IR 05000302/1978007
| ML19308D518 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 04/18/1978 |
| From: | Hufham J, Perratti D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19308D494 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-302-78-07, 50-302-78-7, NUDOCS 8002280847 | |
| Download: ML19308D518 (6) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
[p @4,(o,,
t t
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
$ *- )*c, ( #
&
-
o REGION 11
/.. E 230 PEACHTRE E STREET, N.W. SUITE 1217
[
ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30303
^
s, %,
- ....
.
Report No.:
50-302/78-7 Docket No.:
50-302 License No.:
DPR-72 Licer
Florida Power Corporation
<
P. O. Box 14042, Mail Stop C-4 St. Petersburg, Florida 33733 Facility Name:
Crystal River Inspection at:
Crystal River site, Crystal River, Florida Inspection conducted: March 29-31, 1978 Inspector:
D.J.Perrofti Reviewed by:
.Ld.(
N f.. )
If 7i e
J.(.Hufh'alb, C yef '
/ Ddte En ronmental a:tB Special Projects Section Fuel Facility add Materials Safety Branch Inspection Summar ',
j Inspection on March 29-31, 1978 (Report No. 50-302/78-7)
Areas Inspected: A coutine, announced inspection of emergency planning including the implemen?ation of the facility's emergency organization under simulated emergency conditions, and organization of the fire
,
,
brigade. The inspection involved 14 inspector-hours on site by one NRC
inspector.
Results:
Of the two areas inspected there were no items of noncompliance.
)
OO 8002280 l
__
.-
__
__
_ -.
.
O RII Rpt. No. 50-302/78-7 I-1
,
DETAILS I Prepared by:
M D. J. Perrotti, Radiation Specialist Date
,
Environmental and Special Projects Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Dates of Inspection: March 29-31, 1978 Reviewed by:k,(1), b llam
/f!7F J., 1W. Hufham, Chief
' Da'te En![ironmentalandSpecialProjectsSection L
Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch 1.
Persons Contacted Florida Power Corporation (FPC)
a.
G. Beatty, Plant Manager
- J. Cooper, Compliance Engineer
- T. Luckehaus, Technical Support Engineer
.
- G. Williams, Compliance Plant Engineer
- W. Nichols, Operations Superintendent
_
Q
- K. Vogel, Operations Engineer
- G. Perkins, Health Physics Supervisor
- J. Buckner, Officer of the Guard
- J. Wright, Chemical / Radiation Engineer G. Claar, Compliance Plant Engineer L. Kelly, Compliance Auditor P. Griffith, Training Coordinator P. Breedlova, Office Manager b.
Individuals Contacted by Telephone J. Heard, Director, Region 4 Federal Preparedness Agency 2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings No previous items of noncompliance or deviations were reviewed during this inspection.
3.
Unresolved items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviations.
One unresolved item disclosed during
,
i the inspection is discussed in paragraph 5 of this report.
,
l l
_. _.
'
.
.
.
m m
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/78-7 I-2
._
.
l L
4.
Emergency Drill
-
.
10 CFR 50, Appendix E, Section IV, paragraph I, requires that a.
the Emergency Plan shall contain provisions for resting, by periodic drills, of radiation emergency plans to assure that j
employees of the licensee are familiar with their specific duties, and provisions for participation in the drills by
other persons whose assistance may be needed in the event of a
radiation emergency.
Section 7.3.C.2. of the licensee's
'
Emergency Plan states that Class C radiation drills, which include offsite group participation, will be held annually.
As a minimum the drill will (1) demonstrate adequate familiarization t
of individuals involved in the Plan, (2) test communications networks, and (3) delineate problem areas and provide remedial solutions.
b.
During the drill held on March 30, 1978, an inspector was onsite to observe the licensee's actions during a simulated
'
emergency.
The simulated emergency condition developed as a
result of the loss of contents of a full waste gas decay tank.
In addition, a simulated injury. occurred in the auxiliary building requiring action by the emergency teams to provide
,
first aid and remove the injured party from the area. The
inspector observed the drill activities in the control room,
where the Emergency Coordinator directed the following:
(1) Determined the classification of the accident, announced the evacuation and sounded the site ivacuation alarm (2) Notified the State Duty Warning Officer, Tallahassee, Florida, via the National Warning System (NAWAS)
(3) Notified the Emergency Operations Center at Wildwood, Florida, and the FPC offsite Support Group (4)
Established communications with security personnel and the emergency teams (5) Notified the U. S. NRC-Region II Office in Atlanta, Georgia (6) Notified the offsite medical facility (7) Finalized accountability of all personnel i
_...,. _._.
.., _
,,.
. _ _ _ _,
_,
.. _. _ _. _. _ _,
. _ _ _. _
_
._
. _. -.., - _..... -..,...
,,
-
.
-
-
A
.
i
,n RII Rpt. No. 50-302/78-7 I-3
..
During the exercise the Emergency Medical Team, Re-Entry Team, and Radiation Emergency Team were organized to simulate re-entry into the plant in order to locate two missing persons
'
l (one was the simulated injury), and for radiation monitoring purposes. Accountability was achieved within approximately fifteen minutes, and full evacuation of the site, except for operational and other essential personnel, took approximately fourty-five minutes. Provisions were also made for accountability of personnel from the fossil plant, Ralston Purina and the coal / yard.
The drill was evaluated by the Compliance Section of the nuclear plant organization.
Observers were located in
'
the control room, main guard station and with the re-entry
team.
'
In addition, arrangements were made by representatives of the State of Florida to participate in the drill.
The simulated conditions of the drill required that all of the offsite agencies be contacted and requested to perform their designated emergency responsibilities. Activiation of the Florida Power Corporation Offsite Support Group was also initiated in order to assist with the coordination requests of the offsite agencies.
An evaluation of the offsite exercise was held on March 31,
-
1978. Representatives from the following local, state, and Federal agencies were in attendance:
(1)
State' Office of Disaster Preparedness (2)
Citrus County Civil Defense I
(3) Levy County Civil Defense (4) Marion County Civil Defense (5) Highway Patrol
(6) Federal Preparedness egency (7)
Defense Civil Preparaoness Agency (8)
Department of Transportation (9) Food and Drug Administration - Department of Health, Education and Welfare
.
-
.-
-.
_
-
._
.. -
_
~
n
)
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/78-7 I-4
. -
The inspector contacted the Director of Federal Region IV Federal Preparedness Agency, who functioned as chairman for the cadre of Federal agencies.
The inspector was informed
-
that the offsite agencies respon d timely, followed existing procedures, and that the exercise was considered a success.
At the exit interview the inspector discussed the onsite emergency exercise with licensee management representatives.
The inspector noted that the activities in the control room appeared to be effective, orderly and in accordance with existing emergency implementing procedures. Licensee management representatives stated that a critique of the drill would be held within a few days and that the inspector would be furnished a copy of the results of the critique.
The inspector informed licensee representatives that corrective actions relating to weaknesses in the emergency organization that were defined during the emergency exercise would be followed during a subsequent inspection.
c.
The requirement for the annual radiation emergency drill and quarterly medical drill appeared to be satisfactorily met.
.
5.
Fire Brigade Organization a.
Amendment 13 to the facility's Technical Specifications, effective March 3, 1978, requires a fire brigade of at least 4 members to be maintained onsite at all times, in addition to the 5 members of the minimum shift crew necessary for safe shutdown of the plant and personnel required for other essential functions.
I b.
The inspector reviewed the shift supervisor's log for the period March 3-30, 1978, which indicated that all shifts had at least 4 personnel assigned to the fire brigade.
The inspector asked for some kind of documentation which would I
show that the 4 fire brigade members were in addition to the minimum 5 members of the shift crew.
The inspector was furnished time sheets for Operations and Cheqi".sd Departments for March 1978. The shift supervisor's log showed that on March 14, 1978, a nuclear auxiliary operator (NAO) was assigned to the fire brigade during the mid shift, 2400 hrs. to 0800 hrs. However, the time sheet indicated that this NA0 worked from 1400 hrs.
to 2400 hrs.
This matter was brought to the attention of the Operations Superintendent. At the exit interview the inspector was showed a control room operator's log which indicated that O
..
.
-
--
,,
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/78-7 I-5
_
the NA0 in question had worked during the period 2400 hrs. to 0800 hrs.
It was explained that the reason the time sheet did not agree with the shif t supervisor's log was that the NA0 had
~
'
worked without pay for that eight hour period.. Because of the apparent conflict in cross checking the shift supervisor's log with time sheets, the inspector was not able to verify, for
'
the period March 3-30, 1978, that at least 4 members of the fire brigade were onsite at all times, in addition to the minimum of 5 shift crew members. The inspector informed licensee representatives that this matter would be followed during a subsequent inspection.
The inspector identified the requirement for 4 fire brigade c.
members onsite at all times, in addition to the minimum of 5
'
shift crew members, as an unresolved item (78-7-1).
6.
Exit Meeting The inspector met with licensee management representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the. conclusion of the inspection on March 31, 1978.
The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection.
O
_
.
-
-
.
.