IR 05000312/1992007

Insp Rept 50-312/92-07 on 921110-11.No Deviations or Violations Noted.Major Areas inspected:1992 Annual Emergency Preparedness Exercise & Associated Critiques & Inspector Identified Items

ML20126E295
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	12/10/1992
From:	Mcqueen, Pate R, Qualls P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20126E278	List: IR 05000312/1992007 ML20126E275
References
50-312-92-07, 50-312-92-7, NUDOCS 9212290085
Download: ML20126E295 (4)

Text

_ - _ _ _ _ _ - - . _ _ _ _ _ .

-___ - _ _ - _ _ . - --. - . _ _ - _

y =.  ;

[' Us SJNUCLEAR-REGULATORY: COMMISSION -

. REGION V  ;

LReport Nos.- 50-312/92-07-

,

License Nos.- DPR-54

' Licensee:- Sacramento Municipal Utility District-14440. Twin Cities Road-Herald California 95638-9799-Facility Name: Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station

"'

Inspection at:- Rancho Seco Site,' Herald, California Inspection Dates:. No ember 10-11, 1992 Inspectors:

h ~ tor inspec or lLfl0[TE Date Signed

. _- Quall st' e

' ,4 / e 12Y/>Y1C

. [c ueen, .Kniergency Prepgredness Dat( Signed,

'

An lyst *

. Approved by:

J~ h -

"Pate', Thief,7 Safeguards,

/.2Ma fic. --

Date Signed Emergency Preparedness,. and .

Non-power Reactor Branch ,

Summary:

Areas Inspected: Announced inspection to observe the 1992 annual emergency -: ,

~

preparedness exercise and associated critiques;=and Inspector' Identified-Items. During this-inspection, Inspection Procedure!82301~was use Re sul ts : Overall, the licensee's program demonstrated that _it will adeqilately ;

protect the health and safety-of the public during an emergenc _

,

r

__

~

9212290005:921210

.PDR- ADOCK 05000312: "

,G PDR ' -

z_" _

. . ~. -

_---_ ;

'

.- .

.

^

DETAILS

] . PERSONS CONTACTED The below listed; persons-were contacted during the course of_ the inspectio *S. Redeker, Manager, Operations / Security

• D. Brock, Manager, Plant Maintenance

• Bua, Manager, Radiation Protection, Chemistry, Environmental Monitoring, Emergency Planning

• J. Jones, Manager, Nuclear Technical Services

• J. Delezinski, Manager, QA, Licensing, Administration W. Holton, Shift Supervisor P. Bellville, Assistant Shift Supervisor M. Hieronimus, Staff Shift Supervisor

• Attended-Exit Meeting on November 11, 199 . Exercise Plannina (responsibility, scenario / objectives development, control of scenario)

The Manager, Emergency Planning (EP) has the overall responsibility for

'

developing, conducting and evaluating the annual emergency preparedness exercise. -The EP staff developed the scenario with the assistance of licensee staff from other organizations possessing appropriate expertise (e.g. reactor operations, healtn physics, maintenance, etc.). In anL effort to maintain strict security over the scenario, individuals who had been involved in the exercise scenario development were not participants in the exercise. The exercise document was tightly-controlled before the exercise. Advance copies of,the exercise document were provided to the.NRC evaluators and other persons =having a specific need. The. players did not-have access to the exercise document or information on scenario events. This exercise was intended to meet the requirements of the licensee's approved emergency pla . Exercise Scenario .

The exercise scenario started with'an event classified.as an Alert and remained ~at-that level. The opening event in the exercise involved a' '

security event which involved two former plant employees overcoming the -

security guards and placing a bomb' on the refueling-bridge. 'The.ex-employees then left the Spent Fuel Building and the bomb subsequently exploded. .The explosion blew holes in the building roof, damaged the bridge resulting in a damaged fuel bundle,and spread contaminated water around the room. The exercise was terminated when exercise-objectives had.been demonstrated"by the license . Federal Observers Two NRC inspectors evaluated the licensee's response to the scenari Inspectors were stationed in the Control Room (CR) and Technical Support

,

'

.

-.

y .

Center (TSC). The inspector in the CR also accompanied a

-

repair / monitoring tea . Exercise Observations (82301)

The following observations, as appropriate, are intended to be ,

suggestions for improving the emergency preparedness progra Control Room (CRJ The following aspects of CR operations were observed during the exercise: detection and classification of emergency events, 'l notification, frequent use of emergency procedures, and innovative attempts to mitigate the accident. -The following are observations by i the NRC inspector in the CR and while accompanying a field tea , Several examples of informal communications were observed during the exercise between the Security Watch Supervisor and Shift Supervisor. These were also noted by the licensee during their--

critique, The Security Watch Supervisor anticipated potential radiological conditions and took actions to prevent unnecessary radiation exposure to the security forc Operators promptly classified the event and made all required notification The drill controllers provided, on several occasions, information-to the players that was inconsistent with .the event or licensee expectations resulting in player confusion; examples include:

1, The controller relayed incorrect information to the players concerning the type of damage ~ to the fuel bridge mast. This .

'

was also identified by the licensee-during their_ critiqu . At 0834 a controller told the Health Physics supervisor that

-

radiation levels were at background when they were-reading on the CR instrumentation. This was also identified by the licensee in their critique, One of the two security guards sent to do-initial entrance to the spent fuel building had a respirator card that had an expired date and hence could not be allowed to wear a respirator for building entry, The controller allowed the plant team, accompanied by the

-

inspe_ctor, to simulate wearing anticontamination clothing (anti-c's) and respirators. The security guard stated that he had never worn anti-c' .. . . . . . . . . . _

.

..

. ..

'

.

.- .

~ .

Technical Support Center (TSC)

The following aspects of TSC operations were observed: activation, accident assessment, notification, and interactions with the control room and other elements taking part in the exercise. The following represent the NRC inspector's observations in the TS Activation was rapid after the alert was declared at about 082 The emergency coordinator went first to the Control Room and remained there until about 0853. Then he reported to the TSC and conducted a detailed status briefing. Prior to that time, the TSC staff had been assembled, accounted for, and were already performing support task At about 0821, an announcement was made that personnel not assigned duties at emergency centers or with health physics were dismissed and were to evacuate the sit At about 0831, one TSC manager noticed that this had created a minor problem. TP9 dismissal of non-exercise designated personnel was making it difficult to find craftsmen to make up maintenance and response teams to bring the situation in the spent fuel building under control. Two teams were subsequently constituted and employed in exercise activities. This condition was also identified by the licensee in the after-exercise critique and appropriate solutions to preclude such a situation in the future had been identifie At about 0955, a decision was made that the event could be downgraded from an Alert. Directions were given to so notify offsite state and local agencies. This was begun at 0958 and completed by 100 All in all, the inspector determined that the licensee's performance in the TSC was good. Briefings were timely, as were appropriate notifications to other emergency facilities and offsite agencie . Licensee Critique The inspectors observed the licensee's critique which immediately followed conclusion of the exercise. The critique appeared to be in depth and successful in self identification of drill problem . Exit Intervie On November 11, 1992, at the conclusion of the site visit, the inspectors met with the licensee representatives identified in Paragraph 1 to summarize the scope and the preliminary results of this inspectio The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during the inspectio _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _