05000483/FIN-2012004-02: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| identified by = Self-Revealing | | identified by = Self-Revealing | ||
| Inspection procedure = IP 71124.01 | | Inspection procedure = IP 71124.01 | ||
| Inspector = L Ricketson, P Elkmann, L Carson, L Willoughby, N O, | | Inspector = L Ricketson, P Elkmann, L Carson, L Willoughby, N O'Keefe, T Hartman, N Greene, Z Hollcraft, N Makris | ||
| CCA = H.12 | | CCA = H.12 | ||
| INPO aspect = QA.4 | | INPO aspect = QA.4 | ||
| description = The inspectors reviewed a self-revealing non-cited violation of Technical Specification 5.4.1.a, because a worker did not follow radiation work permit instructions. Specifically, an individual entered an area with radiation dose rates significantly higher than the areas on which he was briefed. As corrective action, the licensee coached the individual on the radiation work permit instructions and the licensees expected radiation worker behavior. This was documented in the licensees corrective action program as Callaway Action Request 201108483. The failure to follow radiation work permit instructions is a performance deficiency. The performance deficiency was more than minor because, if left uncorrected, the performance deficiency had the potential to lead to a more significant safety concern. Using the Occupational Radiation Safety Significance Determination Process, the inspectors determined the finding had very low safety significance because: (1) it was not an as low as is reasonably achievable finding, (2) there was no overexposure, (3) there was no substantial potential for an overexposure, and (4) the ability to assess dose was not compromised. This finding had a crosscutting aspect in the human performance area, work practices component, in that the worker failed to use error prevention techniques, such as self-checking. | | description = The inspectors reviewed a self-revealing non-cited violation of Technical Specification 5.4.1.a, because a worker did not follow radiation work permit instructions. Specifically, an individual entered an area with radiation dose rates significantly higher than the areas on which he was briefed. As corrective action, the licensee coached the individual on the radiation work permit instructions and the licensees expected radiation worker behavior. This was documented in the licensees corrective action program as Callaway Action Request 201108483. The failure to follow radiation work permit instructions is a performance deficiency. The performance deficiency was more than minor because, if left uncorrected, the performance deficiency had the potential to lead to a more significant safety concern. Using the Occupational Radiation Safety Significance Determination Process, the inspectors determined the finding had very low safety significance because: (1) it was not an as low as is reasonably achievable finding, (2) there was no overexposure, (3) there was no substantial potential for an overexposure, and (4) the ability to assess dose was not compromised. This finding had a crosscutting aspect in the human performance area, work practices component, in that the worker failed to use error prevention techniques, such as self-checking. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 00:18, 22 February 2018
| Site: | Callaway  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000483/2012004 Section 2RS1 |
| Date counted | Dec 31, 2012 (2012Q4) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Or Safety |
| Identified by: | Self-revealing |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71124.01 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | L Ricketson P Elkmann L Carson L Willoughby N O'Keefe T Hartman N Greene Z Hollcraft N Makris |
| CCA | H.12, Avoid Complacency |
| INPO aspect | QA.4 |
| ' | |