IR 05000029/1975013
| ML19343B117 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 10/28/1975 |
| From: | Donaldson D, Grallina C, Ruhlman W, Stohr J, Streeter J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19343B107 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-029-75-13, 50-29-75-13, NUDOCS 8012040436 | |
| Download: ML19343B117 (15) | |
Text
t
-
O
- -
-
.
.
2:I F m 12 (Jan 75) (Rev)
.
.
.
.
U.
S.' NUCLEAR REGUIATORY CCMMISSION OTTICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFCRCDiENT
.
REGION I
.
.
'
.
.
50E9/79-13 Docket No:
50-29 IE Inspection Report No:
License No:
non__t Yankee Atomic Electric Coneany Licensee:
20 Turnpike Road Priority-
'
C Westborough, Massachusetts 01581 Category:
-_
Safeguards
~
Group:
Iocation:
Rowe, Massachusetts
_,
PWR, (W), 600 MWe Type of Licensee:
Routine, Unannounced, E=ergency Planning 1,
2 of Inspection.
October 8-10, 1975 Dates 'of Inspection:
Dates of Previous Inspection:
Septenber 23-26. 1975
/O-U'
?
L
U'n Reporting Inspector:
'
DATE W. Al Runiman.<eactor Inspector
[] / s; !)
/ "'^ /'-
^^~'~T_~
-
'
-
'
- Accompanying Inspectors
- D. E. Donaldson, Radiation Specialist DATE, l'
hy8ny09c.LLn'-
Io.2h. 1$
'
'
DAIE C. O. Gallina, Ph.D., Radiation Specialist
'
.
(10/8 & 10/9 only)
10l2-W'7G ii g$$3_
DATE J.'F.
Streeter, Reactor Inspector
'
(10/10 only)
-
Other Accompanying Personnel:
DATE
7 (
/0 Reviewed By:
/
sf DATE J /P. Stohr, Senior Environtiental Scientist
...,
~
-
.
.
.
.
e
.
801204o93g I
--
_
..~
_.. _.
_
_
l
~~~
~ - -
-
-.
-. - _
.
_
___
_
.
.
.
.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Enforcement Action A.
Items of Noncompliance 1.
Violations None identified.
2.
Infractions None identified.
3.
Deficiencies
.
a.
Contrary to Technical Specification D.1 and items 5, 6, 7 and 8 of OP-3304, E'!ERGENCY EQUIPMENT READINESS CHECK, the Emergency Kit at the North Adams Hespital had not been inventoried as required during the first, second or third quarters of 1975.
(Detail 5.b)
b.
Contrary to Technical Specification D.1 and item 3 of OP-3304, EMERGENCY EQUII' MENT READINESS CHECK, all sixteen
-
'
(16) respirator aerosol cannisters contained in the kits prepared for use by monitoring team personnel were one month beyond the manufacturer's designated usage expiration date.
- s All cannisters were replaced with unexpired units prior to completion of the inspection.
(Detail 3.a)
B.
Deviations None identified.
Licensee Action on Previcusly Identified Enforcement Action No previously identified enforce =ent action in the area of Emergency Planning.
,
-
Unusual Occurrences
.
None identified.
.,..
_ _..
_
P00R021cm1
____
-
-..
_
l
-
,
,
-2-
.
.
-
Other Significant Findings A.
Current Findings
-
1.
Plant Status
'
Durins the inspection the plant was operating at an average power level of 77% with an average gross electrical generation of 143 MWe.
2.
Acceptable Areas (These are areas which were inspected on a sampling basis and findings did not involve an Item of Nencompliance, a Deviation,
,
or an Unresolved Item.)
Coordination with Offsite Agencies - Docu=entation Review.
a.
(Detail 2.a)
b.
Coordination with Cffsite Agencies - Personnel Interviews.
(Detail 2.b)
c.
Emergency Control Centers.
(Detail 3.b)
d.
Emergency Communications Equipment.
(Detail 3.c)
e.
