The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is in the process of rescinding or revising guidance and policies posted on this webpage in accordance with Executive Order 14151 Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing, and Executive Order 14168 Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government. In the interim, any previously issued diversity, equity, inclusion, or gender-related guidance on this webpage should be considered rescinded that is inconsistent with these Executive Orders.

Event Notification Report for June 1, 2001

                    U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
                              Operations Center

                              Event Reports For
                           05/31/2001 - 06/01/2001

                              ** EVENT NUMBERS **

38026  38039  38040  38041  38042  

!!!!!!!!! THIS EVENT HAS BEEN RETRACTED. THIS EVENT HAS BEEN RETRACTED  !!!!!!!
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Power Reactor                                    |Event Number:   38026       |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| FACILITY: FT CALHOUN               REGION:  4  |NOTIFICATION DATE: 05/23/2001|
|    UNIT:  [1] [] []                 STATE:  NE |NOTIFICATION TIME: 16:19[EDT]|
|   RXTYPE: [1] CE                               |EVENT DATE:        05/23/2001|
+------------------------------------------------+EVENT TIME:        14:45[CDT]|
| NRC NOTIFIED BY:  MATZKE                       |LAST UPDATE DATE:  05/31/2001|
|  HQ OPS OFFICER:  CHAUNCEY GOULD               +-----------------------------+
+------------------------------------------------+PERSON          ORGANIZATION |
|EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY         |MARK SHAFFER         R4      |
|10 CFR SECTION:                                 |                             |
|DDDD 73.71               UNSPECIFIED PARAGRAPH  |                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
+-----+----------+-------+--------+-----------------+--------+-----------------+
|UNIT |SCRAM CODE|RX CRIT|INIT PWR|   INIT RX MODE  |CURR PWR|  CURR RX MODE   |
+-----+----------+-------+--------+-----------------+--------+-----------------+
|1     N          Y       100      Power Operation  |100      Power Operation  |
|                                                   |                          |
|                                                   |                          |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
                                   EVENT TEXT                                   
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| DISCOVERY OF CRIMINAL ACT INVOLVING INDIVIDUAL GRANTED ACCESS TO THE SITE.   |
|                                                                              |
| COMPENSATORY MEASURES NOT FULLY IMPLEMENTED                                  |
|                                                                              |
| THE NRC RESIDENT INSPECTOR WILL BE NOTIFIED                                  |
|                                                                              |
| CONTACT NRC HEADQUARTERS OPERATIONS OFFICER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION       |
|                                                                              |
| * * * RETRACTED AT 1600 EDT ON 5/31/01 BY ERICK MATZKE TO FANGIE JONES * *   |
| *                                                                            |
|                                                                              |
| Further investigation of the issue determined that the event notification    |
| was not reportable and retracts the notification of event #38026.            |
|                                                                              |
| The licensee notified the NRC Resident Inspector.  R4DO (Dale Powers) was    |
| notified.                                                                    |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Fuel Cycle Facility                              |Event Number:   38039       |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| FACILITY: PADUCAH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT      |NOTIFICATION DATE: 05/31/2001|
|   RXTYPE: URANIUM ENRICHMENT FACILITY          |NOTIFICATION TIME: 10:17[EDT]|
| COMMENTS: 2 DEMOCRACY CENTER                   |EVENT DATE:        05/30/2001|
|           6903 ROCKLEDGE DRIVE                 |EVENT TIME:        11:00[CDT]|
|           BETHESDA, MD 20817    (301)564-3200  |LAST UPDATE DATE:  05/31/2001|
|    CITY:  PADUCAH                  REGION:  3  +-----------------------------+
|  COUNTY:  McCRACKEN                 STATE:  KY |PERSON          ORGANIZATION |
|LICENSE#:  GDP-1                 AGREEMENT:  Y  |MARK RING            R3      |
|  DOCKET:  0707001                              |JOHN HICKEY          NMSS    |
+------------------------------------------------+                             |
| NRC NOTIFIED BY:  M. C. PITTMAN                |                             |
|  HQ OPS OFFICER:  JOHN MacKINNON               |                             |
+------------------------------------------------+                             |
|EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY         |                             |
|10 CFR SECTION:                                 |                             |
|NBNL                     RESPONSE-BULLETIN      |                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

