ML17324A123: 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 18: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:Iesm~nPOWERAUTHORITY
{{#Wiki_filter:I e sm~n POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK JAMES A.FITZPATRICK
OFTHESTATEOFNEWYORKJAMESA.FITZPATRICK
NUCLEAR POWER PLANT JOHN D.LEONARD, JR.Resident Manager October, 4, 1978 JAFP-78-512 P.O.BOX 41 Lycoming, New York 13093 315 342.3840 Mr.Boyce H.Grier, Director United States Nuclear Regulatory
NUCLEARPOWERPLANTJOHND.LEONARD,JR.ResidentManagerOctober,4,1978JAFP-78-512P.O.BOX41Lycoming,
NewYork13093315342.3840Mr.BoyceH.Grier,DirectorUnitedStatesNuclearRegulatory
Commission
Commission
Region1631ParkAvenueKingofPrussia,Pennsylvania
Region 1 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania
19406Reference:
19406 Reference:
Docketf50-333DearMr.Grier:IEInspection
Docket f50-333 Dear Mr.Grier: IE Inspection
f78-16Withreference
f78-16 With reference to the'inspection
tothe'inspection
conducted by Mr.K.Plumlee of your office on August 31 and September 1, 1978, at the James A.FitzPatrick
conducted
Nuclear Power Plant, and in accordance
byMr.K.PlumleeofyourofficeonAugust31andSeptember
with the provisions
1,1978,attheJamesA.FitzPatrick
of Section 2.201 of Part II of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
NuclearPowerPlant,andinaccordance
we are submitting
withtheprovisions
oor reply to item A or~Ap endix A or the Notice or Violation transmitted
ofSection2.201ofPartIIofTitle10oftheCodeofFederalRegulations
by your letter dated September 19, 1978 as received by the undersigned
wearesubmitting
on September 22, 1978.APPENDIX A Notice of Violation Based on the results of an NRC inspection
oorreplytoitemAor~ApendixAortheNoticeorViolation
conducted on August 31 and Septem-ber 1, 1978, it appears that one of your activities
transmitted
was not conducted in full compliance
byyourletterdatedSeptember
with the conditions
19,1978asreceivedbytheundersigned
of your NRC Facility License No.DPR-59 as indicated below.This item is an infraction.
onSeptember
A.Technical Specifications
22,1978.APPENDIXANoticeofViolation
Section 6.11.A, which was effective July 28, 1978, requires that any individual
BasedontheresultsofanNRCinspection
or group of individuals
conducted
permitted to enter high radiation areas be provided with or accompanied
onAugust31andSeptem-ber1,1978,itappearsthatoneofyouractivities
by one or more of the following:
wasnotconducted
1, A radiation monitoring
infullcompliance
device which continuously
withtheconditions
indicates the radia-tion dose rate in the area.2.A radiation monitoring
ofyourNRCFacilityLicenseNo.DPR-59asindicated
device which continuously
below.Thisitemisaninfraction.
A.Technical
Specifications
Section6.11.A,whichwaseffective
July28,1978,requiresthatanyindividual
orgroupofindividuals
permitted
toenterhighradiation
areasbeprovidedwithoraccompanied
byoneormoreofthefollowing:
1,Aradiation
monitoring
devicewhichcontinuously
indicates
theradia-tiondoserateinthearea.2.Aradiation
monitoring
devicewhichcontinuously
integrates
integrates
theradia-tiondoserateintheareaandalarmswhenapresetintegrated
the radia-tion dose rate in the area and alarms when a preset integrated
doseisreceived.
dose is received.Entry into such areas with this monitoring
Entryintosuchareaswiththismonitoring
device may be made after the dose rate level in the area has been established
devicemaybemadeafterthedoseratelevelintheareahasbeenestablished
and personnel have been made knowledgeable
andpersonnel
qf them.'780%18o3'Ig  
havebeenmadeknowledgeable
qfthem.'780%18o3'Ig  
   
   
Page2Anindividual
Page 2An individual
qualified
qualified in radiation protection
inradiation
protection
procedures
procedures
whoisequippedwitharadiation
who is equipped with a radiation dose rate monitoring
doseratemonitoring
device.This indi-vidual shall be responsible
device.Thisindi-vidualshallberesponsible
for providing positive control over the activities
forproviding
within the area and shall perform periodic radiation sur-veillance at the frequency specified by the facility in the Radiation Work Permit.Contrary to the above, up to September I1978, unaccompanied
positivecontrolovertheactivities
individuals (operators
withintheareaandshallperformperiodicradiation
and technicians)
sur-veillance
were routinely permitted to enter high radiation areas without being provided with a continuously
atthefrequency
specified
bythefacilityintheRadiation
WorkPermit.Contrarytotheabove,uptoSeptember
I1978,unaccompanied
individuals
(operators
andtechnicians)
wereroutinely
permitted
toenterhighradiation
areaswithoutbeingprovidedwithacontinuously
indicating
indicating
doseratemoni-toringdevice,oracontinuously
dose rate moni-toring device, or a continuously
integrating
integrating
radiation
radiation dose rate monitor that alarms when a preset integrated
doseratemonitorthatalarmswhenapresetintegrated
dose is received.We have reviewed Inspection
doseisreceived.
Report 50-333/78-16
WehavereviewedInspection
and take issue with the sec-'"*the inspector s finding that the alleged infraction
Report50-333/78-16
exists.The specification
andtakeissuewiththesec-'"*theinspector
'ited clearly states"one or more of the following." We maintain that no vio-lation exists since the operators and technicians
sfindingthattheallegedinfraction
referred to in the Inspection
exists.Thespecification
Report were acting in compliance
'itedclearlystates"oneormoreofthefollowing."
with Technical Specification
Wemaintainthatnovio-lationexistssincetheoperators
6.11(A)I.C.(your item A.3 above)in that: 1)The digital radiation meter in question is a radiation dose rate moni-toring device, therefore satisfies the requirement
andtechnicians
of having a"radia-tion dose rate monitoring
referredtointheInspection
device." 2)These instruments
Reportwereactingincompliance
are used by individuals
withTechnical
qualified in radiation pro-tection procedures.
Specification
3)High radiation area entries made using these radiation dose rate moni-toring devices are, made in accordance
6.11(A)I.C.(youritemA.3above)inthat:1)Thedigitalradiation
with the plant radiation protection
meterinquestionisaradiation
procedures (Extended RWP).4)Only those personnel specifically
doseratemoni-toringdevice,therefore
qualified may use this Extended RWP procedure.
satisfies
therequirement
ofhavinga"radia-tiondoseratemonitoring
device."2)Theseinstruments
areusedbyindividuals
qualified
inradiation
pro-tectionprocedures.
3)Highradiation
areaentriesmadeusingtheseradiation
doseratemoni-toringdevicesare,madeinaccordance
withtheplantradiation
protection
procedures
(Extended
RWP).4)Onlythosepersonnel
specifically
qualified
mayusethisExtendedRWPprocedure.
Individuals
Individuals
sotrainedarequalifedtoexercisepositivecontrolovertheactivities
so trained are qualifed to exercise positive control over the activities
withinthearea.Thedigitalmetersareusedbecausetheyarelightweight,
within the area.The digital meters are used because they are lightweight, compact, easy to oper-ate, accurate, and have a wide range (lmR/hr to 999R/hr).The operators and technicians
compact,easytooper-ate,accurate,
carry these meters with them while making routine plant"rounds." RWPs used in connection
andhaveawiderange(lmR/hrto999R/hr).
with pe'rforming
Theoperators
andtechnicians
carrythesemeterswiththemwhilemakingroutineplant"rounds."
RWPsusedinconnection
withpe'rforming
maintenance
maintenance
workinhighradiation
work in high radiation areas specify that continuous
areasspecifythatcontinuous
reading rate meters are to be used or a radiation pro-tection technician
readingratemetersaretobeusedoraradiation
assigned to provide monitoring
pro-tectiontechnician
during the progress of the job.We therefore contend that we are not in violation of our Technical Specifications
assignedtoprovidemonitoring
and respectfully
duringtheprogressofthejob.Wetherefore
request that the Notice of Violation be withdrawn.
contendthatwearenotinviolation
Very truly yours,~gggIi/Q<'I~~~John D.Leonard, Jr.Resident Manager JDL:smr  
ofourTechnical
Specifications
andrespectfully
requestthattheNoticeofViolation
bewithdrawn.
Verytrulyyours,~gggIi/Q<'I~~~JohnD.Leonard,Jr.ResidentManagerJDL:smr  
DISTRIBUTION:
DISTRIBUTION:
NRCDirector,
NRC Director, Office of Inspection
OfficeofInspection
8 Enforcement
8Enforcement
(3 copies)SNRC Director, Office of Hanagement
(3copies)SNRCDirector,
OfficeofHanagement
Information
Information
8ProgramControl(3copies)G.P.J.J.J.P.R.FiT.BerryLyons/P.RajaramDavisBostonGriffinEarlyBurnsle
8 Program Control (3 copies)G.P.J.J.J.P.R.Fi T.Berry Lyons/P.Rajaram Davis Boston Griffin Early Burns le
}}
}}