Records.
(Detail 3.d)
f.
Procedure Changes.
(Detail 3.e)
g.
Installed Instru=entation.
(Detail 4.a)
h.
E=ergency Transportation.
(Detail 5.c)
1.
Physician / Consulting Service.
(Detail 5.d)
(
j.
Training of Personnel.
(Detail 6.a & 6.b)
k.
Implementing Procedures.
(Detail 7)
1.
Emergency Training Exercise.
(Detail 8.a & 8.b)
l 3.
Unresolved Items l
l (These are items for which, at the conclusion of the inspection,
more information was needed to determine if the item was Acceptable, a Deviation, or an Item of Noncompliance.)
Fire Fighting Training / Fire Fighting Precedure.
(Detail 9)
a.
b.
Emergency Procedure (s) based on instrumentation currently being installed.
- (Detail 4.b)
l B.
Status of Previously Unresolved Items i
No items in this area with respect to Emergency Pl'anning.
I l
--.
,.,
-
.
'
-~
- - -
-_e-
_
- _. -
_,-._._
e,
_ _ _, -
-
.
.......,, -.
-.-.
-
,
--
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
'
.
.
.
_3
.
Management Interviews A.
Entrance Interview A pre-inspection meeting was conducted onsite at the start of the inspection'on October 8, 1975 with the following attendees.
USNRC - Region I Mr. W. A. Ruhl=an, Reacter Inspector Yankee Atomic Elactric Compan:-
Mr. H. A. Autio, Plant Superintendent Mr. W. G. Jones. Jr., Assistant Plant Superintendent Mr. N. N. St. Laurent, Technical Assistant to Plant Superintendent The licensee was requested to address / identify:
1.
Any excessive personnel exposures or releases of radicactive effluents; 2.
Any impending difficulties that may affect operating safety;
.
3.
Recent plant problems including component failures, unusual plant responses or radiological prlblens; and 4.
Any items of general interest.
The licensee identified no items in these areas.
During the pre-inspection meeting the inspector addressed the following:
1.
General scope of the inspection including estimated duration; 2.
Identification of records, procedures and documents to be reviewed; 3.
Personnel to be interviewed; and 4.
Plans to witness the planned Emergency Drill.
--
-
,
.
.
M
'W.'_a..~,
i.",iss' as T
.~.*wn.%fA ?
' '
'M M d ~ i
.A.'~'
~
X ' 3 D*
V~
'
'"]
i
.
.
-4-
.
.
B.
Exit Interview An exit management interview was conducted onsite at the conclusion of the inspection on October 10, 1975 with the following attendees:
USNRC - Region I Mr. D. E. Donaldson, Radiation Specialist Mr. W. A. Ruhlman, Reactor Inspector Mr. J. F. Streeter, Reactor Inspector Yankee Atomic Electric Company Mr. H. A. Autio, Plant Superintendent Mr. H. E. Buchanan, Senior Engineer-Radiation Protection Croup Mr. D. C. Holsinger, Engineer-Radiation Protection Crcup Mr. E. A. Miles, Technical Assistant-Operations Mr. 1. R. Seybold, Plant Health Physicist Mr. C. C. Woody, Assistant Manager cf Security
.
The following su=marizes the areas discussed, a.
Coordination with Offsite Agencies.
(Detail 2)
b.
Facilities and Equip:ent.
(Detail.3)
- c.
Radioactive Release Monitoring Instrumentation (Detail 4)
d.
Medical Treaccent Facilities.
(Detail 5)
c.
Training of Personnel.
(Detail 6)
f.
Implementing Procedures.
(Detail 7)
g.
Emergency Training Exercise.
(Detail 8)
'h.
Fire Procedure.
(Detail 9)
!
l l
.-
l
-
l
.
..
--.
DQQ'
g"9
-
^^
I
_ _ _ _
-
,
f
.
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Yankee Atomic Electric Company Mr. R.
Alix, Control Technician Mr. H. A. Autio, Plant Superintendent Mr. R. L. Eerry, Training Coordinator Mr. W. D. Billings, Chemistry and Health Physics Supervisor Mr. R. L. Boutvell, Technical Assistant
- Mr. H. F. Buenanan, Senior Engineer - Radiation Protection Group Mr. R. F. Cook, Instrument and Control Technician Mr. J. F. Gedutis, Technical Assistant - Chemistry Mr. R. A. Herzog, Shift Supervisor 9.. D. C. Holsinger, Engineer - Radiation Protection Group
- Mr. W. G. Jones, Jr., Assistant Plant Superintendent Mr. P. E. Laird, Maintenance Supervisor (Eccrgency Coordinator)
- Mr. D. A. Lewis, Plant Health Physics Clerk
- Mr. H. M. Mercer, Engineering Assistant to Health Physicist Mr. E. A. Miles, Technical Assistant - Operations Mr. E. H. Pierce, Control Room Ope.ator
- Mr. I. R. Seybcid, Plant Health Physicist (Emergency Coordinator)
!!r. J. H. Shipee, Instrument and Control Supervisor (E=ergency Coordinator)
Mr. J. L. Staub, Technical Assistant Mr. N. N. St. Laurent, Technical Assistant to Plant Superintendent Mr. R. G. Stone, Plant Meccanic Mr. R. H. Streeter, Storekeeper
,
- r. D. B. Vassar, Assistant Operations Supervisor l
Mr. J. R. Williacs, Assistant Plant Mechanic l
- Mr. C. C. Woody, Assi.stant Manager of Security Cor:nonwealth of Massachusetts State Police Captain W. E. Doty, Commonwealth Officer - Troop "D" Trooper P. A. Murphy, Shelbodrne Falls Station l
l
~
of Public Health l
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Departtent Mr. G. W. Swible, Radiation Scientist (telephone only)
North Adams Ragional Hospital
l Mr. G. A. Lerrigo, Administrator (telephone only)
.
...
__,
.
- Drill Observers
- --
-- -
-
P0OR GRIGINAL
~
,
' --
.
.
.
-6-
-
.
Rowe, Massachusetts Volunteer Fire Department Deputy Chief J. L. Staub, Rowe Fire Department
Williamstown Medical Associates Mr. C. N. Binoit, Business Administrator (telephone only)
2.
Coordination with Offsite Agencies a.
Documentation Review The inspecters reviewed records, procedures and letters of agreement furnished by the licensee for the agencies listed below:
i (1) Williacstown Medical Associates; (2) Monroe Bridge Fire Department; (3) Rowe Fire Department; (4) Uhitingham Ambulance Service; (5) New England Power Company; (6) Massachusetts State Police; (7) North Adams Hospital; (8) Commonwealth of Massachusetts.; and, (9) State of Vermont.
.
The inspector stated that the response plans for both the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of Verront had been revised since the conclusion of the licensee's current letters of agreement with these two agencies.
The licensee acknowledged the inspector's statement and stated that close communications were being maintained with both agencies and that when all response plans / procedures had been finalized and approved, updated letters of agreement would be obtained.
.
The inspectors had no further questions in this area.
b.
Personal Interviews The inspectors conducted interviews, either in person or by telephone, with responsible personnel in the offsite agencies listed below:
.
--.
..
.
,
--
.
_ _ -.... - - - - - - + -
-
- ~~~** *
.
-
_ _ _
.
.
?
.
.
.
.
-7-
-
(1) Massachusetts State Police - Shelbourne Falls; (2) Massachusetts State Police - North Hampton;
.
(3) North Adams Regional Hospital;
.
(4) Massachusetts Department of Public Health; (5) Rowe, Massachusetts Volunteer Fire Department; and (6) Williamstown Medical Associates.
The inspectors verified that the agreements between these agencies and the licensee remain in effect and that the licensee's contact with these agencies was adequate to maintain emergency response capability assurance.
.
3.
