ML20236M957

Notice of Violation & Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in Amount of $2,500.Noncompliance Noted:Licensee Failed to Make Surveys Necessary to Identify High Radiation Area in Neutron Radiograhpy Facility & to Post Signs Properly

ML20236M957
Person / Time
Site:	University of Virginia
Issue date:	10/26/1987
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20236M921	List: ML20236M916 ML20236M957
References
EA-87-155, NUDOCS 8711130350
Download: ML20236M957 (3)

Text

- ____ - - _____ __. . _ _ _ . __

l NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITIDT 0F CIVIL PENALTY l

University of Virginia Docket No. 50-62 f Pool Reactor License No. R-66 Charlottesville, VA 22901 EA 87-155 During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspections conducted on July 6-8 )

and 15-17, 1987, violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance l with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," l 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1987), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission proposes to  !

impose a civil penalty pursuant to Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act of J 1954, as amended (Act), 42 U.S.C. 2282, and 10 CFR 2.205. The particular  !

violations and associated civil penalty are set forth below:

I. Violations Assessed a Civil Penalty I I

10 CFR 20.201(b) requires that each licensee make or cause to be made j A.

such surveys as may be necessary for the licensee to comply with the  !

regulations in Part 20 and are reasonable under the circumstances to  !

evaluate the extent of radiation hazards that may be present. j I

10 CFR 20.201(a) defines survey as an evaluation of the radiation l hazards incident to the production, use, release, disposal, or presence of radioactive materials or other sources of radiation under j a specific set of conditions.

10 CFR 20,202(b)(3) defines a high radiation area as an area, acces.-  !

sible to personnel, in which there exists radiation originating in i whole or in part within licensed material at such levels that a major portion of the body could receive in any one hour a dose in excess of (

100 millirem.  !

10 CFR 20.203(c)(1) requires a licensee to post each high radiation  ;

area with a conspicuous sign or signs bearing the radiation caution symbol and the words: Caution, High Radiation Area.

10 CFR 20.203(c)(2) requires each entrance or access point to a high radiation area to be equipped with a control device to reduce the radiation exposure that an individual may receive to a dose below 100 millirems in 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> upon entry or equipped with a control device which shall energize a conspicuous visible or audible alann signal in such a way as to alert an individual entering the area of the activity or be maintained locked except during periods when access to the area is required with positive control over each individual entry.

Contrary to the above, as of July 2, 1987, the licensee did not make or cause to be made surveys necessary to identify a high radiation area in the neutron radiography facility, did not take appropriate action to ensure the area was properly posted with a conspicuous sign or signs bearing the radiation caution symbol and the words: Caution, 'High Radiation Area, and access to all of the entrances to the high radiation area in the neutron radiography facility was not controlled by any of the described methods. An individual could have been exposed to a dose rate of 8 rem per hour.

8711130350 871026 x PDR ADOCK 05000062

/O PDR

~

Notice.of Violation i B. Technical Specification.6.3 requires, in part, that written procedures, reviewed and approved by the Reactor Safety Committee, shall be in effect and followed for: (1). startup, operation, and shutdown'of the-reactor; (2) installation.and. removal.of experiments and' experimental facilities; (3): periodic surveillance -(including test and calibration)-'

of reactor instrumentation and-safety systems; and (4) preventive:

and corrective maintenance' operations that could have an1effect on reactor safety.

Contrary to the above, i

l

1. In 1982, the neutron: radiography. facility, an experimental 11 facility, was installed without written procedures..

2. Procedures.were not adequate, in that, between 1983 andLJune' l 1987, the neutron radiography facility. was operated without3 written procedures.

3. In June 1987, modifications were' installed to the neutron radiography facility without written procedures..

4. Prior to July 2,1987, written' procedures were. not 'in effectifor surveillance testing of the neutron detector'in the' neutron-radiography block house access contro1 system.-

L Collectively, these violations have been evaluated inthe aggregate as'a Severity Level III problem (Supplement ~IV).

Cumulative civil penalty $2,500 - (assessed equally between .the violations).

II. Violation Not Assessed A Civil-Penalty 10 CFR 50.59(a)(1) states, in part, that the' holder 'of ailicense authori--

make changes to thel facility' zing. operation of a utilization facility as described in the safety analysis report ~ _may(SAR) without' prior Commission

! approval unless the proposed change involves:an unreviewed safety; question.

10 CFR 50.59(b)(1) states, in part, that.the licensee shall. maintain records of changes in the facility made pursuant to .this= section to=the. .

extent that these changes constitute changes'in the' facility as: described-in the SAR. These records must include.a written safety _ evaluation which provides the bases for the determination that'the change does;not involve an *:rreviewed safety question.

Safety Analysis Report, Section 5.1, states that the .two 8-inch' neutron beam ports are to be filled with concrete plugs'when not;in use. -

Contrary to the above, in 1982,_the' licensee _made a change to the facility as described in the SAR, by. removing the concrete plugs from a neutron beam port and constructing a. block house at the beam port to compensate'for;the; removed plugs, without preparing:a written safety evaluation to determine that the change did not involve an unreviewed safety question.

This is a-Severity Level IV violation (Supplement;I). ,

h ' >

__z___ ___ 1__ _iJ

h

~'

Notice of Violation '

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, University of Virginia (licensee) 4 is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the Director,  ;

Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, within 30 days of the date of this Notice. This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of V1olation" and should include for each violation: (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) ttle correc-tive steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, and (5) the date when full compliance will be achieved. If an adequate reply is not geceived h, 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 givpn to ,

Under the authority br extending the response time for good cause shown.Section 182 of the Act, 42 U

((

l oath or affirmation. J l

Within the same time as provided for the response required above under  !

10 CFR 2.201, the licensee may pay the civil penalty by letter to the Director, l Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, with a check, draft, or money order payable to the Treasurer of the United States in the amount of the civil penalty proposed above, or the cumulative amount of the civil i penaltiesifmorethanonecivilpenaltyisproposed,ormayprotestimdosition, I of the civil penalty in whole or in part by a written answer addressed to the u Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cctunission. Should )

the licensee fail to answer within the time specified, an order imposing the (

civil penalty will be issued. Should the licensee elect to file an answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 protesting the civil penalty, jn whole or in part, such answer should be clearly marked as an " Answer to a Notice of Violation"-

and may: (1) deny the violations listed in this Notice in % hole or in part, (2) demonstrate extenuating circumstances, (3) show arror in this Notice, or

',d >

(4) show other reasons why the penalty should not be imposed. In addition to x

protesting the civil penalty, such answer may request 9 emission or mitigation of the penalty.

In requesting mitigation of the proposed penalt  !

Section V.B of 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C ,(1987)y, should bethe five factors addressed. Anyaddressed in I 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 specifid reference (e.g., citing page and paragraph numbers) to avoid iepetition. The attention of the 11censee 1 isdirectedtotheotherprovisionsof10CFR2.205;regardingtheprocedhe j for imposing a civil penalty, i

Upon failure to pay any civil penalty due which subsequently has been determined in accordance with the applicable provisions ef.10 CFR 2.205, this matter may be referred to the Attorney General, and the penalty, unless compromised, remit-ted, or mitigated, may be collected by civil action pursuant to Set: tion 234c' of i the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2282c. s , -  !

\ i The responses to the Director, Office of Enforcement, noted abov~e (9.eply to a 1 Notice of Violation, letter with payment of civil penalty, and Answer to a i Notice of Violation) should be addressed to: Director, Office of Enforcement,

.l >

s

- - - - - -- 1