IR 05000250/1993018
| ML17352A122 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 07/09/1993 |
| From: | Barr K, Salyers G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17352A121 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-250-93-18, 50-251-93-18, NUDOCS 9308100079 | |
| Download: ML17352A122 (17) | |
Text
~AR RK00 P0 Cy A.nO
/+g qP
+p*g0 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTASTREET, N.W.
ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30323 JUL
I993 Report No.:
50-250/93-18, 50-251/93-18 Licensee:
Florida Power and Light Company 9250 West Flager Street Hiami, FL 33102 Docket No.:
50-250, 50-251 Facility Name:
Turkey Point Inspection Conduct
Jye 7-11, Inspector:
G.
W.
a yers License No.:
DPR-31, DPR-41 Dat Signed Approved by:
I K. P. Barr, C ie Emergency Preparedness Section Radiological Protection and Emergency Preparedness Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards at Signe Branch SUHHARY Scope:
This routine, announced inspection was conducted in the area of emergency
=
preparedness, and included review of the following programmatic elements:
(1) Radiological Emergency Response Plan and its implementing procedures; 2) emergency facilities, equipment, instrumentation, and supplies; (3) organization and management control; (4) independent reviews/audits; and (5) training.
Results:
In the area inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
The emergency preparedness program received adequate management support.
The Emergency Preparedness Group was dedicated and knowledgeable.
The emergency response organization was capable of being effectively implemented in the event of an emergency.
Emergency Preparedness Program activities.were organized and adequately documented.
Two areas that could be improved were the reliability of electrical power supplied to the TSC and the number of emergency response drills that the licensee performs'during the year.
9308f00079 930709 PDR ADOCK 05000250 PDR~
l.
Persons Contacted REPORT DETAILS Licensee Employees
,*T. Abbatiello, Manager, guality Assurance
- G. Casto, FP&L Emergency Preparedness
- J. Danek, Manager, FP&L Corporate Health Physics
- J. Garozzo, Plant Turkey Point Nuclear Engineer
- G. Hollinger, Manager, FP&L Training
- H. Johnson, Supervisor, FP&L Operations
- F. King, Plant Turkey Point Nuclear, Emergency Preparedness
- J. Lindsay, Supervisor, Health Physics
- L. Pearce, Manager, Plant General
'K. Peterson, Supervisor, FP&L Land Utilization
- T. Plunkett, FP&L Vice President
- D. Powell, Manager, Services Manager
"R. Steinke, Supervisor, FP&L Chemistry
"A. Taylor, Plant Turkey Point Nuclear, Emergency Preparedness Assistant
- R. Tomonto, Licensing Engineer
- E. Weinkam, Manager, FP&L Licensing Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included members of the emergency response organization, training staff, and office personnel.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission R. Butcher, Senior Resident Inspector
- L. Trocine, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview 2.
Abbreviations used throughout this report are listed in the last paragraph.
Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures (82701)
This area was inspected to determine whether significant changes were made in the licensee's emergency preparedness program since the last inspection, to assess the impact of any such changes on the overall state of emergency preparedness at the facility, and to determine whether the licensee's actions in response to actual emer'gencies were in accordance with the Emergency Plan and its implementing procedures.
Requirements applicable to this area are found in 10 CFR 50.47(b)(16),
CFR 50.54(q),
Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and the licensee's Emer'gency Plan.
EP-AD-004, "Corporate Emergency Plan Change Review and Approval" proceduralized the licensee's program for making changes to the REP and EP-AD-005,
"Review and Approval of Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures,"
Revision 0, dated February 18, 1993 proceduralized the licensee's program for making changes to the EPIPs.
EP-AD-004 and
EP-AD-005 specified that a 10 CFR 50.59 evaluation or review and a
CFR 50.54(q) evaluation be performed on REP and EPIPs changes.
The inspector reviewed the
CFR 50.54(q) evaluation and concluded that the evaluation adequately determined if a change was consistent with other Emergency Preparedness Procedures and REP requirements.
The licensee's documentation indicated that they had made nine revisions to the EPIPs since March 1992.
The inspector selected two of the EPIP revisions for review:
EPIP-20127,
"Duties of the Assembly Area Supervisor,"
Implementation Date October 6, 1992, and EPIP-20101,
"Duties of the Emer'gency Coordinator,"
Implementation Date Hay 7, 1993.