Facilities and Equipment The inspectors reviewed the licensce's facilities and equipeent at the locations and with respect to the specific criteria listed below, a.
Emergency Kits The emergency kits listed below were reviewed to verify that inventories were correct and that instruments were calibrated and operable.
Independent inventories were conducted by the inspectors.
(1) Control Room - one kit (2) Furlong House (Emergency Coordination Center) - four kits (3) Medical-Ambulance kit Technical Specification D.1 and 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V require personnel to follow written / approved procedures, Procedure OP-3304, EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT READINESS CHECK, Rcvision 1 dated 3/19/74 requires in part in item 3: " Inventory the emergency equipment...and test, change, and replace the equipment where applicable."
Contrary to the above, sixteen (16) respirator cannisters at the Furlong House were still set out for use on October 8, 1975 when the manufacturer's stamped expiration date was 9/75.
'
This failure to change equipment where applicable is a Deficiency level Item of Nencompliance.
.
,.
,
e,
'
..
d
.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '
~-~~~~'j'*"
,.._..-...~m~~
~ ~ ~
_ _ _ _ _ _ -
.-
_
._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
i i
.
.
.
.
-8-
,
Upon notification the licensee immediately replaced all sixteen
-
(16) cannisters with unexpired units. However, the response for this item does need to address the corrective steps taken or planned to prevent similar items in the future.
- b.
Emerg ncy Control Centers The Control Room and the Furlong House were inspected to verify that the equipment / facilities described in the Emergency Plan /
procedures were available and operable. With the exception noted in 3.a above, the inspectors identified no inadequacies.
.
'
c.
Emergency Communications Equipment
,
The installed radios in the Guard House and the Control Room as well as the four (4) portable radios were inspected for availability and operability.
During the training exercise con-ducted on Octpber 8, 1975, the licensee identified receiving difficulty with one portable radio and_this radio was subse-i quently repaired and returned to service. No inadequacies were identified,
d.
Records The records of the emergency equipment listed below were reviewed
-
to determine that the equipment had been calibrated and maintained in accordance with procedures.
(1) all emergency kit survey instruments
,
(2) base station radio (ccatrol room)
(3) all four (4) portable radios The inspectors identified no inadequacies in this area.
c.
Changes The inspectors reviewed the changes made in the emergency equipment / facilities since the last (Nove=ber 22, 1974) Emergency Plan inspection.
The licensee stated that a new more powerful radio was planned for the Control Room. The inspectors also noted some pen and ink changes to procedures for equipment storage / location procedures which the licensee stated would be included in typed format when the procedure was revised, o
The inspectors identified no inadpquacies in this area.
__,_
.
... - _.. -. -. ~...
_~-.. -,... -.
. ~,... - -. -.
.
_.
-
-
.. - - -
..
.. --
. -
-
-
-.
-
._
_ -._ _
t
-
-
.
.
.
-11-
.
c.
Transportation The inspectors verified that ambulance' service was available 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> a day. The response of the ambulance service was demon-strated by the participation of the ambulance service during the training exercise conducted on October 10, 1975. (See also
-
Detail 8)
.r d.
Physicians / Consulting Services By review of the current letters of agreement and by telephone discussions with responsible personnel, the inspectors verified that qualified physicians are available and obligated to treat contaminated / injured personnel.
The inspectors also reviewed the results of the medical drill conducted by the licensee's consulting firm on August 27 following training of onsite and offsite personnel in the various aspects of a medical emergency conducted on August 26, 1975.
Letters of agreement and telephone calls also verified that the required offsite medical treatment facilities were available as
specified in the Emergency Plan / Implementing Procedures.
.
The inspector identified no inadequacies.
6.
Training of Personnel The inspectors verified both by review of records and discussions with personnel that the training listed below had been conducted.
a.
Training Civen According to the licensee's records, training had been conducted in the areas below on the days listed:
l (1) general health physics / emergency procedures - 1/15 and 1/22/75 l
(2) emergency planning aspects for Operations Department personnel -
t l
3/14 and 3/23/75 -
l (3) medical emergency training - 8/26/75
.
l (4) medical emergency #-ill - 8/27/75 l
(5) emergency training prior to drill - 10/8/75
.
...
--.
The inspectors identified no inadequacies.
.
!
t
_ amese one, m
- e m as -m
__
- * * * * * * *
- "*"*""9*
- N
- -
"
~~~v-
.
-
-
_
- _.
-
i
.
"
.
.
,
,
.
_9
.
.
4.
Radioactive Release Monitoring Instrumentation
<
The inspectors reviewed the equipment listed belov with respect to the areas / items identified.
a.
Installed Instrumentation-
.
The conitors listed below were inspected to verify availability and operability and the licensee records for each were reviewed to verify calibration and maintenance as required by the licensee's procedures and schedules.
'
(1) air ejector effluent monitor
-
(2)
loop seal outlet monitor (3)
co=ponent cooling water detector (4) primary vent stack (5) air particulate detector (6)
steam generator leak detectors (4)
(7) wind speed / direction instruments (8)
temperature detectors (9) area radiation monitors (7)
(10) high radiation moniter The inspectors identified no inade,quacies.
,
'
b.
New System
!
During the course of the inspection the licensee showed the inspectors the parts of the new radiogas, radioiodine and particulate detection system which were being installed as pre-viously documented in report 50-29/75-10, Detail 13.
The licensee had not completed / approved procedures for-use of the new system which will eventually replace the present stack monitoring system.
I The inspector stated that prior to replacing tne current system with the new system, procedures would be required so that at no time was the plant operating on a system without procedures to describe actions to be taken based on data from the system in use.
.
The licensee stated that the required procedures would be approved prior to placing the new system in operation. Until approved and issued, this lack of procedures is an Unresolved Item.
t
.
- -.
.
..
l t
e
.
- N
"
$
ww e9 e * - e we w e. gym.w e.. e m est = c e==,
- *g w %.m
. go -,
e- - a w e en ee*
w ese
'%*6**'****#******"'**
,.. ~ _ -
. - -
~,_
_.. _
-
-
,
_.
-
-.
._
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _
_
f
..
.
,
.
-12-
-
b.
Personnel Interviews The inspector conducted interviews with ptrsonnel listed below to determine that the training documented above had been given and that the scope and purpose of the training were basically as represented by the licensee's documentation.
(1)
two (2) Emergency Coordinators (2) Assistant Operations Supervisor (3) an Assistant Plant Mechanic.
(4) an Instrument and Control Technician
.
(5) a Plant Hechanic.
.
The inspectors identified no inconsistencies or inadequacies.
7.
Implementing Procedures The licensee had revised sixteen (16) Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures since they were last (November 22, 1974) reviewed. The inspectors reviewed the revisions and determined that the licensee had not changed the basic emergency response delineated in his approved Emergency Plan.
In addition, on a sampling basis, the inspectors verified that appropriate copies of the response Plan contained the required revised procedures.
- The inspectors identified no inadequacies.
j 8.
Emercency Training Exercise The licensee conducted an energency training exercise, a simulated loss of coolant accident, on October 10, 1975. This exercise was observed by three (3) NRC representatives and six (6) observers from the licensee's onsite or corporate organization. The scenario was centered around an isolable main coolant Icak and involved an injured
,
victim. Due to postulated readings,the " plant" emergency was esca-lated to require a site evacuation The licensee had predesignated candidates participating in licensee SRO examinations (7), outside contractor personnel (13) and two security guards as exempt from drill participation,for cause. Other than these designated persons and the plant staff required for reactor operation, all site personnel participated.
~
a.
Offsite Participation The licensee contacted the agencies listed below during the drill.
The ambulance service and the NRC actively participated.
.
,...
__.
i
.
.
~ ~ ~ " " ~ ' ' ~ ~ ~
~
-...
...n n.
.... _... ~ ~ - - = ~~~~ ~ ~ -
l
- _
. _ _.