                                   EVENT TEXT                                   
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| FIRE PROOF COVER OVER A PROCESS OPENING  COULD NOT PERFORM ITS INTENDED      |
| FUNCTION.                                                                    |
|                                                                              |
|                                                                              |
| NRC BULLETIN 91-01 24 HOUR NOTIFICATION                                      |
|                                                                              |
|                                                                              |
| At 1400, 05/30/01 the Plant Shift Superintendent (PSS) was notified that the |
| Zetex material used as a fire proof cover on the # 3 low speed purge and     |
| evacuation pump has deteriorated to the point of failure such that it could  |
| not perform its intended function.  The material was being used according to |
| CP2-CO-CN2030, as a fire proof cover over a process opening.  The material   |
| has become brittle and failed to the point of leaving openings to the        |
| process system.  NCSA GEN-10, Removal and Handling of Contaminated Equipment |
| from the Cascade at PGDP, requires fire proof covers to be installed on      |
| cascade system openings to prevent the introduction of moderation from a     |
| sprinkler activation, lube oil leak, or RCW leak.  Double contingency for    |
| this scenario is established by implementing two controls on moderation.     |
| One leg of double contingency is based on the fire proof cover preventing a  |
| moderator release from entering the open process system.  Since the fire     |
| proof cover deteriorated to the point of leaving openings to the process     |
| system, the ability to prevent introduction of moderator was lost.  This     |
| control was violated and double contingency was not maintained.              |
|                                                                              |
| SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE OF EVENTS:                                               |
| A material credited to perform a criticality safety related function was not |
| able to perform its function.                                                |
|                                                                              |
| POTENTIAL CRITICALITY PATHWAYS INVOLVED [BRIEF SCENARIO(S) OF HOW            |
| CRITICALITY COULD OCCUR]:                                                    |
|                                                                              |
| In order for criticality to be possible, greater than 10 kg of a moderator   |
| would have to enter the open process system and interact with a uranium      |
| deposit greater than the minimum critical mass in a geometry favorable for a |
| criticality.                                                                 |
|                                                                              |
| CONTROLLED PARAMETERS (MASS, MODERATION, GEOMETRY, CONCENTRATION, ETC.):     |
|                                                                              |
| Double contingency for this scenario is established by implementing two      |
| controls on moderation.                                                      |
|                                                                              |
| ESTIMATED AMOUNT, ENRICHMENT, FORM OF LICENSED MATERIAL (INCLUDE PROCESS     |
| LIMIT AND % WORST CASE CRITICAL MASS):                                       |
|                                                                              |
| Maximum assay of 1.08 wt.% U235.                                             |
|                                                                              |
| NUCLEAR CRITICALITY SAFETY CONTROL(S) OR CONTROL SYSTEM(S) AND DESCRIPTION   |
| OF THE FAILURES OR DEFICIENCIES:                                             |
|                                                                              |
| The first leg of double contingency is based on the unlikelihood of a        |
| moderator release (Sprinkler, RCW, oil) into the open process system during  |
| the time the system is open.  Since there was no moderator release into the  |
| system, this leg of double contingency was maintained.                       |
|                                                                              |
| The second leg of double contingency is based on the fire proof cover        |
| preventing a moderator release from entering the open process system. Since  |
| the fire proof cover deteriorated to the point of leaving openings in the    |
| process system, the ability to prevent introduction of moderator was lost.   |
| The control was violated and double contingency was not maintained.          |
|                                                                              |
| Since double contingency is based on two controls on moderation, double      |
| contingency was not maintained.                                              |
|                                                                              |
| CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TO RESTORE SAFETY SYSTEMS AND WHEN EACH WAS IMPLEMENTED:  |
|                                                                              |
| The degraded Zetex fire proof material was replaced with an approved AQ-NCS  |
| aluminum cover. Other cascade openings using Zetex material are being        |
| inspected for signs of degradation and will be replaced as necessary.  The   |
| use of Zetex material as a fire proof cover will be re-evaluated.            |
|                                                                              |
| The NRC Resident Inspector was notified of this event by the certificate     |
| holder.                                                                      |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Hospital                                         |Event Number:   38040       |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| REP ORG:  UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH MED. CENT.  |NOTIFICATION DATE: 05/31/2001|
|LICENSEE:  UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH             |NOTIFICATION TIME: 11:24[EDT]|
|    CITY:  PITTSBURGH               REGION:  1  |EVENT DATE:        09/03/1996|
|  COUNTY:                            STATE:  PA |EVENT TIME:        18:00[EDT]|
|LICENSE#:  37-00245-02           AGREEMENT:  N  |LAST UPDATE DATE:  05/31/2001|
|  DOCKET:                                       |+----------------------------+
|                                                |PERSON          ORGANIZATION |
|                                                |ERIC REBER           R1      |
|                                                |JOHN HICKEY          NMSS    |
+------------------------------------------------+                             |
| NRC NOTIFIED BY:  JERRY ROSEN                  |                             |
|  HQ OPS OFFICER:  JOHN MacKINNON               |                             |
+------------------------------------------------+                             |
|EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY         |                             |
|10 CFR SECTION:                                 |                             |
|LADM 35.33(a)            MED MISADMINISTRATION  |                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

