IR 05000259/1988009

Insp Repts 50-259/88-09,50-260/88-09 & 50-296/88-09 on 880404-08.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Review & Evaluation of Licensee Emergency Response Program

ML20151V910
Person / Time
Site:	Browns Ferry
Issue date:	04/22/1988
From:	Decker T, Kreh J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20151V901	List: IR 05000259/1988009 ML20151V897
References
50-259-88-09, 50-259-88-9, 50-260-88-09, 50-260-88-9, 50-296-88-09, 50-296-88-9, IEB-79-18, NUDOCS 8805030237
Download: ML20151V910 (6)

Text

_. . , _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _- _ _ _

i'

[,' [*- . +

~p pjt UNITED STATES

-'

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

" _

-

SIEGION 11

~[.. , , j 101 MARIETTA STREET. * * AT LANTA, G EORGI A 30323

%

' *****

/ APR 2 71988 Report Nos.: 50-259/88-09, 50-260/88 09, 50-296/88-09 Licensee: Tennessee Valley Authority 6N 38A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN ~37402-2801 Docket Nos.: 50-259, 50-260, 50-296 License Nos.: DPR-33, DPR-52, OPR-68 Facility Name: Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Inspection Condu 'ted: April 4-8, 1988 i Inspector: dVtN- , L. - - hf>nYe2A,/950 J , Kreh Date Sign'ed Approved by: >wes Je &&Z jffs T. R. Decker, Section Chief (Tate Sig'ned Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY

.,

Scope: This routine, announced inspection involved review and evaluation of the licensee's emergency preparedness progra Results: No violations or deviations were identified.

.,

u s

a

i j

l

i 8805030237 880427 PDR ADOCK 05000259

.. G DCD i

"^9 E _Y' n.-'tw y1-v vrw,,- Mm,--v---w---- , , - ,m-es 4g , , , , ,

. ..

.-

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees R. Albright, Supervisor, Field Operations Section, Radiological Control

• M. Bolch, Site Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manager

• Ivey, Compliance Specialist

• E. Kingery, Program Manager, Emergency Preparedness Branch (Corporate)

D. Maehr, Engineering Aide

"J. Martin, Assistant to Plant Manager W. Percle, Project Manager, Project Operations

• J. Savage, Compliance Manager

. *J. Walker, Plant Manager P. Welker, Shift Supervisor H. Williamson, Program Manager, Emergency Preparedness Branch (Corporate)

Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, operators, and office personnel, hRC Resident Inspectors

• C. Brooks

• E. Christnot

• G. Paulk

• Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on April 8,1988, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above. No dissenting comments were received from the licensee. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the material provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspectio . Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspection, Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures (82701)

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(16), 10 CFR 50.54(q), Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and Section 16 of the licensee's Radiological Emergency Plan (REP), this area was inspected to determine whether significant changes were made in the licensee's emergency preparedness program since the inspection in April 1987, and to assess the impact of any such changes on the overall state of emergency preparedness at the facilit *

. . - - _ _ _ _ _ ___ _

< ..

,

.-

The inspector reviewed the licensee's system for making :hanges to the REP and the Emergency Plan Implem9nting Procedures (EPIPs). The inspector verified that licensee management approved all revisions to the REP and EPIPs issued during the previous 12 months, and that Til such changes were submitted to the NRC within 30 days of the effective date, as require Controlled copies of the REP and EPIPs were inspected at the following locations: Units 1 and 2 Control Room, Technical Support Center ('SC),

Operations Support C. enter (OSC), Site Director's Office, Plant Mu49er's Office, REP Field Monitoring Van, and Health Station; all documents were found to oe current revision A significant improvement in the licensee's emergency preparedness program occurred with the implementation of the Automated Paging System (APS).

The REP staff was responsible for preparing and issuing a weekly duty roster which assigned pager duty and addressed all off-shift TSC and OSC positions defined in the EPIP The availability of off-duty plant personnel to respond following an emergency declaration was tested by means of weekly drills in which the APS was activated by the Shift Clerk at the direction of the REP Program Manage Other changes in the licensee's emergency preparedness program were in the areas of facilities and management, and are discussed below in Paragraphs 5 and 6, respectivel No violations or deviations were identifie . Emergency Facilities, Equipment, Instrumentation and Supplies (82701)

Pursuant to 3C CFR 50.47(b)(8) and (9),10 CFR 50.54(q), and 52ction I of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, this area was inspected to determine whether the licensee's emergency response facilities and other essential emergency 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 The inspector selectively examined emergency supplies and equipment in the Control Room (Units 1 and 2) and TSC, and concluded that they were being maintained in ha appropriate state of readiness. Documentation of the 13 quarterly inventories specified in EPIP-17 (Emergercy Equipment and Supplies) was selectively reviewed for the period of January 1987 through March 198 In addition, maintenance of TSC equipment, supnlies, and documents was addressed in Site Services Instruction Letter T-2; records of such maintenance for the period January 1987 'to February 1988 were reviewed by the inspecto Documentation of the referenced periodic eudits indicated that identified problems and deficiencies were resolved expeditiousl A major renovation nf the TSC was in progress during the inspectio Although the total area of the TSC was to be unchanged, the licensee expected that renovsl of a partition and rearrangement of the facility's layout would make more efficient use of the available spac Completion of the project was expected before April 30, 1988. During this period of

_ __. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

. .

