IR 05000280/1986008
| ML18149A092 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 04/09/1986 |
| From: | Decker T, Marston R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18149A091 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-86-08, 50-280-86-8, 50-281-86-08, 50-281-86-8, NUDOCS 8604210288 | |
| Download: ML18149A092 (7) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 Report Nos.:
50-280/86-08 and 50-281/86-08 Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company Richmond, VA 23261 Docket Nos.:
50-280 and 50-281 License Nos.:
DPR-32 and DPR-37 Facility Name:
Surry 1 and 2 Inspection Cond~ch 17-~d 26, Inspector: /£_~
t4.,{
R. Marston
~
Accompanying 1986 SUMMARY c:::>~ ~
~ ;5~-
ate Signed Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection involved 64 inspector-hours onsite in the area of emergency preparednes Results:
No violations or deviations were identifie a6o4210200 gig65~80 PDR AD0CK PDR G
- REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- R. F. Saunders, Plant Manager
- H. L. Miller, Assistant Plant Manager, Nuclear Safety and Licensing
- F. M. Cox, Supervisor, Emergency Planning, Corporate
- G. A. Polson, Coordinator, Emergency Planning, Corporate
- B. R. Parkhurst, Coordinator, Emergency Planning, Surry
- W. D. Grady, Supervisor, Quality Control
- W. Craft, Coordinator, Licensing, Surry Other licensee employees contacted included engineers, technicians, operators, mechanics, security force members, and office personne Other Organizations G. Urquhart, Department Environmental Services, State of Virginia M. Cline, Department of Health, Radiological Health, State of Virginia C. Thompson, Emergency Planning Coordinator, Surry County J. Holt, Chief, Volunteer Fire Department, Surry County NRC Resident Inspector
- M. Davis
- Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on March 21, 1986, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 abov The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection finding No dissenting comments were received from the license The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspectio.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspectio.
Emergency Detection and Classification (82201)
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(4) and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Sections I and IV.C, this program area was inspected to determine whether the licensee used and understood a standard emergency classification and action level schem *
The inspector reviewed the licensee's classification procedure The event classifications in the procedures were consistent with those required by regulatio The cl assifi cation procedures did not appear to contain impediments or errors which could lead to incorrect or untimely classificatio Selected emergency action levels (EALs) specified in the classification procedures were reviewe The reviewed EALs appeared to be consistent with the initiating events specified in Appendix 1 of NUREG-065 The inspector verified that the licensee's notification procedures included criteria for initiation of offsite notifications and for development of protective action recommendation The notification procedures required that offsite notifications be made promptly after declaration of an emergenc The inspector discussed with licensee representatives the coordination of EALs with state and local officials. Licensee documentation showed that the 1 i censee had discussed the EALs during July 1985, with State and 1 ocal officials, and that these officials agreed with the EALs used by the license The responsibility and authority for classification of emergency events and initiation of emergency action were prescribed in licensee procedures and in the emergency pla Selected Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures (EPIPs) were reviewed by the inspector and discussed with 1 icensee personne The EPIPs provided direction to users concerning timely classification of accident All personnel interviewed appeared to be familiar with the classification information in the EPIP Walk-through evaluations involving accident classification problems were conducted with three Shift Supervisor A 11 personne 1 interviewed classified the hypothetical accident situations presented to them, and appeared to be familiar with appropriate classification procedure No violations or deviations were identifie.
Protective Action Decision-Making (82202)
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(9) and (10) and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.D.3, this area was inspected to determine whether the licensee had 24-hour-per-day capability to assess and analyze emergency conditions and make recommendations to protect the public and onsite workers, and whether offsite officials had the authority and capability to initiate prompt protective action for the publi The inspector discussed responsibility and authority for protective action decision-making with licensee representatives and reviewed pertinent portions of the licensee's emergency plan and procedure The plan and
procedures cl early assigned res pons i bil ity and authority for accident assessment and protective action decision-makin No violations or deviations were identifie.
Notification and Communication (82203)
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(5) and (6) and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.D, this area was inspected to determine whether the licensee was maintaining a capability for notifying and communicating (in the event of an emergency) among its own personnel, offsite supporting agencies and authorities, and the population within.the EP The inspector reviewed the 1 i censee I s noti fi cation procedure The procedures were consistent with the emergency classification and EAL scheme used by the license The inspector determined that the procedures made provisions for message verificatio The inspector determined by review of applicable procedures and by discussion with 1 icensee representatives that adequate procedural means existed for alerting, notifying, and activating emergency response personne The procedures specified when to notify and activate the onsite emergency organization, corporate support organization, and offsite agencie Selected telephone numbers, which are considered to be proprietary are kept in the Coordinator of Emergency Preparedness 1 s office were checked in order to determine whether the listed numbers were current and correc No problems were note The content of initial emergency messages was reviewed and discussed with licensee representative The initial messages appeared to meet the guidance of NUREG-0654, Sections II.E.3 and II. Licensee representatives stated that the format and content of the initial emergency messages had been reviewed by State and local government authoritie The licensee 1s management control program for the prompt notification system was reviewe According to licensee documentation and discussions with licensee representatives, the system consisted of 48 fixed siren The licensee 1 s records for this system were kept in corporate headquarters and therefore were not reviewe Communications equipment in the Control Room and the Technical Support Center was inspecte Provisions existed for prompt communications among emergency response organizations, to emergency personnel and to the publi The installed communications systems at the emergency response facilities were consistent with system descriptions in the emergency plan and implementing procedures.
The inspector conducted operabi 1 i ty checks on selected communications equipment in the Technical Support Center and the Operational Support Cente No problems were observe Redundancy of offsite and onsite communications links was discussed with 1 i censee representative The inspector verified that the 1 i censee had established a backup communications syste The backup system made use of dedicated circuits, automatic ri ngdown systems, i nstaphone systems, and radio No violations or deviations were identifie.
Changes to the Emergency Preparedness Program (82204)
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(16), 10 CFR 50.54(q), and 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, Sections IV and V, this area was reviewed to determine whether changes were made to the program since the last routine inspection and to note how these changes affect the overall state of emergency preparednes The inspector discussed the licensee's program for making changes to the emergency p 1 an and imp 1 ementi ng procedure The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedures governing review and approval of changes to the plan and procedure The inspector verified that changes to the pl an and procedures were reviewed and approved by managemen It was also noted that all such changes were submitted to the NRC within 30 days of the effective date, as require Discussions were held with licensee representatives concerning recent modifications to facilities, equipment, and instrumentatio The organization and management of the emergency preparedness program were reviewe The inspector verified that there had been no significant change in the organization for the plant emergency planning staff since the last inspectio The inspector's discussion with the licensee representatives also disclosed that there have been changes in the organization and staffing of the offsite support agencies since the last inspectio The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for distribution of changes to the emergency plan and procedure No violations or deviations were identifie.
Knowledge and Performance of Duties (Training) (82206)
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(15) and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.F, this area was inspected to determine whether emergency response personnel understood their emergency response roles and could perform their assigned function The inspector reviewed the description (in the emergency plan) of the training program, training procedures, and selected lesson plans, and interviewed members of the instructional staff. Based on these reviews and interviews, the inspector determined that the licensee had not established a
,{-.
formal emergency training progra Most lesson plans were not available for review as the licensee was in the midst of revising the emergency preparedness training progra The lesson plans that were available were reviewed and appeared to be adequat Documentation was also reviewed which committed the licensee to have all of the lesson plans complete and approved by September of this yea This inspector followup item was discussed with the licensee and will be reviewed in a subsequent inspectio (50-280/86-08-01, 50-281/86-08-01)
Records of training for key members of the emergency organization for the period January 1985 to December 1985, were reviewe The training records revealed that personnel designated as alternates or given interim responsibilities in the emergency organization were provided with appropriate trainin The inspector conducted walk-through evaluations with selected key members of the emergency organizatio During these walk-throughs, individuals were given various hypothetical sets of emergency conditions and data and asked to discuss their response as if the emergency actually existe Walk-through evaluations involving protective action decision-making and other emergency duties were conducted with three Shi ft Supervisor Personnel interviewed appeared to be cognizant of appropriate onsi te protective measures and aware of the range of protective action recommendations appropriate to offsite protectio Personnel had difficulty in making protective action decisions for offsite protection, however, this appeared to be due to inadequate trainin The protective action recommendations made by the Shift Supervisors were not always consistent with each othe This inspector followup item was discussed with the licensee and will be reviewed during a subsequent inspectio (50-280,281/86-08-02)
IE Information Notice 85-80, 11Timely Deel arati on of an Emergency Cl ass, Implementation of an Emergency Pl an, and Emergency Notifi cati ans,U was discussed with the licensee and the notification procedures were reviewe Notifications are the responsibility of selected Control Room Operator The training records for these communicators were reviewed and appear to be adequat The inspector discussed emergency training, coordination, and communications with_ representatives of several offsite agencie These agencies included the Surry County Emergency Planning Office, the Surry County Volunteer Fire Department, the Department of Disaster Services (State of Virginia) and the Radiological Health Division of the State Health Departmen No problems were' noted in these areas; however, both State agencies did mention a problem with notificatio Both State agencies noted that sometimes the notifications were late, or the licensee failed to notify them upon termination of event Both State agency representatives have discussed these issues with the licensee and feel that they have been resolved in a satisfactory manne No violations or deviations were identifie.
Licensee Audits (82210)
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 preparedness progra Records of audits of the program were reviewe The records showed that an independent audit of the program was conducted by the Surry Plant Quality Control Group during August 1985, (ADM-02-04-10, #S85-04).
This audit fulfi 11 ed the 12-month frequency requirement for such audit The audit records showed that the State and 1 oca 1 government interfaces were evaluated, and the findings concerning the interfaces were made to State and local government authoritie Audit findings and recommendations were presented to plant and corporate managemen Three findings were made in the 1985 QA audit, the first (S85-04B) stated that EPIPs were not reviewed and updated on an annual basis, the second (S85-04C) identified that only 78% of licensee personnel were receiving their annual training and the third (S85-04A) stated that the deficiencies identified in the 1984 exercise had not been corrected in a timely manne S85-04B was corrected by September, S85-04A was closed out by October and S85-04C was corrected by January of 198 A review of past audit reports indicated that the licensee complied with the five-year retention requirement for such report The licensee's program for follow-up action on audits, drill, and exercise findings was reviewe Licensee procedures required follow-up on deficient areas identified during audits, drills, and exercise No violations or deviations were identifie.
Inspector Follow-up (92701) (Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item (IFI) 84-EP-01:
Review EALs for NOUE, Alert, Site Area Emergency, and General Emergency based on PNLs plan review of November 198 Classification tables were reviewed and found to be consistent with Appendix 1 of NUREG-065 (Closed) IFI 85-EP-01:
Verify State of Virginia officials notified following Unusual Event of July 23, 198 Notification procedure for the event showed that notification was made in 13 minute (Closed) IFI 85-16-02:
Formal system for documenting individualized training for new members of the emergency organizatio The individualized program was placed on computer diskette and was reviewed by the inspector.