institute of nuclear power operations inpo update: 2017
TRANSCRIPT
I n s t i t u t e o f N u c l e a r P o w e r O p e r a t i o n s
INPO Update:
2017 North American ISOE
ALARA SymposiumJanuary 2017 Paul McNultyINPO Radiation Protection Manager
1© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
2
Update Topics• Industry Performance Summary:
–U.S. Industry Performance–AFI Trends–Continuous Monitoring
• INPO 05-008
© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
Radiological Protection770-644-ext Paul McNulty
ManagerExt. 8021
Brad MitchellPrincipal Evaluator
Ext. 8346
Jim TwiggsSr. Evaluator
Ext. 8280
Dave KallenbachSr. Evaluator
Ext. 8917
Mark TravisSr. Evaluator
Ext. 8263
Tim HallidaySr. Evaluator
Ext. 8726
Neal McKenneySr. Evaluator
Ext. 8309
© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
Phil KlarSr. Evaluator
Ext. 8987
Terry WilkersonSr. Evaluator
Ext. 8901
Moses ColemanSr. Evaluator
Ext. 8
© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 4
CRE PWR Performance
75 76
68 6966
69.4
59.9
54.9 54.3
44.942.8 42.2
37 38.5
30
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
pers
on-r
em
U.S. Collective Radiation Exposure (PWR)Median Values – 3rd Quarter 2016
© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 5
CRE PWR Performance
11
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65Pe
rson
-rem
per
uni
t
U.S. Collective Radiation Exposure (PWR)Median Values 3rd Quarter 2016
Median30 rem
© 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 6
CRE BWR Performance
137131
155 155
140133
129 126131
127121
109 106 106102.7
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Q3
pers
on-r
em
U.S. Collective Radiation Exposure (BWR)Median Values – 3rd Quarter 2016
7
CRE Performance
© 2016 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
27.5
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
pers
on-r
em p
er u
nit
U.S. Collective Radiation Exposure (BWR)Median Values – 3rd Quarter 2016
Median102.7 rem
Industry Performance and Trends (PIC Data)Total High Radiation Events
8© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Quarterly Events
Even
tsRo
lling
12
mon
ths
Total HRA Events Quarterly Total High Rad Area Controls Reference
Industry Performance and Trends (PIC Data)Unplanned Dose
© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 9
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Quarterly Events
Even
tsRo
lling
12
mon
ths
Quarter Cycle Reference
Industry Performance and Trends (PIC Data)RAM Events
10© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Quarterly Events
Even
tsRo
lling
12
mon
ths
Quarter Reference Cycle
Industry Performance and Trends (PIC Data)PCEs
11© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Quarterly Events
Even
tsRo
lling
12
mon
ths
Quarter Cycle Reference
13
RP Performance Indicator
© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99
3rd Quarter 2016
14
RP Performance Indicator
© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
88
90
92
94
96
98
100
102
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Radiation Protection Performance Indicator3mos Index Reference
15
RP Performance Indicator Drivers
© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
Performance Monitoring Drivers
• Collective radiation exposure
• High radiation area events
Common Themes <80 Points
• CRE above goals
• High CRE with HRA Events
• Internal dose and RAM events
0102030405060708090
100
1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93 97
3rd Quarter 2016
© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 16
RP and RS AFIs Through 3rd Qtr 2016
16
15
12
5
1
0
4
0
2
0
1
8
6
2
1 1
7
6
12
7
2
9
8 8
10
8
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Dose Control (RP.2) Radioactive Material Control (RP.4) Contamination Control (RP.3)
Collective Radiation Exposure RP.1 and RS.1 (Fundamentals)
2016 AFIsFundamentals (RP.1, RS.1, NP.1)• Radiation workers not following procedures for HRA and RAM controls
• Radiation protection technicians not applying fundamentals for HRAs
• RP Supervisor’s oversight of radiological work for changing radiological conditions
• Radiation protection not communicating radiological hazards
• Radiation protection technicians not following expectation for work plans
• Radiation protection technicians and supervisors not apply standards
• Qualified radiation workers not communicating radiological hazards
• Radiation workers not monitoring and communicating radiological hazards
17© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
2016 Fundamental AFIs CausesFundamentals (RP.1, RS.1)
- RP Supervisors and technicians do not correct deviations or rationalize deviations because of perceived low risk or low consequence
- Radiation workers deviate because of perceived low risk or low consequence.
- Contributing, supervisors, including radiation protection supervision, are not correcting or coaching to the standard.
18© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
Pending 05-008 RevisionRevision 3 of INPO 05-008
INPO Document Hierarchy
• Tier 1: The standard of excellence expected to be met.
– PO&Cs; Principles for Excellence in Risk Management; Leadership and Team Effectiveness Attributes; Level 1 and 2 IERs
• Tier 2: Provides information to assist members pursuit of excellence. Intent is the document content is met, strict compliance is not required.
– Consists of Guidelines; Process Descriptions; Operating Experience
• Tier 3: Reference. Does not need to come from INPO.
– Good Practice; Manuals; Reports; Must Know OE
19© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
Why 05-008 ChangeTier 1 – PO&C RP.2-3: Radiological procedures specify posting and control requirements for high radiation areas to prevent inadvertent entry. Access to these areas is controlled through administrative and physical barriers.
Tier 2 - 05-008 guidance: Procedures establish posting, barriers and barricades for various high radiation conditions. Requirements for posting and controlling areas during changing plant conditions are also procedurally established. Procedures related to work in HRA/LHRA/VHRAs are used to clearly define radiation worker, RP technician and supervision responsibilities and accountabilities.
Tier 2 – Process Description for Postings:
20© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
≥ 80 & < 800mrem/hour
• A barrier is required for the boundary except while the area is accessed. A SOP is not considered as a barrier.
• Ensure posting of access points that require the removal of bolts and/or the use of lifting equipment. Add posting insert to “Contact RP Prior to Opening.”
Triangle shaped HRA Sign with the following:• RP BRIEF REQUIRED FOR
ENTRY
05-008 Change• Currently resolving comments to document.
• Revision 3 gets issued by end of January 2017
• 05-008 Details:
– Move previous revision content to new format
– Work with RP CFAMs and RP DNP Task Force
• Strategic issuance of documents throughout 2017
• Aligned to PO&Cs
• Capture standard practice and process
• Reflect Excellence
21© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
Continuous Monitoring
22© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
Designed for 2023 End state• All stations achieve industry goals staying
within 1-2 bandwidth, occasional 3• Repeated INPO 3 assessments are rare• No assessments of 4 or 5 • No surprise decreased assessments• No significant events• Rare accreditation probation
Continuous Monitoring
23© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
Measures• Organization: Monitor, Elevate, Escalate,
Recovery• Functional Area Performance:
– Excellence, Solid, Acceptable– Trajectory – Improving, Stable, Declining
Monitoring• Data – KPIs, OE, Reports, Plant Visits, CFAM, Contact
RP and Continuous Monitoring
24© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
Radiological Protection• Is not a functional area to drive out of ‘Monitor’• Program of concern drivers
– Multiple radiological events• Events causes are tied to fundamentals, or past AFIs• Typically accompanied with high CRE, but not exclusive
– No change or cyclic performance• Persistent low performance assessments• Multiple evaluations with similar AFIs• Assistance not effective
RP and Continuous Monitoring
25© 2017 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
• Eleven Programs in ‘Decline’– Nine INPO members, two WANO members
• ‘Turning Decline’ Engagement– Notification to RPM– Assistance (formal and informal)– Recovery plan accountability (formal)
• Collaborative plan with RP manager and Plant Manager
• Criteria for exiting
• Milestones to check