IR 05000313/1990008

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of 900718 Meeting W/Entergy Operations,Inc in Arlington,Tx to Discuss Exercise Weaknesses Identified in Insp Repts 50-313/90-08 & 50-368/90-08
ML20056B415
Person / Time
Site: Arkansas Nuclear  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 08/20/1990
From: Terc N
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
Shared Package
ML20056B414 List:
References
NUDOCS 9008280254
Download: ML20056B415 (26)
v • d • e


Text

.

.

.

,

,

.

.

ENCLOSURE MEETING SUMMARY Licensee:

ir.: cgy Operations, Inc.

Facility:

Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO)

License Nos.: DPR-51 and NPF-7 Docket Nos.:

50-313 and 50-368 Subject:

MEETING TO DISCUSS EXERCISE WEAKNESSES IDENTIFIED IN NRC INSPECTION REPORT 50-313/90-08; 50-368/90-08 On July 18, 1990, representatives of Entergy Operations, Inc., met with Region IV personnel in Arlington, Texas, to discuss issues identified during the 1990 exercise at ANO. The meeting was held at the request of NRC. The attendance list for this meeting is attached as the Appendix to this summary.

The licensee representatives acknowledged all weaknesses, identified by the NRC inspection team and stated that most of them had also been identified in their critique of the exercise.

In addition, the licensee described what was believed by them at that time to be the root cause for each deficiency.

The licensee specified immediate corrective measures and recognized that long term corrective measures will require a review of the entire emergency preparedness program. The effectiveness of some corrective measures will be verified by drills and other methods. The licensee emphasized the need to identify root causes and their commitment to correct them.

The licensee representatives and the NRC personnel agreed that presently, the licensee is capable of responding to emergencies in a manner that will ensure the health and safety of the public.

Furthermore, both parties agreed that improvements in the licensee's emergency program were needed.

Formal corrective measures, and the implementation schedule will be submitted within 30 days of the issuance date of the NRC inspection report.

Y

,N 4W 8lQol90

'

[

Nemen M. Terc, Emerger :y Date Preparedness Analyst

Attachment:

Attendance List 9008280254 900821 ADOCK0500g[g3 q

PDR a

.,

,

.

,

.

,

I

.

ATTACHMENT ATTENDANCE LIST Attendance at the Entergy Operations, Inc., - NRC Meeting on July 18, 1990, at the NRC Region IV office.

Entergy Operations, Inc.

N. Carns, Vice President - Nuclear E. Ewing, General Manager, Technical Support and Assessment E. Force, Manager, Training & Emergency Preparedness F. Van Burskirk, Supervisor, Emergency Planning NRC A Bill Beach, Director, Division of Radiation Safety & Safeguards (DRSS)

Samuel J. Collins, Director, Division of Reactor Projects (DRP)

Lawrence A. Yandell, Deputy Director, DRSS Dale A. Powers, Chief, Security and Emergency Preparedness Section Tom Westerman, Chief, Project Section A, DRP Nemen M. Terc, Security and Emergency Preparedness Section D. Blair Spitzberg, Security and Emergency Preparedness Section i'

.-

-

.

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

- -

_ -. - - -

,

NRC/ANO a

MANAGEMENT MEETING

-

i

,

.

ON

-

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

-

.

.

JULY 18,1990

'

