IR 05000309/1981023
| ML20032B540 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 10/20/1981 |
| From: | Bores R, Lazarus W, Mckenna T, Oneill B, Palmiter C, Snyder G, Swetland P, Thompson B, Wojnas E, Woltner E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20032B527 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-309-81-23, NUDOCS 8111050644 | |
| Download: ML20032B540 (5) | |
Text
p y
.'
'
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT.
REGION I
Report No 50-309/81-23 Docket No.
50-309 License No.
DPR-36 Priority
-
Category C
Licensee:
Maine' Yankee Atomic Power Company 1671 Worcester Road Framingham, MA 01701 Facility Name:
Maine Yankee Atomic Power Station _
Inspection At:
Wiscasset, ME Inspection Conducted:
September 25-27, 1981 Inspectors:
ev/
N
_
/g/f///
E. Wojnas,M adiation Specialist, NRC:RI
'date
_
(
-
/O //V /
E. Woltne'r~, Radiation Specialist, NRC:RI
/dat'e M/WW
/r/f/ff '
j eill, adia ibn S, cialist, NRC:RI
'date B.
N
!
Atf a
M)
/oh/61
'
'G. ' S ~n r,.
tel, P PS, RI
'dtte d"Ar/W hM
/WF/f/
[ T. McKenna7 EPLB, NRC:HQ
'
date
- bk/
/
awm~,
"
P. 59p'tlard, ReUdejd:' Inspector, NRC:RI
'date
/
scftA<cW
//
/
'
E l/p6rus[f r. Resident Inspector, NRC:RI date
'
,
,
8111050644 811021 PDR ADOCK 05000309 G
PDR i
.
.
.
.
.
...
.
.
...
.
U
.
.
AAWh
/W WP/
v 'C. Palmitei, Battelle Northwest Laboratories
'date h^
N/U/6/
f)
or/
[W.' Thompsoif, Battelle orthwest Laboratories da'te A
&
/0/bo/f/
Approved by:"R. B~ ores, Actig Chief, Emeroa r aparedness da+e Sectit Inspection Summary:
Inspecton on September 25-27, 1981 (Report Number 50-309/81-23)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, announced emergency preparedness inspection of a licensee emergency exercise. The inspection involved 290 inspection-hours by a team of nine NRC Region I, NRC Headqua-ters and contractor personnel.
Results: Within the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified.
.
k
.
- - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
.
1.
Individuals Contacted J. Randazza, Vice President, Manager of Operations, MY J. Garrity, Director of Nuclear Engineering and Licensing, MY E. Wood, Plant Manager, MY D. Sturniolo, Assistant to the Plant Manager, MY L. Walsh, Public Service Co. of New Hampshire N. Panzarino, Yankee Nuclear Services Division E. Darois, Yankee Nuclear Services Division
!
P. Casey, Yankee Nuclear Services Division D. Holsinger, fankee Nuclear Services Division In addition to the above, members of the team also interviewed and evaluated the performance of licensee members of plant operations, radiation protection and corporate staff.
2.
Emergency Exercise a.
Pre-exercise Activities Prior to the conduct of the licensee's emergency exercise, the NRC l
team met with licensee representatives to review the nature and scope of the exercise scenar;o and the extent of the actions expected to be implemented in response to the conditions of the scenario.
The licensee's exercise scenario had been developed in coordination with various participating offsite agencies. Areas not exercised were as follows:
-
Search and rescue
-
Medical emergency
-
Medical decontamination The NRC had performed an appraisal of the licensee's emergency preparedness program during the two-week period prior to the exercise, and it was concluded that the exclusion of these areas would not significantly detract from the ability to evaluate the licensee's performance relative to the objectives of the emergency plan. The scenario involved a primary coolant leak with fuel cladding failure, compounded by the failure of both HPSI pumps, and primary vent stack releases to the environment.
Based on the findings in the above area, this portion of the licensee's program appeared to be acceptable.
b.
Exercise Observation During the conduct of the licensee's exercise, nine NRC team members made detailed observations of the following activities:
,.
.
.
...
.
.
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-
_ - _ _ _
..
.
,~
.
t
- 4 1.
Operations staff: actions concerning detection, classification and operational assessment of.the accident;
'
2.
Notification of licensee personnel and offsite agencies; 3.
Radiological (dose) assessment and protective action-decision-making; 4.
Personnel assembly and accountability; 5.
Plant security;
6.
Offsite and in plant radiological surveys; 7.
In plant radiation protection;
"
8.
Technical support; 5-9.
Public information;
,
10.
Repair / corrective actions; and 11. Direction and coordination of the response.
The NRC team noted that the licensee's organizational response was
,
generally in accordance with established procedures and that available facilities and equipment were used, consistent with the
'
emergency plan and procedures.
Based on the findings and observations in the above area, the NRC team determined that the licensee's response met the objectives set forth in the emergency plan and in the NRC's' current requirements and guidance.
c.
Exercises Critique The NRC team attended post-exercise critiques held on September 27, 1981, during which licensee observers and exercise controllers discussed the exercise results. During the critique, the NRC, noted that the licensee observer and controller presentations highlighted areas for improvement and that observer controller and participant comments were documented by the licensee for further evaluation and appropriate corrective action.
The NRC team compared their. findings with those of the licensee observers and controllers and determined that neither the licensee nor NRC observers had identified any major items which exhibited a potential for degraded response. However, the following additional areas were h:ghlighted for improvement:
,
,,-m m.,
e-=-e,-
.n--,.-
..-
4--
--..r-,..
v. m n
-...,
r---
- -,- -. - - +,. -. -.
.-m-w
...
.
.
.
1.
Habitability determination of the Technical Support Center
'(TSC) prior to assigning personnel to the area; 2.
Improvement and/or designation of adequate space in the Operations Support Center (OSC) to accommodate Health Physics and Security personnel; and
,
3.
Provision of field monitoring capability for iodine in any kind of weather. for offsite ronitoring teams and/cr provisions for expediting the confirmation of airborne iodine results.
Discussions during.the critique indicated that licensee perscnnel possessed a sufficient understanding of the improvement items and their causes to permit timely, effective resolution.
Based on the findings in the above area, the NRC team determined'
that the licensee's existing exercise audit and critique provisions had been acceptably implemented.
3.
Exit Meeting and NRC Critique The NRC team met with the licensee representatives denoted in Paragrapi,1 at 8:30 a.m., September 27, 1981. The NRC Team Leader summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection findings. Additional comments were provided by individual team members. The NRC Team Leader informed licensee management that, in general, the findings of the NRC team relative to the exercise were consistent with the findings of the licensee observers and controllers.
-
Licensee management acknowledged tiie findings and indicated that evaluation and resolution of all drill identified improvement items would begin immediately. The licensee was informed that these items will be reviewed by the NRC during a subsequent inspection of this area.
.
t l
.
,..g
. -..
9-wm,-..,+n-.re.-e7...p.
y mg.e-y-um w e