (city),-(state) (if non power reactor or EA XX-XX (if escalated) materials licensee) ] During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted on (date), a violation (violations) of NRC requirements was(were) identified. The violation (s) involved (brief description). In accordance with' the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1985), the violation (s) is(are) listed below: NOTE: Violations will be ALPHABETIZED, not numbeied. Only alphabetize if . there is more than one citation. Indent if there is.only one citation. A. (State requirement that was violated.) l I l Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the requirement was ; violated) l This is a Severity Level violation (Supplement ). I B. (State requirement that'was violated.) . Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the requirement was violated) This is a S verity Level violation (Supplement ). '. ! Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, (name of licensee) is hereby required to submit to this Office within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice a written statement er explanation in reply including (for each violation): (1) admission or denial of the violation, (2) the reason for the violation if admitted, (3) the corrective steps which have been taken and the 6
._______m.______ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ . . . _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _
;. . i MAY 0 21986.
Enclosure 1 i - results achieved, (4).the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid.further violations,- and (5) the date when full compliance will be' achieved. Where good _cause.is shown, consideration will be given to extending _the response time. FOR THE NU' CLEAR. REGULATORY. COMMISSION (name)
- (title) 'q 1
Dated at Atlanta, Georgia - this day of' 19XX NOTE: All Notices of Violation shall'be signed.and dated by the. signer of-the transmittal letter. 1 i i! 1 1 4 0 4 0
MAY02 mag Enclosure 1 '1 31 B. Multiple Violations Evaluated In The Aggregate As One Problem NOTICE OF VIOLATION (name of licensee) Docket No(s). ( f acility name) (if power reactor or fuel facility) License No(s). (city) (state) (if non power reactor or EA XX-XX (if escalated) materials licensee) l l l During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted'on (date), a violation (violations) of NRC requirements was(were) identified. The violation (s) involved (brief description). In accordance with the " General Statement- of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part- 2, Appendix C (1985), the violation (s) is(are) listed below: NOTE: Violations will be ALPHABETIZED, not numbered. Only alphabetize .if I there is more than one citation. Indent if there'is only one citation. A. (State requirement that was violated.) Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the requirement was - l violated) l B. (State requirement that was violated.) Contrary to the above, (date and description of how' the requirement was violated) .-
~
Collectively, these violations have been evaluated in the aggregate as a Severity Level problem (Supplement ). Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, (name of licensee) is hereby required to submit to this Office within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice a written statement or explanation in reply including (for each l violation): (1) admission or denial of the violation, (2) the reason for the. violation if admitted, (3) the corrective steps which have been taken and the-l l
.i 1
4 u_._.-__m__--__-_.__ _ . _ _
.I. .
]
WAY 0 2 886 ! Enclosure 1 9 l 1 I l I results achieved, (4) the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further 1 violations, and (5) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time. FOR THE N6 CLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'(name)
(title) Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this day of 19XX NOTE: All Notices of Violation shall be signed and dated by the signer of the transmittal letter. l l l 4 i a e _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - . _ - - _ _ - _ . __ _ _ . _ - . _ _ . . _ -- ----u_-_-_-_-__ _ . - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
L . .- . MAY 0 21986 ENCLOSURE 2 REQUEST FOR NOTICE OF VIOLATION FORM ' (Involving No Civil Penalty Action) Check appropriate boxes, fill in blanks, and circ 1'e appropriate answers. A. TITLE: B. HEADING: NOTE: In the heading, the facility name shall be used for power reactors or fuel facilities, and the city and state shall be used instead for non power reactors or materials licensees. If Severity Level I, II, or III citatior, is involved, then EA XX-XX must also be used in the heading. (Circle appropriate answers below.) ESCALATED ENFORCEMENT CASE? YES or NO (possible Severity Level I, Use EA XX-XX Do not use EA XX-XX II, or III citation) DOCKET NUMBER or DOCKET NUMBERS LICENSE NUMBER or LICENSE NUMBERS (Provide requested information if appropriate.) NAME OF LICENSEE: FACILITY NAME (if power reactor or fuel facility): CITY (if non power reactor or materials licensees): STATE (if non power reactor or materials licensees): DOCKET N0(S). I LICENSE N0(S). C. INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH: (Circle app opriate answer below.) l A VIGLATION WAS/IS or VIOLATIONS WERE/ARE (Provide requested information.) DATE(S) 0F INSPECTION: VIOLATION (S) INVOLVED (brief description): I i
~ Enclosure 2 '9 - bM D. CITATION (S): NOTE: In the citation, violations will be ALPHABETIZED, not numbered. Only alphabetize if there is more,than one citation. Indent if there is only one citation. (Circle appropriate answer below.) MORE THAN ONE VIOLATION? YES/ ALPHABETIZE or N0/ INDENT (see last page of form) (Provide requested information.) ITEM LETTER (if more than one citation) STATE REQUIREMENT-THAT WAS VIOLATE 0: DATE AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE REQUIREMENT WAS VIOLATED: Contrary to the above, NOTE: The categorization portion of the citation may vary. Examples involving (1) separate Severity Levels for each violation and (2) multiple violations evaluated in the aggregate as one problem rpay be found in the enclosed Sample Notices of Violation (refer to Section II of Enclosure 1). The categorization may be revised to incorporate these modificat *1ns after the Final Enforcement Panel has been held. SEVERITY LEVEL: - SUPPLEMENT: NOTE: Please write additional violations on the last page of this form. Also, indicate the letter designation for each new citation. i i t h___._________..____________ ___ _ _ _ _ . _ _ m.
.. . j Enclosure 2 '9 MAY 0.21986 l E. ACTION PARAGRAPH:
(Circle appropriate answer below.) INCLUDING or INCLUDING FOR EACH VIOLATION (if more than one citation) , F. OPTIONAL PARAGRAPH: YES or NO NOTE: This paragraph should only' be used when security or safeguards information is present. G. SIGNATURE BLOCK: NOTE: All Notices of Violation shall be signed and dated by the signer of the transmittal letter. (Check appropriate boxes.)
/ / 1. NOTICE OF VIOLATION CONTAINING SEVERITY LEVEL I, II, OR III CITATIONS; NOTICE OF VIOLATION TRANSMITTED BY LETTERS WHICH OEVIATE SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THE STANDARD PARAGRAPHS; OR~ IF AN ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE WAS HELD (Regional Administrator's signature) ,
/ 7 2. NOTICE OF VIOLATION CONTAINING SEVERITY LEVEL IV CITATIONS WITHOUT CIVIL PENALTY ACTION OR NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT l ARE TRANSMITTED BY LETTERS THATCONTAIN THE EXTRA PARAGRAPH i EXPRESSING CONCERN ABOUT THE ADEQUACY OF MANAGEMENT CONTROLS AND THAT 00 NOT REQUIRE THE SIGNATURE OF THE REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR (appropriate Division Director's signature) .-
/ / a. REACTOR LICENSEES
/ / b. FUEL FACILITIES AND MATERIALS LICENSEES
/ / 3. NOTICE OF VIOLATION CONTAINING SEVERITY LEVEL V CITATIONS l (appropriate Branch Chief's signature)- l
/ / a. REACTOR LICENSEES i
. / / (1) PROJECTS BRANCH 1
/ / (2) PROJECTS BRANCH 2 I
/ / (3) PROJECTS BRANCH 3
/ / b. FUEL FACILITIES AND MATERIALS LICENSEES H. DATE:
i 1
- _ -- - -- ------ - --- - J
Enclosure 2 ,9 MAY02 g i ADDITIONAL CITATIONS NOTE: Please indicate the letter designation for each additional citation. l l 1 l
, l
( i i I ( l e
- L
( ;
- r
* ,;r'
(' . w I
.w MAY 0 2 886 i
ENCLOSURE 3 STANDARD PARAGRAPHS FOR NOTICES OF VIOLATION I (Involving Civil Penalty Action) TABLE OF CONTENTS Page' I. Standard Paregraphs for a Notice of Violation and l Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty 2 A. Title 2 B. Heading' 2 C. Introductory Paragraph 2. ] D. Citation (s) 2 l E. Action Paragraphs 3 .j Optional Paragraph F. 4
]
G. Signature Block 4 l H. Date 4 II. Sample Notices of Violation and Imposition of Civil Penalty 5 i l l A. Separate Civil Penalties Assessed For Each Violation - 5 l B. One Cumulative Civil Penalty Assessed Equally Among ( the Violations 8. i 1 C. Violations Both With and Without Civil Penalty Action 10 j J I
. / ;j 1
O n
.i k
L{
+ .
2
U . g M Enclosure 3 I. STANDARD PARAGRAPHS FOR A NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OT iEVIL DENALTY A.
Title:
Notice of Violatlon and
, Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty
- 8. Heading:
NOTE: The facilf ty name shall be used for power reactor or fuel fac111 ties, and the city and state shall be used instead for rion power reactors or materials licensees. name of licensee) Docket No(s).
,(Taci_llty_neme)(Tfpowerreactor
( License No(s). EA XX-XX or fuel facility)
,(city),(statel(ifncnpowerreactor or materials licensee)
C. Introductory Paragraph: During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). inspection conducted on (date), a violation (violations) of NRC requirements was(were) identi-fied. The violation (i)~ f uolved (brief description). In . accordance ' with the " General Ststement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appundix C (1985), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission proposes to impose a Leivil penalty pursuant to Section 234 of the Atomic Enu gy Act of l'M, as amended ("Act"), 42 U.S.C. 2282, PL 96-295, and 10 CFR 2.205. The particular violation (s) and asso- ' l ciated civil penalty are set forth below: L . L 1 D. Citatiun(s): 140TE: Violations will be ALPHABETIZED, not numbered. Only alphabe-l tize if there is more than one citation. Indent if there is , only one citation. (State requirement that was violated.) Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the requirement t was violated) - This is a Severity Level violation (Supplement ). (Civil Penalty - $XXX,XXX) NOTE: The. categorization portion of the citation may vary. fixupies involving ('.) separate civil penalties for each ,
. violation,'(P) one cumulative civil penalty assessed equally among the violations, and (3) violations both with and
MAY 0 21986 Enclosure 3 'i - without civil penalty action can be found in the enclosed Sample Notices of Violation and Imposition of Civil. Penalty (refer to Section II). The categorization portion of the citation may be revised to incorporate these modifications after the Final Enforcement Panel has been held. E. Action Paragraph (s): Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, (name of licensee) is j hereby required to submit to the Director, Of fice of Inspection and-Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, with a copy to the Regional Administrator, U.S. Nuclear Regula-tory Ccmmission, Region II, 101 Marietta Street, N.W., Suite 2900, Atlanta, Georgia 30323, within 30 days of the date of this Notice a written statement or explanation including (for each violation): ! (1) admission or denial of the violation, (2) the reasons for the l violation .if admitted, (3) the corrective steps that have been taken ! and the results achieved, (4) the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations, and (5) the date when full compliance.will . be achieved. If an adequate reply is not received within the time l specified in this Notice, the Director, Office of Inspection and. Enforcement, may issue an order 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. Consideration may be given to extending the response time for good cause shown. Under the authority of Section 182 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2232, this response shall be submit-ted under oath or affirmation. Within the same time as provided for the response required above under 10 CFR 2.201, (name of licensee) may pay the civil penalty by letter addressed to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, with a check, draf t, or money order payable to the Treasurer of the United States in the cumulative amount of (written value) Dollars ($XXX.XXX) l or may protest imposition of the civil penalty in whole or in part by a l written answer addressed to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement. Should (name of licensee) fail to answer within the time specif}ed, the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, will I issue an order imposing the civil penalty in the amount proposed above. Should (name of licensee) elect to file an answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 protesting the civil penalty, such aaswer may: (1) deny the violation (s) listed in this Notice in whole or in part, (2) dem-onstrate extenuating circumstances, (3) show error in this Notice, or (4) show other reasons why the penalty should not be imposed. In addition to protesting the civil penalty in whole or in part, such answer may request remission or mitigation of the penalty. 9 an.
- - _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _
MAY 0 21986 Enclosure 3 -it 4 In requesting mitigation of the proposed penalty, the five factors addressed in Section V B of 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, should be addressed. Any written answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 should be set forth separately from the statement or explanation in reply pursuant to 10 CFR 2.201 but may incorpo' rate parts of the 10 CFR 2.201- 4 reply by specific reference (e.g., citing page and paragraph numbers) to avoid repetition. (Name of licensee)'s attention is directed to the other provisions of 10 CFR 2.205 regarding the procedure for imposing a civil penalty. Upon failure to pay the penalty due, which has been subsequently 1 determined in accordance with the applicable provisions of 10 CFR 2.205, this matter may be referred to the Attorney General, ' and .the i penalty, unless compromised, remitted, or mitigated, may be collected j by civil action pursuant to Section 234c of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2282. i F. Optional Paragraph: ) l l NOTE: This paragraph should only be used when security or safe- H guards information is present. Security or safeguards information should be submitted as an enclosure to facilitate withholding it from public disclosure as required by l 10 CFR 2.790(d) or 10 CFR 73.21. ( l $ G. Signature Block: NOTE: All Notices of Violation with civil penalty action shall be j signed and dated by the Regional Administrator. j FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .- ) l I
, (name)
Regional Administrator H. Date: ! Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this __ day of 19XX l I l l l e _ _ - . - _ _ --.._.__________._____Q
MAY 0 21986 Enclosure 3 'i ~ II. SAMPLE NOTICES OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CTVIL PENALTY A. Separate Civil Penalty Assessed For Each Violation NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY (name of licensee) Docket No(s). (facility name) (if power. reactor fuel facility) License No(s). (city), (state) (if non power reactor or EA XX-XX materials licensee) During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.(NRC) inspection conducted on (date), a violation (violations) of NRC requirements was(were) identified. The violation (s) involved (brief description). In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2 Appendix C (1985), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ' proposes to impose a civil penalty pursuant to Section 234 of the' Atomic Energy Act of'1954, as amended ("Act"), 42 U.S.C. 2282, PL 96-295, and 10 CFR 2.205. The particular. violation (s) and associated civil penalty are set forth below: NOTE: Violations will be ALPHABETIZED not numbered. Only alphabetize if , there is more than one-citation. Indent if there is only one citation. A. (State requirement that was violated.) l i
. 1 Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the requirement was ;
violated) l l This is a Severity Level violation (Supplement' ). j (Civil Pena?ty - $XXX,XXX) ] B. (State requirement that was violated.) l l l Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the requirement was violated) l This is a Severity Level violation (Supplement ). (Civil Penalty - $XXX,XXX) l s W A- - - - . - _ _ ._ _ . . - _ - _ - _ . _ - . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . .
~
Enclosure 3 '9 Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, (name of licensee) is hereby required to. submit to the -Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear - Regulatory Commi ssion, Washington, D.C. 20555, with a copy to the Regional ! Administrator, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II, 101 Marietta l Street, N.W., Suite 2900, Atlanta, Georgia 30323,' within 30 days of the date of ! this Notice a written statement or explanation including (for each violation): I (1) admission or denial of the violation, (2) the reasons for the violation. if i admitted, (3) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, ! (4) the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations, and ; (5) the date when full compliance will be achieved. If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, may issue an order to show cause why the license should not be modified, suspended or revoked or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. Consideration may be given to extending the response time for good cause shown. Under the authority of Section 182 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2232, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation. Within the same time as provided for the response required above under 10 CFR 2.201, (name of licensee) may pay the civil penalty by letter addressed to I the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, with a check, draft, or money order payable to the Treasurer of the United States in the cumulative amount of I (written value) Dollars ($XXX,XXX) or may protest imposition of the civil penalty in whole or in part by a written answer addrested to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement. Should (name of licensee) fail to answer within the time specified, the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, will issue an order imposing the civil penalty in the amount proposed above. Should (name of licensee) elect to file an answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 protesting the civil penalty, such answer may: (1) deny the violation (s) listed in this Notice 1 in whole or in part, (2) demonstrate extenuating circumstances, (3) show error in this Notice, or (4) show other reasons why the penalty should not be imposed. In addition to protesting the civil penalty in whole or in part',, such answer may request remission or mitigation of the penalty. In requesting mitigation of the proposed penalty, the five factors addressed in ' Section V.B of 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, should be addressed. Any written answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 should be set forth separately from the statement or explanation in reply pursuant to 10 CFR 2.201 but may incorporate parts of the 10 CFR 2.201 reply by specific reference (e.g., citing page and paragraph numbers) to avoid repetition. (Name of licensee)'s attention is directed to the other provisions of 10 CFR 2.205 regarding the procedure for imposing a civil penalty. i l
- - - - - - _ - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ . . - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . - _ _ _ . . _ -____.--_-----._________-~__.------.-a
- '~
Enclosure 3 M Upon failure to_ pay the penalty due, which has been subsequently determined'in accordance with the applicable provisions of .10 CFR 2.-205, this matter 'may .M. 1 referred to the Attorney General, and the penalty, unless compromised, remitted,' i' or mitigated, may be collected by civil . action pursuant to Section 234c of the . Act,' 42 U.S.C. 2282.
'FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1 1
1 J. Nelson Grace Regional Administrator Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this day of 19XX i 1 I l l i
)
4 9
MAY O 21986 Enclosure 3 ' 'iB - l B. One Cumulative Civil Penalty Assessed Equally Among the Violations l NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND-l PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY (name of licensee) Docket No(s). (facility name) (if power reactor or fuel facility) License No(s). (city), (state) (if non-power reactor or EA XX-XX (if escalated) materials licensee) i During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted on (date), a violation (violations) of NRC requirements was(were) identified. The violation (s) involved (brief description). In accordance with the " General' Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1985), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission proposes to impose a civil penalty . pursuant to Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended ("Act"), H 42 U.S.C. 2282, PL 96-295, and .10 CFR 2.205. The particular violation (s) and I' associated civil penalty are set forth below: NOTE: Violations will be. ALPHABETIZED, not numbered. l A. (State requirement that was violated.) Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the requirement was violated) B. (State requirement that was violated.)
~
Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the requirement was violated) . Collectively, these violations have been evaluated in the aggregate as a Severity Level problem (Supplement ). (Cumulative Civil Penalty assessed equally among the violations - $XXX,XXX) Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, (name of licensee) is hereby required to submit to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, with a copy to the Regional Administrator, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II, 101 Marietta Street, N.W., Suite 2900, Atlanta, Georgia 30323, within 30 days of the date of this Notice a written statement or explanation including (for each violation):
MAY02tggg Enclosure 3 'T - (1) admission or denial of the violation, (2) the reasons for the violation if admitted, (3) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, (4) the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations, and (5) the date when full compliance will be achieved, If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, may issue an order to show cause why the license should not be modified, suspended or revoked or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. Consideration may be given to extending the response time for good cause shown. Under the authority of Section 182 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2232, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation. Within the same time as provided for the response required above under l 10 CFR 2.201, (name of licensee) may pay the civil penalty by letter addressed to i' the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, with a check, draft, or money order payable to the Treasurer of the United States in the cumulative amount of (written value) Dollars ($XXX,XXX) or may protest imposition of the civil penalty in whole or in part by a written answer addressed to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement. Should (name of licensee) fail to answer within the i time specified, the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, will issue an order imposing the civil penalty in the amount pronosed above. Should (name of licensee) elect to file an answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 protesting the j civil penalty, such answer may: (1) deny the violation (s) listed in this Notice in whole or in part, (2) demonstrate extenuating circumstances, (3) show error in this Notice, or (4) show other reasons why the penalty should not be imposed. In addition to protesting the civil penalty in whole or in part, such answer may request remission or mitigation of the penalty. l In requesting mitigation of the proposed penalty, the five factors addressed in Section V.B of 10 CFR part 2, Appendix C, should be addressed. Any written answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 should be set forth separately from the statement or explanation in reply pursuant to 10 CFR 2.201 but .may incorporate parts of the 10 CFR 2.201 reply by specific reference (e.g., citing page and paragraph numbers) to avoid repetition. (Name of licensee)'s attention i s direcud to the other provisions of 10 CFR 2.205 regarding the procedure for imposing a civil penalty. Upon failure to pay the penalty due, which has been subsequently determined in accordance with the applicable provisions of 10 CFR 2.205, this matter may be referred to the Attorney General, and the penalty, unless compromised, remitted, or mitigated, may be collected by civil action pursuant to Section 234c of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2282. . FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION J. Nelson Grace Regional Administrator Dated at Atlanta, Georgia j this _ day of 19XX
---------__-__---_a
MAY 0 2 gg Enclosure 3 -fD. . C. Violations Both With and Without Civil Penalty Action . NOTICE OF VIOLATION f AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTY (name of licensee) Docket No(s). (facility name) (if power reactor or fuel facility) ' License No(s). 1 (city), (state) (if non power reactor or EA XX-XX.(if escalated) l materials licensee) Durir,s the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted on (date), a violation (violations) of NRC requirements was(were) identified. The violation (s). involved (brief description). In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions", 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1985), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission proposes to impose a civil penalty pursuant to Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act of.1954, as amended ("Act"), 42 U.S.C. 2282, PL 96-295, and 10 CFR 2.205. The particular violation (s) and associated civil penalty are set forth below: I. Violations Assessed a Civil Penalty A. (State requirement that was violated.) Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the requirement' was violated) This is a Severity Level violation (Supplement ). (Civil Penalty - $XXX,XXX) l B. (State requirement that was violated.) l Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the requirement ! was violated) This is a Severity Level violation (Supplement ). (Civil Penalty - SXXX,XXX)
- . l
- MAY02 gg Enciosure3 .W .
1 1 II. Violations Not Assessed a Civil Penalty i l A. (State requirement that was violated.)
- i. Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the requirement was violated)
This is a Severity Level violation (Supplement ). B. (State requirement that was violated.)
. I Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the requirement was violated)
This is a Severity Level violation (Supplement ). 1 Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, (name of licensee) is hereby required to submit to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, with a copy to. the Regional < Administrator, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II, 101 Marietta Street, N.W., Suite 2900, Atlanta, Georgia ~ 30323, within 30 days of the date.of this Notice a written statement or explanation including (for each violation): (1) admission or denial of the violation, (2) the reasons for the violation if 1 admitted, (3) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, (4) the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations, and
-(5) the date when full compliance will be achieved. If an adequate reply.is not received within the time specified in this Notice, the Director, Office of:
Inspection and Enforcement, may issue an order 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. Consideration may be given to extending the responrar time for good cause shown. Under the authority of Section 182- of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2232, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation. Within the same time as provided for the response required above under 10 CFR 2.201, (name of licensee) may pay the civil penalty by letter addressed to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, with a check, draft, or money order payable to the Treasurer of the United States in the cumulative amount.of
~
(written value) Dollars ($XXX,XXX) or may protest imposition of the civil penalty in whole or in part by a written answer addressed to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement. Should (name of licensee) fail to. answer within' the time specified, the Director, Office of Inspection and. Enforcement, will issue an order imposing the civil penalty in the amount proposed above. Should (name of licensee) elect to file an answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 protesting the civil penalty, such answer may: (1) deny the violation (s) listed in this. Notice in whole or in part, (2) demonstrate extenuating circumstances, (3) show' error in this Notice, or (4) show other reasons why the penalty should not be imposed. In addition te protesting the civil penalty in whole or in part, such answer may. request remission or mitigation of the penalty. U_____________._____._
~ MAY 02586 Enclosure 3 TI - In requesting mitigation of the proposed penalty, the five factors addressed in Section '<.B of 10 CFR Part 2 Appendix C, should be addressed. Any written answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 should be set forth separately from the staterrent or explanation in reply pursuant to 10.CFR 2.201 but may incorporate parts of the 10 CFR 2.201 reply by specific reference (e.g., citing page and paragraph numbers) to avoid repetition. (Name of licensee)'s attention is directed to the other provisions of 10 CFR 2.205 regarding the procedure for imposing a civil penalty. Upon failure to pay the penalty due, which has been subsequently determined in accordance with the applicable provisions of 10 CFR 2.205, this matter may be referred to the Attorney General, and the penalty, unless compromised, remitted, or mitigated, may be collected by civil action pursuant to Section 234c of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2282. FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION J. Nelson Grace Regional Admi'nistrator Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this day of 19XX t 6 s e e e
Mayo [q
.w .