____
. -..
_ - - - _.
-
. - _.
.-
-
I
'
.
.
t
'
.
-le-
.
5.
Medical Treatment Facilities
a.
Onsite Facilities
-
The licensee's current onsite facilities are being modified by
+
an outside consulting firm. Tne current facilitics are not described in the Emergency Plan and the licensee had not taken i
credit for them in his response procedures.
When these facilities have been modified and are included in the Plan, they will be reviewed by Office of Inspection and Enforcement personnel.
b.
Offsite Facilitics
.
I The plans for handling an emergency at the offsite facility were reviewed by telephone with appropriate offsite personnel.
These plans are also being analy:cd by the licensee's consultant
fer possible upgrading / revision.
Technical Specification D.1 and 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V both require written / approved procedures to be followed.
Procedure OP-3304, CIERGENCY EQUIPMENT READINESS CHECK, Revision 1 dated 3/19/74 requires in part:
.
"S.
Proceed to North Adams Hospital.
"6.
At the North Adams Hospital note that the Emergency Kit is properly stored and readily accessible to one of the hospital staff.
.
"7.
Inventory the contents of the energency kit against those
.
i items listed on OPF-3304.1.
"8.
Return equipment to the emergency kit.
Return to the plant."
,
Contrary to the above, the licensee phoned the hospital and in-l quired if "the kit was in place and the seal intact" for each of
,
the required quarterly inventories for the first, second and third quarters of 1975.
The inspectors stated'that in addition to the procedural require-ment, a physical inventory was necessary to insure that perishable supplies had not deteriorated.
.
The failure to perform inventory checks as required constitutes a Deficiency level Item of Noncompliance.
-
...
._,
...~.
-e.o.-
_
_
- -~n
-
-,, _. - _ _
e..
-
.4 e
i
.
.
.
,.
.
.
.
-13-
.
(1) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I (2) Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Department of Public Health (3) Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Department of Labor and Industry
'(4) Commonwealth of Massachusetts, State Police (5) North Adams Community Hospital (6) Whitingham /mbulance Service (7) New England Power Company b.
Critique The licensee's observers conducted a critique following the drill which was attended by the three (3) NRC observers, the licensee's observers, and some of the drill participants.
Problems were identified by the licensce's observers in the following areas:
(1) availability and use of equipment for reentry team; (2) documentation / time sequence of events recording;
(3) correct usage of survey devices; (4) checkout of survey devices prior to leaving ECC; (5) communications; and, (6) rapid accountability / flow of personnel in the ECC.
The NRC observers provided additional evaluations.
The licensce's
,
observers identified all NRC observed items in their essential elements.
The licensee stated that ali identified problems would be docu-mented and referred to appropriate levels of canagement for evaluation and appropriate resolution. The inspectors stated that these areas / actions would be reviewed during subsequent NRC inspections.
9.
Fire Procedure The licensee was in the process of writing a new procedure for fighting fires within the plant. The Fire Training Procedure was completed but referenced the as yet incomplete Fire Procedure. The inspector discussed general elements for inclusion and noted that the Chief, Deputy Chief, Captain, Lieutenant and twelve (12)
other members of the local (Rowe, Massachusetts) volunteer fire department were employed by the licensee. The licensee stated that
.
g 9 e
.
M
_ _____
_ _ _ _ _.. _ _. _ _
__- -
-
~
---
--
y
.
_ -.,
!
.
,
~
..
.*
'
.
.
-14-
.
the results of the licensee's corporate fire study group were being factored into the new procedure and added that additional licensee personnel were members of other area volunteer fire companies.
The inspector acknowledged the licensee's conn::ents but stated that until the ' procedure had been approved, issued and training coc:pleted on its use, the lack of a fire procedure was an Unresolved Item.
.
e
.
I
,
e m
e h
I r
.
...
--
.
,
!
-
l
..
-
_
_ _ _. _..._ - _,. _...
_._ _ -._. -,-
i