ML20236N012

Responds to NRC Re Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-089/98-202 & 50-163/98-202.Corrective Actions:Discussed Violation W/Health Physics Technician Responsible for Drill & Distributed Memo Re Criticality Warning Alarm Sys Drills

ML20236N012
Person / Time
Site:	General Atomics
Issue date:	07/10/1998
From:	Asmussen K GENERAL ATOMICS (FORMERLY GA TECHNOLOGIES, INC./GENER
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
37-98-2939, 50-089-98-202, 50-163-98-202, 50-89-98-202, NUDOCS 9807140362
Download: ML20236N012 (4)

Text

- _ _ _ - _ _ -_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

hCENERALATDhnCS July 10,1998 37/68-2939 I

i VIA OVERNIGHT EXPRESS SERVICE U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l ATTN: Document Control Desk  !

Washington, DC 20555 I

Subject:

Response to NRC Notice of Violation

Reference:

NRC Inspection Report No. 50-89/98-202 and 50-163/98-202 and Notice of Violation dated June 11,1998

Dear Sir or Madam:

Enclosed is General Atomics'(GA's) response to the Notice of Violation issued on June 11,1998 (Reference). This response was prepared pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201. I GA trusts you will find its response and corrective action measures to be appropriate and satisfactory. If you should have any questions concerning this response, please contact me at (619) 455-2823, or Mr. Brian Laney at (619) 455-4369.  !

Very truly yours, I l

{ _

l Keith E. Asmussen, Ph.D. 1 i Director, Licensing, Safety, and Nuclear Compliance 8

l E

O Enclosure - as above y" cc: Mr. Craig Bassett, Senior Non-Power Reactor Inspector, NRC Region II

/f/

9007140362 990710 '

l PDR ADOCK 05000089 l

G PDR s.

3550 GENERAL ATOMICS COURT. SAN DIEGO. CA 921211194 PO BOX 05608. SAN DIEGO. CA 92186 5608 (619)455 3000

.~ .

l General Atomics' Response to the Notice of Violation / Inspection No. 50-89/98-202 and 50-163/98-202 During the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted on May 4-7,1998, three violations of NRC requirements were identified. The violations are restated below, each l followed by General Atomics'(GA's) corresponding response.

l VIOLATION A:

l " Technical Specification 9.3.c requires the licensee to have written instructions for emergency and abnormal conditions including provisions for evacuation, reentry, recovery, and medical support.

Section 10.3 of the Radiological Contingency Plan (RCP) requires that criticality evacuation drills

'be conducted semiannually at each facility that uses special nuclear material (SNM) in quantities sufficient to require a criticality waming alarm system. The TRIGA Reactors Facility has a criticality waming alarm system.

Contrary to the above, on Saturday, July 12,1997, a " drill" was documented as completed to fulfill the requirements specified in RCP Section 10.3 but it did not qualify as a drill because no one was told that it was a drill and no one evacuated."

GA's Resoonse to Violation A:

(1) The reason for the violation, or, if contested, the basis for disputing the violation:

The TRIGA* Reactors Facility is, and was at the time, in a secure but " shutdown" mode wherein the building was frequently unoccupied. This frequent unoccupied condition contributed to a feeling of indifference which resulted in an inadvertent uncharacteristic lapse of good judgement l by a Health Physics Technician.

(2) The corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved:

i On May 7,1998, the problem was discussed with the Health Physics Technician responsible for j the drill. The following issues were addressed with the technician ~ 1) the importance of the

. j criticality evacuation drill,2) the inappropriateness of attempting to conduct a drill on a Saturday,

3) that the " Saturday drill" did not qualify as a drill since no one was present to evacuate, and 4) appropriate times and conditions for the drill to be meaningful.

The Health Physics technician fully understands the importance of the situation and what should have been done instead.

l (3) The corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations:

In addition to the individual counseling given to the responsible health physics technician, a i memorandum addressing the importance of conducting meaningful criticality warning alarm l system drills was written by General Atomics' Radiation Safety Officer on May 8,1997. This memorandum was distributed to all General Atomics Health Physics Technicians, applicable Principal Investigators and other appropriate individuals. All GA Health Physics Technicians were required to read the memo and acknowledge understanding by signing a form.

(4) The date when full compliance will be achieved:

! General Atomics is in full compliance.

