IR 05000302/1977024
| ML19319D031 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 01/30/1978 |
| From: | Gibson G, Hufman J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19319D003 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-302-77-24, NUDOCS 8003040954 | |
| Download: ML19319D031 (15) | |
Text
f
.
<>..
-
..
.
l ( ],)
[
pshp #8eg UNITED STATES
o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
g v
o REGION 11
.E 230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.W. SulTE 818
-
I
~
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 s...../
Report No.: 50-302/77-24 Docket No.: 50-302 License No.: CPR-72 Licensee: Florida Power Corporation P. O. Box 14042 St. Petersburg, Florida 33733 i
Facility Name: Crystal River 3 Inspection at: Crystal River site, Crystal River, Florida
,
Inspection conducted: December 5-9, 1977 and January 11-12, 1978
,
Inspector:
G. T. Gibson l
Reviewed by:
J.)
o,.a n
'b'
J. \\W.HuflymhChief Date En$ronmenta(land Special Projacts Section Fuel lacility and Materials Safety Branch Inspection Summary Inspection on December 5-9, 1977 and January 11-12, 1978 (Report No. 50-302/77-24)
Areas Inspected: Routine unannounced confirmatory measurements and emergency planning inspection including: examination of equipment, instrumentation and procedures relating to radiochemistry; collection of effluent samples for future comparison of analytical results; examination of results of simulated effluent samples; review of emergency plans and emergency plan implementing procedures; examination of emergency equipment, instruments and supplies; examination of first aid supplies; examination of fire protection equipment and supplies; review of records on tests and drills; discussions with offsite support agency personnel and review of associated '.etters of agreement. The inspection involved 44 man-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: Of the ten areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in five areas; six apparent items of noncompliance (infraction - failure to maintain and implement emergency telephone numbers and emergency plan action levels - paragraph 5; infraction -
failure to have required emergency equipment - paragraph 6; infraction -
failure to adequately staff fire brigade - paragraph 8; infract'on -
fg failure to adequately train and staff emergency survey teams - paragraph (d
)
9; infraction - failure to perform required drills - paragraph 10;
'
deficiency - failure to perform required laboratory equipment calibrations -
paragraph 12) were identified in five areas.
8003040fQ G
&
.
.
'
.
7'N RII Rpt. No. 50-302/77-24 I-1
_
DETAILS I
~ Prepared by:
,A y Y-
-'
-
NY~M G. T. Oibg, Rg61ation Specialist Date Environmefftal and Special Projects Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Dates of Inspection: Dacember 5-9, 1977 Reviewed by:
(ds l M N J
. Hufham,M f
Data E
ronmental an pecial Projects Section Fue Facility and terials Safety Branch 1.
Persons Contacted i
FPC - Crystal River
- G. P. Beatty, Nuclear Plant Manager
- P. F. McKee, Assistant Nuclear Plant Manager
- J. R. Wright, Chem / Rad Protection Engineer O
- J. L. Buakner, Officer of the Guard
- T. C. Lutkehaus, Maintenance Engineer
, l
- J. L. Harrison, Assistant Chem / Rad Protection Engineer l
- G. C. Perkins, Health Physics Supervisor
- D. W. Pedrick, Compliance Engineer j
T. H. Wayble, Nuclear Shift Supervisor D. Slaughter, Shift Supervisor, Crystal River Units 1 and 2 H. L. Watson, Lieutenant, Office of the Guard i
L. Kelly, Compliance Auditor, Assistant Fire Brigade Chief I
The inspector also interviewed twelve other Crystal River employees
during the course of the inspection. They included health physics
'
technicians, operating staff-members of the security force, and general office personnel.
- Denotes those present at exit interview.
FPC - Corporate W. P. Stewart, Director Power Production Q. B. Dubois, Manager Offsite Support Offsite Support Agencies Ulray Clark, Director, Radiological Health, Florida Division l
of Health and Rehabilitative Services (DHRS)
'
Wallace Johnson, Director, Radiological Laboratory, DHRS Jerry Aikens, Public Health Physics, DHRS i
l
.
