Information Notice 2013-01, Emergency Action Level Thresholds Outside the Range of Radiation Monitors: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 15: Line 15:
| page count = 5
| page count = 5
}}
}}
{{#Wiki_filter:ML12325A326 February 13, 2013  
{{#Wiki_filter:ML12325A326 UNITED STATES  NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  OFFICE OF NUCLEAR SECURITY AND INCIDENT RESPONSE  OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION OFFICE OF NEW REACTORS  OFFICE OF FEDERAL AND STATE MATERIALS AND  ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS  WASHINGTON, DC  20555-0001  February 13, 2013


NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2013-01: EMERGENCY ACTION LEVEL THRESHOLDS OUTSIDE THE RANGE OF RADIATION MONITORS
NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2013-01: EMERGENCY ACTION LEVEL THRESHOLDS OUTSIDE THE RANGE OF RADIATION MONITORS


==ADDRESSEES==
==ADDRESSEES==
All holders of an operating license or construction permit for a nuclear power reactor or a non-power (research or test) reactor under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," including those that have permanently ceased operations and have certified that fuel has been permanently removed from the reactor vesse All holders of and applicants for a power reactor early site permit, combined license, standard design certification, standard design approval, or manufacturing license under 10 CFR Part 52,  
All holders of an operating license or construction permit for a nuclear power reactor or a non-power (research or test) reactor under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," including those
"Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants."
 
that have permanently ceased operations and have certified that fuel has been permanently removed from the reactor vessel.
 
All holders of and applicants for a power reactor early site permit, combined license, standard design certification, standard design approval, or manufacturing license under 10 CFR Part 52,  
"Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants."  


==PURPOSE==
==PURPOSE==
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this information notice (IN) to inform addressees of inspection findings related to licensees' failures to properly evaluate the effect of site equipment changes on the emergency pla The agency intends this IN to inform licensees of the importance of having adequate procedures to properly evaluate changes to site procedures, equipment, and facilities for potential impact on the licensee's ability to maintain an effective emergency pla Specifically, this IN informs licensees of issues that arose when radiation monitors were not properly evaluated in conjunction with changes made to emergency action level (EAL) thresholds for emergency classification The NRC previously alerted licensees to similar issues in IN 2005-19, "Effect of Plant Configuration Changes on the Emergency Plan," dated July 18, 200 The NRC expects that recipients will review the information for applicability to their facilities and consider actions, as appropriate, to avoid similar problem However, suggestions contained in this information notice do not constitute NRC requirements; therefore, no specific action or written response is require
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this information notice (IN) to
 
inform addressees of inspection findings related to licensees' failures to properly evaluate the
 
effect of site equipment changes on the emergency plan.  The agency intends this IN to inform
 
licensees of the importance of having adequate procedures to properly evaluate changes to
 
site procedures, equipment, and facilities for potential impact on the licensee's ability to maintain an effective emergency plan.  Specifically, this IN informs licensees of issues that arose when radiation monitors were not properly evaluated in conjunction with changes made to emergency action level (EAL) thresholds for emergency classifications.  The NRC previously alerted licensees to similar issues in IN 2005-19, "Effect of Plant Configuration Changes on the Emergency Plan," dated July 18, 2005.  The NRC expects that recipients will review the information for applicability to their facilities and consider actions, as appropriate, to avoid similar problems.  However, suggestions
 
contained in this information notice do not constitute NRC requirements; therefore, no specific action or written response is required.


==DESCRIPTION OF CIRCUMSTANCES==
==DESCRIPTION OF CIRCUMSTANCES==
At the plants cited below, effluent radiation monitor indications are used as EAL thresholds for emergency classification Any site configuration or procedural changes that have the potential to affect the emergency plan, may benefit from being systematically evaluated by the licensee for their impact on the effectiveness of the emergency pla EAL Thresholds Outside the Range of Radiation Monitors at Kewaunee Kewaunee Power Station submitted a revision to its EAL scheme to the NRC for approval in 200 The revision specified ALERT EAL thresholds for multiple instruments that were beyond the display capabilities of those instruments by a decade or mor Both the waste effluent liquid monitor and gaseous effluent radiation monitor were incapable of displaying values high enough to trigger an ALERT declaratio According to the licensee such deficiencies would have prevented timely and accurate emergency classification and respons The licensee staff that developed revisions to the EAL scheme did not identify that the monitors could not display the calculated value The plant operated for approximately 2 years with inaccurate emergency classifications or EAL thresholds, a condition that could have led to the failure of the licensee to declare an ALERT emergency in a timely manne The NRC determined that a violation of 10 CFR 50.54(q) occurred because of the licensee's failure to follow and maintain in-effect emergency plans that meet the standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b)-in particular, 10 CFR 50.47( b)(4). Additional information appears in Kewaunee Power Station, NRC Emergency Preparedness Inspection Report 05000305/2008503, dated September 23, 2008, available on the NRC's public Web site in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession No. ML08267090 EAL Thresholds Outside the Range of Radiation Monitors at Prairie Island Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant submitted a revision to its EAL scheme to the NRC for approval in 200 The revision specified ALERT EAL thresholds for multiple instruments that were beyond the display capabilities of those instruments by a decade or mor Both the waste effluent liquid monitor and spent fuel pool vent radiation monitor were incapable of displaying values high enough to trigger an ALERT declaration based on the licensee's revised EAL schem These deficiencies would have prevented timely and accurate emergency classification and respons The licensee staff that developed revisions to the EAL scheme did not identify that the monitors could not display the calculated value The NRC determined that a violation of 10 CFR Part 50.54(q) occurred because of the licensee's failure to follow and maintain in-effect emergency plans that meet the standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b), in particular, 10 CFR 50.47( b)(4). Additional information appears in Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, NRC Inspection Report 05000282/2010503, dated April 09, 2010, on the NRC's public Web site in ADAMS under Accession No. ML10099030 EAL Thresholds Outside the Range of Radiation Monitors at Crystal River A revision to the licensee's EAL scheme, in 2010, incorporated threshold values for declaring a GENERAL EMERGENCY (GE) based on an effluent release that was well outside the range of the licensee's EAL-specified effluent monitors to repor The threshold for declaration of a GE was above the maximum usable range of the reactor building and auxiliary building effluent radiation monitors on the range specifie Therefore, the licensee had no way of accurately measuring these threshold values or declaring a GE in a timely manne In evaluating the root cause for this condition, the licensee further identified that the radiation monitor indications were nonlinear above 2/3 full scale on the mid-range instrument, and that this monitor would enter an automatic purge mode before reaching the EAL threshol Both of these design features lowered the usable display range even furthe The NRC determined that a violation of 10 CFR Part 50.54(q) occurred because of the licensee's failure to follow and maintain in-effect emergency plans that meet the standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b), in particular, 10 CFR 50.47(b)(4). Additional information appears in Crystal River Unit 3-NRC Emergency Preparedness Inspection Report 05000302/2011501, dated September 23, 2011, on the NRC's public Web site in ADAMS under Accession No. ML11266054
At the plants cited below, effluent radiation monitor indications are used as EAL thresholds for
 
emergency classifications.  Any site configuration or procedural changes that have the potential to affect the emergency plan, may benefit from being systematically evaluated by the licensee for their impact on the effectiveness of the emergency plan.
 
EAL Thresholds Outside the Range of Radiation Monitors at Kewaunee Kewaunee Power Station submitted a revision to its EAL scheme to the NRC for approval in 2005.  The revision specified ALERT EAL thresholds for multiple instruments that were beyond
 
the display capabilities of those instruments by a decade or more.  Both the waste effluent liquid
 
monitor and gaseous effluent radiation monitor were incapable of displaying values high enough to trigger an ALERT declaration.  According to the licensee such deficiencies would have prevented timely and accurate emergency classification and response.  The licensee staff that developed revisions to the EAL scheme did not identify that the monitors could not display the
 
calculated values.  The plant operated for approximately 2 years with inaccurate emergency classifications or EAL thresholds, a condition that could have led to the failure of the licensee to
 
declare an ALERT emergency in a timely manner.  The NRC determined that a violation of 10 CFR 50.54(q) occurred because of the licensee's
 
failure to follow and maintain in-effect emergency plans that meet the standards in
 
10 CFR 50.47(b)-in particular, 10 CFR 50.47( b)(4). Additional information appears in
 
Kewaunee Power Station, NRC Emergency Preparedness Inspection Report
 
05000305/2008503, dated September 23, 2008, available on the NRC's public Web site in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession No. ML082670904.
 
EAL Thresholds Outside the Range of Radiation Monitors at Prairie Island Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant submitted a revision to its EAL scheme to the NRC for approval in 2005.  The revision specified ALERT EAL thresholds for multiple instruments that
 
were beyond the display capabilities of those instruments by a decade or more.  Both the waste
 
effluent liquid monitor and spent fuel pool vent radiation monitor were incapable of displaying
 
values high enough to trigger an ALERT declaration based on the licensee's revised EAL
 
scheme.  These deficiencies would have prevented timely and accurate emergency classification and response.  The licensee staff that developed revisions to the EAL scheme did not identify that the monitors could not display the calculated values.
 
The NRC determined that a violation of 10 CFR Part 50.54(q) occurred because of the
 
licensee's failure to follow and maintain in-effect emergency plans that meet the standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b), in particular, 10 CFR 50.47( b)(4). Additional information appears in Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, NRC Inspection Report 05000282/2010503, dated
 
April 09, 2010, on the NRC's public Web site in ADAMS under Accession No. ML100990307.
 
EAL Thresholds Outside the Range of Radiation Monitors at Crystal River A revision to the licensee's EAL scheme, in 2010, incorporated threshold values for declaring a GENERAL EMERGENCY (GE) based on an effluent release that was well outside the range of the licensee's EAL-specified effluent monitors to report.  The threshold for declaration of a GE
 
was above the maximum usable range of the reactor building and auxiliary building effluent
 
radiation monitors on the range specified.  Therefore, the licensee had no way of accurately measuring these threshold values or declaring a GE in a timely manner.  In evaluating the root cause for this condition, the licensee further identified that the radiation monitor indications were nonlinear above 2/3 full scale on the mid-range instrument, and that this monitor would enter an automatic purge mode before reaching the EAL threshold.  Both of these design features
 
lowered the usable display range even further.
 
The NRC determined that a violation of 10 CFR Part 50.54(q) occurred because of the
 
licensee's failure to follow and maintain in-effect emergency plans that meet the standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b), in particular, 10 CFR 50.47(b)(4). Additional information appears in Crystal River Unit 3-NRC Emergency Preparedness Inspection Report 05000302/2011501, dated
 
September 23, 2011, on the NRC's public Web site in ADAMS under Accession No. ML112660544.


==DISCUSSION==
==DISCUSSION==
The NRC requires licensees to comply with 10 CFR 50.54(q)(2), which states, in part, that a licensee authorized to possess and operate a nuclear power reactor shall follow and maintain the effectiveness of emergency plans that meet the standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b) and the requirements in Appendix E, "Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and Utilization Facilities," to 10 CFR Part 5 Non-power reactor licensees, while not required to comply with 10 CFR 50.47(b), must also meet the requirements of Appendix Site configuration changes have the potential to adversely impact the licensee's ability to maintain and implement an effective emergency plan as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b) and Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, as appropriate. The licensee may consider evaluating all site configuration changes for their impact on the ability of the licensee to implement the site's emergency plan and, if necessary, the need to implement compensatory measure Changes, such as training, facility modifications, site egress and ingress, etc., can all affect the emergency pla In some of the instances discussed above, the licensee's root cause evaluations generally identified inadequate control of the calculations that established the EAL thresholds, and deficiencies in the training of personnel responsible for these activitie Personnel were not knowledgeable about the design and operation of the radiation monitors credited in their EAL schem
The NRC requires licensees to comply with 10 CFR 50.54(q)(2), which states, in part, that a licensee authorized to possess and operate a nuclear power reactor shall follow and maintain
 
the effectiveness of emergency plans that meet the standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b) and the requirements in Appendix E, "Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and Utilization Facilities," to 10 CFR Part 50.  Non-power reactor licensees, while not required to
 
comply with 10 CFR 50.47(b), must also meet the requirements of Appendix E.
 
Site configuration changes have the potential to adversely impact the licensee's ability to maintain and implement an effective emergency plan as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b) and Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, as appropriate. The licensee may consider evaluating all site configuration changes for their impact on the ability of the licensee to implement the site's
 
emergency plan and, if necessary, the need to implement compensatory measures.  Changes, such as training, facility modifications, site egress and ingress, etc., can all affect the
 
emergency plan.  In some of the instances discussed above, the licensee's root cause evaluations generally identified inadequate control of the calculations that established the EAL thresholds, and
 
deficiencies in the training of personnel responsible for these activities.  Personnel were not
 
knowledgeable about the design and operation of the radiation monitors credited in their EAL
 
scheme.


==CONTACT==
==CONTACT==
S This information notice requires no specific action or written respons Please direct any questions about this matter to the technical contact listed below or the appropriate NRC project manage /RA/ /RA/ Mary C. Muessle, Acting Director Larry W. Camper Division of Policy and Rulemaking Division of Waste Management and Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Environmental Protection Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs
S   This information notice requires no specific action or written response.  Please direct any


/RA/ JLuehman for Laura A. Dudes Division of Construction Inspection and Operational Programs Office of New Reactors
questions about this matter to the technical contact listed below or the appropriate NRC project manager.                      /RA/    /RA/ Mary C. Muessle, Acting Director  Larry W. Camper Division of Policy and Rulemaking  Division of Waste Management and  Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation    Environmental Protection          Office of Federal and State Materials and
 
Environmental Management Programs
 
/RA/ JLuehman for Laura A. Dudes Division of Construction Inspection
 
and Operational Programs
 
Office of New Reactors


===Technical Contact:===
===Technical Contact:===
Jonathan Fiske, NSIR/DPR/DDEP/IRIB 301-415-6277 E-mail: JAF4@nrc.gov Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collection IN 2013-01 }}
Jonathan Fiske, NSIR/DPR/DDEP/IRIB 301-415-6277 E-mail: JAF4@nrc.gov Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections.
 
==CONTACT==
S
 
This information notice requires no specific action or written response.  Please direct any questions about this matter to the technical contact listed below or the appropriate NRC project manager.    /RA/      /RA/ Mary C. Muessle, Acting Director  Larry W. Camper Division of Policy and Rulemaking  Division of Waste Management and  Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation        Environmental Protection
 
Office of Federal and State Materials and          Environmental Management Programs  /RA/ JLuehman for Laura A. Dudes
 
Division of Construction Inspection
 
and Operational Programs Office of New Reactors
 
===Technical Contact:===
Jonathan Fiske, NSIR/DPR/DDEP/IRIB    301-415-6277 E-mail:  JAF4@nrc.gov  Note:  NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections.
 
ADAMS Accession No.:  ML12325A326                                              TAC ME9258 *via e-mail OFFICE PM:NSIR Tech Editor* BC:IRIB:NSIR DD:EP:NSIR D:DPR:NSIR BC:RDB:FSME NAME JFiske CHsu RKahler  MThaggard  RLewis  BWatson DATE 11/28/12 10/23/12 11/28/12 1/15/2013 1/24/13 1/29/13 OFFICE LA:PGCB:NRR PM:PGCB:NRR BC:PGCB:NRRDD:DCIP:NRODD:DWMEP:FSME (A)D:DPR:NRRNAME CHawes MBanic DPelton LDudes (JLuehman for)LCamper MMuessle DATE 2/6/13 2/4/13      2/8/13      2/11/13      2/13/13      2/13/13 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
 
}}


{{Information notice-Nav}}
{{Information notice-Nav}}

Revision as of 09:45, 28 March 2018

Emergency Action Level Thresholds Outside the Range of Radiation Monitors
ML12325A326
Person / Time
Issue date: 02/13/2013
From: Camper L W, Dudes L A, Muessle M C
NRC/FSME, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Office of New Reactors, Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response
To:
Banic M, NRR/DPR, 415-2771
References
TAC ME9258 IN-13-001
Download: ML12325A326 (5)
v • d • e


ML12325A326 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR SECURITY AND INCIDENT RESPONSE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION OFFICE OF NEW REACTORS OFFICE OF FEDERAL AND STATE MATERIALS AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS WASHINGTON, DC 20555-0001 February 13, 2013

NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2013-01: EMERGENCY ACTION LEVEL THRESHOLDS OUTSIDE THE RANGE OF RADIATION MONITORS

ADDRESSEES

All holders of an operating license or construction permit for a nuclear power reactor or a non-power (research or test) reactor under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," including those

that have permanently ceased operations and have certified that fuel has been permanently removed from the reactor vessel.

All holders of and applicants for a power reactor early site permit, combined license, standard design certification, standard design approval, or manufacturing license under 10 CFR Part 52,

"Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants."

PURPOSE

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this information notice (IN) to

inform addressees of inspection findings related to licensees' failures to properly evaluate the

effect of site equipment changes on the emergency plan. The agency intends this IN to inform

licensees of the importance of having adequate procedures to properly evaluate changes to

site procedures, equipment, and facilities for potential impact on the licensee's ability to maintain an effective emergency plan. Specifically, this IN informs licensees of issues that arose when radiation monitors were not properly evaluated in conjunction with changes made to emergency action level (EAL) thresholds for emergency classifications. The NRC previously alerted licensees to similar issues in IN 2005-19, "Effect of Plant Configuration Changes on the Emergency Plan," dated July 18, 2005. The NRC expects that recipients will review the information for applicability to their facilities and consider actions, as appropriate, to avoid similar problems. However, suggestions

contained in this information notice do not constitute NRC requirements; therefore, no specific action or written response is required.

DESCRIPTION OF CIRCUMSTANCES

At the plants cited below, effluent radiation monitor indications are used as EAL thresholds for

emergency classifications. Any site configuration or procedural changes that have the potential to affect the emergency plan, may benefit from being systematically evaluated by the licensee for their impact on the effectiveness of the emergency plan.

EAL Thresholds Outside the Range of Radiation Monitors at Kewaunee Kewaunee Power Station submitted a revision to its EAL scheme to the NRC for approval in 2005. The revision specified ALERT EAL thresholds for multiple instruments that were beyond

the display capabilities of those instruments by a decade or more. Both the waste effluent liquid

monitor and gaseous effluent radiation monitor were incapable of displaying values high enough to trigger an ALERT declaration. According to the licensee such deficiencies would have prevented timely and accurate emergency classification and response. The licensee staff that developed revisions to the EAL scheme did not identify that the monitors could not display the

calculated values. The plant operated for approximately 2 years with inaccurate emergency classifications or EAL thresholds, a condition that could have led to the failure of the licensee to

declare an ALERT emergency in a timely manner. The NRC determined that a violation of 10 CFR 50.54(q) occurred because of the licensee's

failure to follow and maintain in-effect emergency plans that meet the standards in

10 CFR 50.47(b)-in particular, 10 CFR 50.47( b)(4). Additional information appears in

Kewaunee Power Station, NRC Emergency Preparedness Inspection Report 05000305/2008503, dated September 23, 2008, available on the NRC's public Web site in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession No. ML082670904.

EAL Thresholds Outside the Range of Radiation Monitors at Prairie Island Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant submitted a revision to its EAL scheme to the NRC for approval in 2005. The revision specified ALERT EAL thresholds for multiple instruments that

were beyond the display capabilities of those instruments by a decade or more. Both the waste

effluent liquid monitor and spent fuel pool vent radiation monitor were incapable of displaying

values high enough to trigger an ALERT declaration based on the licensee's revised EAL

scheme. These deficiencies would have prevented timely and accurate emergency classification and response. The licensee staff that developed revisions to the EAL scheme did not identify that the monitors could not display the calculated values.

The NRC determined that a violation of 10 CFR Part 50.54(q) occurred because of the

licensee's failure to follow and maintain in-effect emergency plans that meet the standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b), in particular, 10 CFR 50.47( b)(4). Additional information appears in Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, NRC Inspection Report 05000282/2010503, dated

April 09, 2010, on the NRC's public Web site in ADAMS under Accession No. ML100990307.

