IR 05000322/1989005

Emergency Preparedness Insp Rept 50-322/89-05 on 890314-17. No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Changes to Emergency Preparedness Program,Including Emergency Facilities,Equipment,Instrumentation,Supplies & Training

ML20248J583
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	03/27/1989
From:	Conklin C, Lazarus W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20248J552	List: IR 05000322/1989005 ML20248J548
References
50-322-89-05, 50-322-89-5, NUDOCS 8904140478
Download: ML20248J583 (6)

Text

-- - - _-_ ____ -

. - , .i

,

, L

.,

.. *-

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I  ;

.

Report No:- 50-322/89-05

Docket No: 50-322 l

License No: GEE Priority Categor j Licensee: Lona Island Liahtina Company Post Office Box 618 Shoreham Nuclear Power Station i Wadina River. New York 11792 ,

1 Facility Name: Shoreham Nuclear Power Station

- Inspection At: Wadina River. New York Inspection Conducted: March 14-17. 1989 Inspector: b~, [M ~

Craig Conf int 5enior Emergency 3[23P9

~d at~e Preparedness Specialist, DRSS Approved By: l 4% x em- 3 Jr

>

William Lazarjl W Chief, Emergency date Preparedness Section, FRSSB, DRSS Inspection Summary: Insoection on March 14-17. 1989. (Recort N /89-05)

Areas Insoected: A routine, announced emergency preparedness inspection was conducted at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. The inspection areas

- included: Changes to the Emergency Preparedness Program; Emergency-Facilities, Equipment, Instrumentation, and Supplies; Organization and Management Control; Knowledge and Performance of Duties (Training);

Independent Reviews / Audits; and Licensee Actions on Previously Identified Finding Results: No violations were identifie PDR ADOCK 05000322 Q PDC

..

. .

.

'

.

DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted The following licensee rep'r esentatives attended the exit meeting held on March 17, 198 G. Kreiger, On-site Emergency Preparedness Supervisor R. Grunseich, Operations Compliance Engineer C. Daverio, Manager, Nuclear Operations Support L. Britt, Manager, Licensing Division R. Gutmann, Assistant Manager, Nuclear Operations Support D. Crocker, Manager, Nuclear Emergency Preparedness E. Stergakos, Manager, Radiation Protection Division C. Seaman, Acting Manager, Nuclear Quality Assurance W. Steiger, Assistant'Vice President, Nuclear Operations G. Gisonda, Supervisor,' Nuclear Licensing The inspector also interviewed and observed the activities of other licensee personne .0 Doerational ' Status of the Emeraency Preparedness Proaram Chanaes to the Emeraency Preparedness Proaram There have been no significant changes to the licensee's emergency preparedness program since the last inspection. Changes which have taken place have been minor and have been determined to not adversely affect the licensee's overall state of emergency preparedness. Revisions are reviewed by the Review of Operations Committee.(ROC) and approved by the Plant Manager prior to implementatio The inspector reviewed the status of the Public Information Brochure (PIB). Although the PIB has not been issued, the PIB is developed, and is in the form of a booklet for all Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ.) residents and businesses. Specific parts of the PIB are utilized in the form of posters and instructions for recreational areas. The PIB contains emergency instructions and directions, as well as educational information. The program is designed such that a PIB will be issued for each sector in the

' EPZ. Additionally, a farmers Brochure will be distributed to all L EPZ residents along with the PIB. Provisions are in place to distribute the Farmers Brochure within the Ingestion Pathway Zone

,

if required.

l Based upon the above review, this area is acceptabl .2 Emeraency Facilities. Eouipment. Instrumentation and Supplies The inspector toured the Technical Support Center (TSC),

J

. _ _ _ _

.. ,

ll .

.

L c .

.

Operations Support Center (0SC), Emergency Operations Facility (E0F) and the Emergency News Center (ENC). These facilities are adequate to support emergency response and are in agreement with the Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures (IPs). Checks of equipment and supplies revealed that the equipment is regularly inventoried, instrumentation is calibrated as required, and equipment and instruments were operable. The inspector observed the operation of several systems including the Corporate Information Computer System, Radiation Monitoring System and Safety Parameter Display System. These systems were available for operation and were operated correctl The inspector also reviewed the Emergency Response Facility (ERF)

ventilation system in place to meet the NUREG 0737, Supp. I habitability commitmeni.s. The TSC Ventilation System is designated for the TSC/0SC. This system is tested periodically for filter capacities, charcoal efficiencies and total system flow. The. system was placed in operation in accordance with Emergency Plan Implementing Procedure (EPIP) 1-9, Technical Support Center Activation. The system operated as intended and the operator was able to verify that the dampers stroked to the proper positions and that the TSC/0SC envelope was under a positive pressure. The inspector recommended that the licensee reference the station procedure that documents system operation within EPIP 1-9, and that they consider placing pressure boundary signs on each door of the TSC/0SC envelop Based upon the above review, this area is acceptabl .3 Organization and Manaaement Control The inspector reviewed the normal staffing organization as it pertains to emergency preparedness and noted that no changes have taken place. The Manager, Nuclear Emergency Preparedness serves as Emergency Preparedness Coordinator (EPC). He reports through the Manager, Nuclear Operations, the Assistant Vice President Nuclear Operations, the Vice President Nuclear Operations, to the President. The Plant Manager also reports to the Assistant Vice President Nuclear Operations. Management support for emergency preparedness was evident at all level The EPC is responsible for all off-site and on-site emergency planning and for implementation of the program. The EPC has a large staff divided in three functional areas. These areas are on-site, off-site plans and facilities, and off-site drills and training. All portions of the program are under the EPC's direct purview or review. The normal emergency planning staff is sufficient to perform all necessary tasks to maintain the emergency preparedness progra The inspector reviewed the Emergency Response Organization (ER0)

and determined that there have been no major changes since the

_ _ _ _ _ - _ _

- - -_

. .