._..
_
-
.
_- -
--
.-
,
b
.
-
.-
t,
'
REI Rpt. No. 50-302/77-24
. I-2
,
!
'
2. -
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings No previous items of noncompliance or deviations were reviewed within the scope of this inspection.
l 3.
Unresolved Itsas I
No unresolved items or deviations were identified during
'
this inpsection.
,
,
4.
Coordination with Offsite Support Agencies i
a.
The inspector reviewed with licensee personnel the statum of the letters of agreement between FPC and the offsite agencies specified in the Emergency Plan. These agencies include:
(1) ' Florida Division of Health' and Rehabilitative Services
,
,
l (2) Shands Teaching Hospital, Gainsville, Florida i
~
(3) USDOE, Savannah River Operations
,
'
(4) Citrus Memorial Hospital, Inverness, Florida
$
b.
The inspector determined the licensee has agreements with these agencies which have provisions for automatic renewal
.!
annually. The inspector noted the letters of agreement were
originally executed in 1974. Licensee personnel stated that in future renewals of these offsite agreements, a letter of
'
renewal or confirmation would be requested. This item will be examined further during a subsequent inspection.
(77-24-01)
c.
The inspector noted the licensee met with the offsite support
>
,
agencies in March 1977, during the annual emergency exercise
{
as required by Emergency Plan Section 7.3.
The inspector had no further questions regarding this item.
i d.
The inspector contacted by telephone the offsite support l
agency personnel specified in Section I.
The inspector dis-
'
cussed with the DHRS personnel the assistance to FPC which DHRS ve ad provide under the current letter of agreement. The
.
DHRS personnel contacted expressed satisfaction with the
)
delineation of responsibility and support received from FPC.
l The inspector had no further question regarding this item.
w Tr-r wm-ww
-
en+-'
m--
-
-e,w,
-y g
a+'me
- - - -
Tg1'
wmd-m-w'
---ev+
.
.
_.
.
._
_
_
, _ _
. _ _ _ _
_
.
L
^
.
.
,
,
.
-
'
s
%s,)
.
.
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/77-24 I-3
.
!
5.
Emergency Plans and Procedures
The inspector reviewed the emergency plan and implementing
a.
proc edures. - The inspector noted the plan and procedures were.
,
reviewed in, and changes have not been made since, March 1977.
i b.
The inspector examined the Emergency Procedures, EM-200
!
series. -The inspector compared selected requirements of the emergency plan with the implemention specified in the asso-ciated EM procedure. The inspector noted the following items:
i
)
(1) Section 3.1.1 of the Emergency Plan specifies that during an emergency the Emergency Coordinator shall call appro-
)
priate individuals or agencies listed in the Emergency
'
,
t Roster. However, the inspector, as discussed with licensee
personnel, noted the following errors in the EM-206,
'
" Emergency Plan Roster and Notification," Emergency j
Roster call numbers as follows:
I
.
.
I (a)
Mr. Guy Beatty, Jr. - home number
'
(b)
Mr. J. P. Alberdi - no longer Manager of Offsite
-
Support.
(2)
EH-206, Section 3.1, requires an annual review of the telephone numbers to assure correct listings. The listings were last reviewed in March 1977.
.
(3) Section 4.5.4.c of the Emergency Plan specifies action to
be initiated when an unplanned gaseous release exceeds
1.2 x 10~7 tci/ce. However, EH-203 " Classification of Emergencies and Criteria for Evacuation," did not contain such an action level.
(4) Technical Specification 6.8.1.e requires the licensee to j
establish, implement, and maintain procedures covering Emergency Plan implementation. The licensee's imple-i mentation of the Emergency Plan with Emergency Procedures
- ~
was inadequate, in that:
(a) EM-206, Section 3.1, was not adequate to maintain current telephone listings; and
,
(b) EM-203 did not implement Emergency Plan Section
i 4.5.4.c.
This constitutes an item of noncompliance with
'
the referenced Technical Specification.
