IR 05000259/1990016
| ML18033B361 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 05/30/1990 |
| From: | Rankin W, Testa E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18033B360 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-259-90-16, 50-260-90-16, 50-296-90-16, NUDOCS 9006140480 | |
| Download: ML18033B361 (16) | |
Text
~pit REC Iii Vp0 os
~ '->
gO
+w*w+
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTASTREET, N.IN.
ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30323 Report Nos.:
50-259/90-16, 50-260/90-16, and 50-296/90-16 Licensee:
Tennessee Valley Authority 6N 38A Lookout Place 1101 Yiarket Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801 Docket Nos.:
50-259, 50-260 and 50-296 License Nos.:
DPR-33, DPR-52, and DPR-68 Facility Name:
Browns Ferry 1, 2, and
Inspection Conducted:
Yiay 7-11, 1990 inspector:
W.
ski, I7~
E.
D. Testa Approved by:
W.
H. Rankin, Chief, Emergency Preparedness Section Emergency Preparedness and Radiological Protection Branch Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguar ds
~o" s eppes Date Signed
~+3o/fo Date Signed SUYYiARY Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted in the area of emergency preparedness, and included review of the following programmatic elements:
(1) Padiological Emergency Response Plan and its implementing procedures; (2) emergency facilities, equipment, instrumentation, and supplies; (3) organization and management control; (4) training; and (5) independent reviews/audits.
Results:
In the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identified.
The emergency preparedness program received adequate management support.
Emergency response facilities, equipment, and supplies were properly maintained.
Training of emergency response personnel as inspected was effective.
The requirements and commitments addressed by the emergency preparedness program were effectively managed by the licensee's staff.
Records of program activities were maintained and auditable.
The annual independent Emergency Preparedness audit was detailed and comprehensive.
The findings of this inspection indicated that the licensee was adequately prepared to respond to a radiological emergency at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant.
9OIggy4O4ciO POO530 pDF,.
pDOCK OsOOO259 pile
REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- J. Barnes, Audit Manager
- C. Beasley, Communications
- C. Bosley, Quality Assurance Audit Specialist
- J. Carlin, Plant Operations
- L. Clardy, Quality Assurance
- T. Cornelius, Emergency Preparedness Yianager
- R. Grantham, Electrical Engineer
- B. Yarks, Yianager, Emergency Preparedness Program
- R. Mitter, Quality Assurance Evaluator
- N. Yioon, Chemistry Technical Support
- B. Morris, Site Programs
- L. Myers, Plant Yanager
- A. Sorrell, Maintenance Superintendent
- P. Salas, Compliance Licensing Supervisor
- W. Smith, Quality Assurance Specialist
'W.
Thomison, Technical Support
- F. Tsakeres, Acting Radcon Superintendent
- J. Wallace, Compliance, Site Licensing Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included craftsmen, engineers, operators, mechanics, security force members, technicians, and administrative personnel.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- D. Collins, Branch Chief
- W. Little, Section Chief
- C. Patterson, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures (82701)
Pursuant to
CFR 50.47(b)(16),
CFR 50.54(q),
and Appendix E to
CFR Part 50, this area was reviewed to determine whether changes were made to the program since the last routine inspection (April 1989),
and to assess the impact of these changes on the overall state of emergency preparedness at the facility.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for making changes to the Radiological Emergency Plan (REP)
and the Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures (EPIPs).
A review-of selected licensee records confirmed that all changes to the REP and EPIPs since March 1989 were approved by
0
management ano submitted to the NRC within 30 days of the effective date, as required.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's action in response to the following Information Notices ( INs)
and founo the licensee had appropriately considered the applicability of the Information Notice to their facility and had taken appropriate action.
IN No.
IN 90-08 IN 89-89
.
~TO ic Kr-85 Hazard from Decayed Fuel Event Notification Worksheet Failure of Licensed Senior Operators to Classify Emergency Events Properly Confidentiality of Exercise Scenarios Health Physics Network Controlled copies of the Emergency Telephone Directory, Radiological Emergency Plan, and EPIPs were audited in the Control Room, Technical Support Center (TSC),
and the Central Emergency Control Center (CECC).
The selected documents examined were found to be a current revision.
The inspector reviewed the August 29, 1989, correspondence from the Alabama Department of Health discussing the State's review of the Browns Ferry Emergency Action Levels.
The State found the EALs to be sufficient and had no recommendations for change at that time.
The Narch 9, 1990, corres'pondence on this subject also found the revised EALs adequate.
The inspector reviewed selected emergency declarations made by the licensee since the last inspection of Yiarch 1989.
All were classified as a Notification of Unusual Event (NOUE).
Review of the Emergency Action Level (EAL) Classification procedure and conditions prompting the
'lassification indicated that the classifications for events were made promptly, correctly and that timely offsite notification had been made.
The inspector reviewed AO 100-7,
"Tornado Abnormal Operating Instruction,"
and Site Director Standard Practice (SDSP)
22. I, "Tornado Procedure"'hich were created when EPIP-18,
"Tornado Emergency Procedure" was deleted.
During the review of the SDSP 22. 1 the inspector noticed an incorrect reference to the deleted EPIP-18.
An NCR was immediately prepared to correct the identified incorrect reference.
This was identified as an Inspector Followup Item (IFI).
IFI 50-259, 260, 296/90-16-01:
Provide a detailed explanation of the root cause associated with the incorrect reference to the deleted EPIP-18 found in SDSP 22.1 No violations or deviations were identifie Emergency Facilities, Equipment, Instrumentation, and Supplies (82701)
Pursuant to
CFR 50.47(b)(8)
and (9),
CFR 50.54(q),
and Section IV.E of Appendix E. to
CFR Part 50, this area was inspected to determine whether the licensee's emergency response facilities (ERFs)
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 program.
The inspector toured the licensee's ERFs, including the Control Room, TSC, Operational Support Center (OSC),
Backup Control Room, Decontamination Facilities in the Service Building and Radwaste Building, First Aid Station, and CECC.'he facilities and emergency equipment therein appeareo to be maintained in an appropriate state of readiness.
According
. to observations by the inspector and statements by licensee representatives, no significant changes in the facilities were made since the last inspection.
The inspector selectively reviewed the licensee's documentation of required equipment and supp1ies inventory and maintenance records (EPIP-17).
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Attachment Radcon Emergency Equipment Service Building 565'mergency Use Pressure-Demand Self-Contained Respiratory Equipment Emergency Room Supplies Van Emergency Equipment Van Instrument Kit OSC Staging Area Radcon Emergency Equipment Control Building 617'SC Cabinet TSC Cabinet
~Fre uenc quarterly Monthly quarterly
'uarterly quarterly quarterly quarterly quarterly quarterly Inventory records were complete and equipment supplies were maintained as listed on the attachments.
The i'nspector reviewed the licensee's documentation of required monthly communications tests in the TSC and OSC for the period March 1989 to April 1990.
According to the records and selective operational checks by the inspector, the communication lines in the facilities were maintained satisfactorily.
The inspector viewed the first of four new Environmental Monitoring Vans and the new Screening Van.
The vans were roomy, well 1ayed out and attention given to the ergonomics of their intended us The inspector selectively reviewed test records for the Prompt Notification System (PNS) sirens.
The siren availability for the entire year of 1989 was observed to be 95.2 percent.
The system consisted of 99 fixed sirens.
The licensee was in the process of final acceptance testing for a
computerized data logger and feedback system to monitor the activation and operability of the PNS.
The inspector reviewed the oper ation of the interim SPDS.
CRD displays in the Control Room and two displays in the TSC were observed.
Training was being conducted and the inspector observed the user friendly capabilities of the demonstration parameters currently installed.
A selective review of the licensee's agreement letters for hospitals, ambulance support, and offsite Fire Department Support found them to be current.
No violations or"deviations were identified.
Organization and Yanagement Control (82701)
Pursuant to
CFR 50.47(b)(l)
and (16) and Section IV.A of Appendix E to
CFR Part 50, this area was inspected to determine the effects of any chanoes in the licensee's emergency response organizati,on and/or management control systems of 'the emergency preparedness program and to verify that such changes properly factored into the REP and EPIPS.
The organization and management of the emergency preparedness program were reviewed and discussed with a licensee representative.
The reporting chain for the Emergency Preparedness Coordinator has been changed.
The old reporting organization had the Emergency Preparedness Yianager reporting to the Site Programs Manager and then to the Site Director.
The new organization has the Emergency Preparedness Manager reporting to the Site Programs Yianager (vacant)
then to the Site Programs 5 Support Yanager and then to the Site Director.
Significant key onsite organizational changes included a
new plant manager who had been in his current position about six weeks and who had not yet been Site Emergency Director (SED)
trained nor had he participated in an exercise.
Additional key changes included a
new Operations Manager, who was SED trained, and had participated in one training drill and a
new Technical Support Manager, who was not. yet fully trained, and who had not yet participated in any drills.
The current REP Manager was appointed to his present position in December 1989.
Prior to his current position he was the REP Project Engineer.
The current REP Project Engineer was previously in Site gA and HP and began his EP job in March 1990.
These changes in management will be further evaluated during the Browns Ferry exercise in September of this year.
Offsite in Landerdale County the Assistant Director is temporarily filling the County Emergency Director position.
A new Alabama Emergency Management Agency Director has been appointe The corporate support organization has undergone a reduction in force (RIF) from
persons during the last inspection to 12 persons.
The impact of this change was not directly visible.
The shift of responsibility for the exercise scenario from the corporate organization to the site organization has occurred but no exercises have yet been observed.
Other changes brought about by the reduction in force include a
reassignment of the Communication Testing to the Telecommunication oroup.
The inspector reviewed the records of the following drills:
A~i April 12, 1989 Yay 31, 1989 October 5, 1989 November 1, 1989 5:00 p.m. start 5:00 p.m. start 8:30 a.m. start 8:30 a.m. start A
bi 1~F0 F11 April 12, 1989 Nay 31, 1989 October 5, 1989 November 1, 1989 5:00 p.m. start 5:00 p.m. start 8:30 a.m. start 8:30 a.m. start The records indicated that augmentation times and accountability times were accomplished within REP committed time limits.
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Independent Review/Audits (82701)
Pursuant to
CFR 50.47(b)(14)
and (16)
and
CFR 50.54(t), this area was inspected to determine whether the licensee had performed an independent review of the audit of the emergency preparedness program, and whether the licensee has a corrective action system for deficiencies and weaknesses identified during exercise and drills.
Records of emergency preparedness audits were reviewed.
An independent audit conducted by the Oivision of Nuclear guality Assurance (DN(A) was reviewed.
The audit report was documented in Report No.
SSA 89909, dated July 14, 1989.
The report identified no significant findings ( 'conditions adverse to quality" ) in the licensee's terminology with regard to the Browns Ferry Emergency Preparedness Program.'he referenced audit fulfilled the 12-month frequency requirements for such an audit.
The report provided evidence that the State and local government interface was properly evaluated.
Audit findings and recommendations were presented to plant and corporate management.
The inspector reviewed the experience and background of the independent EP audit team and found them well qualified in the EP area to perform an indepth audit of the program.
Items
'identified in the audit and drill and exercise critiques were followed for close-out on the Activities management and Oversight System (AYOS).
The inspector, by reviewing a
Nay 8, 1990 printout, determined that the licensee was effectively using AYOS as a management tool for ensuring the timely completion and corrective action for emergency preparedness problems.
The part of the audit involving the evaluations for adequacy of interface with State and local governments was transmitted to the State of Alabama (Radiological Health Branch and Alabama Emergency Nanagement Agency)
by letter on August"14, 1989.
The EP annual audit scheduled for Nay 7-25, 1990, was being conducted at Browns Ferry during the inspection week.
The inspector reviewed the audit checklist for audit number SS A90008
"Radiological Emergency Preparedness and Neteorological,Nonitoring (7A)" and found the checklist questions detailed and comprehensive.
The inspector contacted the State and one of the local counties to access their workino relationship with the licensee.
The working relationship was characterized by both as effective and technically supportive.
The inspector reviewed the critique items identified during the following drills:
April 12, 1989 Nay 31, 1989 September 20, 21, 1989 Drill critiques appeared to be detailed and in depth and identified items were actively pursued for closeout.
No violations or deviations were identified.
Training (82701)
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(2)
and (15), and Section IV.F Of Appendix E to
CFR Part 50, this area was inspected to determine whether the licensee's key emergency response personnel were properly trained and understood their emergency responsibilities.
The inspector reviewed the Technical Assessment training module and exam (EPT 122.000)
and the Direction and Control REP Overview Nodule and Exam (SED)
(EPT 110.000).
The training module and exams adequately covered the EP material.
The inspector observed three interviews of Shift Operations Supervisors (SOSs).
The interviews were conducted as part of the EP annual audit and included Unit 2 SOSs from day, night and graveyard shifts.
The SOS was
given different sets of hypothetical emergency conditions and plant data by the gA auditor, and the SOS was asked in each case to talk through the response he would provide as Site Emergency Director if such conditions actually existed.
The individual demonstrated a comprehensive knowledge of the REP and Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures.
No difficulties were observed in the areas of event classification, protective action decision-making and notification procedures.
The inspector reviewed training records for 25 individuals randomly selected from names appearing on the April 9, 1990 Revision to EPIP
Radiological Emergency Personnel Call List.
All selected personnel had met the training requirement of their assigned Emergency Duty Function.
No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Action on Previous Inspection Finding (92701)
There were no open items to be reviewed.
8.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on Yiay 11, 1990, with those persons indicated in Paragraph l.'lthough proprietary information was reviewed during this inspection, none is contained in this report.
Dissenting comments were not received from the licensee.
Item Number 50-259, 260, 296/90-16-01
~Di i
dR IFI - Provide a detailed explanation of the root cause associated with the incorrect reference to the deleted EPIP-18 found in SDSP 22. 1 (Paragraph 2).
0