IR 05000334/1985019

Insp Rept 50-334/85-19 on 850917-20.No Violation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Status of Changes to Emergency Program & Participation in 850919 Emergency Exercise

ML20133K535
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	10/15/1985
From:	Harpster T, Rich Smith, Vito D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20133K530	List: IR 05000334/1985019 ML20133K527
References
50-334-85-19, NUDOCS 8510220133
Download: ML20133K535 (6)

Text

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

.

'

,

!

!

!

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report N /85-19 I l

Docket N t

,

$

!

i License No. DPR-66 Priority -

Category _ .- ;

t Licensee: Duquesne Light Company One Oxford Center, 301 Grant Street -

Pittsburgh, pennsylvania 15219 -

,

I Facility Name: Beaver Valley Power Station Unit 1 l

'a  ;

, Inspection At: Shippingport, Pennsylvania

'

'l Inspection Conducted: September 17-20, 1985

{

Inspectors: /O /t D. ' ito Senio Emergency Preparedness Specialist '/dalte

~

) <> '//$ l R /fi . 'Smi t'h E6ergency Preparedness Specialist datf

/

i l

t G. Arthur, Battelle, PNL i

, C. Gordon, NRC, Region I  !

! C. Hawley, Battelle, PNL  !

1 G. Martin, Battelle, PNL i M. Stein, Battelle, PNL Approved by: ) [C/f)[\ l T.' fjbrpster, iief / dgte l

EmergeAcy Prepar{gness Section, DRSS - Inspection Summary: Inspection on September 17-20, 1985 (Report No. 50-344/85-19

[

Areas Inspected: Routine announced emergency preparedness inspection to review the status of changes to the Emergency Program and to observe the  !

licensee's annual partial participation emergency exercise performed on [

l September 19, 1985. The inspection involved 166 inspector hours by a team l

of seven NRC Region I and NRC contractor personne i Results: No violations were identified. The licensee's emergency response I actions for this exercise scenario were adequate to provide protective  ;

j measures for the health and safety of the publi !

I

l $5A o *$0lE S ,

! o i r

!

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

.

.

DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted The following licensee representatives attended the exit meeting on September 20, 1985:

D. J. Aley, Engineer, Nuclear Operations R. F. Balcerek, Manager, Management Service E.'J. Barth, Director, Personnel Administration D. W.'Blair, Director, Radiological Health Service T. W. Burns, Director, Operations Training C. P. Bussick, Senior Mechanical Maintenance' Engineer J. J. Carey, Vice President, Nuclear Group A. E. Castagnacci, Health Physics Specialist J. M.. Clark, Radcon Foreman E. D. Cohen, Senior Health Physics Specialist M. Coppula, Shippingport Representative C. I. Custer, Station Mechanical Maintenance Engineer R. J. Druga, Manager, Technical Services D. E. Faller, Director, Administrative Services K. D. Grada, Nuclear Station Operations Supervisor J. F. Grogan, Communications Specialist R. L. Hansen, Director, Site Maintenance T. D. Jones, General Manager, Nuclear Operations J. A. Kosmal, Manager, Radcon J. F. Kowalski, ORC Coordinator W. S. Lacey, Plant Manager V. J. Linnenbom, Director, Plant Chemistry A. T. Lonnett, Health Physics Specialist J. H. Lukehart, Director of Security R. M. Mafrice,- Director, Generator & Plant Engineering J. W. McIntire, Environmental Coordinator W. J. Mercer, Senior Test Coordinator D. J. Miller, Direct'or, Emergency Planning T. P. Noonan, Director, Site I & C J. F. Rathke, I & C Support Coordinator J. D. Sasala, Nuclear Information Specialist ,

F. D. Schuster, Nuclear Shift Supervisor J. D. Sieber, General Manager, Nuclear Service H. M. Siegel, Manager, Engineering G. S. Sovick, Senior Compliance Engineer J. E. Starr, Supervisor, Engineering Management Service J. Summers, Nuclear Operations Coordinator D. L. Swofford, Radcon Foreman N. R. Tonet, General Manager, Nuclear Engineering and Construction R. M. Vento, Director, Radiological Engineering H. J. Wacker, Engineer, Nuclear Operations The team observed and contacted several licensee personnel prior to and during the exercis .

.

.

2.0 Changes to the Emergency Preparedness Program The inspectors verified that changes to emergency facilities, equipment, and instrumentation since the previous inspection had been incorporated into the Emergency Plan and Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures (EPIP's). The inspectors also reviewed Issue ~8, Rev. O to the Emergency Plan that was effective October 23, 1984 and all revisions to EPIP's from June 28, 1984 to August 27, 198 .0 Emergency Exercise The Beaver Valley partial participation exercise was conducted on September 19, 1985, from 7:00 a.m. to 3:35 .1 Pre-Exercise Activities Prior to the emergency exercise, NRC Region I representatives had telephone discussions with licensee representatives to review the scope and content of the exercise scenario. As a result, minor revisions were made to the scenario and the supporting data sheet The NRC observers and licensee' controllers / observers attended a scenario briefing on September 18, 1985. The changes in the scenario and the emergency response actions expected during the various phases of ~the scenario were discussed, t

'

The exercise scenario included the following events:

• Reactor coolant leak;

Malfunction of containment. inner air lock door;

.