(77-24-02)
The inspector reviewed the licensee's EM-200 series procedure c.
to ascertain conformance with NRC regulatory guides and stan-
,
dards. The inspector noted the licensee has made several i
_ procedural directives, as tcilows:
1.
J
..
,
. -,, - -, -
,, - - ~, -,
.w,
--,
.
. -..
, -,. - -... _ _ _ - - - _ -
,,.... _ m
.._-_.,___-.-~_...--.~m-~
..
'
a
-
.
.
.
.
N
{G
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/77-24 I-4
-
.
(1) EM-204 " Dose Assessment by Use of Meteorological Over-lays" utilizes a conversion factor of 252 Rads /hr per
Ci/m, which is apparently conservative by an approximate order of magnitude. This conservative factor is incorpo-rated into the whole body dose by including the beta skin dose in the whole body dose.
.
i (2) EM-203 and EM-204 utilize a 16900 Ci inventory of Xel33 for the " Fuel Handling Accident" analysis as presented in the PSAR Table 14-25. However, the licensee did not utilize the more conservative 22000 Ci Xe133 inventory postulated for this accident by the NRC in the FSAR Table 14-25A. Licensee personnel stated they would review this item to determine if the NRC design basis
" Fuel Handling Accident" was more appropriate for incor-poration into EM-203 and EM-204. This iten will be examined during a subsequent inspection.
(77-24-03)
6.
Equipment and Instrumentation
'g a.
The inspector examined the equipment and instrumentation to be
-
]
utilized during emergency operations. These items include:
emergency kits, meteorological systems, process monitors, general supplies, and other related items. The inspector examined the licensee's program as follows:
(1) Emergency Plan Sections 1.0, 4.6. 2. 7. c., 6.1, and 6.3 specify equipment and applicable materials to be avail-able at selected locations. The inspector noted the following items were not available as specified:
(a) Emergency Assembly Center (EAC)
(1) Copy of Emergency Plan (ii) Base Radio Station for communication on channel I with oil barge traffic (iii) Portal Monitor (iv) Decontamination kit (v) Emergency Environmental Survey Team Vehicle during backshift operation.
(vi) Monitoring Kit 1 - High Range Instrument
-
e
-
.
..
,m RII Rpt. No. 50-302/77-24 I-5
-
(b) Fossil Plant Control Room - Copy of Emergency Plan (c) Fossil Plant Water Laboratory - Copy of applicable Emergency Procedures.
(2) Technical Specification 6.8.1.c requires the licensee to establish, implement, and maintain procedures covering Emergency Plan implementation. Failure to implement the inventory requirements specified in (1) above. constitutes an item of noncompliance with the referenced Technical Specification.
(77-24-04)
(3) Prior to the completion of the inspection, the inspector noted the licensee had initiated action to comply with the inventory requirements. These actions are as follows:
(a) EAC (i) Copy of Emergency Plan placed in Security Office
\\
(ii) Portal Monitor is awaiting replacement parts (iii) Decontamination Kit - returned to EAC (iv) High Range Instrument returned to Monitoring Kit 1.
{
(b) Fossil Plant Control Room - copy of Emergency Plan placed in control room i
i (c) Fossil Plant Water Laboratory - copy of applicable Emergency Procedures placed in laboratory.
b.
The inspector examined the licensee's meteorological equipment and instrumentation. The inspector noted the equipment was adequate to implement Di-204. The inspector presented to the
'
licensee an NRC analysis of the calibration electronics for a similar type meteorological system for which the NRC determined errors in anemometer calibration might result. The licensee stated the information would be evaluated to determine if a similar problem exists in the Crystal River meteorological system. This item will be examined further during a subsequent inspection.
(77-24-05)
The inspector examined the communications network which the c.
licensee nill utilize in an emergency. The inspector noted
_
\\
l
__
.. _.
.
.
,
. *
@:
i
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/77-24 I-6
~
.
