IR 05000354/1993019
| ML20046C233 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 07/27/1993 |
| From: | Nimitz R, Pasciak W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20046C226 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-354-93-19, NUDOCS 9308100019 | |
| Download: ML20046C233 (7) | |
Text
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-354/93-19 Docket No.
50-354 License No. NPF-57 Licensee:
Public Service Electric and Gas Company P. O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge. New Jersey Facility Name:
Hope Creek Nuclear Generating Station
Inspection At:
Hancocks Bridee. New Jersev Inspection Conducted:
June 15-17.1993 Inspector:
kbNUd d2@(3 R. L. Nimitz, CHP, Senior Ra"diation Specialist flate e4 '
7 'll D Approved by: '
-
W. Pasciak, Chief date Facilities Radiation Protection Section
Areas Inspected: The inspection was an announced inspection of the radiological controls
program at the Hope Creek Nuclear Generating Station. Areas reviewed during the inspection
'
were important to health and safety and included organization and staffing; audits and assessments; ALARA controls and performance; external and internal exposure controls;.
radioactive material and contamination control; implementation of the revised 10 CFR Part 20; and station housekeeping.
Findings: The inspector determined that, within the scope of this inspection, very good radiological controls _were implemented at Hope Creek Station. No safety concerns or violations were identified. Isolated examples of apparent ingestion by personnel of snack food in the j
Reactor Building, a radiological controlled area, were identified. The licensee initiated a review of this matter.
9308100019 930728 PDR ADDCK 05000354 G
PDR,
.!
.
.
DETAILS
.
1.0 Individuals Contacted 1.1.
Public Service Electric and Gas Company
- R. Hovey, General Manager-Hope Creek
- J. Clancy, Technical Manager
- M. Prystupa, Radiation Protection Engineer - Hope Creek
- F. Ricart, On site Safety Review Engineer
- D. Smith, Station Licensing Engineer
- R. Gary, Senior Radiation Protection Supervisor
- V. Ciarlante, Senior Supervisor-ALARA 1.2 NRC Personnel
- T. Fish, Resident Inspector
- Denotes attendance at the exit meeting on June 18,1993.
The inspector also contacted other licensee personnel during the course of the inspection.
2.0 Areas Reviewed The following areas were reviewed during the inspection:
-
organization and staffing
,
-
audits and assessments
!
-
ALARA controls and performance
!
-
external exposure controls
-
internal exposure controls
-
radioactive material and contamination control
!
-
implementation of the revised 10 CFR Part 20
-
station tours
3.0 Organization and Staffing The inspector reviewed the organization and staffing of the on-site radiological controls organization. The review was with respect to criteria contained in applicable Technical Specifications and licensee a(..ninistrative documents.
The inspector evaluated licensee performance in this area by review of applicable documentation, discussions with cognizant individuals, and independent observations during tours of the facility, i
l l
.
a-*
-
a
.
-
.
_ - - - -
.
_
..
.
.
.
f
.
The following matters were noted:
-
On May 24,1993, the position of Radiation Pmtection and Chemistry (RP&C)
Manager was eliminated. The Radiation Protection Engineer and Chemistry Engineer, who reported to the RP&C Manager now report to the General Manager. The inspector reviewed the reorganization and noted that the change r
was made in a controlled manner and exhibited no apparent negative impacts.
The individual responsible for the on-site radiation protection progam met i
Technical Specification qualification requirements.
-
On March 1,1993, the licensee selected a new Senior Supervisor-ALARA. The
,
individual's qualifications were verified to meet station requirements.
The individual was currently in training status and was authorized limited
responsibilities pending full sign-off of position training requirements.
,
The inspector's review indicated that the licensee was in the pmcess of up-dating administrative procedures to reflect the changes.
,
No safety concerns or violations were identified.
4.0 Audits and Assessments
.
!
The inspector myiewed the scope of audits, assessments, and surveillances of the radiological controls program. The review was with respect to applicable criteria
!
contained in Technical Specifications and station procedures. The following documents were reviewed and discussed with cognizant personnel:
-
1992 Dosimetry Audit
)
-
May-June 1993 Radiation Protection Audit (draft)
-
March 1993 Radiation Protection Surveillances
'
-
Radiological Occurrence Reports for the period October 1992 - June 1993.
The inspector's review indicated that the licensee implemented an effective audit and surveillance program. Timely corrective actions were taken where appropriate for identified findings. Them was very good use of technical specialists, audits were
,
'
perfonnance based, and barrier analysis techniques were used to identify potential weaknesses in program elements in order to preclude unfavomble performance.
No safety concerns or violations were noted.
5.0 ALARA Efforts The inspector reviewed selected aspects of the licensce's ALARA Program.
In particular, the inspector reviewed ALARA goals and overall performance in the area of
,
'
___
, _
__
__ _
.
..
'
reduction of personnel occupational radiation exposure, including performance during the past refueling outage (September 12-November 10,1992). The review was with respect to general guidance and criteria contained in the following:
-
Regulatory Guide 8.8, Information Relevant to Ensuring that Occupational Radiation Exposures at Nuclear Power Stations will be As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable
.
-
Regulatory Guide 8.10, Operating Philosophy for Maintaining Occupational Radiation Exposures As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable
.
l The evaluation of the licensee's performance was based on discussions with cognizant personnel, independent inspector observations during tours of the station, and review of
documentation.
The inspector's review indicated that the licensee implemented an effective program to
-
reduce personnel occupational radiation exposure to as low as reasonably achievable
(ALARA). The following positive observations were made:
'
-
The licensee sustained an aggregate radiation exposure during the outage of 346 person-rem as compared to an outage goal of 325 person-rem. The additional
>
exposure was attributed to emergent work which received appropriate ALARA reviews.
t
-
The licensee used Radiological Assessors during the refueling outage to oversee on-going radiological work activities. The assessors reported to the Radiation
Protection Engineer. Use of assessors was considered a very good initiative.
-
The licensee removed 232 unnecessary snubbers. The reduction in snubbers will, according to the licensee, reduce maintenance and surveillance activities and i
result in a commensurate reduction in aggregate personnel radiation exposure.
-
The licensee also continued to implement exposure reduction initiatives as
,
follows:
,
-
Operator rounds in High Radiation Areas were reduced.
l
-
The licensee implemented injection of depleted zine in January 1993. The
- depleted zinc, according to the licensee, will result in lower radiation dose rates on piping systems carrying reactor coolant.
!
)
-
The licensee plans to replace portions of the extraction steam piping. The
,
piping is considered a source of corrosion products that, upon irradiation, i
contribute to ambient radiation exposure dose rates in areas of the station.
i
,
-
-
. - -
O
.
.
No safety concerns or violations were noted.
!
6.0 External Exoosure Controls The inspector reviewed selected aspects of the external exposure control program. The review was with respect to criteria contained in 10 CFR Part 20, Standards for Protection i
Against Radiation, and applicable licensee procedures.
The evaluation of the licensee's performance in this area was based on discussions with cognizant personnel, review of records, and observations by the inspector during plant tours. The following matters were reviewed:
-
posting and barricading of Radiation and High Radiation Areas i
-
access control to High Radiation Areas
-
performance in the area of external exposure controls during the fourth refueling l
outage.
The following additional matters were reviewed:
-
The inspector reviewed the circumstances surrounding, and licensee evaluations
,
associated with, an apparent unplanned exposure of 3.055 rads (shallow skin dose) to a personnel monitoring device (thermoluminescent dosimetry (TLD))
worn by an individual. The exposure was identified during routine processing of individual dosimeters for the exposure period of October 1-26,-1992. The
inspector's review indicated that the licensee performed an extensive review of the matter and concluded that the results were attributed to chemical
contamination of the TLD. The individual was credited with Locut 326 millirem
.
following the evaluation.
!
-
The inspector's discussions with licensee personnel indicated that general issuance
!
of dosimetry devices to all personnel who enter the protected area will be discontinued in the near future. Rather only individuals entering the radiological
.
controlled area (RCA) of the station will receive personal monitoring devices.
!
It was not apparent that adequate provisions had been made to periodically
,
evaluate radiological conditions, outside, but near RCAs, to ensure that personnel
working at these locations would be provided personnel monitoring devices if needed. The licensee's personnel indicated this matter would be reviewed.
The inspector's review indicated that the licensee implemented an effective external exposure controls program.
No safety concerns or violations were identified.
.
.
.
7.0 Internal Exposure Controls The inspector reviewed selected aspects of the licensee's intemal exposum controls
"
program. The review was with respect to criteria contained in 10 CFR 20, Standards for protection Against Radiation, and applicable station procedures.
The evaluation of the licensee's performance in this area was based on review of documentation and discussions with cognizant personnel.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's follow-up and evaluation of all instances (40 total)
of facial or head contamination that occurred in 1992 and all those identified as of June 16, 1993. No intakes of radioactive material in excess of NRC limits were identified.
Corrective actions for the personnel contamination events appeared appropriate.
B The licensee implemented an effective internal exposure control program.
No safety concerns or violations were identified.
"
!
8.0 Radioactive Material Control and Contamination Control The inspector reviewed the control of radioactive material, contaminated material, and contamination. The following matters were reviewed:
-
personnel frisking practices
-
use of pmper contamination contml techniques
-
posting and labeling (as appropriate) of contaminated and radioactive material
-
efforts to reduce the volume of contaminated tmsh including steps to minimize introduction of unnecessary material into potentially contaminated areas
,
Overall, the inspector concluded that the licensee was effectively controlling mdioactive and contaminated material, and contamination.
The following areas for enhancement were noted:
-
The inspector identified isolated examples of snack food residue and expelled -
chewing gum in the Reactor Building. The consumption of food in the Reactor Building, a radiological controlled area, could result in unplanned ingestion of radioactive material. The licensee indicated this matter would be reviewed.
!
-
A rope barrier and Radioactive Materials Storage Area posting, for an outside
>
storage area, were found on the ground. The posting and rope barrier were
'
replaced and a review was initiated by the licensee.
,
.
!
- - -
_
_
.
I
.
i i
No safety concerns or violations were identified.
9.0 Implementation of the Revised 10 CFR Pan 20
The inspector reviewed the licensee's plans for implementing the revised 10 CFR Part
'
20 (effective January 1,1994). The evaluation of the licensee's performance was based
on discussions with cognizant personnel and review of documentation.
The inspector's review indicated that the licensee developed an action plan and schedule
'
for implementation and was closely following the status of development of necessary procedures. The licensee was developing technical basis documents for the program and
,
expected to have all procedures completed by about September 1993. The licensee plrns t
to implement the revised 10 CFR Pan 20 on January 1,1994.
'
No safety concerns or violations were identified.
10.0 Station Tours The inspector's tours of the station identified generally very good housekeeping. The licensee was cleaning, painting and refurbishing areas throughout the station.
,
11.0 Exit Meeting
,
!
l The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Section 1.0) on June 17, 1993. The inspector summarized the purpose, scope and findings of the inspection. The
-
licensee's representatives acknowledged the findings and did not express any disagreement with them.
l
!
.
>
h I
f
k l
.
?
6