1 i

5EE550TEONS "

~~~ ~

-

.

-

-

-n-

......

l

..

.

.......--,..........;-..~..; _..._

3..

.,......_......_....,,,;........__7_.

_ _ _. -..., - _ -. _,.,..

-

,

.

I

'

NRC/ANO I

MANAGEMENT I

MEETING I

I I

I ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS g

I I

I JULY 18,1990 I

I I

g l

I ENTERGY m

~

OPERATIONS I

p-

....,,.Ilum ll

-.

-e

--.m-----,-------s--..-.-.---+.,----g

---e

  • _ _ - --

e__

4_

-__- - - - -. - - -. - - - - - - - - - *. -. - -

-

_

I'

AGENDA I

g I

1.

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS N. S. CARNS I

II.

ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS F. P. VAN BUSKIRK g

l 111.

DESCRIPTION OF CORRECTIVE F. P. VAN BUSKIRK MEASURES IV.

EP PROGRAM OVERVIEW E. A. FORCE A. SALP SELF ASSESSMENT I

V.

CLOSING REMARKS N. S. CARNS g

I I

I I

I I

I

__

m.

---

%

....,

...3-

.-

-I

- '.-. '

s-,.,

,..,,.. '.,

.'7

,.

,....,,,..y.

.,....

.Iy,,,,.

,.....,,

,s.,.,* ',..,,,,,,,,,.,, _,,,,,.

'

I I

I I

1. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS g

I I

I i

B-

,

I-N.S. i' BUZZ) CARNS t

I

L g

I

'

I I

I I

'

-.. - -.

-_

-

___.....

s.

..,

.s..

..

s

. -.

_I

-

ve..

<

- - ' - -

'

'

"[_

- - '- _,, + - __ -,

,-..e.c-

--

.

'n

--..,.' -...-'.'

['__I.'

- __.. ' ' '. ' -

.' ',.,,

. --.

'

_

I i

l ll I

11. ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS 4'

l:

[5:

I il.

F.P. VAN BUSKIRK jl LI i

il I

-

.g

_

4g

.,.,

.

-

..

--.

._ ----

-

.

- - -

^1

..

.= = = =

a

.

= =

=

.

,

i I

l;g; AREAS OF DISCUSSION j

.

l-:.

I 1.

ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS PROCESS l'

2.

RESULTS OF ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS

!

3.

DESCRIPTION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION g

.

,

.I q

I

g.

Lg I

g

.I

I I

.g.

-

.

--

-

.

.

1i.

,

_____;.._._;....__---.;____..-----_...___..-_._-..__.--_-__.

-

..

__ _

___

I

Lg FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS

'I LI

'

l!;

1.

WHY WERE MORE WEAKNESSES

.

i OBSERVED DURING THE 1990 EXERCISE THAN HAVE TYPICALLY BEEN OBSERVED

,g

.

L IN PREVIOUS EXERCISES?

Lg 2..WHAT DO THESE OBSERVATIONS INDICATE

'

'

l REGARDING THE STATE OF THE EP PROGRAM -AT. ANO?

!

I Lg

.

I I-y

'I I

I I

'l.

_

_

..

..

.

.

..

-.

_

- -

-

_

-

_ -

.

-.-.

I T

L-g LI:

ROOT CAUSE I

I L

IMPACT OF THE RECENT PLANT-

.

REORGANIZATION

  • LESS THAN OPTIMUM g

PERFORMANCE FROM NEW PERSONNEL IN THE l

ERO l-l

RESTRUCTURING OF SHIFT STAFFING ll L

SEVERAL KEY DECISION I

MAKERS PERFORMING FOR THE FIRST TIME

  • UNCERTAINTY CREATED DUE

'

!

TO MISMATCH BETWEEN THE

-

NORMAL PLANT ORGANIZATION I

AND' THE ERO g:

LI I

I

- - -

.

.

.

.

.

.

,

I;

l CONTRIBUTING CAUSES

I

'

l:

USE OF A MORE CHALLENGING

,

SCENARIO WHICH STRESSED

"

.

ll THE ERO l l.

- OFF-HOURS EXERCISE

,

I

- IMMEDIATE ENTRY INTO ALERT I

- INGESTION PATHWAY EXERCISE

!:

ACTUAL EMERGENCY IN THE COMMUNITY

'

g g

- UNCERTAINTY OF PARTICIPATION L

OF LOCAL SUPPORT GROUPS LI L

- MISCOMMUNICATION LI.

LI g

I

,

-

--

.

-

.-

-

-

-.

- - -

. -

.

..

.

..

.

.--------+-e

- - + -., -

m-.

,w ea6

"... - -..

.._.-...-.y._.

.. -..- --- - - - ---.---,-