,
the licensee has three (3) normal telephone lines, which is being expanded to six (.6) lines in January,1978. In addi-tion, the licensee has six (6) microwave telephone lines from the facility to FPC and the FPC automatic, switchboard for outcalls. The inspector observed the licensee's mobile
,'
communication network and base stations. The inspector had no further questions regarding this item.-
d.
Food
'
The inspector examined the licensee's control room refri-gerated food locker, to be utilized in the event of a control room isolation. The locker appeared to be adequately supplied.
The inspector had no questions regarding this item.
e.
Isolation of Control Room Ventilation
'
l The inspector determined the licensee has installed HEPA i
filters to process the control room ventilation during an
~ l emergency. In addition, the inspector noted emergency light-
'
ing from vital D.C. buses was installed.
The inspector had no questions regarding these items.
7.
Medical The inspector noted the licensee has a first aid facility a.
located inplaat. The first aid room is supplied with materials needed to provide general emergency medical care until the 4 -
victim can be transported to a hospital. The onsite first aid room is maintained by an individual who has received extensive
,
first aid training.- The facilities were evaluated as adequate to implement the medical procedures of EM-213 " Medical Emergency Procedures." The inspector had no further questions regarding this item.
l l
b.
The licensee has agreements with two offsite medical facili-I ties, as follows:
l
(1) The Shands Teaching Hospital of the University of Florida,
Cainesville, Florida, is the facility which will treat radiological injuries. As discussed in Section 10.a. the annual drill included participatioh of Shands Hospital.
(2) Citrus Memorial Hospital in Inverness, Florida is the f
' facility for non-radiological injuries. The hospital ( _
will not treat any radiation accident victims.
i!'
!
.
s
--s--=
.
.
,. - -.. - - -,
w
,.,w
- -
-4-
-
,-..g
-,,,-
,
--,a-v-y%-,,w y-
,&wy-g
-
.-
.
. -
.
-,.
O RII Rp t. No. 50-302/77-24 I-7
.
The inspector noted that the' Seven Rivers Community Hospital c.
is being built near the entrance to the FPC property on US 19.
The inspector discussed with licensee personnel the advantages of incorporating the new hospital into the FPC emergency plan.
Licensee personnel stated a review would be made of possible inclusion of the new hospital into the emergency program.
This item is considered an open inspection item.
(77-24-06)
8.
Fire Protection k
-
a.
The inspector discussed with licensee personnel the FPC response to the NRC, Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) Branch Technical Position on Fire Protection. The licensee repre-
,
sentatives stated that final plans and procedures relating to the NRR response and associated fire technical specifications would be completed after the NRR site visit in January 1978.
This item will be examined further during a subsequent inspec-tion.
(77-24-07)
b.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's emergency procedure EM-216
" Duties of the Nuclear Plant Fire Brigade." In addition, the
'
inspector reviewed staffing records of backshif t operations
'
relating to the fire brigade. The inspector noted there were apparent occasions when two (2) shif ts had only one (1)
member of the shif t who was a fire brigade member. Section 3.2.8 of the Emergency Plan specifies that the fire brigade shall be self-reliant. Emergency Procedure EM-216, Section 3.4 states that each fire brigade should consist of persons who have received specified training.
EM-216, Section 12, states the fire brigade will implement actions to effectively handle the fire emergency. Technical Specification 6.8.1.c requires writtca procedures to be established, implemented, and maintained covering Emergency Plan implementation. The failure to have an adequate backshif t staffing of the fire brigade constitutes an item of noncompliance with the referenced Technical Specification.
(77-24-08)
i c.
Af ter the conclusion of the inspection, discussions regarding the staffing and training of the fire brigade were held between i
FPC and NRC:IE:RII. In a letter, dated December 15, 1977, to
!
FPC, the NRC summarized the current status of the FPC fire brigade staffing:
(1) Each shift now has a minimum of 3 qualified fire brigade
-
members on duty, in addition to the number of persons required for the safe operation or shutdown of the plant, (_,/
or required for radiation monitoring associated with a postulated fir. _.
~
.
,,
. -.
.
-
..
.
,
_~
s
,.
\\
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/77-24 I-8
-
,.
(2) A procedure for recalling additional personnel, qualified in accordance with procedure EM-216, was implemented on December 13, 1977, to assure backup support for the on duty fire brigade. The effectiveness of this procedure will be tested weekly until implementation of the NRR l
approved fire protection plan.
d.
In addition to the items specified in c above, the NRC received from FPC the following commitments:
i-(1) One-half of the fire brigade personnel received 4-hours on-site fire training on the 4-12 shift December 14, 1977; the remaining half received, 4-hour on-site train-ing during the 8-4 shift December 15, 1977.
(2) A 4-day on-site fire training course would begin on December 19, 1977 for fire brigade members not currently qualified.
(3) All required on-site training would be completed by December 23, 1977 to meet minimum staffing of 3 fire
-
brigade members per shift.
,
(4) Fire Brigade members who have not had State Fire College (Ocala, Florida) training will be scheduled, in groups,
,
for that training. The first group will start the Ocala training on February 1, 1978.
l The items specified in sections e and d above were examined e.
during a subsequent inspection on January 11 and 12, 1978, which is discussed in Details II of this report.
9.
Emergency Teams The inspector reviewed the licensee's methods of determination a.
and quantification of an emergency. The inspector reviewed
<
EM-203, EM-204, " Duties of the Radiation Emergency Team" (RET)
and EM-210, " Duties of the Environn. ental Survey Team" (EST).
The inspector noted the licensee's procedures specify that actual measurements of radiation levels will be used to quantify the accident. These measurements will be taken at the initiation
!
of an accident by the EST and RET.
b.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's staffing of backshift operations for-the EST and RET. The licensee has specified that the EST and RET shall be staffed by the chem / rad per-j
[}
sonnel.; The inspector noted that on weekends:
\\, j
.
.
-
.
,
.
- -.
.
. __ _.
. _ _ _
-
.. _ _
_
__
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
.
-
e
,
-
.
,
'
-
'
.
.)
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/77-24 I-9
-
(1). Only one (1) chem / rad technician was available.
(2) Periodically, the one (1)' chem / rad technician on duty on -
weekends had not completed the emergency training program.
The inspector reviewed the personnel. log of shift staffing and'
c.
,
,
compared the shift' staff with functional responsibilities
'
under the Emergency Plan and Emergency Procedures. The inspector noted that during an emergency the licensee would
~ initiate Emergency Procedures EM-205, D(-208, and Df-210.
.
However, the shift staffing provided, during the backshift on weekends, -only one person designated for the EST and RET teams.
,
d.
The Emergency-Plan, Section 7.2 specifies that the emergenc)
i
>
teams will be staffed by personnel who have received a high proficiency, through - training, in emergency monitoring.
Technical Specification 6.8.1.e, requires the licensee to establish, implement, and maintain procedures covering Emergency.
Plan impler.entation. The licensee's failure to adequately staff the EST and RET with adequately trained personnel constitutes
-
~
,
!
an item of noncompliance with the referenced Technical' Specification.
(77-24-09)
Subsequent to the exit interview, the inspector was informed e.
by licenses personnel that two chem / rad technicians were being assigned to each shift. These chem / rad technicians have the responsibility to perform the functions of the EST and RET.
The licensee is reviewing the overall staffing of the emergency l
,.
teams and will propose permanent shift -articipation. This
'
item is discussed further in Details II-of this report.
'
10.
Tests and Drills I
.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's critique of the annual
,
a.
!
emergency exercise which was conducted in March 1977. The
drill included participation with the Florida Division of Health and' Rehabilitative Services and the Shands Teaching
)
Hospital in Gainsville, Florida. The drill was observed by a i
USNRC inspector. The inspector reviewed drill records and recommendations made from the drill critique. The inspector noted the reconnendations made had been implemented. The l
inspector had-nc further questions regarding this item.
'
\\
b.
The insp'ector discussed _with licensee personnel the quarterly medical and ' semiannual class A and B drills required by the (
Emergency Plan S'ections 7.3.b and 7.3.c.1, respectively. The
,
l-
-)
,
'
)
.