l ENCLOSURE 4 l REQUEST FOR NOTICE OF VIOLATION FORM (Involving Civil penalty Action) l Check appropriate boxes, fill in blanks, and circle appropriate answers. A. TITLE: l B. HEADING: NOTE: In the heading, the facility name shall be used for power reactors or fuel facilities, and the city and state shall be used instead for non power reactors or materials licensees. (Circle appropriate answers below.) DOCKET NUMBER or DOCKET NUMBERS LICENSE NUMBER or LICENSE NUMBERS (Provide requested information if appropriate.)' NAME OF LICENSEE: l FACILITY NAME (if power reactor or fuel facility): CITY (if non power reactor or materials licensees): STATE (if non power reactor or materials licensees): DOCKET N0(S). LICENSE N0(S). i C. INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH: (Circle appropriate answer below.) A VIOLATION WAS or VIOLATIONS WERE
, f (Provide re' quested information.)
DATE(S) 0F INSPECTION: VIOLATION (S) INVOLVED (brief description): i I
]
- I
]
I
Enclosure 4 *9 - D. CITATION (S):
~
NOTE: In the citation, violations ~ will be ALPH.ABETIZED, not numbered Only alphabetize if there is more ,than one citation. Indent if there is only one citation. (Circle appropriate answer below.) MORE THAN ONE VIOLATION? YES/ ALPHABETIZE or N0/ INDENT' , (see last page of form) ! (Provide requested information.) 1 ITEM LETTER (if more than one citation) STATE REQUIREMENT THAT WAS VIOLATED: ; l
)
DATE AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE REQUIREMENT WAS VIOLATED: Contrary to the above, I NOTE: The categorization portion of the citation. may- vary. Examples involving (1) separate civil penalties for each. violation, (2) one l cumulative civil penalty assessed equally among the violations, and (3) violations both with and without civil penalty action can be found in the enclosed Sample Notices of Violation and Imposition ) of Civil Penalty (refer to Section II of Enclosure 3). The categorization portion of the citation may be revised to-incorporate these modifications after the final Enforcement Panel has been held. SEVERITY LEVEL: SUPPLEMENT: CIVIL PENALTY AMOUNT ($XXr.,XXX): NOTE: Please write additional violations on the last page of thisEform. Also, indicate the letter description for each new citation. i O 7
Enclosure 4 4 .2 M E. ACTION PARAGRAPHS: (Circle. appropriate answer below.) INCLUDING or INCLUDING FOR EACH VIOLATION' (if more than one citation) F. OPTIONAL PARAGRAPH: YES or NO NOTE: This paragraph should only be used when security. or safeguards information is present. , G. SIGNATURE BLOCK: ! NOTE: All Notices of Violation with civil penalty action shall be l signed and dated by the Regional Administrator. H. DATE:
- I l
I 9
e ,
~
MAY0g y l Enciosure 4 . _ 1 ADDITIONAL CITATIONS I NOTE: Please indicate the letter designation f,or each additional citation. ! 1 j
.i
.l 1
A d e 4 4
'WAY 02 886 .
, w- .
ENCLOSURE 5 STANDARD PARAGRAPHS FOR NOTICES OF DEVIATION
. J TABLE OF CONTENTS
- Page l
I. Standard Paragraphs For a Notice of Deviation 2-A. Title 2 B. Heading _ 2 C. Introductory Paragraph 2 1 2 i D. . Citation (s) E. Action Paragraph- 2 1 I F. Optional Paragraph 2 G. Signature Block 3
- 1. Regiona! Administrator 3
- 2. Division Director 3
- a. Reactor Licensees 3
- b. Fuel Facilities and Material's Licensees 3 g
- 3. Branch Chief 4' 1
- a. Reactor Licensees 4 (1) Projects Branch 1 4 I
(2) Projects Branch 2 4 (3) Projects Branch 3 4
- b. Fuel Facilities and Materials Licen' sees 4 H. Date 4
- l II. Sample Notice of Deviation 5 4
.- l i
i e e
Enclosure 5 'i j l I. STANDARD PARAGRAPHS FOR A NOTICE OF DEVIATION A.
Title:
Notice of Deviation . B. Heading: NOTE: The facility name shall be used for power reactors or fuel I facilities, and the city and state shall be used instead for I non power reactors or materials licensees. l (name of licensee) Docket No(s). ) (facility name) (if power reactor License No(s). l or fuel facility) l (city), (state) (if non power reactor , I or materials licensee) C. Introductory Paragraph: The following deviation (s) was(were) identified during a Nuclear - Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted on (date). D. Citation (s): NOTE: Deviations will be ALPHABETIZED, not numbered. Only alpha-betize if there is more than one citation. Indent if there is only one citation. (State commitments to the NRC; applicable codes, guides, or standards approved by the NRC; or generally accepted industry practices that were not met.) Contrary to the above, (date and description of how the commitments, i codes, guides, standards or accepted industry practices were rot met. l E. Action Paragraph: Please provide in writing within 30 days of the date of this Notice, a description of corrective actions regarding this(these) deviation (s), actions taken to avoid further deviations, and the dates when these actions were or will be completed. ! F. Optional Paragraph: l NOTE: This paragraph should only be used when secur.ity or safe-guards information is present. Security or safeguards information should be submitted as an enclosure to facilitate withholding it from public disclosure as required by 10 CFR 2.790(d) or 10 CFR 73.RI.
.. a Enclosure 5 *T bO6 G. Signature Block:
NOTE: All Notices of Deviation shall be signed and dated by the signer of the transmittal letter.
- 1. Notices of Deviation transmitted with Notices of Violation containing civil penalty action or Severity Level I, II, or III '
citations, with Notices of Violation transmitted by letters which deviate significantly from the standard paragraphs, or with l Notices of Violation where an Enforcement Conference was held are to be prepared for the Regional Administrator's signature. l FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l (name) l Regional Administrator
- 2. Notices of Deviation transmitted with Notices of Violation containing Severity Level IV citations without civil penalty action or with Notices of Violation that are transmitted by i letters that contain the extra paragraph expressing concern about ;
the adequacy of management controls and that do not require the signature of the Regional Administrator are to- be prepared for the signature of the appropriate Division Director,
- a. Reactor Licensees:
I FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (name) , Director Division of Reactor Projects
- b. Fuel Facilities and Materials Licensees:
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l l t (name) , Director l Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards - e
MAY 021986 i Enclosure 5 'W -
- 3. Notices of Deviation transmitted alone or with Notices of Violation containing Severity Level V cftations are to be prepared for the signature of the responsible DRP or' DRSS Branch Chief. ,
j
- a. Reactor Licensees:
(1) Projects Branch 1: l 1 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1 1 (name) , Chief. l Reactor Projects Branch 1 Division of' Reactor Projects (2) Projects Branch 2:
- l. FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION )
l (name) , Chief 1 Reactor Projects Branch 2 l Division.of Reactor Projects l (3) Projects Branch 3: 1 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (name) , Chief Reactor Projects Branc.h 3 Division of Reactor Projects
- 6. Fuel Facilities ~and Materials Licensees:
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0lWISSION (name) , Chief ~ Nuclear Materials Safety and , Safeguards Branch ( Division of Radiation-Safety. and Safeguards C. Date: Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this day of 19XX
,, e s MAY02.586 Enclosure 5 ,y .
