ML20058D264
| ML20058D264 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 11/24/1993 |
| From: | Hehl C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Danni Smith PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058D270 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-93-290, NUDOCS 9312030115 | |
| Download: ML20058D264 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000277/1993027
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:- .__. _ _- . . _. _. . _ _ - - _ . -_ i
1 . ' , ' .h0V 2 4 1593 ! ! Docket Nos. 50-277, 50-278 License Nos. DPR-44, DPR-56 ' EA 93-290 . ! ! Mr. D. M. Smith Senior Vice President-Nuclear Philadelphia Electric Company ! Nuclear Group Headquarters Correspondence Control Desk , P. O. Box 195 l Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-0195 i Dear Mr. Smith: SUBJECT: NRC Combined Inspection Nos. 50-277/93-27; 50-278/93-27 An announced inspection at the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station was conducted by Mr. , L. Eckert on October 4-8,1993. The inspection findings for this portion of the inspection ! ' were discussed with members of your staff on October 8,1993. Additional inspection of your licensed program was conducted by Messrs. R. Fernandes, G. Kenna and L. Eckert on - November 8-10,1993. Dr. R. Bores and Mr. L. Eckert of my staff provided the inspection - , findings for this pordon of the inspection to Mr. D. Miller and other members of your staff ' on November 10,1993.
Areas reviewed during the inspection are important to health and safety and are discussed in , Sections 2.0 through 6.0 of the enclosed inspection report. The areas reviewed in the first j portion of the inspection included the program for maintaining radiation exposures as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), work planning, radiation worker practices, training and qualifications, and shipping oflow-level wastes for disposal. The inspector noted good performance by the radiological engineering and radiological , controls technician (RCT) staff. Also, the inspector noted no radiation worker practice discrepancies during the first portion of the inspection. However, he noted one area that we i believe warrants your attention to assure resolution. A weakness was noted in the area of your ability to provide emergency response information in accordance with 49 CFR 172.
Accordingly, within 30 days of receiving this letter, we request that you provide us in writing your planned actions and associated completion schedules to address this weakness. No violations of regulatory requirements were identified in the first portion of the inspection. 9312030115 931124 p OFFICIALRECORD COW If @^ ()lh .. u r > w# 6 8 (- .- -
, . . . ' , Philadelphia Electric Company 2 The second portion of the inspection was conducted to review two entries into posted high radiation areas and an entry into a respiratory protection equipment required area without satisfying the radiological safety requirements. The NRC reviewed these three events and j PECo's response primarily to assure that radiological protection of plant personnel was being i maintained. The second portion of the inspection is discussed in Sections 6.0 through 8.0 of the enclosed inspection report. 1 In general, the inspectors noted very good performance by the licensee's radiological controls technician staff during the second portion of the inspection. However, the two improper high radiation area entries and the improper respiratory protection required area entry are apparent violations and are being considered for escalated enforcement action in accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy),10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C. Accordingly, no Notice of Violation is presently being inued for these inspection findings. In addition, please be advised that the number and . characterization of apparent violations described in the enclosed inspection report may change as a result of further NRC review. While the radiological consequences of these events were minimal, the NRC is concerned that the actions taken in regards to disseminating management's expectations on good radiation worker practices have not been fully effective in correcting past problems of this nature. Additionally, the NRC is concerned with the potential willful nature of these violations. A closed enforcement conference to discuss these apparent violations has been scheduled for 1:00 p.m. on December 10, 1993, in the regiona' office located in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. We encourage the attendance of the three individuals directly involved in these events, however, their attendance is not required. The decision to hold an enforcement conference does not mean that the NRC has deter *niued that a violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be taken. The purposes of this conf:rence are to discuss the apparent violations, their causes and safety significance; to provide you the opportunity to point out any errors in our inspection report; and to provide an opportunity for you to present your proposed corrective actions. In particular, we expect you to address the actions taken concerning management's expectations in regards to ensuring that workers use good radiation worker practices (focusing on lessons-learned from the past two refueling outages and the summer of 1993 Unit-3 mini-outage), and any other future planned actions on your - part. In addition, this is an opportunity for you to provide any information concerning your perspectives on 1) the severity of the violations,2) the application of the factors that the NRC considers when it determines the amount of a civil penalty that may be assessed in accordance with Section VI.B.2 of the Enforcement Policy, and 3) any other application of the Enforcement Po? icy to this case, including the exercise of discretion in accordance with Section VII. You wlll be advised by separate correspondence of the results of our deliberations on this matter. No response regarding these apparent violations is required at this time. l OFFICIAL RECORD COPY . = . -
. . . . Philadelphia Electric Company 3 In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. Sincerely, Original signed By: Chalics W. liehl jif Charles W. Hehl, Director Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards Enclosure: NRC Inspection Report No. 50-277/93-27; 50-278/93-27 cc w/ encl: J. Doering, Chairman, Nucia Review Board G. Rainey, Vice President, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station G. Cranston, General Manager, Nuclear Engineering Division C. Schaefer, External Operations - Nuclear, Delmarva Power & Light Co. G. Edwards, Plant Manager, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station A. J. Wasong, Manager, Experience Assessment G. A. Hunger, Jr., Manager, Licensing Section J. W. Durham, Sr., Senior Vice President and General Counsel J. A. Isabella, Director, Generation Projects Department, Atlantic Electric B. W. Gorman, Manager, External Affairs R. Mclean, Power Plant Siting, Nuclear Evaluations D. Poulsen, Secretary of Harford County Council R. Ochs, Maryland Safe Energy Coalition J. H. Walter, Chief Engineer, Public Service Commission of Maryland Public Document Room (PDR) Local Public Document Room (LPDR) Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC) K. Abraham, PAO (2) NRC Resident Inspector Commonwealth of Pennsylvania TMI - Alert (TMIA) OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
.1 , . .- . . t - ! -6 Philadelphia Electric Company 4 , i " bec w/ encl: Region I Docket Room _ (with concurrences) I bec w/ encl: (Via E-Mail) -l W. Dean, OEDO i Joseph Shea, NRR l M. Boyle, Acting PDI-2, NRR .l - D. Holody, RI . , OI,RI l K. Smith, RI ' J. Partlow, NRR _ J. Lieberman, OE l J. Goldberg, OGC L. Cunningham, NRR C. Anderson, DRP i , . ;- - ! , i
i
! ! l i 'i i ! - . - . . ~ CONCURRENCES: LLE QB Y l Eckert B6~res Ioyner 1 -j RI:FRPS RI:FRPS RI:FRSSB S
- 11/11 /93 11/p/93 IlhJ /93 II/pd93 -{ 1 1 OFFICIAL RECORD Q . l l . . _ . , . . _ . - _ _ . _ . _ . , . - - - , , , _ , . _ . . . . . - _ _ . . . . . _ . , . . . .. _.,, __ ----.- -..__ -.._..-=,,_ ._ ' . }}