EAL Thresholds Outside the Range of Radiation Monitors at Crystal River A revision to the licensee's EAL scheme, in 2010, incorporated threshold values for declaring a GENERAL EMERGENCY (GE) based on an effluent release that was well outside the range of the licensee's EAL-specified effluent monitors to report. The threshold for declaration of a GE

was above the maximum usable range of the reactor building and auxiliary building effluent

radiation monitors on the range specified. Therefore, the licensee had no way of accurately measuring these threshold values or declaring a GE in a timely manner. In evaluating the root cause for this condition, the licensee further identified that the radiation monitor indications were nonlinear above 2/3 full scale on the mid-range instrument, and that this monitor would enter an automatic purge mode before reaching the EAL threshold. Both of these design features

lowered the usable display range even further.

The NRC determined that a violation of 10 CFR Part 50.54(q) occurred because of the

licensee's failure to follow and maintain in-effect emergency plans that meet the standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b), in particular, 10 CFR 50.47(b)(4). Additional information appears in Crystal River Unit 3-NRC Emergency Preparedness Inspection Report 05000302/2011501, dated

September 23, 2011, on the NRC's public Web site in ADAMS under Accession No. ML112660544.

DISCUSSION

The NRC requires licensees to comply with 10 CFR 50.54(q)(2), which states, in part, that a licensee authorized to possess and operate a nuclear power reactor shall follow and maintain

the effectiveness of emergency plans that meet the standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b) and the requirements in Appendix E, "Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and Utilization Facilities," to 10 CFR Part 50. Non-power reactor licensees, while not required to

comply with 10 CFR 50.47(b), must also meet the requirements of Appendix E.

Site configuration changes have the potential to adversely impact the licensee's ability to maintain and implement an effective emergency plan as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b) and Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, as appropriate. The licensee may consider evaluating all site configuration changes for their impact on the ability of the licensee to implement the site's

emergency plan and, if necessary, the need to implement compensatory measures. Changes, such as training, facility modifications, site egress and ingress, etc., can all affect the

emergency plan. In some of the instances discussed above, the licensee's root cause evaluations generally identified inadequate control of the calculations that established the EAL thresholds, and

deficiencies in the training of personnel responsible for these activities. Personnel were not

knowledgeable about the design and operation of the radiation monitors credited in their EAL

scheme.

CONTACT

S This information notice requires no specific action or written response. Please direct any

questions about this matter to the technical contact listed below or the appropriate NRC project manager. /RA/ /RA/ Mary C. Muessle, Acting Director Larry W. Camper Division of Policy and Rulemaking Division of Waste Management and Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Environmental Protection Office of Federal and State Materials and

Environmental Management Programs

/RA/ JLuehman for Laura A. Dudes Division of Construction Inspection

and Operational Programs

Office of New Reactors

Technical Contact:

Jonathan Fiske, NSIR/DPR/DDEP/IRIB 301-415-6277 E-mail: JAF4@nrc.gov Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections.

CONTACT

S

This information notice requires no specific action or written response. Please direct any questions about this matter to the technical contact listed below or the appropriate NRC project manager. /RA/ /RA/ Mary C. Muessle, Acting Director Larry W. Camper Division of Policy and Rulemaking Division of Waste Management and Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Environmental Protection

Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs /RA/ JLuehman for Laura A. Dudes

Division of Construction Inspection

and Operational Programs Office of New Reactors

Technical Contact:

Jonathan Fiske, NSIR/DPR/DDEP/IRIB 301-415-6277 E-mail: JAF4@nrc.gov Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections.

ADAMS Accession No.: ML12325A326 TAC ME9258 *via e-mail OFFICE PM:NSIR Tech Editor* BC:IRIB:NSIR DD:EP:NSIR D:DPR:NSIR BC:RDB:FSME NAME JFiske CHsu RKahler MThaggard RLewis BWatson DATE 11/28/12 10/23/12 11/28/12 1/15/2013 1/24/13 1/29/13 OFFICE LA:PGCB:NRR PM:PGCB:NRR BC:PGCB:NRRDD:DCIP:NRODD:DWMEP:FSME (A)D:DPR:NRRNAME CHawes MBanic DPelton LDudes (JLuehman for)LCamper MMuessle DATE 2/6/13 2/4/13 2/8/13 2/11/13 2/13/13 2/13/13 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY


Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=Information_Notice_2013-01,_Emergency_Action_Level_Thresholds_Outside_the_Range_of_Radiation_Monitors&oldid=522592"