II. SAMPLE NOTICE OF DEVIATION NOTICE OF DEVIATION (name of licensee) Docket No(s). (facility name) (if power reactor or fuel facility) License No(s). (city), (state) (if non power reactor or material licensee) The following deviation (s) was(were) identified during a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted on (date). NOTE: Deviations will be ALPHABETIZED, not numbered. Only alphabetize when there is more than one citation. Indent if there is only one citation. (State commitments to the NRC: applicable codes, guides, or standards approved by the NRC; or generally accepted industry practices that were not met.) _ Contrary to the above, (date and description of'how the commitments, codes, guides, standards, or accepted industry practices were not met.) Please provide in writing within 30 days of the date of this Notice a description of corrective actions regarding this(these) deviation (s), actions taken to avoid further deviations, and the dates when these actions were or will be completed. NOTE: The following paragraph should only be used when security or safeguards-information is present. , (Optional Paragraph) Security or safeguards information shall be submitted as an enclosure to facili-tate withholding it from public disclosure as required by 10 CFR 2.790(d) or ' 10 CFR 73.21. .- FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (name) l (title) Dated at Atlanta, Georgia this day of 19XX NOTE: All Notices of Deviation snall be signed and dated by the signer of the transmittal letter. _..________m ___-
t.. . t-MAY 0 2 886 ENCLOSURE 6 J REQUEST FOR NOTICE OF DEVIATION FORM Check appropriate boxes, fill in blanks, and circle appropriate answers. A. TITLE: B. HEADING: NOTE: In the heading, the facility name shall be used for power reactors or fuel facilities, and the city and state shall be used-instead for non power reactors or materials licensees. (Circle appropriate answers below.) DOCKET NUMBER or DOCKET NUMBERS LICENSE NUMBER or LICENSE NUMBERS (Provide requested information if appropriate.) NAME OF LICENSEE: FACILITY NAME (if power reactor or fuel facility): CITY (if non power reactor or materials licensees): STATE (if non power reactor or materials licensees): DOCKET N0(S). LICENSE N0(S). C. INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH: (Circle appropriate answers below.) DEVIATION WAS or DEVIATIONS WERE (Provide re uested information.) DATE(5) 0F INSPECTION: e t 4 - - - _ - - - _ _ _ - - - - _ - - - ~
S ., ,. f Enclosure 6 'W i D. CITATION (S): NOTE: In the citation, deviations will be ALPHABETIZED, not numbered. Only alphabetize if there is more than one citation. Indent if there is only one citation. .j (Circle appropriate answer.) MORE THAN ONE DEVIATION? YES/ ALPHABETIZE or N0/ INDENT (see last page of form) (Provide requested information.) ITEM LETTER ~ (if more than one citation) STATE COMMITMENTS TO THE NRC; APPLICABLE CODES, GUIDES, OR STANDARDS APPROVED BY THE NRC; OR GENERALLY ACCEPTED INDUSTRY PRACTICES.THAT WERE NOT MET: l : I 1 l DATE AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW COMMITMENTS, CODES, GUIDES, STANDARDS, OR l ACCEPTED INDUSTRY PRACTICES WERE NOT MET: Contrary to the'above, l NOTE: Please write additional deviations on the last page of this form. Also indicate the letter designation for each new citation. E. ACTION PARAGRAPH: (Circle appropriate answer below.) l THIS DEVIATION or THESE DEVIATIONS F. OPTIONAL PARAGRAPH: YES or NO NOTE: This paragraph should only be used when security or safe-guards information is present.
2 Enclosure 6
% MAY 0 (1986 G. SIGNATURE BLOCK:
NOTE: All Notices of Deviation shall be signed and dated ~ by the signer of the transmittal lett,er. (Check appropriate boxes below.)
/ / 1. NOTICE OF DEVIATION TRANSMITTED WITH NOTICE OF VIOLATION CONTAINING CIVIL PENALTY ACTION OR SEVERITY LEVEL I, II, OR III . CITATIONS; WITH NOTICE OF VIOLATION TRANS-MITTED BY LETTERS WHICH DEVIATE SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THE STANDARD PARAGRAPHS; OR WITH NOTICE 0F VIOLATION WHERE AN ENFORCEMENT CONFERElICE WAS HELD (Regional Administrator's signature)
/ / 2. NOTICE OF DEVIATION TRANSMITTED ' WITH NOTICE OF' VIOLATION CONTAINING SEVERITY LEVEL.IV CITATIONS WITHOUT CIVIL-PENALTY ACTION OR WITH NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT ARE TRANSMITTED BY GTTERS THAT CONTAIN THE EXTRA PARAGRAPH EXPRESSING CONCERN ABOUT THE ADEQUACY OF MANAGEMENT CONTROLS AND THAT DO NOT REQUIRE THE SIGNATURE OF THE REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR (appropriate Division Director's signature)
/ / a. REACTOR LICENSEES
/ / b. FUEL FACILITIES AND MATERIALS LICENSEES
/ / 3. NOTICE OF DEVIATION . TRANSMITTED ALONE OR WITH' NOTICE OF VIOLATION CONTAINING SEVERITY LEVEL V CITATIONS.
(appropriate Branch Chief's signature), .-
/ / a. REACTOR LICENSEES
/ / (1) PROJECTS BRANCH 1
/ / (2) PROJECTS BRANCH 2 l
/ / (3) PROJECTS BRANCH 3
/ /- b. FUEL FACILITIES AND MATERIALS LICENSEES H. DATE:
4 e 0
- ?.' en e~-
> MAY 0 21986
,4 Enclosure 6 ,
i ADDITIONAL CITATIONS , 1 NOTE: Please indicate the letter designation for each additional citation, i l l i i l \ i
-j
.l
.1
< I i
e L i t 1 t
e e 9D UNITED STATES
/p* 880 o / NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4
[ n REGloN li
$ y 101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
l
- t ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30323
...../ FE8111987 Regional Office Instruction No. 0917 EVALUATION AND FOLLOWUP OF LICENSEE RESPONSE / CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS A.
Purpose:
l l To inform the staff of procedures to be followed subsequent to issuance of a Notice of Violation. B. Discussion: i When a Notice of Violation is issued, the licensee is required to respond. l That response must include the corrective steps that have been taken and results achieved, the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, and the date when full compliance will be achieved. The Region 3 must carefully and thoroughly evaluate the licensee's response to determine 1 if the licensee's corrective action is adequate and comprehensive and that ) it addresses the underlying cause of the problem. Unless this is done, the i Region will share responsibility, by passive concurrence, in corrective actions that may be superficial or inadequate. The licensee clearly bears the primary responsibility for proper corrective actions, but NRC inspectors and supervisors must recognize that we have a ) most important responsibility at this stage of the enforcement process, l Inadequate corrective action by a licensee should be viewed as an adverse ! reflection on the performance of the Regional staff as well. { The actions outlined below address the review and evaluation of licensee responses to violations and provide guidance for inspection followup and resolution. C. Action:
- 1. Promptly and thoroughly review the licensee response to each violation, with special emphasis on the adequacy and comprehensiveness of the l corrective actions. This review should receive as much consideration ,
l as the original identification and formulation of the violation.
- a. If the license response is acceptable, issue the. standard acknowl-edgement letter. (See Enclosure 1 for example.) (Note: If the response involves a case where a civil penalty has been paid, the acknowledgement letter will be issued by the Director, IE Enforce-ment Staff - not the Region.)
l
- b. If the licensee response has minor omissions (e.g., date of completion of corrective action) or if clarification is required, a telephone call should be made to the licensee to get resolution or clarification. The additional information received by tele-
~
fe.TO-87'VSO R/9
i Regional Office Instruction 2 FEB 111987 No. 0917 (
)
phone should then be incorporated in the Region II acknowledgment { 1etter, as confirmation. (See Enclosure 2 for example.) !
- c. If the licensee response is unacceptable > or has major omissions.,
the licensee should be contacted by telephone and requested to J provide a supplemental response. This telephone call should be promptly documented by letter to the licensee, including the date - g that the supplemental response is due. (See Enclosure 3 for 1 example.) ] i
- d. For those cases where a licensee response denies or takes issue ]
with the Notice of Violation, the acknowledgment letter must deal {" with the issues. If the licensee denies 'a violation, the acknowledgment should clearly indicate whether we agree with the ; licensee based on new information he. has provided. '(See i Enclosure 4 for example.) If we continue to believe a violation l occurred, we must address the licensee's reasons for. denial and explain why they are being rejected. If this can be stated briefly (e.g., one or two paragraphs), . it should be included in - . the letter; otherwise, the letter should refer to an enclosure ! l entitled, " Staff Assessment of . Licensee Response." The staff l I assessment should include a restatement of each violation, a i summary of the licensee's response, an NRC evaluation of the response, and a conclusion. (See Enclosure 5'for example.)
- 2. At the next inspection opportunity following the date for completion of corrective actions, verify that all committed corrective actions have ,
been accomplished. Do not defer followup inspection of violations in ' order to accomplish the routine inspection modules. If at*this time f all corrective actions have not been completed, determine if there continues to be e violation of the regulatory requirement originally cited. If so, this is a serious matter that should be brought. to the attention of Region management for appropriate action. Actions to be considered would include a management call followed by. Confirmatory ' i Action Letter, an Enforcement Conference, or' an NRC Order.- If the violation of the basic requirement was properly corrected, ' but associated committed corrective actions such as procedure changes or additional training have not been completed and the incomplete actions are considered significant, the following actions should be taken:
- a. Bring the issue to the attention of licensee management while on site;
- b. Address the licensee's failure to complete all significant corrective actions in the letter that transmits the Inspection Report, and request that he respond in writing.to provide actions taken to assure that commitments to NRC are met;
- c. Keep the original violation OPEN in the Inspection Report,. and document the committed corrective actions that were not completed
___-______.__m._ s
Regional Office 16struction 3 / FEB 111987 , No. 0917 .; I 5 (Note: Do Not close the violation and cite .a Deviation for .. failure to meet a written commitment; a Notice of Deviation would. l be a weaker message to the licensee than a'special paragraph in the letter described in b. above.) i If the omitted corrective actions are of such a minor nature - ." form" v.s. " substance" -- that there is no safety significance, the omission should not be pursued and the original. violation should be closed. D.
Contact:
Comments or questions concerning this Instruction should be directed to the Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordination Staff. , E. Effective Date:
)
J l 1 This Instruction is effective upon issusnce.
]
.q h.
. i
#'A .;
J. Nelson Grace I Regional Administrator i
, i
Enclosure:
l Example Acknowledgement Letters to Licensee j
* 'l'1 Distribution List A '
l l i l I i i
FEB 111987 f ENCLOSURE 1 l Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
REPORT NOS. 50-424/86-60 AND 50-425/86-27 Thank you for your response of October 3,1986, to our Notice 'of Violation issued - on September 4,- 1986, concerning activities conducted- at your facility. We have evaluated your ' response and found that it meets the requirements of 10 CFR 2.201. We will examine the implementation of your corrective actions during future inspections. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, l l g l 1
)
{ 9 m
. s
/ ENCLOSURE 2 i
Gentlemen:
~
SU3 JECT: REPORT NO. 50-800/66 10 lhank you.for ycur .esponse of October 2,1986, to our Notice of Violation issued on September U , '986, 4 concerning activities conducted at your facility. Rega a ding Item 2, your response did not specifically show the date that correc-tive action will be coi.pleted. As a result of the telephone conversations with your Mr. Jones, Administrative Assistant, on October 8 and 9,1986, we understand 7 that packing on .tije vls!ves will be verified to be adequate or the valves will be repla:ed by Decetoer !5, 1986. As an interim measure, we understand that the Unit 2 X-arec wil? ' be visuelly checked for steam leaks by the operator during daily reunds. This surveillance will continue until the new packing on valves 2 410-93 is verified to he adequhte or until the 2-220-90 valves are replaced. We will examine your corrective action during a future inspection. Your coopera-tion with us is appreciated. Sincerely, 4 I s P
/ ENCLOSURE 3 FEB 111987-Gentlemen:
I
SUBJECT:
REPORT NOS. 50-850/86-05 AND 50-851/86-07 I This will acknowledge receipt of your-response of October 2,1986, to our Notice of Violation issued on September 21, 1986, concerning activities conducted at i
.your facility.
1 Your response to Item No. 2 refers to an Engineering Change Notice -(ECN) which modified the - requirements for curing of concrete test cylinders to state that
"... the temperature requirements need not be satisfied so long as theicylinders
-are cured in . curing boxes as equipped as described in ASTM C31 ...." This i response is considered to be unsatisfactory in that the curing temperature during 1 the first 24 hours can affect the 'later cylinder test strength, and the require-ment that the curing box be ".. . equipped as described in ASTM C31..." is not i sufficient by itself to assure that the equipment is utilized to maintain the !
temperature within an acceptable range. For your information in this regard we I have enclosed a copy of an American Concrete Institute (ACI) paper, Title No. 77-55, " Low Initial Curing Temperature Improves the Strength of Concrete Test Cylinders,"' dated December 1977. Your response to Item No. 5 did not include in your revised procedures a specific j schedule or date of completion for training of the QC inspectors. During a telephone conversation on October 9,1986, between Mr. Jones of my staff
- . and Mr. Smith of your staff, Mr. Smith agreed that a revised response to Items 2 1
and 5 will be provided to this office by October 15, 1986. Your cooperation with us is appreciated. , Sincerely, 1 i s l l
/ ENCLOSURE 4 pp,g }.1 g)g7 Gentlemen:
]
SUBJECT:
REPORT NOS. 50-900/86-10 AND 50-901/86-02 Thank you for your response of October 2,1986, tc' our Notice of Violation issued q on September 21, 1986, concerning activities conducted at your , facility. We have evaluated your response and found that it meets the require- I ments of 10 CFR 2.201. After reviewing your letter, we agree with your conclucion that Item No. 2 of the September 21, 1986, Notice of Violation did not constitute a violation. This information was not available to our inspector during the inspection. Accord- ; ingly, we will adjust our records to reflect that no violation of regulatory 1 requirements occurred with respect to Item No. 2. i Your corrective action associated with Item No. I will be reviewed during future inspections. Your cooperation with us is appreciated. Sincerely, b I 1 l
/ ENCLOSURE 5 FEB 111987 i
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
REPORT NOS. 50-750/86-22 AND 50-751/86-22 Thank you for your response of October 7,1986, to our Notice of Violation issued on September 21, 1986, concerning activities conducted at your
, facility. We have examined your response and .found that it meets the, require- i ments of 10 CFR 2.201. We will examine the implementation of your action to correct Violation B during future inspections.