. -

unavailability of the TSC for its intended function, the Plant Manager's of fice was designated as the backup TSC. (The fact that all three reactors were in a defueled condition while the TSC modification was occurring greatly reduced the probability that TSC activation would be required.)

No violations or deviations were identifie . Organization and Management Control (82701)

.,

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(1) and (16) and Section IV.A of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, this area was inspected to determine the effects of changes in the licensee's emergency response organization and/or management control systems on the emergency preparedness program, and to verify that such changes were properly factored into the REP and EPIP The organization and management of the emergency preparedness program were reviewed. As a result of a recent organizational change, the REP Program Manager reported to the Manager of Project Operations instead of the Director of Site Services (Site Services was abolished in the subject reorganization). This change had the effect of removing one level of management between the REP Program Manager and the Site Directo However, the Manager of Project Operations, while reporting to the Site Director, had a total of 11 program managers or supervisors reporting to him. The long-term impact of these changes on the emergency preparedness program will be assessed during future inspection '.

Personnel changes in certain plant management positions resulted in the reassignment of some key roles in the emergency response organizatio Selective review of training records of such personnel confirmed that requirements for their new positions in the emergency organization were

,

completed prior to actual assignment to these position No violations or deviations were identifie . Training (82701)

- Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(2) and (15),Section IV.F of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and REP Section 15.0, this area was inspected to determine whether the licensee's key emergency response personnel were properly trained and understood their emergency responsibilitie The inspector reviewed records of training required by the REP for a representative sample of persons assigned to the onsite emergency organization. Information obtained from the licensee's computerized record-retrieval system indicated that (for the sample chosen) personnel

were provided with training which was appropriate, in terms of content and 4 frequency, and consistent with the requirements of the governing procedure (Site Director Standard Practice 22.4).

- - - -,o - -- - - - wn ,, - - - .,n . .

._

The inspector conducteo an interview with one Shift Supervisor, who was given several sets of hypothetical emergency conditions and plant data and was asked in each case to talk through the response he would provide as Site Emergency Director if such conditions actually existe The individual demonstrated good understanding of the REP and associated implementing procedures. No problems were observed in the areas of event classification and protective action decision-makin No violations or deviations were identifie l Independent Reviews / Audits (S2701)

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14) and (16) and 10 CFR 50.54(t), this area was inspected to determine whether the licensee had performed an independent review or audit of the emergency prepredness program, and whether the licensee had a corrective action system for deficiencies and weaknesses identified during exercises and drill Records of emergency preparedness audits were reviewed. An independent audit was conducted by the Division of Nuclear Quality Assurance (DNQA)

during the period May 18-July 31, 1987, and was documented in Report No. QSS-A-87-0016, dated August 28, 198 That report identified 3 significant findings ("conditions adverse to quality," in the licensee's terminology) with regard to the Browns Ferry emergency preparedness program. Two of these findinos were closed by DNQA on January 21, 1988; corrective action for the other was being actively pursued by the license The referenced audit fulfilled the 12-month frequency requirement for such an audi The report provided evidence that the

"

State and local government interf aces were thoroughly evaluated. Audit findings and recommendations were presented to plant and corporate managemen Deficiencies identified during audits by DNQA and during drills and exercises by licensee evaluators were tracked for follow-up on a computer-based file known as the Activities Management and Oversight System (AMOS). The inspector determined that the licansee was effectively using AMOS as a managerent tool for ensuring the completion of corrective action for emergency preparedness problem No violations or deviations were identifie . Inspector Follow-up (92701) (Closad) Inspector Follow-up Item (IFI) 259, 260, 296/87-31-01:

Periodic verification tnat evacuation route signs are in plac According to licensee documentation, following replacement of a number of missing signs, all 94 required signs were verified to be in

place in Limestene and Morgan Counties. In addition, signs in

'

Lauderdale and Lawrence Counties were determined adequate (i.e., no

'

replacements were required). The inspector independently verified the presence of all required signs on several route A memo from

,

_ _ _ _ _ , .

. .

..

the State of Alabama's Emergency Management Agency to the emergency management coordinators of the 4 referenced counties requested that they provide the State with written procedures addressing the need to periodically check evacuation route signs and provide replacements as necessar b. (OPEN) IFI 259, 260, 296/87-39-02: Exercise Weakness -

Onsite personnel were not kept apprised of the emergency status. This item confirmed and updated past NRC findings regarding the inadequacy of the licensee's PA and emergency alarm system (source of requirements:

NRC Bulletin 79-18). The inspector discussed with cognizant management representatives the licensee's plans for replacing the present system with one that would provide coverage in all areas of the plant, including those with high noise level The project was still at the design stage; completion was expected by September 1989, but must, in any case, occur prior to the startup of Unit 3, in accordance with a commitment in TVA's Nuclear Performance Pla .

. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _