IR 05000254/1993022

Insp Repts 50-254/93-22 & 50-265/93-22 on 931206-10.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operational Status of Plant EP Program & Followup on Licensee Actions

ML20059E219
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	12/29/1993
From:	Foster J, Jickling R, Mccormickbarge NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20059E215	List: IR 05000254/1993022 ML20059E211
References
50-254-93-22, 50-265-93-22, NUDOCS 9401110038
Download: ML20059E219 (7)

Text

. .

.

.

I

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

^

REGION III

Report Nos. 50-254/93022(DRSS); 50-265/93022(DRSS) i Docket Nos. 50-254; 50-265 License Nos. DPR-29; DPR-30 Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company '

Executive Towers West 11:

1400 Opus Place, Suite 300 Downers Grove, IL 60515 Facility Name: Quad Cities Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 ,

Inspection At: Quad Cities site, Cordova, Illinois .;

Inspection Conducted: December 6-10, 1993 Inspectors: tN ) cl </ [L /2/n/<7;

'd. Foster t) e Date '

/ / 'l Y h Ic b a /2/?fl93 I

, R. Jickling/ / / Date /

L/ V Approved By: //d/br[d N ysd' d r 2h r#1 J. W. McCormick-Barger, Chief- Date .

Radiological Programs Section 1 Inspection Summary

'

Inspection on December 6-10. 1993 (Recort Nos. 50-254/93022(DRSS): 50-

-

265/93022(DRSS))

Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of the operational status of the Quad Cities Nuclear Generating Station's emergency preparedness (EP)

program (IP 82701) and followup on licensee actions. The inspection involved two NRC inspector Results: No violations, deviations or deficiencies were identifie ;

In general, review of the EP program did not indicate any problem area Reviews of actual emergency activations indicated they were properly don i Nuclear Utilities Management and Resources Council (NUMARC) Emergency Action l Levels (EALs) were in the process of being approved and training of station personnel was under way. Emergency response facilities and equipment were ' i an excellent state of operational readiness. Procedures reviewed were i adequate in scope and detail. Exercise.and drill records we,e well detaile' -1 The 1992 and 1993 audits and surveillances of the prograr were tha lu @. j Auditor followup on identified concerns was goo '

9401110038 931229 PDR ADOCK 05000254 G PDR I

.

-.

DETAILS I 1. Persons Contacted G. Campbell, Station Manager J. Burkhead, Station Quality Verification Superintendent J. Kudalis, Support Services Director D. Winchester, Quality Verification Director L. Tucker, Technical Support Superintendent S. Sober, Radiation Protection Supervisor L. Kreuder, Emergency Planning Coordinator L. Hamilton, Regulatory Assurance M. Levy, Emergency Planning Trainer ,

B. Ganser, Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety K. Walton, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspector The above licensee staff attended the exit interview on December 10, 1993. The inspectors contacted other licensee personnel during the inspectio .,

2. Licensee Action on Previously Identified Items (IP 82301 and IP 82701)

JClosed) Insoection Followuo Item 254/265-93026-02: During the 1993 annual Generating Stations Emergency Plan exercise, the scenario included a fire in one train of the standby gas treatment system while the other train was out of service for maintenance. Scenario writers -

intended that the shift operating crew classify this event as an Alert under Emergency Action Level. (EAL) 6.k which stated '"As a result of a natural or destructive phenomena, all trains of a safety system are '

affected such that it may not perform its required functions." The assigned shift crew interpreted this guidance literally to mean that the phenomena affect all trains, rather than one (remaining inservice)

trai ,

Discussion with licensee personnel indicated that review of the EAL for more definitive wording would not be performed, as a completely revised EAL scheme is intended to be implemented in January 1994. The NUMARC EAL scheme as proposed for the Quad Cities Station was reviewed, and-it appeared that the scenario condition would not be a classifiable even i This item is close No violations or deviations were identifie . Operational Status of the Emeroency Preparedness Proaram (IP 82701) Actual Emeroency Plan Activations Since May 1992, the licensee correctly declared four Unusual Events in accordance with the plant's EAls. State, county, and NRC officials were initially notified in a timely manner following each declaration and subsequent event terminatio On November 30,1993, at 12:53 am, an Unusual Event was declared per EAL 3.a for Unit I when Technical Specifications required a j

l

. .

