ML20199E228

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Rept 50-155/97-11 Issued on 971006.Reviewed C/As & Have No Further Questions
ML20199E228
Person / Time
Site: Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date: 11/15/1997
From: Grobe J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To: Powers K
CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
References
50-155-97-11, NUDOCS 9711210128
Download: ML20199E228 (2)


See also: IR 05000155/1997011

Text

.

_

_

_

__

_ _ .

_ _ _

__.

_.

. _ _ _

_

_

,

Ot!*

!

.' *

.

l

'

November 15, 1997

l

!

!

Mr. K. P. Powers

Plant General Manager

Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant

Consumers Energy Company

10269 US 31 North

Charlevoix, MI 49720

l

SUBJECT:

NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC INSPECTION REPORT 50155/97011(DRS))

,

Dear Mr. Powers:

This will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated October 24,1997, in response to our

- letter dated October 6,1997, transmitting a Notice of Violation associated with a maintenance

worker's failure to follow plant radiation protection procedures. We have reviewed your

corrective actlNs and have no further questions at this time. These corrective actions will be

examined during future inspections.

,

i

Sincerely,

Original Signed by John A. Grobe

John A. Grobe, Director

Division of Reactor Safety

Docket No. 50-155

License No, DPR-6

Enclosure:

Lir 10/24/97 J. S. Rang

Consumers Energy to US NRC

,

l

cc w/o encl: R. A. Fenech, Senior Vice President,

Nuclear, Fossil, and Hydro Operations

I

James R. Padgett, Michigan Public

Service Commission

ec w/ encl: -

Michigan Department of Pubil:: Health -

lgg

,g,.

Department of Attorney General (MI)-

,

DOCUMENT NAME: G:DRS\\BRP11157.DRS

to receive a copy of this document indicate in 14 box: 'C's Copy w/o attrond *E's Copy w/att/ encl *N' = No copy

l OFFICE

)]D)2/,g/A E

Rlli

lo IRill , f/ -

l

Rill

a

l

lNAME

GV/est:ip~

GShear6%

BBurjHW

JGrobd5N

[DATE

11//J/97 -

11//3/97

11/@l97

11/L(/974

~'i9tlitotas97sts

'

'

PDR

ADOCK 05000155

G-

PDR

.-

-

. .

. - . .

.

-

. . - .-. . . . - , - .

. . -

-

-

, _ . , -

- - .

-

__

.

.

.

.

K. P. Powers

2

November 15, 1997

DJstribution:

Docket File w/o encl

SRIs, BRP, Palis w/ encl

Hill PRR w/enci

PUBLIC IE 01 w/enci

LPM, NRR w/enci

OCFO/LFARB w/enct

A. B. Beach, Rlll w/enci

DRP w/enci

J. L. Caldwell, Rlli w/ encl

i

DRS w/ encl

Rlli Enf. Coordinator w/enci

.

$

,.

__-_

. _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ __ _ _ . _ _ _ _ .. _ _.

-:

,.

.

'

hM

-,

- -

,

,

r

w Rwor cmay

nogiwiuayr ne,r

l

can. a wn

,

October 24, 1997

Nuclear Regulatory Conrnission

Document Control Desk

Washington, DC

20555 0001

DOCKET 50155

LICENSE DPR 6

BIG ROCK POINT PLANT

REPLY TO A NOTICE OF

VI0lATION

NRC INSPECTION REPORT 97011,

During a routine NRC inspection conducted from September 2.1997, through

September 5,1997, one violation of NRC requirements was identified and

forwarded by letter dated October 6,1997.

The violation concerns a maintenance worker that laid dcwn for several minutes

in a contaminated, low dose area while waiting to participate in reactor head

.

de tensioning operations. Even though his behavior was inaapropriate, the

contamination levels were low, and he did not contaminate 11mself.

Consumers Energy Company agrees with the violation as stated.

Pursuant to the direction provided in the report, find attached a Reply to the

Notice of Violation. The proposed corrective action: are intended to address

the concerns expressed by the NRC Inspectors, and to prevent recurrence of

similar incidents.

,

.

ML

(

lames S Rang

N

g 3usiness and Licens q anager

CC: Administrator, Region 111. USNRC

NRC Resident inspector

Big Rock Point

NRR Project Manager

OWFN, USNRC

,

ATTACINENT-

,

e nvvo6 d (5

'OCT S 0

f

f

,

.

,

.

9

,

ATTACHMENT

CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPN 1Y

BIG ROCK POINT PLANT

DOCKET 50 155

REPLY TO A NOTICE OF VIOLATION

INSPECTION REPORT 97011

Sutnitted October 24, 1997

,

e

%

2 Pages

.

.

  • ^

RLk Y TO A N011CL Of V10LA110N - NRC INSfECTION REPOR1 97011

'

.'

1riolation 97011 01

As a result of an inspectton conducted Septeaber 2-5. 1997, a violation of NRC

requirtments was identified.

In accordance with the * General Statment of

Po1 icy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Act1ons. * NUREG-1600, the violatton

is listed below:

Technical Specificalion 6.11 requires, in part. that procedures for

personnel radiction protection shall be adhered to for all operations

involving personnel radiat ton oposure.

Step 10 of Attachment 1, * Individual Responsibilities for Proper

Radfation Protectlon.* of Adninistrative Procedure 5.5. *Radiatton Work

Pennit. * (Revision 12).

In:tructs sorkers to not unnecessarily contact

contaminated surfaces with their bodies, tools or equipment, and to not

disturb such surfaces, which could spread contamination or create

airborne radioactivity.

Contrary to the above on Septmber 2.1997, a maintenance worke

preparing to participate in reactor head detensioning operations laid

down in a contaminated area for several minutes while waiting for other

workers to cmplete a task.

This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).

Consumers Energy Company agrees to the violation as stated.

I. 8cason for the violation.

The reactor head detensioning and removing operation involves a coordinated

effort by those working the job. Due to the nature of the job, workers will

experience periods of inactivity while waiting to perform their job

responsibilities. In some cases, it is difficult to determine the length of

time between these periods; however the worker is expected to remain close et

hand (by waiting in a low dose rate area) so that delays can be minimized. In

this worker's case, he was fully dressed out in anti contamination clothing

and was waiting in a low dose area for less than 10 minutes for other workers

to complete their assigned task. No chairs or bench'es had been provided for

worker: in the low dese waiting area. When faced with this situation in the

past, workers took it upon themselves to deter-

what worked best in a

particular situation. Depending on the indiv-

, and the length of the jcb.

laying down or reclining against a wall in a . .w dose rate area was determined

to be an option in lieu of no chairs or benches. Radiation Protection

Technicians. Maintenance Supervisors, and Plant Management accepted the

practice since it did not lead to an increased incidence of personnel

contaminations. Management failed to establish the appropriate radiation

protection culture. This practice can pose an unnecessary risk to the workers.

and will not be tolerated at the station in the future.

.

%

- . . _ -

-_ - . - . - -

- . -

.

..- . . - - .

,'

RCPLY 10 A NOTICE Of V10LA110N

NRC INSPEC110N REPORT 97011

11. The correct 1ve stens that have been tden and the results achieved.

The worker involved was counseled on appropriate beht 'or within a

contaminated area. The work crews were also briefed on this situation.

Management also directed that if long delays are anticipated, seating area 4n

the low do ,e waiting area would need to be nrovidad. or leaving the

contaminated area would be required. These expectations were reiterated during

the pre-job briefings for the remainder of the maintenance activity.

The Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant Policy was also revised to provide

direction for worker rest in contaminated areas, and now states the following:

When workers in contaminated areas require res' . the following items are to

'

t

be considered:

- Waiting in a low dose area versus leaving the work are).

Providing appropriate facilities for resting such as chairs or benches.

-

- Avoiding contact with contaminated surfaces,

in addition facility employees were made aware of the policy change and

managements expectations that laying or leaning on contaminated surfaces is

not appropriate except in emergency circumstances.

111. The corrective stens that will be taken to avoid recurrence.

No further actions are required at this time. The corrective steps previously

discussed are intended to prevent recurrence.

IV. The date when the facility will be in full comoliance.

The facility is currently in full compliance.

.

+

$

. - . .

,

,

.

. . . . . . , , . _ . .

_m,