. -
.
')
.
-
,
,
-
...
.-
-
.
(
RII'Rpt. No. 50-302/77-24 I-10 s
i
,
..
l inspector _ was informed that the drills had not been performed.-
In addition, the inspector noted the licensee had not established a procedure or administrative controls for implementing the :
drill requirement of the Emergency Plan. Technical Specifi--
cation 6.8.1.s requires the licensee to establish, implement, and maintain written procedures covering Emergency Plan imple-mentation. Failure of the licensee to perform the required drills is an item of noncompliance with the referenced Technical Specification and the Emergency Plan.
(77-24-10).
11.
Audits of Emergency Planning The inspector discussed with licensee personnel the emergency plan audit requirements under Technical Specification 6.5.2.9.e and
'
Emergency Plan Section 7.1.
The licensee had not yet performed the
'
required audits. The inspector noted the licensee's audit schedule lists an audit for late December 1977. This item shall be considered an open item.
(77-24-11)
-
12.
Radiochemistry Equipment and Instrumentation The inspector examined the licensee's GeLi gamma spectroscopy a.
system. The inspestor noted the licensee has completed all modifications to the analytical equipment and the GeLi system is fully operable. The inspector determined the present system is adequate'to perform the radiological analyses
required by Appendix B Technical Specifications 2.4.1 and 2.4.2.
The inspector had no further questions regarding this item.
!
b.
The inspector reviewed selected calibration data and calibra-tion records for the GeLi gamma spectroscopy system, liquid scintillation counter, and gross beta counting system and compared them to facility procedures, and found the equipment to be adequate to implement the analytical requirements of Appendix B Technical Specifications 2.4.1 and 2.4.2.
The inspector reviewed calibration procedure SP-707 which c.
requ.res weekly determination of the GeLi gamma spectroscopy resolution. The inspector noted the licensee failed to per-form the required resolution determination during the weeks of October 31 and November 15, 1977.
This constitutes an item of noncompliance with Technical Specification 6.8.1.a. which requires the licensee to implement radiochemistry calibration.
procedures which were.recomended in Regulatory Guide 1.33, Appendix A, Section J.
(77-24-12)
N~
,
.
_
.
-
-_
- -. _,
- _,
.
_. - - -
- - - - -. - -
.
.
=
-
.
..
'
'
,
_
s i
/%
V.
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/77-24 I-11
-
d.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's corrective action to the above items of noncempliance prior to the conclusion of the inspection. The licensee emphasized to the appropriate labora-tory personnel that weekly surveillance requirements must be completed, or identified to management if personnel are unable to perform the analysis. The inspector had no further questions regarding this item.
13.
Radiochemistry Procedures The inspector ' reviewed selected radiochemistry procedures and a.
determined the licensee has prepared, reviewed, and approved these procedures required to implement the radiological moni-toring program analyses of the Appendix B Technical Speci-fications 2.4.1 and 2.4.2.
The inspector had no further questions regarding this item.
b.
In addition, the inspector examined the licensee's Quality Assurance procedures relating to audits of radiochemistry.
The inspector noted the Quality Assurance procedures were adequate to implement the audit requirements of the Operations
-
,\\
Quality Assurance Manual Section 12.
The inspector had no further questions regarding this matter.
14.
Confirmatory Measurements The inspectar collected a liquid waste, waste gas, particulate filter and charcoal adsorber effluent samples. In addition, the inspector submitted to the licensee a spiked simulated particulate filter and charcoal adsorber samples. The results of the analyses of the samples will be evaluated during a subsequent inspection.
(77-24-13)
15.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in j
a.
paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the ' inspection on necember 9, 1977. The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and findings.
.
b.
Communications with FPC subsequent to the conclusion of this inspection are discussed further in Details II.
l l
!
I l
s
\\s_ I
.
l
_
_
.
-
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
..
.
-
.
-
,
'
(o)
.
\\' '
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/77-24 II-l
_
4-h2.h 78 DETAILS II Prepared by:
=
G. f.'dibson,l-Aadi/ tion Specialist Date Environmental and Special Projects Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Dates of Inspection: January 11-12, 1978 Reviewed by:
,d I' JL %
,
??
J.
Hufham, Chie!
/ Date Ensi nmental and Special Projects Section Fue acility and Materials Safety Branch 1.
Persons Contacted
- W.
P. Stuart, Director Power Production
- G. P. Beatty, Nuclear Plant Manager
- P. F. McKee, Assistant Nuclear Plant Nbnager
- J. R. Wright, Chem / Rad Protection Engineer
~
- T. C. Luckehaus, Maintenance Engineer
- J. L. Harrison, Assistant Chem / Rad Protection Engineer s
[
- G. C. Perkins, Health Physics Supervisor
\\s,
- D. W. Pedrick, Compliance Engineer
- L. Kelly, Compliance Auditor, Assistant Fire Brigade Chief
- Denotes those individuals present at exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on previous Inspection Findings No previous inspection findings were reviewed during this inspection.
Items identified in Details I of this report were examined during the course of this inspection and are discussed in Section 4.
3.
Unresolved Items No unresolved items or deviations were identified during this inspection.
4.
Fire Protection Program The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for training, a.
staffing, and implementation of the fire brigade and fire protection program. The inspector reviewed the commitments made by the licensee, as per the NRC's letter of December 15, 1977, as follows:
.
. _
.
.,
e
-
---.__-_ __._.__ _ __ _.
-
.
-
,
m RII Rpt. No. 50-302/77-24 II-2
- -
(1).The inspector serified the licensee has maintained three (3) qualified fire brigade members on shift.
.
(2) The inspector verified that weekly drills to test the effectiveness of backup fire brigade supports were
!
conducted weekly, b.
As discussed in Details I, Section 8.d, the inspector examined the training committed to by FPC in subsequent telephone communications. The inspector determined the fire brigade training was conducted as follows:
(1) Fire brigade training (8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />) had been concluded on Dece-aer 15, 1977.
(2) The four (4) day fire training course for fire brigade members was conducted on vecem'ver 22, 1977.
(3) The four (4) day fire training course for all Chem / Rad technicians will be completed on January 13, 1978.
\\
(4) All onsite fire brigade training for the'three (3) fire brigade members per shift was completed by December 23.
c.
The inspector examined selected training records and interviewed selected personnel, and determined the training of the current fire brigade is in accordance with the NRC's letter of December 15, 1977.
5.
Fire Brigade Implementation
a.
The inspector discussed with licensee management the staffing of the fire brigade, radiation survey team (RST), and environ-
E'
mental survey team (EST).
The licensee management stated:
(1) In the event of a fire involving control room evacuation and remote plant shutdowa:
(a) The fire would be a nonradiological fire and the RST and EST would not respond.
(b) The fire brigade would be composed of 2 Control Room Pers;nnel and 1 Chem / Rad Technician.
(c) One additional Chem / Rad Technician (2 per shif t) is still availabic for additional fire fighting or
<
[v)
radiation monitoring.
.
-9--
=
e-
,_7
-
%
e----
.
.
- *
..
- -
m
.\\
/
RII Rct. No. 50-302/77-24 II-3
.
.
(2) In the event of a fire not involving control room evacua-tion:
(a) Additional qualified fire brigade members would be available from Control Room personnel. At least 3 Control Room personnel would respond, and would be considered the initial fire attack team-
'
(b) One Chem / Rad Technician would respond, as a predesig-nated fire brigade member; however, he would be relieved (with the arrival of the three Control Room personnel) and he would parform the RST radiation survey if the fire involved radioactivity.
(c) The additional second Chem / Rad Technician would implekent the EST or join the RST as per the Emergency Coordit stor's evaluation of the significance of the
)
accident.
6.
Exit Interview f)
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in para-s _/
graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on January 12, 1978.
i s
The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the findings.
'o
_
- _.
... _
-
.