ML20072Q676
| ML20072Q676 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 12/19/1990 |
| From: | Tuckman M DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9012260281 | |
| Download: ML20072Q676 (3) | |
Text
p 11 1
lhtke hver Co.. pany AlS 71runy o
Nuclear l'roduction Iht!
- h e l'rrudent l'O lint 1007 Nuclear 0;>crations Charlotte, N C 28201 1007 (70;j3;3,39l OUKEPOWER December 19, 1990 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555
Subject:
McGuire Nuclear Station Docket Nos. 50-369, -370 Inspection Report No. 369, 370/90-22 Reply to a Notice of Violation Gentlemen:
Pursuant to 10CFR 2.201, please find attached Duke Power Company's response to Violation 369, 370/90-22-01 for McGuire Nuclear Station.
Should there be any questions concerning this matter, contact L.J. Rudy at (704) 373-3413.
.Very tru
- nrs, h_
M.S. Tuckman, Vice President Nuclear Operations LJR003/1jr Attachment xc-(W/ Attachment):
Mr. S.D. Ebneter Regional Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission-
[01 Marietta St., NW, Suite 2900 Atlanta, GA 30323 Mr. T.A. Reed, Project Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation One White Flint North, Mail Stop 9H3 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. P.K. VanDoorn NRC Senior Resident Inspector t
McGuire Nuclear Station l'
90.1226o2e1 9o1219,
S, l-pn 1
a,,,
n~cn avooou I
McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF V10LAT. ION Violation 50-369, 370/90-22-01 Technical Specification 6.11 requiras procedures for personnel radiation protection to be prepared consistent with the requirements of 10CFR 20 and be approved, maintained and adhered to for all operations involving personnel radiation protection.
Radiation Protection Manual, Section 2.4, Radiation Work Permits, Revision 19, dated October 11, 1990, requires that the Radiation Work Permit (RWP) requirements set forth must be followed unless otherwise directed by Radiation Protection personnel.
RWP 90-2019, Revision 1, All Work Associated with Sleeving in "A" Steam Generator, dated October 9, 1990, specifies that a particulate respirator may be substituted for a bubble hood depending upon job scopo and Guration and decontamination activities.
Decontamination of loose surface contamination greater than950,000 disintegrations per minute per 100 square centimeters (dpm/100 cm') requires the use of appropriate respiratory protective equipment.
Gontrary to the above, on October 11, 1990, the licensee failed to follow procedures in that a worker failed to wear respiratory protective equipment as detailed on the applicable RWP and as directed by the lower containmentRPsupervisorypersonnelformanipulatingatoolheag actuator having contamination icvels exceeding 50,000 dpm/100 cm.
This~is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV),
Response
1.
Admission or denial of the alleged violation.
McGuire admits the violation.
2.
The reason for the violation, or, if contested, the basis for disputing the violation.
Tha reason for the violation was poor work practices. On October 11, 1990, the worker reported to the Radiation Protection (RP) lab for permissien to enter Unit 2 lower containment to decon and refurbish an actuator that had been used in the "A" steam generator.
A pre-job briefing was neld betwoon the worker and the RP supervisor. The RP supervisor was not aware of the total job scope.
The worker was informed that a respirator would be required to decon the actuator. A respirator issue card was signed by the RP supervisor and given to the worker. The worker was told that the RP rover in containment would provide coverage.
When the worker arrived in containment, the RP rover did not sco a respirator in the worker's possession and did not ask about one.
The rover assisted in the decon of the actuator.
r-2 3.
The corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved.
2.
The worker was decontaminated and had a body burden analysis.
The results of the body burden analysis were negative.
3.
RP instructed the worker on the importance of notifying RP of any change in job scope and proper contamination control techniques to avoid skin contamination.
The remaining corrective steps were performed by the vendor personnel. The RP supervisor stated that he felt the corrective actions performed by the vendor were thorough and proper.
4.
Two counseling sessions were held between the worker and the vendor ALARA engineer.
5.
The worker's work practices in containment were monitored periodically by the vendor ALARA engineer and the RP supervisor.
The work practices were found to be satisfactory by both the ALARA engineer and the RP supervisor.. The RP supervisor stated
- he felt'the worker had a good understanding and a better attitude toward good RP work practices.
6.
The event was reviewed with the other vendor workers on site.
7.
Pre-job briefings held by the vendor ALARA engineer prior to each containment entry re-emphasized good work practices and
-contamination control.
8.
The vendor Manager.of Training and ALARA reviewed the event with thn worker.
9.
The worker was required to assist'the vendor training department in retraining vendor personnel on good work practices and contamination control prior-to his next field assignment.
4.- The corrective steps that will be taken to avoid.further-violations.
None.
5.
The date when full compliance will be achieved.
McGuire Nuclear Station is in full compliance.
-