.

plant shutdown due to_ degraded reactor level instrumentation. The event was declared terminated at 4:32 am on the same dat '

On July 27,1993, at 3:37 am, an Unusual Event was declared per EAL 3.d for Unit 2 when normal power was lost to electrical busses 23-1 and 24-1. The cause of this event was a suspected lightning strike. Unrelated to the event, the Illinois Nuclear Accident Reporting System (NARS) telephone line was found to be inopera- ,

tiv Required notifications were still made in a timely manne The event was terminated at 6:18 am on the same dat On June 18,1993, at 9:05 pm, an Unusual Event was declared'per.-

EAL 3.b for Unit I when High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI) was inoperable due to seal problems and repairs could not be effected within the allowed 14 days. The event was terminated at 7:55 am on June 19, 199 On June 9,1993, at 9:18 am, an Unusual Event was declared per EAL '

10.b for Unit I when injured / contaminated persons were transported >

offsit Injuries were caused when a HPCI steam turbine exhaust >

rupture diaphragm ruptured, causing minor contaminations and burns to five individuals. The event was terminated at 11:59 am on the same dat ,

No violations or deviations were identified, b. Emeraency Plan and Implementina Procedures >

<

Discussion with licensee personnel indicated that revisions to the plan anl its implementing procedures were sent to the NRC within 5 the rega..ed 30 days of their effective date Procedure QEP 300-1, " Notifications for GSEP Emergencies,"

Revision 12, dated February 1993, and procedure QEP 300-3

" Activation of the ERDS", Revision 3, dated February,1993, were reviewed. Section E. 10 of QEP 300-1 and QEP 300-3 indicated that the "NRC expects the Emergency Response Data System (ERDS) to be-initiated as soon as possible after an ALERT or higher classification has been declared." Discussion with licensee i personnel indicated that both procedures had been modified to !

include the "within one hour" requirement of 10 CFR 50.72 (a)(4), I and would be reissued shortly. Section f.3 of the procedure QEP 300-1 requires initiation of the ERDS system per QEP 300- No violations or deviations were identifie '!

c. Emeraency Response Facilities (ERFs). Ecuipment. and Supplies The inspectors- toured the Control Room, Technical. Support Center (TSC), Operations' Support Center (OSC), and the Emergency Operations facility / Joint Public Information Center (E0F/JPIC). -'

The TSC has been substantially enlarged and rearranged since the last routine inspection. Modifications have added space to the TSC, allowing adequate collocation of NRC site personnel. A ,

central briefing table concept has been included in the new ;

design. In the OSC, the inspectors noted that storage units i 3 1 l

.

,

,.

lacked tamper-indicating seals. Discussion with licensee personnel indicated that such seals would be implemented in the -

near future. The' inspectors also reviewed records of procedurally required equipment inventories and communications' equipment tests performed since the previous NRC inspection. No problems were identified by the inspectors. Based on facility tours and the review of records, the TSC, OSC, and EOF were determined to be i

'

maintained in an excellent. state of operational readines Based upon a study performed by a consultant (Versar)and.an engineering analysis by Ogden Environmental and Energy Services ,

Co., the licensee recently modified its siren system to delete some redundant sirens, remove other sirens and install some new sirens. The modified system consisted of 53 sirens, 22 sirens in >

Illinois and 31 sirens in Iowa, and provided additional coverage that previously required mobile route alerting. The modification was reviewed and approved by FEMA Headquarters and Region V and VII FEMA staffs. Inspector discussions of the modifications identified no problem No violations or deviations were identifie d. Oraanization and Manaaement Control The EP Coordinators continued to be a strength to the program with each having more than four years experience and the support from plant management. Their reporting chain has changed since the last NRC inspection from reporting directly to the Technical Services Superintendent to reporting to the Radiation Protection

'upervisor, who reports to the Technical Services Superintenden The emergency response organization's (ER0's) staffing levels

_

ranged from very good to excellent for all key and support position Discussion indicated that a " Media Day" orientation session-is i held during years when the annual exercise includes activation of-the Joint Public Information Center (JPIC). A " Media Reading ,

Package" is developed in conjunction with the Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety (IDNS) during those years when the annual exercise does not include JPIC activation. Licensee personnel indicated that this year's media reading package was scheduled to be distributed on or near December 15, 199 No violations or deviations were identifie .

e. Trainina On December 7,1993, the inspectors attended portions of licensed operator training on the proposed NUMARC EALs. A detailed lesson plan was utilized and attendees were provided with proposed QCA- :

93-01 " Classification of Emergencies," dated July 1993. The ;

classroom session was videotaped for later use. The instructor was very knowledgeable, answered questions adequately, and actively solicited comments and suggestions relative to improvement of the proposed EAL ,

.:

i

.,

a Interviews were conducted with persons who would be assigned to key positions in the Technical Support Center. These positions i were the Technical Director, Radiation Protection Director, and i Operations Director. Their overall performances were very good i with respect to overall knowledge of their responsibilities, tasks >

to be performed, and procedures to be used. Responses.to questions regarding training and " test out" options were very positiv i During the interviews, those. interviewed utilized key TSC position l specific manuals. These manuals provided position-specific :

checklists for each emergency action classification, and contained applicable procedures and forms. These manuals appeared to be a significant aid for emergency response personne It was noted that no procedural or checklist guidance was provided '

such that operations personnel provide information on expected duration of a radioactive release to the Environs staff. -This information can be important in revising the release duration ,

estimate (normally a default value) to a best estimate. While this information was described as being discussed during periodic briefings, guidance on routinely providing this information would ,

be worthwhil ,

Records indicated that the required meeting with State and county officials regarding the plant's EAls and other topics of mutual interest occurred in 1992 and 1993, as did the annual offering of EP program orientation training to local media representative ,

,

A meeting with Radiation Protection and Chemistry instructors identified the process for emergency preparedness training for the technicians, since the full time EP instructor position was discontinued. Each discipline uses their instructors for EP trainin ,

Records wele reviewed for 75 randomly selected ERO persons from >

the Fourth Quarter 1993 GSEP Organization Call List and compared >

to the current Qualification Due Report generated by trainin All required EP training for these persons was complete and within the requalification frequency defined in the GSE No violations or deviations were identifie ,

r f. Review of Annual Exercise Records Records of the 1993 Pre-exercise held on October 13, 1993, were *

reviewed. The scenario utilized for this pre-exercise was very i different from that in the annual exercise itself. Exercise *

records were excellent, and a large number of minor corrective actions were identifie Records pertinent to the November 3,1993, annual Generatin ,

Stations Emergency Plan (GSEP) utility-only exercise were reviewed in detail. This exercise was partially observed by the NRC resident inspectors, as detailed in Inspection Reports No. 50-254/93026(DRP); 50-265/92026(DRP). ,

.

.

/

<

'

The license submitted the Scope and Objectives of the exercise an an exercise scenario to the NRC prior to the exercise. No ,

problems were noted. Records reviewed indicated that the scenario !

was adequate to challenge most portions.of the site emergency plan and procedures, and that adequate critiques were held subsequent-to the exercise. The licensee's evaluations of each facility-indicated they were satisfactory, and no objectives were evaluated l as not me ;

l No violations or deviations were identifie g. Indeoendent Reviews / Audits Records of 1992 and 1993 audits and surveillances of the EP program were reviewed. The audits were thorough and met the ;

'

requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(t). The requirement to assess the adequacy of the interfaces with State and local support organizations was met by the audits and surveillances reviewe Records indicated good followup by the auditors on previously identified concern Records indicated that offsite agency emergency response support-personnel meetings had taken place on November 10, 1993, and September 1, 1992. A "Public Notice" sent out with notifications regarding this meeting advised of the availability of the portions of the annual audit addressing the adequacy of the interface with offsite authoritie Nuclear Quality Program Audit Report Number 04-92-03A dated May 5, j 1992, was reviewed. This audit was performed during April-20 -

~

May 1,1992, and resulted in one audit finding. The audit ;

verified corrective actions for the 1991 audit, assessed actions taken in response to a previous 50.54(t) report, and evaluated 1992 drill performance in various facilitie Site Quality Verification (SQV) Outage Oversight Audit #04-93-03 'i dated April 19, 1993, was reviewed. This audit contained a-section addressing the emergency preparedness training program, !

corrective action system, and off-site agency correspondenc SQV Surveillance Report #QAS 04-93-012, dated November 16, 1993, ;

was reviewed. This highly detailed surveillance report-documented observations of various pre-exercise drills and exercises . t conducted during October 13 - November 13, 1993, including the November 3,1993, utility-only annual GSEP exercise for Quad Cities station. The surveillance found the drills to be challenging, with adequate adherence to procedures. Interfaces with offsite authorities were evaluated and found acceptabl Also included was an EP audit conducted April 4,1993, reviewing training, corrective actions and offsite agency correspondenc Appendix B of this report consisted of an Outage Oversight Audit (above) pertaining to Emergency Preparedness training and a review of the Emergency Preparedness corrective action system, as well as offsite letters of Agreemen No violations or deviations were identifie >

.

-

,.

f

.. ,

. ,

~4 .

P i  ; Exit Interview - ;f

,

The inspectors held an exit interview on December 10, 1993, with those d '

'

licensee representatives. identified in Section I to present~and' discuss the preliminary inspection finding l The inspectors indicated that review of the EP program had.not indicated

~

-l

any problem areas. Licensee reviews of actual. emergency activations ..

were properly done. NUMARC EALS were:in the. process of being, approved- ;

and training of station personnel'was beginning. Emergency response *

facilities and equipment were in a good-state of operational readines j Procedures reviewed were adequate in scope and detai Exercise and-drill records were well detailed. The 1992-and 1993 audits and surveillances of the program were thorough. Auditor followup on identified concerns was goo ;

The licensee acknowledged the findings and . indicated that none of the ;

matters discussed were proprietary in natur .

.

'l I

!

-!

,

.

a

'!

~

l i

.'

-!

!

'

.

7  !

.

. 4 -

'-f.: