IR 05000293/1978028
| ML19282B196 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 01/18/1979 |
| From: | Bores R, Stohr J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19282B193 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-293-78-28, NUDOCS 7903090352 | |
| Download: ML19282B196 (3) | |
Text
.
,
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No.
50-293/78-28 Docket No.
50-293 License No. DPR-35 Priority Category e
-
Licensee:
Boston-Edison Company M/C Nuclear 800 Boylston Street Boston, Massachusetts 02199 Facility Name:
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Inspection at:
Plymouth, Massachusetts Inspection conducted: December 13 and 14,1978 Inspectors:
d/-/B-7f R. J. dres, Radiation Specialist date signed date signed date signed Approved by:
/!/S
J. P.
odr, CI11e'f, Environmental &
'date' signed Sp cial Projects Section Inspection Summary:
Inspection on December 13 & 14,1978 (Report No. 50-293/78-28)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, announced inspection limited to the observation of a licensee conducted radiation emergency drill and review of emergency field monitoring instrumentation.
The inspection involved nine onsite inspector-hours by one NRC regionally based inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance wer~e identified.
79030903 N Region I Fonn 12 (Rev. April 77)
.
DETAILS 1.
Individuals Contacted Principal Licensee Employees
- P. McGuire, Pilgrim Station Manager
- H. Balfour, Methods, Compliance and Training Group Leader M. Hensch, Chief Radiological Engineer The inspector also interviewed several other licensee personnel including drill participants and drill observers.
- denotes those present at exit interview on December 14, 1978 2.
Emergency Drill a.
Pre-Drill Activities Prior to the initiation of the drill, the inspector discussed the nature and scope of the drill scenerio with the cognizant licensee representative to verify the adequacy.
The scenerio involved a simulated break in the extraction steam line to the "B", 1st point heater with offsite release consequences and a simulated injury to an employee. The inspector noted that outside support agencies were notified of the drill; the Commonwealth of Massachusetts participated in the scenario; and the U.S. Coast Guard sent a representative to the site to observe the drill.
The inspector noted that the drill had been unannounced to the licensee to the extent that the drill scenario, date, and time of the drill were known only to the drill observers, the NRC inspector, and a limited number of licensee higher management personnel, b.
Drill Observation During the drill the NRC inspector made detailed observations of the following activities:
(1) Control Room actions concerning the detection and response to the simulated emergency conditions; (2) Notification of plant personnel and offsite agencies; (3) Plant evacuation; (4) Assessment actions;
.
'
-
.
(5) Preparation and dispatch of re-entry and offsite monitoring teams; (6) Comunications; and (7) Coordination and control of response actions.
c.
Drill Results The inspector attended a post-drill critique, during which the drill observers, several participants and the NRC inspector discussed the drill results and highlighted areas of recommended improvements.
Items discussed by the inspector included:
(1) Timeliness of survey of ECC; (2) Consideration of the time factor in removing injured from a radiation area; (3) Counting of air samples in high background areas; (4) Sample time determination with respect to plume velocity for offsite air samples; and (5) Good use of dose isopleths, overlays, status board and multicopy records in ECC.
Based on the licensee's demonstrated perfomance during the drill, the inspector determined that the response objectives of the licensee's Emergency Plan could be effectively met.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Discussion of Emergency Plan and Procedures The inspector discussed with the licensee the licensee's plans for upgrading the current Emergency Plans / procedures and equipment.
The licensee stated that the current documents were being reviewed and that other sampling / analytical / survey instrumentation were being evaluated.
The licensee stated that when these evaluations / reviews are completed, appropriate modifications in terms of procedures and equipment would be implemented.
The licensee anticipated that the full implementation would be completed by June or July 1979.
The inspector had no further questions in this area at this time.
4.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in Detail 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on December 14, 1978.
The inspector discussed the purpose, scope and findings of this inspection.