United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19401

Phone: 610/337-5330 Fax: 610/337-5241

Internet: dps@nrc.gov or nas@nrc.gov

I-97-104 August 12, 1997

Contact: Diane Screnci FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil A. Sheehan

NRC STAFF PROPOSES $176,000 FINE

FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS AT CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a

$176,000 fine against Baltimore Gas & Electric (BG&E) Co. for

three alleged violations of agency requirements at the Calvert

Cliffs nuclear power plant in Lusby, Md. The infractions stem

from inadequate control of diving activities in the Unit 2 spent

fuel pool earlier this year, creating a substantial potential for

a diver’s significant overexposure to radiation.

In addition, the NRC cited, but did not propose a fine, for

10 other alleged violations involving other inadequate

radiological controls and inadequate control of refueling

activities.

The event that precipitated the apparent violations related

to diving activity occurred on April 3. During the fourth of

five dives into the Unit 2 refueling cavity and spent fuel pool

to inspect and repair malfunctioning fuel transfer equipment, a

contractor diver left the previously surveyed and approved dive

location at the south end of the roughly 40-foot-deep, stainless

steel-lined pool. As a result, he entered areas exhibiting

significantly higher radiation fields, where he received an

unplanned radiation exposure and could have received a dose in

excess of regulatory limits.

Following the fourth dive, a decision was made to begin the

fifth dive, using another diver to complete the repair/inspection

work. Although his radiation detection devices had not been

processed to determine his previous exposure, the diver from the

fourth dive was allowed to re-enter the spent fuel pool work area

to support the other diver.

NRC staff, which held a predecisional enforcement conference

with BG&E regarding the matter on June 12, determined the

violations associated with the diving activities were as follows:

! Failure to ensure the diver would not be able to gain
unauthorized or inadvertent access to areas where

radiation levels could be 500 rads or more in an hour. NRC

radiation dose limits are 5 rems per year. (A rem is a

measure of radiation exposure. The average American is

exposed to 300 millirem of radiation from natural sources

each year. The values of ”rem” and “rad” are numerically

equal. A “millirem” is one-thousandth of a rem.)

! Failure to provide adequate instructions to the diver as to

the nature and location of very high radiation fields and

the authorized work tasks.

! Failure to perform adequate surveys during and after the

diver entered an area of spent fuel pool that had not been

previously surveyed.

Preliminary calculations performed by BG&E staff indicated

the diver’s right knuckles may have entered radiation fields of

155 to 310 rem per hour and his right arm may have entered

radiation fields ranging from 45 to 90 rem per hour. Dose

calculations show the diver received 270 millirem to the whole

body, and 885 millirem to the extremities. Regulatory dose

limits are 5 rem and 50 rems respectively. Subsequent dose

assessments indicated that no exposure in excess of NRC limits

likely took place.

“Although subsequent detailed dose assessments for the diver

indicated that no apparent radiation exposure in excess of NRC

limits likely occurred, this was nonetheless a significant event

given the serious consequences that could result from the diver

being in close proximity to irradiated (spent) fuel,” NRC Region

I Administrator Hubert J. Miller wrote in a letter to BG&E.

“Weaknesses in the establishment and implementation of the type

of radiological controls necessary to assure safety in the

vicinity of very high radiation areas resulted in a substantial

potential for an exposure in excess of regulatory limits at the

facility.”

The NRC believes the event constituted a breakdown in

controls that were to be provided for diving work, Mr. Miller

continued. Significant deficiencies in communications,

coordination, and management oversight and decision-making

existed, he said.

The violations pertaining to the other inadequate

radiological controls for which no fines were proposed include:

a failure to prevent access to areas inside the Unit 2

containment building exhibiting radiation levels greater than

1,000 millirems at 30 centimeters; failure to post a caution sign

and require radiation detection devices for workers entering high
radiation areas; and a reviewing supervisor’s failure to forward

to the plant’s Issues Assessment Group reports written regarding

a high radiation area access control concern and a safety concern

associated with Unit 2 containment emergency airlocks.

The refueling activity violations include inadequate actions

to preclude the numerous and repeated problems with refueling

equipment that occurred during the defueling of Unit 2 in March;

and the commencement of Unit 2 refueling activities on April 23

without properly aligning for operation the spent fuel pool area

ventilation system charcoal filters.

BG&E has 30 days to pay the fine or request in writing that

all or part of the penalty be withdrawn.

#