The inspector reviewed the procedure change package for each of the changes and verified that a
CFR 50.54(q) evaluation had been performed.
The inspector concluded that, for the changes reviewed, the licensee had properly implemented procedure EP-AD-004.
A review, of licensee records indicated that all of the REP and EPIPs changes 'between Hay 1992 and Hay 1993 were approved by management and submitted to the NRC within 30 days of the effective date, as required.
No deficiencies were identified.
The inspector reviewed documents dated May 20,'992, indicating that the EALs were presented to and reviewed by the State of Florida, and Monroe and Metro Dade counties.
Neither the State nor local governments recommend any changes to the EALs at that time.
The inspector reviewed the EALs as found in EPIP-20101
"Duties of Emergency Coordinator" Implementation Date May 17, 1993 and determined that they were consistent with those in the REP and NUREG-0654.
The EALs did not appear to contain impediments or errors which could lead to incorrect or untimely classification.
The inspector noted that the EALs were based on parameters obtainable from Control Room instrumentation.
Controlled copies of the REP, EPIPs, and Emergency Telephone Directory in the Control Room and randomly selected controlled copies in the OSC, and EOF were audited for the most current revision.
No problems were identified.
Two emergency declarations were made by the licensee since the last inspection:
November 25, 1992, NOUE RCS Pressure boundary leakage
~
January 15, 1993, NOUE RCS pressure boundary leakage The inspector reviewed the classification and conditions prompting the classifications for each of the above events.
The November 25, 1992 event required an interview with the on-shift SRO for clarification.
The initial "non-isolable leak was first noted at 13:30, and 15:00 leak rate test indicated a leakage of 2.88 gpm (total RCS leakage).
This leakage appeared to be greater that the 1 gpm TS requirement for unidentified leakage.
The SRO stated that they physically observed the
"non-isolable leak,"
and noted that it was only a couple drops a minute,
but they did not know it was a pressure boundary leakage until 18:25.
At that time they declared a
NOUE.
The SRO stated the VCT level was not stable when the leak rate was calculated.
After. the interview, the inspector concluded that each classification was made correctly and offsite notifications were timely.
Section 7, "Haintaining Emergency Preparedness" of the REP addressed the performance of a variety of required activities.
The section addressed drills, educational information to the public, testing of communication systems, training for licensee and offsite emergency response personnel, and other program maintenance activities.
Licensee procedure EP-AD-007,
"Emergency Response Facility and Equipment Surveillances,"
implemented Section 7 of the REP and was a more detailed procedure specifying required maintenance and testing of equipment and functions.
The inspector's review of these emergency facility maintenance and test results indicated they were comprehensive and conducted in accordance with the REP and EP-AD-007.
All of the required records reviewed by the inspector were determined to be satisfactory.
The inspector verified that the REP had received the required annual management review.
The inspector also-noted that the each associated EPIP was assigned a periodic review date.
A random review by the inspector indicated that the licensee met their procedural review commitments.
By reviewing documentation and discussion with licensee personnel, the inspector determined that the following NRC INs applicable to emergency planning were reviewed by the licensee and distributed to cognizant personnel.
The inspector noted that corrective actions were taken when appropriate:
IN 91-72: Revision of EPA PAG Hanual IN 92-08:
Revised Protective Action Guidance for Nuclear Incidents IN 92-32:
Problems Identified With Emergency Ventilation Systems for Near-Site (Within 10 Hiles) Emergency Operations Facilities and Technical Support Centers
~
Implementation Date for the Revision to the EPA Hanual of Protective Action Guides and Protective Actions for Nuclear Incidents
No violations or deviations were identified.
Emergency Facilities, Equipment, Instrumentation, and Supplies (82701)
This area was inspected to determine whether the licensee's ERFs and associated equipment, instrumentation, and supplies were maintained in a state of operational readiness, and to assess the impact of any changes in this area upon the emergency preparedness progra Requirements applicable to this area are found. in 10 CFR 50.47(b)(8)
and (9),
CFR 50.54(q),
Section IV.E of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and the licensee's Emergency Plan.
The inspector toured the licensee's TSC and EOF.
Ir, the TSC, the licensee demons'trated the operability of the Dose Assessment computer, and ERDADS (SPDS) terminals.
The inspector observed a dose calculation demonstration.
The licensee provided documentation that indicated the dose assessment program had been compared with the State of Florida and the NRC's dose assessment program and that the program test results were comparable.
The ERDADS terminals in the TSC were successfully accessed and immediately available for use.
While observing an operational demonstration of ERDADS ability to view different screens and. to print them out on a color printer, the inspector noted that the ERDADS terminal displayed normal readings in GREEN and alarms conditions in RED, but the color printer printed the alarms in GREEN and normal conditions in RED.
The color on the print outs did not match the colors on the ERDADS erminals.
This mismatch in colors was brought to the licensee's attention.
A licensee technician promptly corrected the color mismatch.
The ERDADS terminals in the EOF were successfully accessed and immediately available for use.
Licensee's procedure EP-AD-007,
"Emergency Response Facilities and Equipment Surveillances" was a detailed procedure for maintaining the TSC and the EOF.
The procedure prescribed the lay out of the facility, maintenance of the facility inventory, and operational check of ERDADS, NAWAS, radios, facsimile machines, telephones, cellt.lar telephones, and ringdown telephones.
The inspector reviewed documeniation associated with the implementation of EP-AD-007 and concluded that the licensee was
- aggressive in maintaining the operational readiness of the TSC and EOF.
The inspector noted that the interior of the TSC had been redone.
The licensee stated that Hurricane Andrew (August 1992)
had damaged the roof and consequently caused water damage to the interior.
The licensee had elevated portions of the floor and replaced the carpet.
Hurricane Andrew also damaged (interrupted)
normal overhead power lines and disabled the Cranking Diesel Generators which were the emergency power to the TSC.
The loss of normal and emergency power resulted in the TSC being inoperable for approximately two weeks following the hurricane.
The licensee used portions of the control building as an alternate TSC during the time the TSC was inoperable.
The inspector reviewed procedure O-OSP-301.2,
"Technical Support Center Emergency Ventilation System Operational Test" approval date of August 27, 1991.
The test data points monitored Pre-Filters, HEPA Filters, Charcoal Filters, Final Filter and Total Filter D/P, and TSC/outside D/P.
The test listed maximum accepted values for each of the data points.
The test also tested the systems airflow annually.
The inspector noted that all of the reading were within accepted values, and that the system appeared to be properly maintaine The inspector reviewed procedure EP-AD-007,
"Emergency Response Facility and Equipment Surveillance,"
dated March 29, 1993.
The procedure specified required maintenance and testing of equipment and functions in the Control Room, TSC, EOF, OSC, Turkey Point Medical Facility, and Offsite Assembly Area.
Activities specified in the procedure were:
Facility Walkdowns Facility Equipment Inventories and supplies Facility Communication verification and Equipment Testing EP-AD-007,
"Emergency Response Facility and Equipment Surveillance" had 13 Attachments.
The inspector reviewed Attachment 2,
"TSC Inventory Sheet",
Attachment 3,
"EOF Inventory Sheet",
Attachment 10 "quarterly Communication Test Record",
and Attachment ll "guar'.erly ERDS Link Test" of procedure EP-AD-007 for the period of May 1992 to May 1993.
All records were complete.
Based on review of the records, prompt corrective actions were undertaken when equipment deficiencies were identified.
The inspector reviewed quarterly inventory records from May 1992 to May 1993 for the various emergency kits.
Health Physics was responsible for maintaining and inventorying the emergency kits.
The licensee maintains numerous well equipped emergency kits.
The records indicated that the emergency kits were being properly maintained.
The ANS consisted of 47 fixed sirens in Monroe and Metro Dade Counties.
A bi-weekly fu'll cycle test of each siren was initi=ted at the siren by the licensee.
A full system activation was performed monthly from both counties'OC.
The monthly testing was performed under the jurisdiction of the respective county emergency management agency, and monthly test results were forwarded to the licensee.
Except for the week of September 5,
1992, (the first bi-weekly test following Hurricane Andrew)
the test results indicated the bi-weekly availability simple average was approximately 97 percent.
The documentation indicated that siren system met the annual 90 percent operability criterion.
The inspector reviewed documentation indicating that the licensee had purchased and installed 104 tone alert radios.
The radios were placed in public and private schools, day care centers, medical care facilities, and local community and office buildings with'n the 10 mile EPZ.
The tone alert radios were recently installed and were under the control of the county EOC.
The tone alert radios could be activate in conjunction with the emergency sirens (ANS) or as a separate system.
The inspector concluded that the emergency response facilities and emergency equipment were appropriately maintained.
No violations or deviations were identifie.
5.
Organization and Management Control (82701)
This area was inspected to determine the effects of any changes in the licensee's emergency organization and/or management control systems on the emergency preparedness program, and to verify that any such changes were properly factored into the Emergency Plan and EPIPs.
Requirements applicable to this area are found in 10 CFR 50.47(b)(1)
and (16),Section IV.A of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and the licensee's Emergency Plan.
The licensee had regular meetings with the local governments.
Based on the licensee's post hurricane Andrew interaction with the community and documentation of licensee response to community requests, the inspector concluded that the licensee supported the community.
Review of organizational charts and discussions with the licensee indicated there were no management changes which affected the position of Emergency Preparedness in the licensee's management organization.
The assignment of additional departmental responsibilities to the previous Emergency Coordinator resulted in the assignment of a new Emergency Coordinator.
After reviewing the new Emergency Coordinator's qualifications, the inspector concluded new Emergency Coordinator possessed the professional knowledge to effectively maintain the licensee's Emergency Preparedness program.
The organizational structure of the ERO was basically unchanged since the last inspection.
After reviewing the licensee'~
organization, the maintenance of the facility, and the emergency preparedness procedural process, the=inspector concluded that management was involved in and supportive of the Emergency Preparedness Program.
No violations or deviations were identified.
Independent Review/Audits (82701)
This area was inspected to determine whether the licensee had performed an independent review/audit of the emergency preparedness program, and whether the licensee had a corrective action system for deficiencies and weaknesses identified during exercises and drills.
Requirements applicable to this area are found in 10 CFR 50.54(t)
and the licensee's Emergency Plan.
The inspector reviewed audit report,
"gAO-PTN-92-032" dated October 1,
1992.
The audit reviewed various plant implementing procedures, surveillance records, and interviews with plant personnel.
Areas reviewed were EP training, plant facilities, emergency equipment, previous audit findings, and plant activities following Hurricane Andrew.
The audit team consisted of a principal auditor and three accompanyin9 auditors.
All were guality Assurance Engineers.
The inspector considered the resources dedicated to the team to be a positive
indicator of management's commitment to the EP program.
The audit was adequate in depth and coverage of the program and met the requirements identified in 10 CFR 50.54(t).
The inspector verified that the audit findings were being tracked and adequately resolved by the Emergency Preparedness organization.
The inspector reviewed Section 7. 1.4,
"Conduct of Exercises, Drills, and Tests" of the REP.
The REP permitted the licensee to satisfy more than one drill requirement within the same drill.
As an example, the requirement for a medical drill, radiological drill, and emergency exercise could all be satisfied during the same drill.
The inspector reviewed documentation that indicated the licensee's compliance to Section 7. 1.4 of the REP.
The inspector concluded that the licensee's drill schedule met the minimum requirements to sati!.".y Section 7..1.4 of the EP.
Documentation indicated that in 1991, the 'licensee conducted one Site EP Drill on November 11, 1991 then the EP Evaluated Exercise on December 4,
1991.
In 1992, the licensee conducted one Site EP Drill on April 15, 1992 then the EP Evaluated Exercise on May 6, 1992.
In 1991, in addition to the evaluated exercise, the licensee conducted one Medical drill and one HP Drill.
In 1992, in addition to the evaluated exercise, the licensee conducted two Medical Drills and one HP Drill.
The inspector discussed the frequency of drills with the Emergency Preparedness Coordinator and during the Exit.
The licensee acknowledged the need to increase their drill activities and indicated they were considering an incr'ease in the number of drills.
The inspector reviewed a matrix that tracked the licensee performance of the major elements of the Plan within a five year period as stated in the REP.
The inspector did not identify any deficiencies.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's programs for follow-up of findings from audits, drills, and exercises.
The licensee used two tracking systems:
Florida Power and Light Company Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Complete EPASS Report.
This was a lower "priority" system used by the Emergency Preparedness Group to track items primarily identified in the performance of EP functions, such as drill comments or needed procedure changes.
Florida Power and Light Company Commitment Tracking System.
This system was used by management to track NRC identified items and commitments pertaining to Emergency Preparedness.
The inspector reviewed the tracking list and concluded that the licensee was responsive in addressing and completing identified items.
No violations or deviations were identifie.
Training (82701)
This area was inspected to determine whether the licensee's key emergency response personnel were properly trained and understood their emergency responsibilities.
Requirements applicable to this area are contained in 10 CFR 50.47(b)(2)
and (15),Section IV.E of Appendix E to
CFR Part 50, and the licensee's Emergency Plan.
The inspector interviewed two Training Instructors and reviewed documentation concerning the emergency preparedness training program.
The inspector concluded that the training program was maintained and was receiving management support.
EP training was performed by the individual groups that perform that EP function.
As an example, training for ERO personnel holding an
.
Operators License was covered in the Operator License Training Program; HP teaches Field Monitoring Team training; and Chemistry teaches Dose Assessment training.
The inspector reviewed lesson plans associated with Emergency Coordinator training and Dose Assessment training.
Each lesson plan contained Terminal Objectives and Learning Objectives.
The lesson plan covered the objective.
The inspector noted that the lesson plan was organized and contained sufficient detail to enable the student to acquire the necessary knowledge to perform his/her ERO function.
A test was given for each lesson plan.
After reviewing tl'est'ssociated with the lesson plan, the inspector concluded that the test covered the lesson objectives and adequately tested the student's knowledge of the subject.
The inspector reviewed the EP Training tracking system.
The training records were computerized and personnel training status was tracked by the licensee.
The system listed each individual's name, ERO position, the date they completed each course.
The inspector selected nine members of the ERO and reviewed their training records.
Procedure EPIP 20201,
"Maintaining Emergency Preparedness
- Radiological Emergency Plan Training," defined the training program.
EPIP 20201, Attachment 1,
"Emergency Plan Training Matrix" listed the ERO position and referenced the required training for the position.
Using EPIP 20201, Attachment 1 and the computer system, the inspector verified the nine ERO members'raining was initially given and that retraining was up-to-date.
The inspector also verified the computer listing against hard copies of individual training documentation.
No deficiencies were identified.
Section 5.3, "Fire Brigade Retraining" of O-ADM-016.2, "Fire Brigade Program" describes retraining of the fire brigade.
The inspector reviewed the training records and frequency of drilis for the fire brigade.
The training program and all training records were detailed and well organized.
The inspector noted that drills involved offsite participation and the frequency of fire drill exceeded the licensee
requirements.
No deficiencies were identified.
All of the records reviewed were current.
No violations or deviations were identified.
Action on Previous Inspection Findings (92701)
The inspector reviewed one open items from previous inspections:
(Closed) IFI 50-250-251/91-26-04:
Review licensee's evaluation and actions regarding audibility of containment public address system during outage activities.
IFI 91-26-04 was closed based upon the satisfactory completion of the licensee's acceptance test and close out of PC/H 92-154.
This pl'ant modification upgraded the plant page audibility insi.:le containment and installed four high intensity blue strobe lights inside containment.
Exit Interview (30703)
The inspection scope and results were summarized on June 11, 1993,'ith those persons indicated in Paragraph 1.
There were no dissenting remarks by the licensee.
No proprietary information was reviewed during this inspection.
Index of Abbreviations Used in this Report ANS ABT
,
CFR D/P EAL EDG EOC EOF EP EPASS EPIP
.
EPZ ERDADS ERO IFI IN NAWAS NOUE OSC PAR REP SPDS TS TSC Alert and Notification System Automatic Bus Transfer Code of Federal Regulations Differential Pressure Emergency Action Level Emergency Diesel Generator Emergency Operations Center Emergency Operating Facility Emergency Preparedness Emergency Preparedness Activity Scheduling System Emergency Plan Implementing Procedure Emergency Planning Zone Emergency Response Data Acquisition and Display System Emergency Response Organization Inspector Follow-Up Item Information Notice National Warning System Notification Of Unusual Event Operational Support Center Protective Action Recommendation Radiological Emergency Plan Safety Parameter Display System Technical Specification Technical Support Center