                                   EVENT TEXT                                   
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| MEDICAL MISADMINISTRATION                                                    |
|                                                                              |
| The following is taken from a faxed report:                                  |
|                                                                              |
| The following event is being reported as a medical misadministration in      |
| accordance with the May 22, 2001, directive of NRC Region I                  |
| representatives.                                                             |
|                                                                              |
| At 6:00 PM on September 3,1996, a patient was implanted with six ribbons,    |
| each containing four Iridium-192 seeds. The seeds each contained 1.01        |
| millicuries (total activity of 24.2 millicuries). The ribbons were placed in |
| catheters implanted into the patient's right jaw and secured by crimping a   |
| metal button around the catheter. The corresponding written directive        |
| prescribed a treatment time of 47 hours. At 4:45 PM on September 5, 1996,    |
| the radiation oncologist arrived to remove the sources and determined that   |
| one ribbon was missing from the treatment site. The Radiation Safety Office  |
| (RSO) was notified. The five remaining ribbons were removed from the patient |
| and a survey was done of the patient, the patient's room and surroundings.   |
| The missing ribbon was located on the floor in front of a laundry bin. The   |
| ribbon was secured and returned to storage.                                  |
|                                                                              |
| The RSO investigated this event and determined that all six ribbons were in  |
| place at 8:00 AM on September 5th when the day nurse checked the patient and |
| documented the status of the brachytherapy implant in the patient's record.  |
| (Note: Prior to this event nurses were required to evaluate and document the |
| status of brachytherapy implants at the beginning of each work shift.) At    |
| approximately 9:30 AM the patient complained of discomfort and experienced   |
| significant vomiting. This condition persisted through the remainder of the  |
| day. A Patient Service Technician (PST) reported that she changed the        |
| patient's gown and bed linens at approximately 2:30 PM. Staff physicians,    |
| nurses and residents evaluated the patient throughout that day as documented |
| in the patient's record. However, such documentation does not include an     |
| indication or the status of the implant.                                     |
|                                                                              |
| The licensee concluded that the brachytherapy ribbon likely became dislodged |
| from the treatment site due to the patient's vomiting and/or                 |
| self-intervention sometime between 9:30 AM and 2:30 PM on September 5th. The |
| ribbon was apparently entangled in the patient's bed linens until the linens |
| were changed by the PST at 2:30 PM; whereupon the ribbon dropped from the    |
| soiled linens when they were placed in the linen storage bin. It is also     |
| possible that the ribbon may have become dislodged at the time (2:30 PM) the |
| patient's gown was being changed.                                            |
|                                                                              |
| Assuming the worst case that the brachytherapy ribbon became dislodged at    |
| 9:30 AM, the deviation from the total prescribed treatment dose due to the   |
| single ribbon missing for 7.5 hours is 2.7 percent, The possible localized   |
| radiation dose outside the treatment Site was also evaluated. If it is       |
| assumed that with patient movement the average location of the ribbon would  |
| be 10 cm from the patient's body. then the closest area of the body exposed  |
| would receive a radiation dose of less than one rad. This radiation dose is  |
| no more than the lower extremities would receive from the prescribed         |
| brachytherapy implant procedure and substantially less than that which would |
| be received by the upper torso and head in areas near the implant site. If   |
| the ribbon became dislodged when the patient's gown was being changed, there |
| would be no significant radiation dose to any portion of the patient's body  |
| since the source had been removed from the bed at that time.                 |
|                                                                              |
| Based on its review of the circumstances surrounding this event and the      |
| possible associated radiation exposures, the licensee concluded that the     |
| event did not constitute a misadministration or recordable event. However,   |
| in consideration of the possible ramifications of a future such event, the   |
| licensee implemented a policy requiring that documented checks of the        |
| implant site be performed at four hour intervals by nursing personnel.       |
| (Note: The NRC's regulations and guidance are silent on the issue of         |
| frequency of monitoring implants.)                                           |
|                                                                              |
| Elmer Cano, M.D., the Radiation Oncologist, did not feel that this event     |
| would impact on the well being of the patient. The patient's referring       |
| physician was verbally notified of this event at the time of its             |
| occurrence.                                                                  |
|                                                                              |
| Full details of the event were documented and placed in the incident file to |
| be reviewed during the next NRC inspection.                                  |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Fuel Cycle Facility                              |Event Number:   38041       |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| FACILITY: PORTSMOUTH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT   |NOTIFICATION DATE: 05/31/2001|
|   RXTYPE: URANIUM ENRICHMENT FACILITY          |NOTIFICATION TIME: 16:52[EDT]|
| COMMENTS: 2 DEMOCRACY CENTER                   |EVENT DATE:        05/31/2001|
|           6903 ROCKLEDGE DRIVE                 |EVENT TIME:        13:30[EDT]|
|           BETHESDA, MD 20817    (301)564-3200  |LAST UPDATE DATE:  05/31/2001|
|    CITY:  PIKETON                  REGION:  3  +-----------------------------+
|  COUNTY:  PIKE                      STATE:  OH |PERSON          ORGANIZATION |
|LICENSE#:  GDP-2                 AGREEMENT:  N  |MARK RING            R3      |
|  DOCKET:  0707002                              |LARRY CAMPER         NMSS    |
+------------------------------------------------+                             |
| NRC NOTIFIED BY:  RICK LARSON                  |                             |
|  HQ OPS OFFICER:  FANGIE JONES                 |                             |
+------------------------------------------------+                             |
|EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY         |                             |
|10 CFR SECTION:                                 |                             |
|NBNL                     RESPONSE-BULLETIN      |                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