After careful consideration of the bases for'your denial of Violation A, we have concluded, for the reasons presented in the enclosure to the letter, that the violation. occurred as stated in the Notice of Violation. Therefore, in accord-ance with 10 CFR 2.201(a), please submit to this office within 30 days of the date of this letter a written statement describing steps which have been taken to correct Violation A and the results achieved, corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations, and the date when full compliance will be achieved. The response directed by this letter is not' subject to the clearance procedure of' the Office of Management and Budget issued under the Paperwork Reduction Act, PL 96-511. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely,
Enclosure:
Staff Assessment of Licensee
Response
D
FEB 11 t387 f 2 STAFF ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE RESPONSE I Restatement of Violation A l 10 CFR 50.54(k) states, "An operator or senior operator licensed pursuant to Part 55 of this chapter shall be present at the controls at all times during the operation of the facility." Technical Specification 6.2.A. requires that detailed written procedures be prepared, approved, and adhered to for operating activities involving nuclear safety. Station Procedure QAP-300-2, Conduct of Shift Operations, paragraph 9, delineates ) responsibilities of all operation department personnel licensed by the Nuclear ' Regulatory Commission as Reactor Operators and performing the duties of a reactor operator. Section 9b of responsibilities and duties states, "b. To be present at the controls of his assigned shift position at all times." This duty is further clarified by a notation in the procedure which states in part:
" Paragraph k of 10 CFR 50 states 'An operator or senior operator licensed pursuant to part 55 of this chapter shall be present at the controls at all times during the operation of the facility.' In order to comply with this paragraph, an operator will be considered to be at the reactor controls if he (she) is physically within the operating area in front of the unit panels." ,
Contrary to the above, on August 30, 1986,-the Unit 1 operator licensed pursuant to Part 55 was not present at the controls at all times during the operation of. the facility. The Unit 1 operator left his assigned unit unattended with the - Unit at full power, for a period of approximately 1E minutes, while responding to events occurring on the adjacent Unit. Specifically, the Unit 1 operator. lef t his position to assist the Unit 2 operator in bypassing the Rod Worth Minimizer and tiien manually initiated the High Pressure Coolant Injection system on Unit 2.~ During this period there was no operator at the controls physically within the operating area in front of the unit panels of Unit 1, except when he responded to ar. annunciator on his Unit. Summary of Licensee's Response The licensee argues that the "at-the-controls" language of 50.54(k) is vague and subject to differing interpretations. The licensee notes that the Notice of Violation cited Station Procedure QAP-300-2 as a basis for the proposed violation (see restatement of violation for QAP-300-2 language) but contends that addi-tional language in this procedure is relevant. l l
I r 3 FEB 111987 The licensee contends that the Unit 1 operator was always in a position to view the Unit i visual alarms and was always within audible range of the Unit 1 annunciators during the fifteen minute period in question. It is the licensee's position that the distinct locations of Unit 1 and 2 annunciators, at opposite ends of the' control room, precluded the possibility of confusing a Unit 2 , annunciator with a Unit 1 annunciator. The licensee also contends that the ! conduct of the Unit 1 operator showed professionalism that was consistent with ! the letter and spirit of 10 CFR 50.54(k). The licensee argues that a citation in ! this case would be inconsistent with the NRC's position in the past. The ! licensee states that procedures similar to the procedure in question have been in j effect since at least 1977 and have always been understood as not precluding the ! operator of a stable unit from assisting an operator experiencing difficulty at l another unit as long as his actions did not interfere with his ability to respond l l to potential safety events at his unit. The licensee further argues that l operators have done so in the past and were never criticized by the NRC for such j l conduct. { NRC Evaluation 1 The NRC staff has carefully reviewed the licensee's response and has concluded l that the licensee did not provide any information that was not already considered l i in determining the significance of the violation. While the licensee maintains l that the operator acted in a professional manner in assisting the Unit 2 I operator; the facts are unchanged that the operator left the controls of a , ! reactor operating at 100 percent power for a period of time without proper relief l or authorization. The NRC does agree with the licensee's statement that the operator was within audible range of the Unit 1 annunciators under some circumstances. There were, l however, at least two circumstances which could have interfered with proper attention to Unit 1 operation or problems if they had occurred. First, the j l operator had his back to the Unit 1 panels during the time he was working on a ! Unit 2 system and was presumably concentrating on Unit 2 concerns. Second, if a scram at Unit 2 had occurred, with the many alarms associated with such a scram j the NRC believes there is a real probability that the Unit 1 operator would not ' have been able to differentiate a Unit 2 annunciator from a Unit 1 annunciator. j l With the respect to the licensee's argument that the NRC is changing its inter-pretation of 10 CFR 50.54(k), it has always been the NRC position that the l operator must be present at the controls at all times during operation of the facility except in an emergency when action is immediately needed to protect the public health and safety (10 CFR 50.54(x)). Section 50.54(k) is clear on this point. Regulatory Guide 1.114, Paragraph 8, provides further amplification, if any is needed, as to what 10 CFR 50.54(k) requires. It states: l l "In order for the operator at the controls of a nuclear power plant to be ! able to carry out these and other responsibilities in a timely fashion, he l I must give his attention to the condition of the plant at all times [ emphasis added]." l D
r 4 FEB 1.11987 It is the responsibility of the licensee to ensure that station procedures are l consistent with the regulations. The licensee's procedures state "... an operator will be considered to be at the reactor controls is he (she) is physically within the operating area in front of the unit panels. An operator is not at the controls when behind the panels or out of the control room." Although this procedure describes some examples of not being at the controls, it does not
~
cover all of the possible situations such as the one at issue here. To read it as describing all of the impressible situations would be inconsistent.with the regulations and inappropriate. The NRC was also concerned that the off going. Shift Control Room Engineer (SCRE), by leaving the control room to go and talk to the Shif t Engineer, did not i exercise adequate control over the control room operators during the transient. Because the SCRE was out of the control room he was (1) unaware that Unit I was unattended and (2) the Unit 1 operator did not receive proper relief. or authorization when leaving the controls. NRC inspectors have always taken the position that when a' reactor operator was away from the control panels, another licensed oper.ator must monitor the status of the " unattended" unit except in an emergency as described above. This was not such an emergency. To the extent that licensee personnel have previously acted in a fashion similar to that which is'the subject of the violation at issue, such actions were improper. The NRC was unaware of such past practice and, had it been aware, would not have condoned it. I NRC Conclusion For the above reasons, the NRC ' staff concludes that the violation occurred as j stated. 1
, 1 p. \ &S Hog Do UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[' - n REGION ll
$ j / 101 MARIETTA STRE ET. N.W.
*' f ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323
\...../
Regional Office Instruction No. 0912 JUN 181987 ESCALATED ENFORCEMENT PROCESS AND TIMELINESS OF ACTIONS A.
Purpose:
The purpose of this Instruction is to . provide guidance to ensure that-escalated enforcement actions are prepared expeditiously. B. Discussion: To emphasize the significance of escalated enforcement . actions and. to deter recurrence of serious violations, it is essential that 'such actions be timely. Since .many individuals are involved in the enforcement process, each must complete .his part of the effort in a timely manner. Proposed escalated enforcement actions are' to be sent to the enforcement staff at headquarters within five weeks of the last date' of the in-spection. This Instruction applies to any inspection finding that may warrant holding an Enforcement Conference, including a potential civil penalty or a Severity Level I, II, or III citation. C. Action: The escalated enforcement process and required timeliness are presented in the following schedule:
- 1. The responsible Section Chief schedules a Pre-Panel to be held _wl Q one week of the end of the inspection. Prior to the Pre-Panel, the 7esponsible Section completes and distributes a draf t Notice of Violation. The purpose of the Pre-Panel is to discuss,, the safety significance of the findings and determine if an Enforcement Conference should be held.
The Pre-Panel should include the inspector ~ and Section Chief, Senior-Management representing the responsible Division, the Projects Division, and EICS representative. The Deputy Regional Administrator or Regional Administrator should be advised to determine whether he should attend.
- 2. The responsible Division Director briefs the Deputy Regional Administrator or the Regional Administrator on the- issues and the recommendation regarding an Enforcement Conference within one day after the Pre-Panel, if neither attended the meeting. At that time, the preliminary posture of the Region should be set' with regard' to the thrust of the enforcement action.
1 I I
- 3. The Division with project responsibility contacts licensee management within two days after the Pre-Panel to schedule an Enforcement Conference (if applicable), normally to be held af ter issuance of the inspection report but within four weeks of the end of the inspection. ;
fozg W6 5/f
i . Re n ffice Instruction 2 JUN 181987
- 4. A final Notice of Violation (without "boilerplate" after the citations), approved by the responsible Division Director, is 1 provided to EICS and the Regional Counsel within two weeks of the end i of the. inspection. The inspector.also at this time provides to the l Enforcement Coordinator a copy of_ the appropriate part of each l document (FSAR, T.S., License Conditions, LER, procedures, etc.)'
-referenced in the NOV.
- 5. The Inspection Report is normally issued within three' weeks of the "end of the inspection._ For each violation, the Inspection Report
.snouia aadress the items listed in Enclosure 1. . A copy of. the Inspection Report should be provided to EICS promptly upon. issuance.
- 6. The Enforcement Coordinator prepares a draf t enforcement lette* and Notice of Violation prior to the Enforcement Conference. .
- 7. The Enforcement Conference is held within four weeks of :the end of.
~
the inspection.
- 8. An Enforcement Panel is normally convened _on the day of the Enforce-' 4 ment Conference. The purpose of the Panel _is to. review and assess information presented at the Enforcement Conference, determine the ,
appropriate severity levels for violations, evaluate . enforcement i policy escalation and mitigation factors, and recommend appropriate civil penalty (if applicable). The Panel _ should . include' the same attendees as the Pre-Panel.
- 9. The responsible Division Director and Director,. EICS', . brief L the Deputy Regional Administrator or the Regional Administrator-on the recommended enforcement action .within' one day af ter the Panel,. if neither attended the panel meeting. - At this time, the final thrust
! of the enforcement action. is established (tone of the. letter, grouping and level of violations, whether a CP should be issued, etc)
- 10. Within three days after the Panel, the Enforcement Coordinator providef~c6 Ties of an enforce h letter and Notice, and an )
enforcement memorandum to HQ to the Deputy Regional Administrator; the responsible Divis Nonirector; the Director, EICS; and the-Regional Counsel for review. The enforcement memorandum' to HQ , describes the rationale for the proposed _ action, including t,he basis l for the severity levels and civil penalty.
- 11. Any required changes will be provide'd to the-Enforcement Coordinator within one day; the Enforcement Coordinator will promptly make necessary changes.
I
- 12. The completed enforcement " package" (enforcement memorandum, enforce-ment letter, Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty, Inspection Report, Enforcement Conference handout, and NOV
___ --_.2_.- __ ____.-_____._m .--__-..-___.i..-___
l' Regional Office' Instruction '3 JUN 181987~
.No. 0912 /
- l references) will'then be routed expeditiously for concurrences by the '
Regional Counsel; Director, EICS; responsible Division Director; Deputy Regional Administrator; and the Regional Administrator for forwarding to HQ.
- 13. An Enforcement Conference Report documenting the results . of ~ the Enforcement Conference is normally issued within two weeks af ter the Enforcement Conference Information to be included in this Report is provided in Enclosure 2.
D.
Contact:
Questions and/or comments regarding this Instruction should be. directed to the Director, EICS, at extension:5505. E. Effective Date: 1 1 This Instruction is effective upon issuance and replaces Regional' Office i Instruction No. 0912, Rev. 2, issued on August 30, 1983.
)
, , $ fr J. Nelson Grace Regional Administrator ,
Enclosures:
- 1. Inspection Report.for Escalated Enforcement Cases 4
- 2. Enforcement Conference Report I Distribution List A i
l O _._-.__._-._____._.__.__-____-m_
.-----~
r .;
~
> J N 18' 1987 ENCLOSURE 2 l Enforcement Conference Report Af ter the enforcement conference, a report will be issued . documenting, the results of the conference (IE MC 0400-05.04.e and IE MC 0610-05.03.c).
Specific report details will include the following'information, as. applicable:
- 1. List the enforcement conference attendees from the NRC and licensee.
1 Describe additions or - corrections to the factual. information in the.
- 2. [
inspection report.
- 3. If the licensee takes issue with the violations, describe the' licensee's position.
- 4. Describe any additional information which affects the-. regulatory'or safety I significance of each violation.
- 5. Describe any additional information on corrective and. remedial actions the licensee has implemented or has committed to implement; ;
If the licensee provides significant new or revised information during the enforcement conference, it 'will be described in the enforcement con fe rence ' ; re po r t .~ 1 l
- I i
1 i i 1 t
)"~ JUN 18.1987 f
ENCLOSURE 1 i Inspection Report for Escalated Enforcement Cases u
'The facts documented in .the inspection report will address the following questions for each' violation as applicable (IE MC 0400-05.02.a and b and.
IE MC'0610-05.03.e):
- 1. What was the requirement and, if the requirement was conditional, t how were the conditions satisfied which made the requirement' applicable?
- 2. How the requirement was violated?
- 3. When the requirement was violated and What was the duration of the-violation?
- 4. Who or what caused the violation?
- 5. How and by whom (be specific if an NRC inspector) was the violation discovered?
- 6. Was the violation required to be reported and, if . so, what was the applicable reporting requirement?
- 7. Was the violation reported and, if so, when and by whom was.it reported?'
l 8, If the violation was reported, but the report was late, why was the report late?
- 9. Was the report complete and accurate?
- 10. Were there multiple examples of the violation?
- 11. What was the apparent root cause and contributing casual factors for the:
l violation? l . .
- 12. Describe any facts and circumstances that. address the aspects of negligence, careless disregard, willfulness and management involvement.
- 13. Was there economic or other personal or corporate gain associated'with the violation?
- 14. What were the opportunities and when did they exist for licensee staff and management to be aware of the violation?. ,,
)
l 15. What were the circumstan'ces surrounding the violation, such as'. system configuration and operational conditions for reactor cases, which affect the significance of the violation?
- 16. Is the viclation indicative of programmatic problems ar .is it an isolated-case?
T
... JUN 181987 2
f
- 17. What short term corrective and remedial action was taken and when was it taken?
- 18. Did NRC have to intervene to accomplish satisfactory short-term correction and remedial action?
- 19. Were there previous similar NRC inspection or licensee audit findings and, if so, should the corrective actions from those findings have prevented this violation?
The inspection report details will include times, dates, titles of persons, types of equipment and specific factual information responsive to the above listed questions, as applicable. Potential severity level and enforcement options will not be discussed in the inspection report. l l l l l l l
N l UNITED STATa8 g meerg'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
#^
/ k nEcloN II 101 M ARIETTA STR E ET, N.W.
/ '
5
- f ATLANTA.GEOMGIA 30303
" ~%****/
- 007 31 too, Regional Office Instruction No. 0914 REGION II ENFORCEMENT MANUAL A. purpose:
I To instruct the technical staff on enforcement policy and procedures and to provide guidance on the preparation and issuance of enforcement documen-j tation. B. Discussion: The Region II Enforcement Manual will be issued in Supplements during the coming year. This Instruction contains Supplement 1, " Format and Content of a Notice of Violation" and Supplement 2, " Enforcement Decision Guide". 2 Forthcoming Supplements (tentatively entitled, " Format and Content of an l Inspection Report", " Format and Content of a Notice of Deviation", "How to f Recognize a' Violation" and " Unresolved Items") will be issued by Regional Office Notices as addenda to this Instruction. . Serial issuance of the Enforcemertt Manual. allows for orderly preparation and review of each segment of the policy, scheduled training sessions, and time for adaption of such changes as may be introduced. Dividing the Manual into (O L Supplements also facilitates revisions as our experience expands. C. Action: l . Technical staff members should be guided by the enforcement policy and procedures presented in the enclosed Region II Enforcement Manual. . D.
Contact:
Comments regarding.this Instruction should be directed to the Deputy Regional Administrator at extension 5610. E .' Effective Date: This Instruction is effective upon issuance. Q.Nr4A.Q'g\ io f01R
- W W i mes P. O'Reilly ,
R ional Administrate g// ( j
Enclosure:
Region II Enforcement Manual,- . O Sup,iements I aod 2
. 1 I
Distribution List B .
- 1 1
1 .- ( .
- )}}