ML19332E139
| ML19332E139 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 11/15/1989 |
| From: | Stohr J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Tucker H DUKE POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19332E140 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8912060274 | |
| Download: ML19332E139 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000369/1989028
Text
74
-
-
_
gggc,(,p
,
v
+.
,
.
~
& A+
NOV 151989i
c 9 :, e
<
k
D'ocket Nos. 50-369,'50-37'O
!
License Nos. NPF-9, NPF-17-
+
Duke ~ Power Company- ~
l
- ATTN:: Mr. H. B. Tucker, Vice President
Nuclear Production Department
422 South Church Street
Charlotte,' North Carolina 28242
- Gentlemen:
'
-SUBJECT:
NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-369/89-28 AND 50-370/89-28'
This ' refers to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:(NRC) inspection conducted by ~
3
.
W.. B. Gloersen ' and team on August 28.- September 1,
1989.
The inspection
- included a-review of activities authorized for your McGuire facility.
At the-
conclusion of the' inspection, the findings were discussed with those members of-
your staff ~ identified in the enclosed Inspection Report.
i
The inspection was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of actions that have
~ been taken or are being- taken to keep radiation doses:as low as reasonably
0-
achievable _( ALARA).-
The : inspection team used selective examinations of
procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and
-
observation. of activities _ in progress to perform the evaluation.
Particular
-attention was directed toward assessing management's awareness of, involvement
' n, and support of your facility's ALARA program.
'
i
_
A number of notable strengths and improvement efforts identified in your
,
programs are. described inL Enclosure 1 and are discussed in detail in the
r
enclosed report.
Within-the scope of-the assessment, several areas where the ALARA program couldL
be improved - were identified.
These improvement items are outlined in
J
Enclosure 1 to this letter and are discussed in detail in the enclosed report.
Since the results of your evaluation of these improvements are of interest to
the 'NRC,-you are requested to submit to this office within 60 days of the date
Lof' this letter, your written assessment of each of item including actions that
you'have taken or plan to take ore the item.
'
Additionally, . the; enclosed inspection report identifies one activity that
appeared-to violate NRC requirements but was not cited; therefore, no response
,
is required.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2,
Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosures
will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
891206027f h
69
f,
ADOC
Q
\\
.ZE0l
.
.
p:
-
2
x
.
.p
y
.
,
,
t
ENCLOSURE I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
During the period August 28 - September 1, 1989, a special team inspection was
>
conducted of. the. licensee's program for maintaining occupational radiation
doses ALARA. The assessment included a review of the causes for the relatively
high radiation doses of the past; an evaluation of the licensee's current
organization' and program for keeping radiation doses ALARA; a review of
initiatives the licensee has taken or is taking. to bring radiation doses to
within industry norms; and, an assessment of licensee management's awareness
of, involvement in, and support of the program for maintaining doses ALARA.
1
Since 1983, the annual collective doses have generally increased with a maximum
collective dose of 700 person-rem per reactor occurring in 1988.
The
significant. increase in the annual collective dose since 1986 primarily was
attributed to increased steam generator maintenance, valve and pump repairs,
and various. nuclear station modifications.
In 1988, resistance thermocouple
detector (RTD) bypass manifold removal, valve repair, and steam generator
maintenance collectively contributed 55 percent of the total collective dose.
Overall, steam generator maintenance work including shot peening, eddy current
testing, and tube plug removal and installation was the largest contributor to
the station's total collective dose since 1986.
In 1989, the Unit I steam
generator tube rupture event contributed 23 percent to the station's total
collective dose while steam generator maintenance activities contributed
32 percent.
Although some of this upward trend could be attributed to
non-routine. exposure, management's continued support of the as low as
reasonably achievable (ALARA) program is necessary in order to control this
upward trend in the station's collective dose.
-In general, the assessment team found an adequate level of plant and corporate
management awareness and support for the dose reduction program. The licensee
has allocated a significant amount of resources to steam generator maintenance
activities due to design problems in the system which have contributed
significantly to increase the annual collective dose.
Increased innovative
dose management techniques for steam generator maintenance and repair, and
valve maintenance have been implemented by the licensee in an attempt to
reverse the recent increasing trend in collective dose. Although the licensee
has attributed the increasing trend to non-routine activities, it becomes
increasingly important for the licensee's management to focus on improved dose
management techniques for routine, low dose activities. Program strengths and
items to consider for improvement that were identified in the inspection are
summarized below.
Strengths
General worker and managenent knowledge of ALARA concepts and awareness of
their responsibility to keep doses ALARA.
ALARA concepts stressed throughout training.
"
y
.
--
?-
-
.,
,
.n.
-
y
.,
,
,
,_
,
,
. -' i
'-
,
a
1
2
Good contamination control program.
~
Completion and/or implementation of many dose reduction initiatives, such
- '
as:
RTD bypass removal; controlled crud burst program; reactor head
-shield stand,
i
Use of the newly revised dose status summary report for improved dose
i
managenent.
j
i
Items to Consider for Improvement
,
Plant-wide procedure for development and submittal of ALARA job action
f
plans and for selection of ALARA job sponsors (Paragraph 3.a.).
j
Controls for evaluation of on-going work by upper management for jobs
]
approaching or exceeding dose estimates (Paragraph 3.b).
Increased job site visits in the radiologically controlled area (RCA) by
,
jobplanners(Paragraph 3.c).
Update and use job history files during job planning (Paragraph 3.c).
ALARA Committee objective to perform post-job reviews for high dose rate
l
]
jobs in cases where the actual dose was significantly greater than the
estimated dose (Paragraph 5.b).
Improved use of the suggestion program for . making ALARA improvements
(Paragraph 5.c).
l
Improved use of protective clothing and equipment in mock-up training
L
conducted for high dose jobs (Paragraph 7.d).
\\
l
Documented guidance on acceptability of thermoluninscent dosimeter (TLD)
l
vs pocket ~ dosimeter (PD) correlations to facilitate job planninq
activities for work groups receiving high accumulated dose (Paragraph 8).
!
Knowledge and awareness by individuals and supervisors of departmental and
section dose goals (Paragraph 9.a(2)).
,
Guidance for conducting and responding to General Office evaluations,
reviews, and audits (Paragraph 10.b).
1
)
- - - - - -
. -
.