                                   EVENT TEXT                                   
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| BULLETIN 91-01 - 24 HOUR REPORT                                              |
|                                                                              |
| The licensee, during a review of the plant surveillance program, discovered  |
| a surveillance that was suppose to be done every 6 months was missed the     |
| last time and is about 6 months overdue.                                     |
|                                                                              |
| The following is taken from a faxed report:                                  |
|                                                                              |
| At 1330 hrs. the Plant Shift Superintendent was notified that a required     |
| surveillance for NCSA 705_040 was not performed in the required periodicity. |
| This surveillance is necessary to ensure that uranium bearing material is    |
| not accumulating in the piping due to either precipitating out or through    |
| bonding with oil-bearing material which then layers out in the piping. By    |
| not performing this surveillance one of the barriers for maintaining double  |
| contingency was lost for this operation thus making this a reportable        |
| event.                                                                       |
|                                                                              |
| SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE OF EVENTS:                                               |
|                                                                              |
| The surveillance required to perform non-destructive analysis (NDA) on       |
| piping of the 705 geometrically safe overhead storage (GSS) was not          |
| performed. However, based on the historic evidence as discussed in sections  |
| 4.3 and 4.5 of analysis performed for this system it is highly unlikely that |
| material is accumulating in the piping and thus the safety significance of   |
| this event is low.                                                           |
|                                                                              |
| POTENTIAL CRITICALITY PATHWAYS INVOLVED (BRIEF SCENARIO[S] OF HOW            |
| CRITICALITY COULD OCCUR):                                                    |
|                                                                              |
| Without measuring a significant amount of material could accumulate in GSS   |
| piping and result in an unsafe condition.                                    |
|                                                                              |
| CONTROLLED PARAMETERS (MASS, MODERATION, GEOMETRY, CONCENTRATION, ETC.):     |
|                                                                              |
| The parameter which was violated during this upset was maintaining the       |
| concentration of material in the GSS piping to a safe level through periodic |
| NDA surveillance of various piping in the GSS. It should be noted that the   |
| physical integrity of the piping in question (i.e., that containing the      |
| uranium-bearing material) was maintained.                                    |
|                                                                              |
| ESTIMATED AMOUNT, ENRICHMENT, FORM OF LICENSED MATERIAL (INCLUDE PROCESS     |
| LIMIT AND % WORST CASE OF:                                                   |
|                                                                              |
| Based on the most recent sampling of solution contained in the GSS the       |
| amount of uranium involved is small (approximately 0.0002 grams              |
| uranium/liter)                                                               |
|                                                                              |
| NUCLEAR CRITICALITY SAFETY CONTROL(S) OR CONTROL SYSTEM(S) AND DESCRIPTION   |
| OF THE FAILURES OR DEFICIENCIES:                                             |
|                                                                              |
| Did not perform the required surveillance within the allotted time period.   |
|                                                                              |
| CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TO RESTORE SAFETY SYSTEM AND WHEN EACH WAS IMPLEMENTED:   |
|                                                                              |
| Isolated the GSS from other influents at 1335 hrs. Will commence NDA         |
| measurements 06/01/01.                                                       |
|                                                                              |
| The licensee notified the NRC Resident Inspector and the local DOE           |
| representative.                                                              |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Power Reactor                                    |Event Number:   38042       |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| FACILITY: HOPE CREEK               REGION:  1  |NOTIFICATION DATE: 05/31/2001|
|    UNIT:  [1] [] []                 STATE:  NJ |NOTIFICATION TIME: 17:03[EDT]|
|   RXTYPE: [1] GE-4                             |EVENT DATE:        04/11/2001|
+------------------------------------------------+EVENT TIME:        00:05[EDT]|
| NRC NOTIFIED BY:  BRIAN THOMAS                 |LAST UPDATE DATE:  05/31/2001|
|  HQ OPS OFFICER:  FANGIE JONES                 +-----------------------------+
+------------------------------------------------+PERSON          ORGANIZATION |
|EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY         |ERIC REBER           R1      |
|10 CFR SECTION:                                 |                             |
|AINV 50.73(a)(1)         INVALID SPECIF SYSTEM A|                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
|                                                |                             |
+-----+----------+-------+--------+-----------------+--------+-----------------+
|UNIT |SCRAM CODE|RX CRIT|INIT PWR|   INIT RX MODE  |CURR PWR|  CURR RX MODE   |
+-----+----------+-------+--------+-----------------+--------+-----------------+
|1     N          Y       100      Power Operation  |100      Power Operation  |
|                                                   |                          |
|                                                   |                          |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
                                   EVENT TEXT                                   
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| INADVERTENT LOSS OF 'A' RPS BUS                                              |
|                                                                              |
| The following is taken from a faxed report:                                  |
|                                                                              |
| This 60-day optional report in accordance with 10CFR50.73(a)(1), is being    |
| made under the reporting requirement of 10CFR50.73(a)(2)(iv)(A) to describe  |
| an invalid actuation of the Containment Isolation System.                    |
|                                                                              |
| On April 11, 2001, at 0005 hours, the control room received an alarm for     |
| loss of the 'A' Reactor Protection System (RPS) bus. As a result of the loss |
| of the 'A' RPS bus the following actuations occurred: an A1 & A2 RPS half    |
| scram, a Nuclear Steam Supply System Shutoff (NSSSS) logic A & C trip,       |
| tripping of the 'A' and 'B' Reactor Water Clean Up (RWCU) pumps due to       |
| closure of the inboard isolation valve BG-HV-F001, recirculation sampling    |
| isolation, and closure of the inboard Main Steam Line Drain valve            |
| AB-HV-F016                                                                   |
|                                                                              |
| The 'A' RPS bus was shifted to the alternate feed at 0023 and the RPS A1 &   |
| A2, the NSSSS, and the primary containment isolation signals (PCIS) were     |
| reset. At 0036, recirculation sampling was restored. Valve, BG-HV-F001 and   |
| AB-HV-F016 were reopened at 0039 hours.                                      |
|                                                                              |
| The above actuations and isolations were expected as a result of the loss of |
| the 'A' RPS bus. These actions and isolations were due to an invalid signal  |
| resulting from the inadvertent de-energization of the 'A' RPS bus.           |
|                                                                              |
| Fire Protection Operators were performing testing of the smoke detectors in  |
| the RPS motor-generator (MG) set room using a test pole. When the Fire       |
| Protection Operator in the overhead was handing the test pole to the Fire    |
| Protection Operator on the floor, the pole slipped and struck breaker switch |
| for H1SB-1AN410 (A RPS EPA breaker), causing the breaker to open. Opening of |
| the breaker lead to the loss of the 'A' RPS bus.                             |
|                                                                              |
| After determining that no damage occurred to breaker H1SB-1AN410, the 'A'    |
| RPS was restored to the normal power source.                                 |
|                                                                              |
| The impact on the plant safety from this event was minimal.  The isolations  |
| and equipment losses during the event caused only a minor plant transient    |
| and the equipment performed as expected. After the plant was stabilized and  |
| the cause of the loss of the 'A' RPS was identified, the half scram was      |
| reset.                                                                       |
|                                                                              |
| This event has been entered into the corrective action program.              |
|                                                                              |
|                                                                              |
| The licensee intends to notify the NRC Resident Inspector.                   |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+


Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021