Page 1

n.

l VIOLATION B : I "The licensee's Physical Security Plan, entitled " Fixed Site and Transportation Plan for the Protection of Special Nuclear Material of Moderate and Low Strategic Significance," dated April ,

1997, requires in Par 1II, Section 3.2 that key locks and combinations for controlled access areas l (CAAs) will be changed any time a new area is activated or... at least annually. Section 1.3 of l Part Il stipulates that the Mark I reactor CAA encloses all accesses to the reactor's pool, control  !

console, and shop area.

Contrary to the above, key locks for the Mark I reactor controlled access area were changed in l 1995 and 1996 but not changed for 1997."

GA's Resoonse to Violation B:

(1) The reason for the violation, or, if contested, the basis for disputing the violation:

GA's records indicate that the locks were changed in 1995,1996, but, as noted in the violation,

, no record could be found of them being changed early in 1997, as required to meet the annual requirement.

General Atomics underwent a transition of locksmith personnel in early 1997. Similarly, the TRIGA* reactor facility was in a mode of transition from an operating facility to a possession only facility. As a result of these changes, the requirement for the annual change of locks in the TRIGA* Reactors Facility was inadvertently overlooked.

(2) The corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved:

The TRIGA* Reactor Facility locks were changed on December 15 and 18,1997.

Although the annual lock change out requirement is the responsibility of each facility manager, GA Security has instituted a suspensa system to ensure that this requirement will continue to be met annually as required.

(3) The corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations:

GA commits to incorporate the annual requirement for the change of locks into a TRIGA*

Reactor Facility procedure. This procedure will include a checklist to clearly identify the requirement and assure that it is completed in a timely manner.

Further, as mentioned above, although the annual lock change out requirement is the responsibility of each facility manager, GA Security has instituted a suspense system to ensure that this requirement will continue to be met annually as required.

l (4) The date when full compliance will be achieved:

General Atomics is in full compliance.

Page 2 l

1 -

1 l

l l

VIOLATION C :

"10 CFR 50.54(l) requires that, except as provided in 10 CFR 55.13, the licensee may not permit the manipulation of the controls of any facility by anyone who is not a licensed operator or senior operator as providedin 10 CFR Part 55.

10 CFR 55.54(k) requires that an operator or senior operatorlicensedpursuant to Part 55 of this l chapter shallbe present at the controls at all times during the operation of the facility.

Contrary to the above, the licensee's TRIGA Mark I research reactor was operated on various occasions in 1996 and 1997 by two individuals whose licenses had expired and were not renewed untilMarch 21,1997. Individual A, whose reactor operatorlicense had expired on November 8,1995, operated the reactor on various occasions in 1996 and on January 23,1997.

Individual B, whose reactor operatorlicense had expired on November 7,1996, operated the reactor on various occasions in 1997 including February 21 and March 4."

)

GA's Resoonse to Violation C:

(1) The reason for the violation, or, if contested, the basis for disputing the violation:

While attention was given to properly completing the operator requalification program requirements, the reactor operators and their management inadvertently failed to note the passing of the expiration dates of the subject licenses.

(2) The corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved:

License renewal applications were submitted for both reactor operators on January 28,1997.

On February 21,1997 GA's Director of Licensing, Safety, and Nuclear Compliance issued a f memorandum to the Director of the TRIGA* Reactors Facility reiterating that "once an individual's reactor operators license expires, they are no longer authorized to perform license required functions nor operate the reactor." The NRC reviewed the license renewal applications for each of the two individuals and each received a new operating license dated March 21,1997.

(3) The corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations:

All GA reactor operators were reminded of their individual responsibilities to assure that their licenses is renewed in a timely manner and remains current as long as they are in a position requiring them to perform reactor licensed activities.

To provide additional assurance that operator qualification requirements and other commitments are properly maintained, a checklist will be developed as a part of the TRIGA* Reactors Facility procedures. The intent of this checklist will be to clearly identify the requirement for timely operator license renewal and assure that this and other periodic actions required to meet license conditions are met. Actions addressing the checklist requirements will be reviewed by the Criticality and Radiation Safety Committee (CRSC) during their annual audit of GA's TRIGA*

reactors under possession only license amendments (POLA).

(4) The date when full compliance will be achieved:

General Atomics is in full compliance.

Page 3

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -