IR 05000213/1982002
| ML20041D587 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/10/1982 |
| From: | Crocker H, Wojnas E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20041D578 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-213-82-02, 50-213-82-2, NUDOCS 8203050437 | |
| Download: ML20041D587 (4) | |
Text
.
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
-
REGION I
Report No.
50-213/82-02 Docket No.
50-213 License No.
OPR-61 Priority
-
Category C
Licensee:
Northeast Utilities Service Company P.O. Box 270
'
Hartford, CT 06101 Facility Name:
Haddam Neck
_
Inspection at:
Haddam Neck, CT Inspectica conducted:
February 5-7, 1982 Inspectors:
N k/d/8L Edward J. Wojt'as, Tenm Leader, EPS, RI date signed W. B. Kinney, Inspector, EPS, RI M. T. Mojta, Inspector, EPS, RI R. H. Smith, Inspector, EPS, RI
-
T. H. Smith, Resident Inspector, RI E. Kantor, EPLB, HQ W. Herrington, Battelle, PNL C. Palmiter, Battelle, PNL M. Lindell, Battelle, PN
'
M/0/f2 Approved by:, Y #
<
'~ H. W. Crocker?' Chief, Emergency
' 'dat4 signed Preparedness Section, DEP&OS Inspection Summary:
Inspection on February 5-7, 1982 (Report No. 50-213/82-02)
Area Inspected:
Special, announced emergency preparedness inspection and observation of the licensee's annual emergency exercise.
The inspection involved 265 inspection hours by a team of nine NRC Region I, NRC Headquarters, and NRC contractor personnel.
Results: No items of noncompliance were identified.
,
8203050437 820212 DR ADOCK 05000
__
_
_
_
__
_ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted W. G. Counsil Senior Vice President, Nuclear Engineering and Operations R. C. Rogers Manager, Radiological Assessment Branch E. R. Foster Director, General Constructica R. Z. Test Station Service Superintendent S. T. Fleming Training Supervisor R. H. Graves Station Superintendent J. F. Opeka Vice President, Nuclear Operations J. P. Cagnetta Vice President, Nuclear Engineering and Environmental R. Brisco Supervisor, Radiological Protection Section L. Landry Emergency Preparedness P. Luckey Emergency Preparedness Coordinator F. Sears Director, Nuclear Engineering G. R. Doughty System Communications R. W. Bishop Counsel The team also observed and interviewed other licensee emergency
,
response personnel as they performed their emergency response functions.
2.
Emergency Exercise The Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Plant emergency exercise was conducted on February 6, 1982 from 5:30 a.m. until 2:30 p.m.
l a.
Pre-exercise Activities The NRC team of observers met with the licensee on February 5, 1982 and reviewed the nature and scope of the exercise scenario. During this meeting, the licensee stated that essential operational and maintenance personnel would not participate in the evacuation portion of the exercise.
The licensee coordinated the exercise scenario with the various participating offsite agencies.
The scenario included an offsite radioactivity release exceeding the Environmental Protection Agency's Protective Action Guides under meteorological conditions that would require response on the part of offsite agencies.
The scenario also included a missing person who was contaminated.
Finally, the scenario included activation of the station fire i
brigade as well as the support of the Haddam Neck FireCompany to suppress a fire in the switchroom. A medical drill was not performed during the exercise because a medical drill utilizing onsite and offsite facilities was conducted during the fall of 198 f
.
,
Based on the above findings, this portion of the licensee's exercise program appeared to be acceptable.
b.
Exercise Observations During the conduct of the licensee's exercise, nine NRC team members made detailed observations of the activation and augmentation of the emergency organization; establishment of the emergency response facilities; and actions of emergency response personnel during the operation of the emergency response facilities.
The following activities were observed:
(1) detection, classification, and assessment of the events making up the scenario; (2) direction and coordination of the emergency response; (3) notification of licensee personnel and offsite agencies of pertinent information; (4) evacuation, assembly, and accountine for licensee and contractor personnel; (5) assessment and projection of radiological (dose) data and consideration of protective actions;
'
(6) performance of offsite, onsite, and in plant radiological surveys; (7) performance of fire fighting activities; (8) provision of in plant radiation protection; (9) maintenance of site security and access control; (10) periormance of technical support;
'
(il) performance of repair and corrective actions; ana (12) provision of information to the public.
'The NRC team noted th:+ the licensee's activation and augmentation of the emergency organizatloa; establishment of the emergency response facilites; and actions and use of the facilities were generally consistent with their emergency response plan and implementing procedures.
The team alst noted procedural and equipment shortcomings for the
'
onsite and offsite survey teams (i.e., use of inappropriate procedures, missing survey instruments, etc.).
Training of
.
%
survey team members in the use of communications equipment, survey instrumentation, and appropriate implementing procedures for their emergency functions should be improved.
The media center in the Hartford Armory was exercised; however, media personnel who would normally report to the Armory were allowed access to the site during the exercise. This action was inconsistent with the licensee's emergency plan and implementing procedures.
c.
Exercise Critique The NRC team attended the licensee's post-exercise critique on February 6,1982 during which key licensee exercise participants discussed their reactions to the exercise. The observations made by their observers / controllers were presented by the chief observer / controller. The participants highlighted areas for improvement which the licensee indicated would be evaluated are appropriate corrective action taken.
-
The NRC team compared their findings with those of the licensee and determined that neither the licensee nor the NRC observers had identified items which exhibited a potential for a degraded emergency response. However, areas for improvement were identified.
Discussions during the critique indicated that licensee management possessed sufficient understanding of these areas to permit timely and effective improvements.
3.
Exit Meeting and NRC Critique The NRC team met with the licensee representatives listed in Section 1 of the report at the Middletown, Connecticut, Municipal Building on February 7, 1982. The team leader summarized the purpose, scope and findings of the NRC inspection. Additional comments were provided by individual team members. The team leader also informed the licensee that their performance in the exercise demonstrated that they could implement their Emergency Plan and Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures in a manner which would adequately provide for the health and safety of the public.
Licensee management acknowledged the findings and indicated that evaluation and resolution of the identified improvement items would begin immediately.
!
r
,
m
,