ML20207M335
| ML20207M335 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1986 |
| From: | Shanbaky M, Sherbini S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207M327 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-219-86-13-MM, NUDOCS 8701130146 | |
| Download: ML20207M335 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000219/1986013
Text
._
_.
-
-
'
.
- .
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 50-219/86-13
Docket No.
50-219
License No. DPR-16
Priority --
Category --
Licensee: GPU Nuclear Corporation
P.O. Box 388
Forked River, New Jersey 08731
Facility Name: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station
Meeting At: Region I, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania
Meeting Conducted: September 26, 1986
NRC Personnel: See Meeting Report Details
17 - 71- 1988
Prepared by:
B ,r
A1
^
S. Shertiini, Radia'tidn SpeTFalist
date
Facilities Radiation Protection Section
Approved by:
bLd M
de
11 hIl %6
M. Shanbaky, Chief, Facil Miesi
date
Radiation Protection Section
Meeting Summary:
A special licensee-requested meeting was held on September 26, 1986, between
representatives of GPU Nuclear Corporation, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
Station, and NRC Region I staff members. The purpose of the meeting was to
discuss Air Sampling and ALARA Programs at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
Station. The findings of Inspection Report No. 50-219/86-13 relative to these
two areas were also discussed.
Dbhkoffy
r
_
- - - - . .
-,
-
, , . _ _ - , - - - ,-
-,_
g,.
- --
'
.
.
DETAILS
1.
Meeting Attendees
GPU Nuclear Corporation
R. Heward, Vice President, Radiological and Environmental Controls
D. Turner, Director, Radiological Controls, Oyster Creek
T. Snyder, Manager of Production, Oyster Creek
J. Thorpe, Director of Licensing, GPU Nuclear
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
T. Martin, Director, Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards
R. Bellamy, Chief. Emergency Preparedness and Radiation Protection
Branch
.M. Shanbaky, Chief, Facilities Radiation Protection Section
A. Blough, Chief, Reactor Projects Section IA
D. LeQuia, Radiation Specialist
S. Sherbini, Radiation Specialist
2.
Discussion
The meeting was held at the request of the licensee to discuss NRC's
concerns regarding air sampling and ALARA programs and to clarify two
specific statements that appeared in Inspection Report No. 50-219/86-13.
The inspection for that report was conducted during the week of April
21-25, 1986, at Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. The statements
of concern were also in connection with ALARA and air sampling practices
on site. The statements were:
"Furthermore, there does not appear to be any clear accountability
for ALARA performance of individual jobs, and little upper management
emphasis on the importance of minimizing exposures."
"As a result, the licensee's air sampling program has degenerated to
a program devoted almost exclusively to sampling for the purpose of
assigning intakes to workers after job completion."
The licensee representatives stated that they disagreed with both state-
ments in that they did not reflect actual practice on site. They pointed
out that, in the ALARA area, they have an extensive ALARA program and that
there is a constant effort on the part of management and the supervisors
to minimize exposure. The licensee further stated that extensive resources
have been devoted to that effort, including job-specific training, the use
of mock-ups, ALARA reviews before and after jobs, shielding, and many other
measures, including attempts to decontaminate parts of the system prior to
the start of outage work.
The NRC staff then pointed out that, although
they acknowledge these efforts, there appear to be significant weaknesses
in the ALARA program that require management attention. An example of a
- -
-
.
.
.
. _ __
'.
i
3
recent incident involving some aspects of these perceived weaknesses was
also presented by the staff to illustrate some of the points being made.
The staff also emphasized the high outage and man-rem exposure and sug-
gested that a stronger ALARA program may have reduced the accumulated
exposure.
The licensee also pointed out that there is an extensive air sampling
program at Oyster Creek, and presented figures indicating the large
numbers of air samples taken throughout the outage and during normal
operations. The NRC staff agreed with the licensee that a large number
of samples were indeed being collected and analyzed on a routine basis.
The staff then explained that their concern was not in regard to the
extent of the sampling program, but rather with the manner in which that
program was being utilized. NRC staff members were concerned that there
was insufficient emphasis to quantify airborne radioactivity prior to
start of work and during job progression. The staff pointed out that the
licensee appeared to have a tendency to consider air sample collection
during job execution and analysis only after job completior, as sufficient
to satisfy protection purposes.
It was further stated by the staff that
analysis of air samples and review of the results was not timely in some
cases. Some examples of incidents involving minor inadvertent intakes
were presented by the staff to illustrate this point of concern.
The meeting ended with a mutual understanding of the two issues involved.
Although the program implementation in these two areas did not signifi-
cantly degrade the radiological controls program, needed improvements in
these areas were warranted.
F
,--
e
-
-n
> -,