Revision as of 09:44, 6 July 2018

Responds to NRC 780919 Ltr Re Violation Noted in IE Insp Rept 50-333/78-16.Disputes Alleged Infraction & Requests Notice of Violation Be Withdrawn
ML17324A123
Person / Time
Site: FitzPatrick Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 10/04/1978
From: LEONARD J D
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK
To: GRIER B H
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML17207A152 List:
References
NUDOCS 7901180249
Download: ML17324A123 (4)


See also: IR 05000333/1978016

Text

I e sm~n POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK JAMES A.FITZPATRICK

NUCLEAR POWER PLANT JOHN D.LEONARD, JR.Resident Manager October, 4, 1978 JAFP-78-512 P.O.BOX 41 Lycoming, New York 13093 315 342.3840 Mr.Boyce H.Grier, Director United States Nuclear Regulatory

Commission

Region 1 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania

19406 Reference:

Docket f50-333 Dear Mr.Grier: IE Inspection

f78-16 With reference to the'inspection

conducted by Mr.K.Plumlee of your office on August 31 and September 1, 1978, at the James A.FitzPatrick

Nuclear Power Plant, and in accordance

with the provisions

of Section 2.201 of Part II of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations

we are submitting

oor reply to item A or~Ap endix A or the Notice or Violation transmitted

by your letter dated September 19, 1978 as received by the undersigned

on September 22, 1978.APPENDIX A Notice of Violation Based on the results of an NRC inspection

conducted on August 31 and Septem-ber 1, 1978, it appears that one of your activities

was not conducted in full compliance

with the conditions

of your NRC Facility License No.DPR-59 as indicated below.This item is an infraction.

A.Technical Specifications Section 6.11.A, which was effective July 28, 1978, requires that any individual

or group of individuals

permitted to enter high radiation areas be provided with or accompanied

by one or more of the following:

1, A radiation monitoring

device which continuously

indicates the radia-tion dose rate in the area.2.A radiation monitoring

device which continuously

integrates

the radia-tion dose rate in the area and alarms when a preset integrated

dose is received.Entry into such areas with this monitoring

device may be made after the dose rate level in the area has been established

and personnel have been made knowledgeable

qf them.'780%18o3'Ig

Page 2An individual

qualified in radiation protection

procedures

who is equipped with a radiation dose rate monitoring

device.This indi-vidual shall be responsible

for providing positive control over the activities

within the area and shall perform periodic radiation sur-veillance at the frequency specified by the facility in the Radiation Work Permit.Contrary to the above, up to September I1978, unaccompanied

individuals (operators

and technicians)

were routinely permitted to enter high radiation areas without being provided with a continuously

indicating

dose rate moni-toring device, or a continuously

integrating

radiation dose rate monitor that alarms when a preset integrated

dose is received.We have reviewed Inspection

Report 50-333/78-16

and take issue with the sec-'"*the inspector s finding that the alleged infraction

exists.The specification

'ited clearly states"one or more of the following." We maintain that no vio-lation exists since the operators and technicians

referred to in the Inspection

Report were acting in compliance

with Technical Specification 6.11(A)I.C.(your item A.3 above)in that: 1)The digital radiation meter in question is a radiation dose rate moni-toring device, therefore satisfies the requirement

of having a"radia-tion dose rate monitoring

device." 2)These instruments

are used by individuals

qualified in radiation pro-tection procedures.

3)High radiation area entries made using these radiation dose rate moni-toring devices are, made in accordance

with the plant radiation protection

procedures (Extended RWP).4)Only those personnel specifically

qualified may use this Extended RWP procedure.

Individuals

so trained are qualifed to exercise positive control over the activities

within the area.The digital meters are used because they are lightweight, compact, easy to oper-ate, accurate, and have a wide range (lmR/hr to 999R/hr).The operators and technicians

carry these meters with them while making routine plant"rounds." RWPs used in connection

with pe'rforming

maintenance

work in high radiation areas specify that continuous

reading rate meters are to be used or a radiation pro-tection technician

assigned to provide monitoring

during the progress of the job.We therefore contend that we are not in violation of our Technical Specifications

and respectfully

request that the Notice of Violation be withdrawn.

Very truly yours,~gggIi/Q<'I~~~John D.Leonard, Jr.Resident Manager JDL:smr

DISTRIBUTION:

NRC Director, Office of Inspection

8 Enforcement

(3 copies)SNRC Director, Office of Hanagement

Information

8 Program Control (3 copies)G.P.J.J.J.P.R.Fi T.Berry Lyons/P.Rajaram Davis Boston Griffin Early Burns le