..- -._

I l

s

.

l

,A -

. Ill. DESCRIPTION OF

-

.

CORRECTIVE MEASURES i

I I

=

,

.

I

-

I::

F.P. VAN BUSKIRK

<

I;

'

I; g

,

.

I:

LI I

-

ll

_

- -

-

.

-

-

.

.

. -

-

- -

-

-

-. -

.

l

.

-. - _

- -.

- - - -,,. _ - - - -., _. - _.

,. _ _. - _

- - - -. - - - - - -..._y

..... _ __.,.

,

-

.

....... _ -

-

-

--

.

I I:

.

CORRECTIVE MEASURES

'

.

1.

ERF DRILLS

,g g --

2.

TECHNICAL SUPPORT

,

il-

.3.

INFORMATION FLOW il.

4.

NOTIFICATION METHOD

l.

5.

TRAINING

'

g

I.

'

Lg

LI LI L

LI

'I

'

'

.

.

-

.. _...

.-

_. _

..

_.

_ _ _ __._ _

_

1:

-- -- x.2-.: -^::--.. ::.. : :.: ;;;: : _Tr^. ^.-.: :: :-- ~ -: - -

- ~-- 2::...

- ::....:.. :..:--^. :_..

T :.- -....

.

- ^ -

-

--

- - -

.

..

it ll

!

ERF DRILLS

l i

I

QUARTERLY

[II

  • TEAM CONCEPT
  • OBJECTIVES I

- EAL DETECTION AND g

CLASSlFICATION Lg

- DEVELOPMENT OF TEAMWORK SKILLS

.

I

- INCREASE EFFECTIVENESS,

>

lL EFFICIENCY AND ACCURACY OF INFORMATION FLOW

- PREPARE BRIEFINGS FOR

$~

COLOCATED RESPONSE AGENCIES I:

I.

I g

__

_____

-

-

-

-

m W*

=e--vsye-

-

w

+w

"a~-'

w

--'

"T 95PTT t"r*'

  • V NW-

-

-

.

I; I

TECHNICAL SUPPORT

'I I

  • ADDED ERO STAFF SUPPORT

- ACCIDENT ASSESSMENT MANAGER I

- TECHNICAL ASSISTANTS'(INCREASED FROM 25 TO 50)

.I-

~

--TSC SUPPORT SUPERINTENDENT

-- COMMUNICATOR SUPERVISOR g

- EMERGENCY RADIATION TEAM g

(INCREASED FROM 49 TO 64)

g

  • REVIEW OF JOB PRIORITIES-l'
  • RELOCATION 'OF RADWASTE AND RAD PROTECTION-MANAGER FROM THE l

OSC TO THE TSC I

  • UPGRADE OF THE DOSE ASSESSMENT COMPUTER SYSTEM LI LI I.

l-

l

_

.

..

.

_

--

.

-

-

-

..

--

.

.

_-

%

,. _....

...

.a---

. -,. -

-

- - - - - - - - - - -, - - - - -

- - -

- - - - -

- - - - - -, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -, - - - - -

-

I INFORMATION FLOW I

I

.

FORMALIZE GUIDELINES FOR

I INFORMATION FLOW

'I I:

I I

I

.

'

..

I I

I-

-

g I

l

..

-

_--

...,.[.

.y

  • ,

' ' **

'-______r.+.

_. _' = ' _ - -' ' _ ' ' '

.+__ ; ' ' - _, '"__

'

_

r_

_'

_ -'

' '-

.l g:

NOTIFICATION METHOD UPGRADE 3:

I

  • AUTODIALER

}

  • FIVE-COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS

,I EVALUATED TO DATE

!

  • EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM.

CONCEPT g

I I:

.,

I I

I g

I I

,2 l

I

.__

_ _

.

.

--.

-.

.-

.

-.

-

-

'

.......U_

... _ _ _

.--._--.__----.--..m

'

.______.$_._'.__'.

_[_~'._

~ ', ' ',.

'

- _ _ _,.. -...

_

,

-

.

'

I i

LI L

TRAINING LIl

,

LI.

'

"

  • UPGRADE TRAINING FOR I;

RADIOLOGICAL / ENVIRONMENTAL

.

l ASSESSMENT MANAGERS (REAMS)

'I AND DOSE ASSESSMENT SUPERVISORS (DASs)

g

- * FIRE' BRIGADE TRAINING

'

g EP TRAINING EVALUATION Lg TRAINING COMPLETED FOR

ERO PERSONNEL I

FACILITY WALK-THROUGHS

ll lN PROGRESS I

I LI

'I I'

l

- = - + +

- - -

-

g.

,,e,-

-

. _.

_.

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

. _ _ _ _

._ _

'I

.

-

_

.

.-

..

..

.

_ -

-. - __- - _ __.

.

ll CORRECTIVE ACTION SCHEDULE l

l l.

QUARTERLY ERF DRILLS 12/90 l.

II. TECHNICAL SUPPORT

,

.g; A.ADDED:

A.CCIDENT ASSESS. MGR COMPLETE

<

u TSC SUPPORT SUPT COMPLETE COMMUNICATOR SUPV COMPLETE l

TECHNICAL ASSISTANTS COMPLETE g

s. aOs PRIORITY Review COuPLETE

C. RAD PROTECTION & RADWASTE I.

MANANGER RELOCATION TO TCC COMPLETE i

ll D. RADIATION. TEAM STAFFING INCREASE COMPLETE g '

E. DOSE ASSESSMENT UPGRADE 11/30/90.

Ill. INFORMATION FLOW 11/30/90 IV. NOTIFICATION METHOD UPGRADE 01/01/91 I

V. TRAINING A. REAM & DAS TRAINING UPGRADE 11/30/90 l

B. FIRE BRIGADE TRAINING COMPLETE

<i(

C. EP TRAINING EVALUATION 12/31/90

!g

-

l.

.

- -

- - -

.

--

-

_-

.

, _ _

_ _ _

_

.. _..

... _

..-

_ _.

.. _ _...

_.

_...,.

. _.

-

i,

~ ;

., :. _ L - ::_' a ~~. - :: :: *: ^ ~..... :- ---.. '. : ^ - - ' - '- --' - -~

- - - ^; ; ~ r. :. T ::: - _;-- : :- _: :_ z..;. - -

'

..

.

.

'I I

CORRECTIVE ACTION MATRIX lI l

NRC IDENTIFIED WEAKNESSES

01

03

05

07

09

11

,

A X

X X

X X

X X

X l-w e

X X

X X

X X

X X

E lE

@

C X

X X

is e

-,

D X

s l-E X

X X

I I

LEGEND FOR ANO CORRECTIVE ACTION

' A - DRILLS I'

B-TECHNICAL SUPPORT C-INFORMATION FLOW D - NOTIFICATIONS f

E - TRAINING.

I I

(

-

_

__

__

_

e-g---

g-y-----

-

,-,.w---

_

.,w.

-

in---eieisi,

.> '

' ' '_.-- -_ _,, _

__

_,,

_ d" " "_

_" ", --, '"

""

"'"n

'_ '_* -

g%

-" _,' _'_ *

_,_

" - _

r

" '_ -

-

-"

_ _, _

I I

I I

IV. EP PROGRAM OVERVIEW I

I y

I I

E. A. FORCE I.

I I

I; g

I g

l

_._._____

.

.

.._

..

_

I

,m

..: =

=:---

-

-.

- - -

= - =. - - - -

.

..

LI; EP PROGRAM OVERVIEW

g

.I

  • SALP SELF ASSESSMENT

'

I.

I

-

I I

!

I j

I I:

I I

I I

il

'7 l

. -

..

--

-.

.

-_ -

.

.

.-

--

?

........__... -

- _ _.

...

..

.

. - - _ - -.

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

m g :mg-

.

)

ll 7g;'

(

SALP SELF ASSESSMENT

l

-

,

It

?

AREAS REVIEWED

JIL

!

- NOVs

[:!: '

- DEVIATIONS hg

- QA AFRs

- INSPECTOR FOLLOWUP ITEMS.

'

- EXERCISE PERFORMANCE g

I
I

.I lI I

.I-I

.

I I

l

- - - -

-

-

--

-

.

.

.

_ _ _ _.....

,,. -,,, - '

"I.-

',. -.,,

"'s a'

'

.s

'..'_

.'s 5""

". '. '+. " ,'

,_.[__

[

_- _ _ -

s'

' -

-'e.

'

' ' ' ' '

+

'

-

PROGRAM WEAKNESSES

  • EXERCISE FINDINGS
  • EXERCISE CRITIQUE BOARD FINDINGS
  • EXERCISE IMPROVEMENT ITEMS
  • INSPECTION FINDINGS

I

.m.

..-

.=

.. _

.

..

.

z.

. _ e.m-

. - -.. -

I l

PROGRAM STRENGTHS

l l:

EP STAFF

l REWRITE OF EALs INCLUDING

DEVELOPMENT OF EAL BASIS

.I DOCUMENT

!.

QA ASSESSMENTS

!

PERFORMANCE BASED AUDITS AND SURVEILLANCES

.g

- LINE BY LINE AUDIT OF THE g

EP PROGRAM AGAINST THE l

REGULATIONS ll QUARTERLY SIMULATOR DRILLS

l QUARTERLY DOSE ASSESSMENT

PRACTICE SESSIONS COOPERATIVE RELATIONSHIP-WITH

.!

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT MEDIA RELATIONS

I g

_ _ _ _ _

--

-

..

-

.

--

- - - -

-

.. -.

..... _ _

...... _ _.. _. _. _ _ _.. _......

. _...

. _.

_ _.. _ _.... _..

.. _ _ _. _ _ _. _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _

..

.-

.

.

....

LI I~

SUMMARY

'

-

q

g
  • GOOD MANAGEMENT SUPPORT

-

lI

'

  • WEAK AREAS ARE UNDERSTOOD l
  • EP PROGRAM CONTINUES TO.

,!

BE A STRONG AND EFFECTIVE PROGRAM g;

I

I

.

I I

I il Il I

I l

.

_

__

W

l 'L n i,

.

.

--

-

_

I I

I I

'l'

V. CLOSING REMARKS I

I I

I I

N. S. I' BUZZ) CARNSL

,

I I

I I

I I

I g

22

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=IR_05000313/1990008&oldid=5511194"