An NRC-identified finding of very low safety significance with an associated Non-Cited Violation (NCV) of Technical Specification 5.4.1 was identified in the area of occupational radiation safety associated with the licensee’s failure to perform adequate job planning to evaluate the radiological hazards, as required by station procedures. Specifically, the licensee failed to properly assess the radiological hazards to workers associated with the decontamination, demobilization and packaging of fuel sipping equipment on the refuel floor. This issue has been entered into the licensee’s corrective action program and implemented corrective actions that include changes to procedures to include a holistic risk-based review of radiologically significant work.

The finding is more than minor because, given the radiological uncertainty of working with fuel handling equipment, if left uncorrected the finding could become a more significant safety concern. The finding was determined to be of very low safety significance because it did not involve unintended collective dose (ALARA planning); there was no overexposure, nor potential for overexposure; and the licensee’s ability to assess dose was not compromised. Additionally, the cause of this finding had a cross-cutting aspect in the area of Human Performance. Specifically, the licensee failed to appropriately plan the work activity by incorporating risk insights and job site conditions, including conditions which may impact radiological safety (H.3 (a)).

I’m having trouble understanding what this report is about, because I am dumb and when I try to read through it, it goes way over my head.
Could someone please summarize this in words easier to understand?

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/PRAI2/prai2_pim.html#OR1st
^that is the site the report is from if it matters

In a small nutshell:
The investigation found that the licensee did not perform a study to determine any risks associated with handling nuclear fuel cutting tools on the refuel floor. Not that there were any hazards, but the licensee didn’t due their duty to ensure there were none.

It’s sort of like not bothering to study MSDS’s of chemicals you are using even though the is a very low likelihood of the chemicals being harmful.

The "slap on the wrist with a wet noodle" was to tell the licensee that a corrective action program has to be performed.

Take this interpretation for what it’s worth and what you paid for it <g>.

What exactly does this report mean? Nuclear safety inspection stuff?