-

(

.

.

last inspection. Personnel turnover has been low to moderat The inspector was. able to determine that most ERO positions are three deep or more. The inspector noted that the EPC evaluates and provides a monthly report to management regarding ERO  ;

shortfalls and actively strives to cover these short fall '

The ERO call-out is accomplished by a combination of pagers and telephone calls. Additionally,' key staff are assigned to a rotating duty roster which is updated quarterly or as neede Based upon the above review, this area is acceptabl .4 Knowledae and Performance of Duties (Trainina)

The licensee maintains a roster of personnel designated for assignment to the ERO which is' approved by the Vice Presiden These individuals are trained and subsequently assigned to the ER Initial training is provided to the ER0 and retraining is provided annually. The inspector verified that training for the ERO is being conducted in accordance with EPIP 5-4, " Emergency Preparedness Program Training". Training is current for all members of the ERO, except for one individual. This individual was scheduled for training prior to the end of the inspectio All training records are maintained in the Corporate Information Computer System under the Training and Qualification subsyste All company employees are contained within the system with emergency preparedness as a subset. Each record details the individual, ERO position, training modules required, qualification status, date qualified and date of expiration. This program is reviewed every two months, training needs are identified and department managers are informed of personnel needing training and training is scheduled. Additionally, the Training Department issues a monthly report to department managers detailing the training needs for all employees. This system was accessible and very easy to use. Additionally, hard copy records, including tests and test results, are kept in the emergency preparedness offic Random checks indicated that these records were up to date. These records were also accessible and easy to us ,

Lesson plans were reviewed and determined to be current and approved. Although lesson plans are reviewed yearly, if changes are not necessary there is no other documentation available to show these reviews were accomplished. The licensee is currently revising all lesson plans to conform to the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations methodologies. Approximately one third are complete, one third are in progress and completion is scheduled for May 31, 1989. This program will require annual documentation of lesson plan reviews. Test and question banks are maintained and acceptance criteria is clearly state Based upon the above review, this area is acceptabl l

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

. .

.

'

,

2.5 Independent Reviews / Audits The Quality Assurance department performs the annual emergency preparedness audit. The audit was conducted on November 28 -

December 2, 1988 and on December 14, 15, and 22, 1988. The audit included both program and performance elements. The assigned audit team consisted of individuals experienced in audits as well as emergency preparedness. The team utilized an audit checklist that was very detailed and complete. The audit adequately identified areas requiring corrective action, as well as reviewed off-site interfaces. A corrective action system is in place and utilized to track t>ese areas to completion. The audit was formally distributed to senior management and the Nuclear Review Board (NRB). The inspector was able to determine that the Local Emercency Response Organization (LER0) was made aware of the audit interface areas by virtue of the LERO Executive Committee as well as the NRB. The inspector recommended that this process be formalized by including the LER0 Executive Committee on report distributio .

t The inspector reviewed the drill program and determined that all drills, exercises and tests were conducted in accordance with EPIP 5-5, " Preparation, Conduct and Documentation of Emergency Preparedness Drills and Exercises". Documentation was complete and corrective actions performed as appropriate. The inspector ;

noted that a summary report for management was rut prepared for the annual medical drill. Many required drills were conducted in concert with a larger drill. The inspector recommended that the licensee clearly indicate in the drill objectives and drill summary when drills are being combined. The licensee maintains a detailed and thorough commitment tracking and corrective action syste The inspector noted that several improvements have been instituted for the drill program including the use of the Radiation Monitoring System in a drill accident mode, and in the use of mockups in the fiel The inspector observed a training drill conducted on March 15, 1989. This drill included partial activation of the EOF and full activation of the ENC as well as the LER0 Emergency Operations Center (E0C). The drill date was announced but the start time was not. The drill was started at 0640 by initiating the call-out system. ENC activation was prompt. Several press briefings were held and the ENC spokesperson, as well as the LER0 spokesperson, were knowledgeable and responsive, and adequately and promptly answered questions from the playing pres Based upon the above review, this area is acceptabl _____m_, __ __.__. _

- .

.

. . l

i i Response to Actual Events The inspector reviewed the licensee's response to bomb threats received July 4, 1987, August 5, 1987 and December 4, 1987. Each of these events was classifiea as an Unusual Event. Notifications were prompt and correct. Security actions were conservative. The I

'

licensee maintains a file of each event including the sequence of events, logs and forms and a report to management. As a result of these events, the licensee clarified their emergency classification procedure to provide guidance on credible bomb threat Based upon the above review, this area is acceptabl .0 Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findinas During the inspection, the inspector reviewed the licensee's progress concerning the items opened during previous inspections (Inspection Report No. 50-322/88-05). (Closed) (50-322/88-05-01): The technical spokespersons at the ENC did not adequately explain technical issues raised for certa'.n questions and answers were not provided for several question See section .0 Exit Meetina The inspector met with licensee personnel denoted in Section 1 at the conclusion of the inspection to discuss the scope and findings of this inspection as detailed in this repor The licensee was informed that no violations were identified. Several areas of improvement were discussed. The licensee acknowledged these findings and agreed to evaluate them and institute corrective actions as appropriat At no time during this inspection did the inspector provide any written information to the licensee.