IR 05000237/1993018
| ML17179A940 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 06/02/1993 |
| From: | Michael Kunowski, Schumacher M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17179A939 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-237-93-18, 50-249-93-18, NUDOCS 9306110009 | |
| Download: ML17179A940 (3) | |
Text
- '.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I I I Reports No. 50-237/93018(DRSS); 50-249/93018(DRSS)
Docket Nos. 50-237; 50-249 Licenses No. DPR-19; DPR-25 Licensee:
Commonwealth Edison Company Opus West III 1400 Opus Place Downers G~ove, IL 60515 Facility Name:
Dresden Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3 Inspection At:
Dresden Site, Morris, Illinois Inspection Conducted:
March 24 to May 26, 1993 Inspector:
I A *
//.A. K,~I~
M. A. Kunow~ *
Approved By:/!!/~#/~:___
M. C. Schumacher, Chief Radiological Controls Sectiori I Inspection Summary
- l. -1, :2.. I j 'f.)
~
Inspection from March 24 to May 26. 1993 (Reports No. 50-237/93018CDRSS}; 50-249/93018CDRSS Areas Inspected: Spetial inspection of radiation protection (RP) activities during the 13th refueling outage for Unit 2 (Inspection Procedure (IP) 83750) to review a concern that extensions of daily administrative dose limits were being given indiscriminately and to review the circumstances of an incident where two workers intentionally entered a radiologically controlled area (RCA) without authorization. The RCA was established for industrial radiograph Results: Dose extensions, both daily and quarterly, did not appear to be * given indiscriminately. Regarding the RCA entry, the workers, *a station electrician and a contract radiation protection technician {CRPT), admitted to station management tha.t they intent i ona 11 y entered an RCA without authorization. The electrician was given time off without pay and the CRPT was denied access to the site. The approximate dose received during the entry by the electrician was 15 millirem {0.15 mSv) and by the CRPT was 30 millirem (0.30 mSv).
A ~on-cited violation was identified for the willful violation of station procedures by the two worker PDR ADOCK 05000237 G PDR *
DETAILS-1~ Persons Contacted +D. Ambler, Health Physics Services Supervisor R. Flahive, Superintendent Technical Services M. Hayworth, Lead Health Physicist--Operational L. Jordan, Lead Health Physicist--Technical N. Kauffman, Industrial Relations J. Moser, Alara Coordinator, Engineering and Construction T. Twombly, Mechanical Maintenance ALARA Liaison +Contacted by telephone for exit meetin The inspector also interviewed other lice~see and contractor personne. Radiation Protection Concern {IP 83750) Concern: Extensions of the licensee's 100 millirem (1 mSv) per day limit are so readily obtained as to make the limit meaningless; Discussion: The dose extension -program is governed by_ Dresden Radiation Protection procedure DRP 1250-4, Revision 8, "EXPOSURE REVIEW AND . AµTHORIZATION PROCEDURE." A review by _the inspector of dose extensions given to workers on selected Radiation Work Permits (RWPs) during the current outage indicated that procedural guidelines and requirements had been met and that dose extensions did not appear to have been given out liberally. The dose extension program appeared well controlled, particularly for jobs in higher dose rate areas. This view was also* corroborated in discussions with the contract ALARA liaisons in the Engineering and Construction group and the station mechanical maintenance department~-the two groups in which most of the dose . extensions are given-~and with the personnel in the station RP group who approve the extension Findin~s: The concern ~as not ~ubstantiated and no violations of NRC requirements were identified. This issue is close. Transgression of RCA Boundary during Industrial Radiography {IP 83750) Around 11:00 p.m. on February 13, 1993, two workers entered without authorization a posted RCA established for industrial radiography in the Unit i HPCI Buildin The two radiographers and the radiation protection technician involved with the radiography were on a meal break at the time of the entry. After the break, radiography was resumed and after five minutes of a second six-minute exposure (of a 54-curie (1.998
- TBq) Ir-192 source) had elapsed, the two workers exited the area and were observed by the radiographer.\\.
-
The licensee's subsequent investigation of the event determined that the two workers, a station electrician and a CRPT, disregarded postings and intentionally entered the area to hold a personal conversation in a second floor room of the buildin During the event the workers were both wearing thermoluminescen dosimeters (TLDs}, but not electronic dosimeters, and neither was signed onto any Radiation Work Permi The route to this room led through the first floor room where the radiography source was located, but was some distance away from the sourc Using* the workers' total TLD readings and their electronic dosim~te~ readings from previous entries into other RCAs, the licensee determined a dose of 15 millirem (0.15 mSv} for the electrician and 30 millirem (0.30 mSv} for the CRP These estimates were supported by licensee measurements afterward Because of the workers' entry into an RCA without a valid reason and their initial false written and oral statements about the event, disciplinary action was taken; the CRPT was denied further access to the site and the electrician was given two-weeks off without pa Other action by the licensee included prompt discussion of the event and management's expectations with other station personne The inspector's review indicated the licensee'$ investigation was thorough and the corrective actions were prompt and extensive. The performance of 'the radiographer personnel, who were working under ~n Agreement State license, was reviewed by Illinois official The entry of the workers into the RCA without a valid reason was contrary to Dresden Administrative Procedure DAP 12-25, Revision 2, "RADIATION WORK PERMIT," and a willful violation of Technical Specification 6.11.1 which requires that procedures for personnel radiation protection be adhered to. However, the licerisee identified this violation and it is not being cited because the criteria specified in Section VII.B.(2}(d} of the "General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions," (Enforcement Policy, 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C}, were satisfie One non-cited violation was identifie. Exit Meeting Tentative results of the inspection.were discussed with licensee personnel on April 2, 1993. A follow-up meeting was held on May 26, 1993, by telephon The licensee acknowledged the inspection findings and did not identify any documents reviewed by the inspector as proprietary. 3 }}