IR 05000057/1987003
| ML20235B242 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Buffalo |
| Issue date: | 09/10/1987 |
| From: | Conklin C, Lazarus W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235B224 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-057-87-03, 50-57-87-3, NUDOCS 8709240033 | |
| Download: ML20235B242 (6) | |
Text
. _ _
.
U.
S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COFMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50 ',7/87-03 Docket No.
50-57 License No.
R-77 Licensee:
State University of New York at Buffalo Rotary Road Buffalo, New York 14214 Facility Name:
Buffalo Materials Research Center Inspection At:
Buffalo, New York Inspection Conducted:
August 24-25, 1987 Inspectors:
3 C. Cophlin, Emergency Preparedness date Sp a
st, EP&RPB, DRSS 9c/h Approved by:
/
.< N W. y La @ s, Chief, Emergency date'
Preparedness Section, EP&RPB, DRSS Inspection Summary:
Inspection on August 24-25, 1987 (Report No.
50-57/87-03)
Areas Inspected:
Routine announced emergency preparedness inspection.
The inspection areas included:
Observation of the annual action drill; and open items identified in the 1985 appraisal.
Results:
No violations were identified.
g'aiWR fs@$a'
O
- _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-
. _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
,
DETAILS
l
1. 0 Persons Contacted
- L.
Henry, Director
- J.
Griffin, Senior Health Physicist
- D.
Sullivan, Reactor Engineer
- N.
Hutchison, Health Physicist
- M.
Pierro, Radiation Safety Officer P. Orlosky, Operations Manager
!
M. Adams, Senior Reactor Operator
- Denotes those present at the exit interview
]
2.0 Licensee Action on previous Inspection Findings During the inspection, the inspector reviewed the licensee's
progress concerning the~ items opened'during the emergency
'
preparedness appraisal (Inspection Report 50-57/85-02).
The status of these items is as follows.
..
(OPEN) 85-02-01:
Include succession list of key emergency
-
positions in the emergency plan.
The licensee's key emergency staff consists.of the Emergency Director, Reactor Operations and Health Physicists.
Appendix II of the plan contains the succession list for Emergency Director, but does not specify the succession for Reactor Operations and Health Physicists.
Additionally, Appendix II is out of date.
A new list has been distributed for the Emergency Director succession, but has not been included in the plan.
The licensee agreed to specify the succession for the remainder of the emergency staff in the plan and appendix II.
This area will be reviewed in a subsequent inspection.
- (OPEN) 85-02-02:
Identify the function of NYSDH during an emergency.
The New York State Department of Health (NYSDH) provides safety assessment and technical support to BMRC.
In addition, they are the primary point of contact with other support agencies such as Brookhaven.
The plan does not contain a description of the support that would be available from NYSDH during an emergency.
The licensee agreed to evaluate the areas where support would be available and i
I f
(L
.
revise the plan accordingly.
This area will be reviewed in a subsequent inspection.
(CLOSED) 85-02-03:
Develop preformed messages for initial
-
notifications.
The licensee has developed preformed messages for initial notifications to both the Public Safety Department and NYSDH.
These messages are contained in the Emergency Director's notebook.
The inspector noted that the Emergency Director's notebook has not been formalized into either the plan or emergency procedures.
The licensee agreed to include the information in the notebook with the appropriate emergency procedure.
Based upon the above review, this area is acceptable.
(CLOSED) 85-02-04:
Date emergency telephone lists and
-
include pagers.
The inspector reviewed several documents including the BMRC telephone directory, Appendix II of the plan, and EP-2,
"Eme.rgency Medical Procedure".
These documents contain the
'
telephone numbers of the emergency staff including the revision / issue date and pager numbers.
Based upon the above review, this area is acceptable.
(CLOSED) 85-02-05:
Provide chart to correlate EAL's and
-
initiating conditions and an implementing procedure.
The inspector reviewed the emergency plan, and emergency procedures for failed fuel, LOCA, and other emergencies.
The plan adequately describes the initiating conditions that would require an emergency classification.
The emergency procedures describe operator and staff actions in the event of an emergency.
Based upon the above review, this area is acceptable.
(CLOSED) 85-02-06:
Provide procedure for on and offsite
-
,
monitoring and designate equipment and supplies.
l The emergency plan adequately describes the types of j
emergency equipment available and its location.
In f
,
!
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _
._
.
_
. _ _
._ ______-_ _ _-
4 addition, several emergency procedures describe other equipment such as fire alarms, evacuation alarms, and fire extinguishers.
The inspector noted that the emergency kits stored in the Howe Building have been inventoried and the instruments calibrated in accordance with the emergency plan.
Based upon the above review, this area is acceptable.
(CLOSED) 85-02-07:
Provide monitoring equipment to obtain
-
dose rates associated with EAL's.
See response to item 85-02-06.
(OPEN) 85-02-08:
Develop lesson plan for classification,
-
required notifications and dose commitment calculations.
The inspector reviewed the lesson plan for emergency planning.
The licensee utilizes a single lesson plan that covers all aspects of the program and is given to all the BMRC staff.
The program includes an examination that is given to all reactor operators.
The remainder of the staff does not take the examination.
Training records were complete for all reactor operators.
The inspector was unable to find any documentation for the remainder of the BMRC staff.
Through interviews with several staff members and observation of the annual action drill, the inspector was able to determine that training had been received by the remainder of the BMRC staff.
The licensee has agreed to upgrade the documentation of training for the remainder of the BMRC staff.
This item will be revised to reflect the documentation problems and will be reviewed in a subsequent inspection.
3.0 Annual Action Drill The inspector observed the annual action drill that was conducted by the licensee on August 25, 1985.
The drill was initiated by a simulated explosion of flammable materials on the Neutron Deck.
The explosion damaged a hot cell, knocking down shielding and spreading activated metal samples on the floor.
A tour was on the deck at the time of the explosion and resulted in six injuries, of varying severity, and with various levels of contamination.
The explosion was promptly reported to the control room by a l
staff member, and the fire alarm was initiated to the I
!
!
_
_ _ _ _ _ _
_
._
._
l
_
__-_
.
l
.
Buffalo Fire Department.
The inspector noted that the fire
~
alarm was actually demonstrated.
The reactor operator quickly simulated the shutdown of the reactor, and evacuated the control room in accordance with the emergency plan.
The j
Emergency Director quickly took charge, directing the l
reactor operator and health physicist to set up a control
point and reenter the containment to investigate the fire l
and aid the victims.
The fire department was onsite in several minutes, and was able to make the first entry.into the containment with the BMRC staff.
Triage was established at the control point, victims administered first aid and then transported to the Veterans Hospital.
3.1 Drill Observations The following observations were indicative of the
!
licensee's ability to cope with abnormal plant I
conditions:
Timely containment evacuation and subsequent
-
accountability.
a Timely notifications to onsite and offsite
-
authorities.
Good use of emergency equipment by the BMRC staff
-
including SCBA's and monitoring equipment.
Quick, effective response by fire and rescue j
-
personnel, including: triage and first aid i
treatment of victims; transport of victims; and j
treatment of the victims at the hospital, This
area is highly eifective due to the proximity of the hospital and fire / rescue units as well as the capabilities and training of the offsite agencies.
Positive command and control of the area was
-
exhibited by the Emergency Director, and the Health Physicist at the control point.
l The following areas are identified for corrective i
action.
The offsite notifications were prompt and
-
correct, however the Emergency Director did not utilize the message forms available in the
Emergency Director's notebook.
Use of the forms I
!
l l
L__ ____
.
.
.
will help ensure that the proper information is transmitted to the offsite agencies.
The notification to the NRC was made to Region I
-
rather than the Operations Center.
The plan and emergency procedures should be revised to show notification is made to the Operations Center.
Victim rescue was hampered by a lack of
-
stretchers in the containment.
It is unlikely that some of the victims that were simulated being carried out by hand, could have been carried out without a stretcher.
-
The inspector did not observe any discussions at the conclusion of the drill regarding the dose commitment received by the Health Physicist in containment.
4.0 Changes to the Emergency Plan The inspector reviewed the licensee's emergency plan and procedures for changes that could decrease the level of preparedness.
It was noted that no changes have been made that decrease the level of preparedness.
One observation was made however, on the distribution of the plan and procedures.
The current revision of the plan does not call l
for the procedures to be forwarded to NRC Region I.
The j
inspector recommended that the plan be revised to include
)
both the plan and procedures be forwarded to NRC Region I l
when revisions are made.
5.0 Exit Meeting l
The inspector met with the licensee personnel denoted in j
Section 1 at the conclusion of the inspection.
The licensee I
was informed that no violations were noted.
The inspector I
also discussed some areas for improvement.
The licensee
]
acknowledged the findings and agreed to evaluate them and l
institute corrective actions as appropriate.
At no time during the inspection did the inspector provide j
any written information to the licensee.
i l
l I
!
_______
J