Contaminated injured individuals requiring hospitalization;

!

'

Puncture of RWST by a high pressure oxygen bottle;

• Reactor trip;

Hydrogen burn and emergency hatch malfunction in containment; I ~* Reactor core degradation;

=

Release of radioactivity; and

*

Implementation of the Recovery Organizatio The above events caused the activation of the licensee's emergency facilities and also permitted the states ard local government agencies to exercise their Emergency Plan .2 Activities Observed

_During the conduct of the licensee's exercise, NRC team members made

' detailed observations of the activation and augmentation of the emergency organization; activation of emergency response facilities; and actions of emergency response personnel during the operation of the emergency response facilitie The following activities were observed:

I

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

. ,

4 .

-

4'

*

Detection, classification, and assessment of the scenario events;

Direction and coordination of the emergency response;

Notification of licensee personnel and offsite agencies of pertinent information;

Assessment and projection of radiological (dose) data and consideration

, of protective actions; *

' *

Provisions for in plant radiation protection;

Performance of offsite, onsite, and in plant radiological surveys;

Maintenance of site security and access control;

. .

. Performance of technical support;

Performance of repair and corrective actions;

'

4 *

Assembly and accounting for personnel;

Performance of first aid and rescue;

,{ *

Provisions for information flow to the public;-

*

Communications /information flow, and record keeping; and i

! *

Management of Recovery Operation i

3.3 Exercise Observations j

The NRC team noted that the licensee's activation and augmentation of the i

emergency organization; activation of the emergency response . facilities;

'

and actions and use of the facilities were generally consistent with their  ;

emergency response plan and implementing procedures. The team also noted '

the following actions of the licensee emergency response organization that were indicative of their ability to cope with abnormal plant condition !

Emergency response personnel were knowledgeable in their assignments

) and the emergency procedures. Individuals were conscientious and in '

t general, demonstrated that'they were competent in performing their '

assigned function ,

'

Status and information displays were maintained and continuously l'

1 updated at the emergency facilities.

ll l

The command positions in the emergency facilities were changed in a i

'

timely and effective manner by shift turnovers, and detailed briefings were conducted.

i

Frequent and comprehensive communications were maintained in the EOF

with the representatives of the three state .

}

t

.The offsite monitoring teams were well co'ordinated and properly positione ,

The news media center presentations were thorough and informativ *

Dose assessment projections for both-the liquid and gaseous releases were accurate and timel ,

The fire brigade response to an actual event, when the exercise was f delayed, was indicative of an active training progra !

. i

!

?

'

h

[

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

.

.

.

The following areas were identified which require licensee attention:

Evaluate EPIP 3.2, " Personnel Accountability", since there was confusion regarding accountability of personnel in the assembly areas (50-334/85-19-01).

Plant data sheets were used in the Control Room instead of obtaining information from the computer which caused some confusion in other locations. All emergency facilities should use the same source for incident data (50-334/85-19-02).

The issuance of emergency dosimetry to personnel in the ERF was slow and inefficient (50-334/85-19-03).

The following health physics practices regarding contaminated and injured individuals contributed to a degraded performance (50-334/85-19-04:

Response team members had untaped openings on protective clothing;

Badges and dosimeters handled by potentially contaminated hands;

Contaminated individual instructed to don coveralls prior to completion of surveys; and

Rad technician was prompted to recora personnel survey result *

Provide habitability survey requirements for each of the Emergency Facilities when they are activated and occupied (50-334/85-19-05).

4.0 Licensee Actions on Previously Identified Items The inspectors confirmed that adequate protective actions had been implemented regarding all but on2 of the items identified during the annual emergency exercise conducted on June 27, 1984, and these items are considered closed. The item that has not been corrected and remains open is:

The Radcon Operations Center (ROC) does not contain adequate space (50-334/84-19-06).

5.0 Licensee's Critique The NRC team attended the licensee's post-exercise critique on September 20, 1985, during which lead licensee controllers discussed observations of the exercise. The critique adequately addressed the areas which were identified requiring further evaluation to prevent recurrenc _-- - - _ _

O

,

.

..

5.1 Exit Meeting The NRC team met with the licensee representatives listed in Section on September 20, 1985. The NRC team leader summarized the observations made during the exercis The licensee was informed that no violations were observed and that within the scope and limitations of the scenario, the licensee's performance demonstrated that they could implement their Emergency Plan and Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures in a manner which would adequately provide for the health and safety of the publi At no time during the inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector