ML20245D551

Notice of Violation from Insp on 880205-0617.Violations Noted:Overexposure of Licensed Matl on Skin,Hot Particle Zones Established to Repair Drain Line Not Posted & Licensee Did Not Notify Individual of Overexposure

ML20245D551
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	07/29/1988
From:	Martin J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20151Q111	List: IR 05000312/1988007 ML20245D551
References
EA-88-173, NUDOCS 8808110039
Download: ML20245D551 (3)

Text

.

NOTICE OF VIOLATION Sacramento Municipal Utility District Docket No. 50-312 Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station License No. DPR-54 EA 88-173 During inspections conducted from February 5,1988, through June 17, 1988, violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the "General Statement o' Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1988), the violations are listed below:

A. 10 CFR 20.101(a) provides, in part, ti at no licensee shall possess, use, or transfer licensed material in su,:h c manner as to cause any individual in a restricted area to receive ir any period of one calendar quarter from radioactive material and otbar sources of radiation a total occupational dose in excess 7.5 rem to the skin of the whole body.

Contrary to the above, on Febriary 4,1988, an irdividual received from licensed material an occupaticual dose to a small area of skin of the whole body calculated to be in the range of 19 to 278 rem.

B. Technical Specification Section 6.11 requires that procedures for personnel radiation protection shall be prepared consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20 and shall be approved, maintained, and adhered to for all operations involving personnel radiation exposure.

Requirements established in the licensee's Rcdiation Control Manual for controlling personnel exposure are as follows:

"Area (1) LicenseeRadiationProtectionprocedure(RP)305-7(1)HotParticle Definitions and Posting" Section 6.7, requires:

Zones (HPZ) to be conspicuously posted as Contaminated Areas per l

Section 6.6 with Hot Particle Zone Signs, (b) continuous radiation protection coverage for entry into HPZs, and (c) surveys of personnel exiting HPZs to ensure that those personnel are free of hot particles.

Contrary to these procedural requirements:

(a) A HPZ established for the repair of the "A" Decay Heat Cooler Pump drain line, on February 3-4, 1988, had not been ,

conspicuously posted with a HPZ sign.  ;

1 (b) Continuous radiation protection coverage had not been provided for work performed in an established HPZ for the period between 11:30 p.m. on February 3, 1988 through 7:00 a.m. on February 4, 1988.

(c) On February 4, 1988, personnel exiting a HPZ in the "A" Decay Heat Cooler Pump room were not surveyed to ensure that they l

were free of hot particles.

l

~

880811003s 880729 PDR ADOCK 05000312 G PNU

Notice of Violation (2) RP.305-98, paragraph 6.2.1, provides that all personnel who have been in a posted contaminated area shall conduct a whole body frisk as close as possible to the exit point, but always prior to donning additional clothing or leaving a Controlled Arca.

Contrary to these procedural requirements, at approximately 6:30 a.m. on February 4, 1988, an individual exiting the "A" Decay Heat Cooler Pump room, which was a posted cont:minated area, failed to perform a whole body frisk prior to donning his clothing.

C. 10 CFR 19.12 provides, in part, that all individuals working in or frequenting any portion of a restricted area shall be kept informed of the storage, transfer, or use of radioactive materials or radiation in such portions of the restricted area; shall be instructed in the health problems associated with their exposure to such radioactive materials or radiation; and in precautions or procedures to minimize exposure. The extent of these instructions shall be commensurate with potential radiological protection health problems in the restricted area.

Contrary to the above, on February 3-4, 1988, at least three individuals, including a health physics technician, without having been instructed on the precautions and procedures to minimize their exposure to highly radioactive particles, performed work involvh the "A" Decay Heat Cooler Pump.

D. 10 CFR 20.409(b) provides: "When a licensee is required pursuant to paragraphs 20.405 or 20.408 to report to the Commission any exposure of an individual to radiation or radioactive material, the licensee shall also notify the individual. Such notice shall be transmitted at a time not later than the transmittal to the Commission and shall comply with the provisions of paragraph 19.13(a) of this chapter."

Contrary to the above, the licensee did not notify the individual in writing of his exposure on or before the date that the Comission was notified. On March 8, 1988, pursuant to paragraph 20.405(a)(1)(iv), the licensee submitted a letter to the Commission reporting the exposure received by an individual from NRC licensed material while working at the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station.

These violations are categorized in the aggregate as a Severity Level III violation (Supplement IV).

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Sacramento Municipal Utility District is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region V, and a copy to the NRC Senior Resident Inspector, Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice.

Notice of Violation )

i This reply should be clearly marked as a "Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include for each violation: (1) the reason for the violation if admitted, (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, (3) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order may be issued to show cause why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. Consideration may be given to extending the response time for good cause shown.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

. s, s D.

in ~~ A 49 Regional Administrator Dated at Walnut Creek, California this .g_9 day of % 1988