ML19350A340
| ML19350A340 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 12/16/1980 |
| From: | Arnold R METROPOLITAN EDISON CO. |
| To: | Grier B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19350A334 | List: |
| References | |
| TLL-673, NUDOCS 8103130547 | |
| Download: ML19350A340 (4) | |
Text
.
-/
i-.:9 ATTACH.v.ENT 2
= =-
- =
K=
, png g j 2
P:s:
Metroocumn Ecison comnan, C*d ce Ecx 480 EETI.3 Iy.4 e i
- sm uemeto. 5,,nsw..,.. m 7]
717 WC41 Z-- Z TLL 573
==
= ;--
~ ~
Deceber 16, 1980 2 -:
- ts::ibu:len m
-9 I L
2ffice of Inspection and Enforcement
- /""G/ h 4ttention:
B. H. Grier, Director
-3 legion I 1
J. S. Nuclear Regulatory Corm:issicn et,.4 :. % J 531 Park Avenue Mh King of Prussia, PA 19406
**2' Gentlemen:
n, Three Mile Island Nuclear Statien, Unit 1 (TMI-1)
,,: % n j j
Operating License No. DPR-50 co-rue :.
11ts-5 :. a u
/
Docket No.
50-289
/
Health Physics Evaluation QQy l
I
.,ue-rar a.
r i
c'.':-51. :n y
- e m-Your letter of November 26,19S0, forwarded the Three Mile Island Health Physics
[*'y,"*3
< Evaluation Report from Region I and included a Notice of Violation whien set 2-V. orth five items of non-c::::pliance. Attached to this letter is a description f
ec-sr,. n og.
au -7:rsts.
[ cf our actions to address those items of non-compliance. As discussed with smann-P usu.
j Jngpgggjon and Enforcec:ent managment, our response to the items set forth in
,O!.**
- the evaluation as requiring corrective action prior to restart will be sutriitted y :ist a later date. While the NRC's Health Physics Evaluation concluded tnat the
- 1.-cre. nas.<
j
,'1***-Par 8 4
/ Unit 1 aspects of the health physics program are adequate to support the CQ, f bresent ' evel of activities, it identified significant weaknesses that must be
- orrected to provide reasonable assurance that the program will be adequate e: n.-re.1,.
- ti-tr: ns e tiuring operation and major outages.
',,, lIn view of the extensive scope of 'the inspection, the number of indiv
- anae-Parsip.
/
items flagged by the report as needing corrective action, the highlighting of
-u,. 4 j
, pg. q d the concern about management effectiveness in implementing the healtn physics j
- program, and our request for additional opportunity to discuss our response to
, 3 M. b-those items, we consider it " appropriate to provide at this tiine a sunnary of the
.' p,)o - M
/ netions which have been undartaken by managment over the last year to improve Dur Radiological Controls program. We believe that many of 'the items set forth
.in tne evaluation recort reflect that our planned upgrading is not yet complete.
2:
.F.
ct,2 es.-, e o 50.
== c.s e s t',3 sh r ?C
'O O N;O M31' is:
.g1o313o5W a
"=
cc
- iu m
)
Metroedaan Ecson Comsany is a Me-ter cf me Gevs! F:dc ta*:)es Syrem
'Te
A j......,..
- 4.........
4.....
.-, x... s 4. v.. e. s.... s.. ',.. '4.
.............~....,..,.s~.~.a*....***..*....v
..s".*.......
...s.. el s a
.v...,. e...
- .., 4...
s..
- a. ra."y a.*.*..* s e *..' '. i.a.,
- a.t
- . '. '.-s *. s '. x...-. *..a. s a #...
.a....--4.
ea....
..-.-..o.-...- *i* $
- *ur*ing Ouring :*s: 2* ice".* a::ivities an* :n:se ice".*.i#ie:
- urin; ne v.*
- 4.
". 5 i n v a. s *. d. a, a *. '..^*.. s i.a.*..*
8.--'..***.*..*.**..a.-*.
s ". - *
- s a #. " *.. ~. ~. '. s
- . 8 * *.. =.s
... i......
.,.y
..y 4...,$
.. i.... 3......._.. ;:
..y One a:::in:=en ey :ne Dire==r, *i".R in Se::er.:er,1975 Of a 5:e:iai :anei =
u..t n n. j. ; s a.d i.= *. i r. :..* * *.d. -.. 3'.,.=..
i.
Tne 0:r :any re=gni:e: :ne ineffe::iveness :f its e#f:r:s an: un:er =:i in 0:=:er,1975 :: ::c:letely reva : an: re:rien: :ne res:;r:es :eing a::ite:
- en radiciegi:a1 =ntr:Is Oregra.
A :r:gra: :ian -as :evel::e, an:
pr: viced :: tne NRO :::
Increase n e te:nni:al and mana; een; streng n f : e Organi:ati:n.
Increase One : gani:sti:nal s*""-*
- -d i.:e:encen:a f
- ne radf eiegical =ntr:I Organi:ation.
. Upg-ade :he progre pr::ecures.
Fe-. ally state for c e :::21 crgani:ation =e i=::-tan:e of :ne radiological := 01 rogras anc ea:". radiati n werker's res:ensi:ility for r=er ;-;gre i=leentati=.
Upgrade and ex:and te training : g es f:r racici:si:ai
- ntrol te:.nicians and w:rkers.
Previde ade:uate f:r.a1 definition of tne :-gani:ati:n and the ressensittlities Of ne individual eicents and Desitiens winin :ne Organi:ation.
This progre had tne involveen; and su::c-ef managment throusneut me e gani:atien including :ne presiden Of Gene-al Public Utilities.
.s Major progress has been made in carrying out tais program in:luding the following which affe:t the Unit 1 progrm:
Aeorgani:ation of the Radiological Control organi:ation whien began in Nove. der 1975, culminated in :ne pla:ing cf both Unit 1 and Unit 2 Radiciogical Cen: 01 *.e:a mea.:s under a single divisien neac in = e G U Nuclear Greu: en July 1,1930, wnen staff a:ditiens se:me avaiiatie =
fill out the organi:ation.
GPU/ Net-Ed issued a detailed Radiation Pre.e:: ion Pun in January 1950 :xx:i :ing manager en and all :ersent.ei :: hign standeds Of perfer ance in radiol:gical ::ntrol.
. Y..
':l=-
fg..
p.-
l
- .A.
-J-J: - 3 The radic1cgi:a1 c:ntrol management -as streng:nenec :y the addition of experienced pr fessienals.
Functiens not essential : the Radiological Centrol Depart-ment wer* transferred :: einer gr u:s.
The staff responsible fer radielegical c:n:rol in Uni 1
was increased to five times its pre'ious si:e.
Suc: ort activities such as instrument calibration and desi-metry now have secarate crgani:ations witn rescur:es dedi:atec to tnese tasks. Approximately 46 full time indivicuals in these two organi:ations alone perfor: fune;!cns previously done on a part-time basis.
Approximately one hundred radiological ::ntrol procedures were rewritten to make 1: easier f6r werkers to follow procedures Exactly as written.
Results of efforts to reduce radiation execsure are already apparent since exposures for 1980 have been one-tnird less than forecast.
4 Major radioactive work including steam generator insce: tion has been perfenned in 1980 with mini =al radiological problems.
The Auxiliary Building area in Unit 1 centro 11ed be:ause of contanination has been reduced by 80t.
Training for radiological control personnel and those who perform radioactive work has been extensively upgraded.
Radiological Centrol Technicians have been carrying out their assigned responsibility to stop radiological work that is not perfonned properly.
Radiological audits and inspections have been upgraded, including l
assignment of an individual full time, to identify weaknesses before they become significant problems.
Unit 1 radioactive waste generation rate has been reduced by 50%.
Subsequent to the Unit 2 accident a Radioactive Waste Shipping groups was formed within the Unit 2 Site Operations organi:ation. This dedicated group is responsible for shipping radioactive waste for both units whereas this function was previously j
handled on a part-time basis. The Radioactive Waste organi:ation has been up-grading the radioactive waste program at TMI. This upgrading includes procedure review, c'efinition of responsibilities, radioactive waste reduction, and quality assurance measures such as checklists and audits.
i o
e g
e y
_. ~
4 We believe our corrective' action progra.. as icentifiec in the radiological control management plans has been cread basec and ressensive to :ne scope of the identified problems. We are decicated :o comple:ing that program as scheduled and are confident it will result in a heal:n pnysics capability sufficient to fully support nomal operation, major outages, cff nomal conditions and the decontamination cf Uni 2.
Further, we expect that our overall efforts to improve the TMI radiological controls program, including an expansibn of the application of our Quality Assurance Program in conducting surveillance and audits of radiological work activities will substantially reduce tne likelinced of furtner items of non-compliance.
Upgrading of our emergency plan also has been the subject of extensive efforts.
Starting with the draft guidelines made availa le in September 1979, the draft NUREG 0654 distributed in January 1980 and publication of the final rule (10 CFR Aspendix E) in November 1980 we have been working continuously and conscientiously with NRC *o develop an acceptable Emergency Plan, the additional response capabilities and the implementing procedures.
Our understancing is that we were the first utility to be authoriced to implernent a Plan consistent with the requirements of draft NURIG 0654. We have made even further improve-ments to reflect coments on that version of the Plan and to comply with the final rule on Emergency Planning.
We have expanded the staffing and improved the management capability for this area of activity also. We now have a corporate department head reporting at the vice-president level dedicated to energency preparedness. The professional qualification and personal capabilities of the individual assig'ned to this position have.been endorsed, based upon prior association, by personnel of the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency.
\\
We will be c:rnpleting our detailed procedures and implementing our new emergency program on the schedule established by NRC. We anticipate this effort will
.4_
satisfy.the concerns raised in the related portions of the evaluation report.
r.
E=.
We hope.this information will be helpful in providing a background for discussion f.t on our detailed responses to the specific items of the evaluation report.
?
Sincerely, a_._.
.....1.
Is/P c.knota
~:~
J
-+-
~ ~ =.= ' ;-i. *:
l
=-g.
- - :.:......w - -
.-g_...=.:-..-..-....
l
.3_-
.. -- - -.. =_ Y- : + ~ ': 3 *= =..
===-
1 RJ C. Ainold - "-
+
~
.f-.5E~r 3 =
Chief Operating Executive RCA: des
=
-E Attactment l
l I
.E_.
cc:
V. Stello
=
=:.
3:.=-
l W.*.
?
. 5.- 5...
. L.;.-- _ F3 = *
~. '
^^
--.2.7.=_'~
^
T. -W ' ~2- -t'E=i: + * ~:
'd *f.
_.. r.
- g..-
.