ML20033B501
| ML20033B501 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 03/28/1981 |
| From: | Knapp P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Joyner J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20033B470 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8112010472 | |
| Download: ML20033B501 (3) | |
Text
'
ATTACHMENT 3 h
3 Doctet Nos. 50-277 SC-278 MEM30.ANDUM r0R:
J. Joyner, Chief, Technical Inspection Branch FROM:
P. J. Kr. app, Chief, Fecility Radiological Protection Section
SUBJECT:
RECCMMENDATION FOR MANAGEMENT ENFCRCEMENT CCNFERENCE WITH PHILACELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY
REFERENCE:
My Mamos on this Subject dated February 9 and Ma rch 3,1981 I have seen Mr. Brunner's handwritten memo relating to my second memo on this subject. He listed several points and in the following I have responded to those that I could understand.
The topics listed below do not correspond to his topics.
I would like to get a definitive statement on this matter.
I believe that the record cannot continue to show repeated noncompliance without a companion entry somewhere which makes clear what action has been taken to correct the situation and prevent recurrence or, as an alternate, the rationale for considering the situation acceptable.
The following topics seem to be the important ones.
However, if there are other considerations which have not been brought out I would like an opportunity to consider them.
A.
Procedural reguirement is frivolous l It is expected that through the exercise of judgment, the inspector will filter out such situations and not cite them in the first place.
In most cases this is true.
B.
Proced_ure is more restrictive than reculatory reouirements or standards In most of the cases in question the " procedure" workers failure to follow in the radiation protection area is, in fact, a radiation protection require-ment such as use of a continuously indicating dose rate instrument in a high radiation area or the use of respiratory protection equipent in airborne radioactive caterial, imposed through Procedure or RWP.
These requirements are frequently arrived at after, 1) an evaluation of the radiological conditions and 2) a determination of the appropriate corrective m:-a s u r e s.
These are actions that the worker is not usually qualified to 8112010472 811109 PDR ADOCK 05000277 G
tbmotcJ.Jcyr.er 2
carry out and which he would ncrmally view as an interference with his
~
primary responsibility.of accomp.lishing his task. _.:
- ._..c
.e If'the imposed radiation protection requirement is inappropria'te, there is f~ ~
a problem in the radiation protection organization's system for proper evaluation of the hazard and prescription of the appropriate degree of protection.
This must be corrected by correcting the system.
From the practical point of view, it is not possible to achieve adequate protection if each vorker is allowed to determine for himself which portion of the requirements he will adhere to and which he will violate.
C.
The Resident Inspector is taking a much icnaer sampl_e of licensee perforcance (tirc.e exposure versus snapshot)
The frequency with which the resident inspector at Peach Bottom has cited failure to follow procedures (and has, generally, presented valid examples) far exceeds the f requency cited by all other resident inspectors.
The comparison is " time exposure" versus " time exposure".
D.
Programmatic Concerns - We should be looking for management control-Wstemprobelms That is why the matter was raised.
The frequency with which this. noncom-pliance is reported for Peach Bottom seems to clearly indicat, a management-control problem.
If there is no such problem, our system for using recurrence as an indication of management performance in this area should be modified.
In this case I believe our system is appropriate and giving the correct signal.
E P. J. Knapp, Chief Facility Radiological Protection Section cc:
E. Brunner E. McCabe
+
/
I l
..- -. r. -..;.
' ' ')... -.Ucw ei&. ' *T : h;* %~
. t.
~.
' s;c;;~c & ~.lt l.. -,.~.UL... M-k ~..>. \\... a. c m -
....i..
7 '.ej ;
9 3..-
~.
,...,..., _ ~ - - - _
.. ~....
~,_
2 m,
- o.,.,.
._;.',,_..4..
./&_,.
.*.m N.'..
-^.,.s,. f _ L.
,. y.' -
g
)
u.
_. ; _ _ _ _._.._3**__,.
.s.....
m...
s
.,. _ ?...w'..:...
.*s..
. 'c-
- ,m, n. ~.. ".. -
...s
-c
. ;. 3.c
..... 1
~.
.s.
.w.
_,_L.
.n.
.-.- ~~-.
-~. ~.
.. -v.
...,2-.l s
y -.
.~ :..--._.
..s_,-
. 1~2..
.- ~. - --8.,. -Gir c u-:m:_
~
. f % vs:xi.n b,.
Mcc_-im. '
... O. /.S _4
,6
.ws m
U d.
Q8 mo.c
/. 3 k w c aca s.
8 a.x&<m^-
'; 'O.Od7
~~
- ^.
.y 2 9f g,a
- y.
.+
-E-
- _ D..
i spun
.M.
3 MA=c:7cas -.
&' *'p L O. _o /(.
^
/ 26~ /MS.:: _
~.
- s
s-
..)
r.
r rt(-j 429.~es E.
/Ju. bisKcws
/8
/2aciacompt.
O. O 7. 8
~y
.r
, - =,
r
.,_:L.'~~.-..---.-
[ &,.
.---r..-.
~
~...
- ~,.
,......,....: -. =...-.
,y
.P
-s
~3
._...i>7W - _/NV~W*93.AS _ rvoR MYM=0 _
F OO?c 5_ Jvn M S...MM alWs W 70 m ewc.a 5
pwp co, sp&i/ pix 6 P-%CE.
WW78cn 2.$r'_ Q cM 1e w.
M %
- ver we%
..P,.-
/w,h
/
~
. - -. 7,-._..._._._..:.._
e
.p. ~_,._.
..s..... ".*-. -... _...-.
t..
f.,.-.
,m=*
b c.
d....
y_. -.
i
,e O
@~
p TDNN p
g 4
',W"">*W1. ". > q *. ~ ' 3 y.....,M. :., e.,.. y
-s. y !,. \\ y, c..~ ~.
-. -rM i
=.M.,
A6
, r;* -' p pl*,.r
-.3
- - ~ 4~.'>;,:.,, -~,**~q,-c._*
e<%.r *, v
,=.
s._
a n.
r
-+
- 0 ) * *y*
' ". \\
a 1~ ~ * *$ ' ' ~ (. f h
j
- -~g g
a
,.T,' ?
' "' N ; ^.
L
. _. l, - Y Q ',- 3. y.*
<{,.t,** f _ 2.?
- ?.~ l.
,, ' j.
,".,.{*.
.sa
.c t.
e s
t
- e
..*1-e
.<..c
.,...t
,t a
..s,
_ ~.
.s a.
e t-4
..9 A
6.
e e "
.. g f
4 a
L -
n
-