IR 05000346/1990011
| ML20043A863 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 05/16/1990 |
| From: | Dan Barss, Foster J, Snell W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20043A848 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-346-90-11, NUDOCS 9005230210 | |
| Download: ML20043A863 (11) | |
Text
.'
-
m
.,.
-
.
.,
w
<
s :..
.,
.
,
'A'
'
- [j
g_,s
,
.
,,
, 3.;g.
..
3:, '
'U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION-oe
-
.REGIONilII
[
'ReportNo.'50-346/90011(DRSS)
e
. Docket No.~50-346 License _o qNPF-33 N.
'
.
- Licensee
- i fToledo' Edison Company _
,
Edison-Plaza 300 Madison' Avenue 7*
. _ _
" Toledo,10H 143652!
,
Facility.Name: : Davi s-Be s se ;Nucl ea rl Powe rl Stati ori,7 Uni t' l'
Davis-BesseJSite,0aklHarbor,30hio=
'
Inspection'At: L
'
-
J Inspection Conducted: : April' 30 through: May 3,.1990 =
,'
Qhd j
'
.>
- N /4 0 Inspectors: LJ. Tosterc
'
'
"
/
-
.Date,
,
jglb
"
];
=
'D. Barss:
f.
,
.
LDatec
>
Approved-By: - W1111am' Snell,l Chief-
.
T*
-
. Radiological Controls and
.
. Da'te.
..
. Emergency Preparedness'Section
"'
.
,
. Inspection Summary-
_
~
- 1 Inspection' on April 30 through?May 3.> 1990 -(Report No.95'0-346/90011(DRSS))i d
- Areas Inspected:-Routine,-announced 1 inspection of the:fol; lowing;ar.eas:of the
-
Davis-Besse. Nuclear Power Stationi Unitol emergency:preparednessiprogram:
' licensee action on previously-identified' items 3(IP 92701); followup on;a~ctual,
emergency' plan.' activations (IP -92700); and operational l status ofithel emergency
-
preparedness programL(IP 82701)..The inspection involved;two NRClinspectors.
Results: No-violations,-deficiencies :or deviationi.were; identified:dur.ing :
-
.this inspection.
ThelDavis-Besse Nuclear. Power; Station' Emergency Preparedness;
'l
,
pregram' continues betwell thought-out1and wellemaintained.
l d
q
!l
- !.j
'
{fy-n 9005230210 900'J6 PDR-ADbCK 050DO346
'
'
Q PDC
.
,
, [1
..(
j I..!
-
.j
,
,.
,,
,
. w a.
.
.
..
.
.
=
-
--
<
-
-
,
,
,
..
t
,g.-
7,.
"
'
"
.
,
...
,
1,,
-.
l
,
_
3. ;.
DETAILS
.
.
y
1.-
Persons Contacted
"
'
,
- B. DeMaison, Emergency Preparedness Manager;
.
- B.-Cope, Onsite Emergency.. Preparedness
.
- G. Honma, Compliance Supervisor, Licensing
.
.
-*B.oAn;drews, Quality Assurance
- J. Basa,xEmergency Preparedness; j
- W.1 Comit.gs',' NISH
..
a
- M._Findlay,wEmergency: Preparedness; j
- G.~ Grime,? Security'.
'
-
- R. R1shel,-Quality Assu_rance-
,
,
,
s,
"M. Bezilla, Operations
- D. Gordon, Emergency Preparedness
"
- T..Meyers,< Technical-Services -Director
.
~
.
,
- TheLabove personnel _ attended the May 3, 1990. exit: interview..
,,
The. inspector also" contacted other members offtheLlicensee!s stafffduring,
~
the course of.the-inspection'.
~.'
'
"
2.'
Licensee Action on' Previously Identified Items:(IPL92701); *
-
a.
_(Closed) Open' Item Ho; '50-346/86007-06:.This; item wassopenedlin?
April 1986, to track needed: improvements t'obthe) Emergency l Action Level scheme which would simplify initialTno.tification? messages; to State and loca1 -officials,by enhancing communication [of plant:
L L
~
'
con'ditions and "the Emergency Action LevelsTutilizedhforLemergencyj
- 4 classification.. These changes were madeLpriorrto;1987;Tand are)
.
referenced in NRC' Inspection ReportiNo.-50-346/87016L(Section.5).(
as-having been: completed,_withLthe:commentithat:thel0penLItem wasa closed via an earlier NRC d.'spection: reportL(50-346/87.008). _ Thef referenced NRC" report did not orovide~a status?off,NorDelose the10 pen-
~
Item, so this item has remained on the,ToledoLEdison%Regulatoryf Management System (TERMS) trackins system (TERMSLA11953)?awaitingi closure..The currentLnotification~ forms and_ Emergency Action. Level:
>
scheme-have received several modifications over!theRintervening._
l-
'"
h years, and have proved:effectiveEin drills and exercises.!LThisiitem-is closed.
b.
(Closed)-Open' Item-No. 50-346/89018-01:
DuringfhA[dugu'st1989.
b annual Emergency Exercise, the. individual notifying the:NRC-did not. utilize the'NRC Event. Notification Worksheet,1and' complete-L information was lacking.. The licensee.has complet,ed retraining.
L of all licensed personnel. (Senior: Reactor;0perators and ? Reactor-
'
m Operators).on the f uset of the correcttform -as' required by procedure.
U This training specificallyidealt.ich.theuse'of-the NRC Event
. Notification Worksheet when communicating _with thstNRC, and m_ention:
was made of the other.available worksheets for' local.and State-i agencies. This _ item is closed.
1L
A
,
'
- .
i
%
^
-
'
pa
,
,
,
WLU
.,
y
'
.
c,7
,
c.
-(0 pen) Open Item No; 50-346/89018-02:
Review of the' licensee
- dose projection program indicated that-the program did not.
-
-include provisions for assessment"of-offsite: radiation doses-
,
l M
'under lakebreeze conditions. -Licenseefdocuments indictted that-
~
o Procedures HS-EP-02230 :and HS-EP-02240 have been revisad to -
..
,
address the lakebreeze effect..-Revisions =to-Procedure HS-EP-02245 remain to be completed. This item willHremain'open.
d.
(0 pen) Open Item No. 50-346/89018-03:
Ths* Data Acquisiti_on System:.
.*
.
~ component dedi_cated to. dose calculation had not receivedJanyLformal-
'
verificationiand. validation as a dose _ assessment system.
Discussion:
a with. licensee: personnel indicated that vr.rification and validation-of the dose assessment' program-is in' progress essentially;as
lscheduledL butthas not been completed. This itea'wi11' remain open.
~
,
Based'upon the above findings,'this. portion of the? licensee's program _was
~
acceptable.
'
'
'
'
~ 3.1 Emergency Plan ActivationsL(IP-92700)'
'c
- Licensee and NRC records of. actual emergency plan-activations for the'
'
period ~May 15, 1989 (last routine emergency prepa_rednessLinspection);
; -
.
,
through April,.'1990 were reviewed.
During this time periodhthe' licensee?
'
did not' declare any actual events.
,q-Discussion with licensee personnel and. review of documentation associatedL _
with the last classifiable' event: indicated'that1there istminimal procedural-i direction to; initiate the assembly of documents /and other information:
,
'
prtaining to actual: Emergency Plan activationsi Relevantiguidancefis j
found in Emergency Plan Implementing Procedure HS-EP902720;DRecovery
'
Organization ~. Additionally, Nuclear Group Procedure NG-QA-00702',:
" Potential Conditions Adverse to Quality /ReportingS would pro' vide-additional direction in. documenting and evaluati_ngLactual.: activation's of-
]
the emergency: plan.
!
-
'
.
Neither of the above documents ensure'a thorough review of: actual events-
-from an Emergency Planning viewpoint. ~ Evaluation of;the"actionsitaken i
during actual Emergency Plan activationsLeaniprovide valuable 11nsight; l
l into weaknesses in the Emergency ' Plan'or.its! implementation _ Ideally; a
package-containing pertinent ControlLRoom 'og pages, notification forms, resultant memoranda, deviation reports, critique sheets,,and' media reports ~
'
!
.
is assembled. The package is:then-reviewed by Emergency Preparedness
personnel for adherence -with the, Emergency' Plan, < Implementing Procedures and action. time goals. -Any corrective action items developed from-thei
,
review-can also be: referenced to the package.
u-
<.q Based upon the above findings,'this portion of the' licensee's program was
-
acceptable. However, the following item is recommended for' improvenient;
l L
r
't
L
,
)
va
- =-
.-
>.
..
-
- q-
.
,
..
.
,
,
-
-
- The licensee'should' develop add'itionalfprocedural'gu'idance.
- to ensure that actual activations of the
- Emergency Plan:are evaluated in a : consistent. manner; from an Emergency; Plsnning -
viewpoint.:
4.
~ Operational-Status'of the' Emergency Preparedness Program (IP 82701)-
a. _. : Emergency Plan and-Implementing Procedures?
_By< letter dated February 27, 1990' NRCLRegionL IIITstaffLdocumented :
,
-their' review and' approval of" revision 113 toLthe Emergency Plan'
> for' the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 11/which had :an -
'ef fective date ofc December '14,1989.. Review of the revisions 1made to_the emergency preparedness program indicated that major changes had not;been made; Land-these changes hadinot, adversely affected'the overall state'of. emergency preparedness.,-Licensee-personnel?were e
aware that changes to.the: Emergency PlanLdetermined toJdecreas'eithe
effectiveness offthe plan-couldinot'be implemented withou*t priortNRC s
t
. approval.
_
Review and' updating ofothe Emergency Planlisicovered:in general-
.
fashion _.in Sectio'n 8.3,<" Review'and;UpdateLof_the: Emergency Plan andt Emergency Plan Procedures" The? inspector di.scussed,the1 procedure
'(NG-IH-00115,." Preparation and Control of Nuclear-GroupDDepartment" and Section/ Unit Procedures",1 Revision 6) directingireviewn
'
modification and approval'of changesLto thel 11censee's, Emergency-Plan and' Emergency: Plan limplementingiprocedures.; Site procedures
--provide for theiappropriate-distribution 20f plan modifications onsite, and _ plan -change transmittal toithe 'NRC within 30Ldays' bf approval.
.The. inspector verified':that current copies of the Emergency 1 Plan and
,
Implementing Procedures were;avallable:in the~onsite;Emergencya d.
Response Facilities ~ (ERFs) and,the ControlE Roomi
. Based upon the above' findings, thisiportion of:the licensee'st program was acceptable.
~h.
Emergency Response Facilities (ERFi), Equipment,:and: Supplies
>
The onsite ERFs (Control Room, Satellite Technical: Support. Center, Technical Support Center, Operational' Support' Csnter,LEmergency
-
Control Center,LRadio1_ogical= Testing Laborator,y [RTL],iJoint Public-
Information Center) were toured and were'as; described inLthe-Emergency Plan and relevant Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures'
(EPIPs).
All facilities' appeared to' be clean, orderly, and 'in an.
excellent state of operational readiness.
Emergency Notification System telephones (NRC " Red Phones") were successfully tested ini
,]
the and the Control. Room. ' Inspection of a representative sample-of.
j essential. equi d
problem ' areas.pment,. inst umentation and supplies did'not : reveal' any Lj I
,
]
,.
J kn
,
,
n
,
.
.
fj
_
~
,.
.
.
,,
,
t c
,
,.
"
..
.,
f& -
t A selective review of complet d checklists, for the period May,_
L1989 through April, 1990_ indicated that the-licensee'had' completed-
.i procedurally required periodic communications equipment checks,.
first aid' supplies inventories,-and inventories 1of Health Physics:
,
and office supplies. reserved for 'uso-by emergency responders as requi' red by Emergency Plan Administrative Procedure.HS-EP-00600-
~
'" Emergency. Facilities and Equipment: Maintenance Program," Inventory;
.
~
check 11sts specified minimum i
everi fication of theJ supplies' quantities.of? items'and Lreaut red
- locations'and completeness..-
i
"
-TheLEmergency Preparedness. Group ~ utilizes the: Emergency Planning'.
-
' Activity Schedulin.g System (EPASS);programL t.o schedule ~ periodic j
-
emergency. preparedness activities;Ea subset..of Lthis. program is1the:
Reoccurring Activity Tracking System (RATS) which prompts. activities; i
.such as equipment inventories.: '. Appropri. ate. inventory checklistsi
_
tt addressed periodic' replacement ofyperishablejitems,: verification of
- the" current calibration of survey,instrumentsfand air _ samplers, and.
q
.
functional tests of, battery powered equipment.
Inventory procedures:
-included-provisions foriconducting inventories after use of the?
.
.
supplies or: following discovery -of. an ' unsealed supply container, in
.'
additioiV thelperiodic; inventory requirement.
~
j
.
,
Records-reviewed!1ndicate'd that problems-_ identified 'during :
~
..
.
inventories and communications. equip.nent checks!had been corrected i in a timely manner.
'
'
a Based upon the above findings,.this portionfof theElicensee's~ _
d program was acceptable.
~ '
'
l+
,
- c.
Organization and Management Controli
Overall organization and managementocontroltofitheLDavis-Besse'
Emergency Preparedness program'is unchanged from the last' routine-l inspection, conducted May,.1989. No major. changes;have been made--
o
'
!;
in the responsibilities, authorities and staffing ofokey emergency
.
response personnel',~ orlinterfaces and coordination,between onsite,
,
_
of fsite, and corporate organizations.
~
The two' Supervisors - Onsite and Offsite Emergency Preparedness
- -
report to'the Manager - Emergency Preparedness, who reports to'the Director - Technical Services,' who reports to,the;Vice-President-g
?
Nuclear. There_ are presentlyta' < total of"fif teen / people assigned to l
the.Onsite.and Of fsite' Emergency _ Preparedness sections, and-twerity;
people are assigned duties in the= Emergency Preparedness
'
organization.
[
The corrective action _ tracking systems in place during the previous ~-
[
p inspection remained in use:during 1990.
The tracking systemsfalso i
tracked onetime and: periodic action items.
'
'
f h
.(
'
,
'
i d
.
-
e.
,
.
'
t>
x
!
<+
'
.
?;
.(y
,. -
r
.
l
~
Adequate h
and suppo, numbers of personnel 1 ave;been identified forLspecific lead-
~;
rt positions.in the:onsite Emergency Response Organization-
.i (ERO)' Administrative systems;were~in use totensure:that ERO-
.t members and; thetF supervisors :were: informed of the formers' ~ ER0'
membership.
The'callout procedure for the onsite ERO has been
.
'
d
= updated on a quarterly basis.
J-i
'
' Based upon.the:above findings; this-_ portion of the lisensee's'
program was. acceptable <
~
-
{
.
d
- d. : Training:
4a TheJrequired ' annual EP training! program' for.' members.of-the 'onsite -
Emergency Response Organization:(ERO)~ consisted of classroom sessions, required readings of Emergency olanjImplementing; n
Procedures (EPIPs) and.s'ections.of: the: Emergency Plan" relevant:
' ;
'
ito" specific: ER0_ positionsLand walkthrough dr11.ls'.
,
_
u i
.The' licensee Emergency Response. Organization-(ERO) training matri.x,
-
found in Emergency; Plan Administ ative Procedure HS-EP-00100
" Emergency l Plan : Training Program", was reviewed._1Several! positions:
,
identified by-title'in'the' Emergency; Telephone directoryJwhich is?
,l the officialsERO listC wereEnot:readilyL1dentifiablelin the ERO
Training matrix.. Through' discussions with cognizant? licensee
'!
personne'l;..those, positions which were; not specifically: identified
.
in the training matrix.were, correlated to an< appropriate:titleithatP-was listed.
'
)4 One partictilar area'in which; lack of_ position correla' tion wasJmosti l
- noticeable 1was for those positions associated with1thefdointiPublic'
d Information' Center (JpIC).1 -Many of :the JPICLpositions were referenced to. by.a. team ' designation in the training matrix.. However,
,*
thel training matrix does not specify which individualsstby position ~
j
.
. title,-would make up these. teams. =~The onlyndocumentation which J
could be found.which could identify the position titlesiassociated:
!
,
with. these t'eams' was a' lower' tier document,n a JPIC: staf faTraining.
Lesson Plan, EPT-JST-104.00,. dated January 9,.1989, and an associated'_.
student handout-package;
.
-
[
y The training r' cords for randomly. selected individuals. asiigned:
- s e
.to 15 different1ERO positions were reviewed; A1.1.of the records-
'
reviewed indicated that ERO perso^nnel had received theftraining;
required by the established training matrix within-the-required'
time' limits. However; it wa.s.noted that.for several positions,z j
,
for example; Chemistry Supervisor;;Radwaste Supervisor;cRadw^aste
.
e Servicemen and Alarm Station Operators, no. specific' Emergency P1an -
'
-training was required, other than > that which.is normally. included t
,in General Orientation Training (GOT).
ItLis recommended.thatJthe training matrix clearly identify all-_ ERO. positions and trainingi
/
,
which is required for these ' positions. 'If team designations are_'
L.
used in the matrix, then the composition'of these teams'should be-
,
F,'
>.-
-
1
. _ -
~~-a~
- 4_'
.
t identified in upper tier' documents and not iniloweritier training l e s son -_ pl an s. : Also'all personnel assigned to1the ERO should: receive some specific training on-the unique organizational requirements established-for?the: facility they are assigned to during an-
' emergency response. iSupervisors should additionally be trained at least-to the same level as the'persont.el they are responsible ~
_for.
'
.
iThe: licensee has an ongoing: program to make appropriate't ai in ng:
,
r available to;h cal. support organizations who;may be: called on for=
.
assistance.
This program includes-local law enforcement agencies
'(Sherif f Department _ training in April,:1990)1 medical support organizations (four_. local hospitals and severalL ambulance squads)(
.
Fire departments '(two).
'
The licensee also has an ongoing program to provide educational.
information to the general public concerning emergency response actions. This program includes aEveryy attractive calendar withs m"
emergency information, distributed lto postal customers,ia Ltelephone-book insert,' and leaflets for:the transient; population.s
~
The Emergency Response Telephone' directory {isLut'ilized,asi hed t
official list of those currently _ qualified for emergency response -
positions. The listingJis updated quarterly,:, based onca; review.of the= assigned positions-.and printouts.from'the<Individuah Tr'ainingi Report Matrix.1 The requalif.ication period lfor emergency response.
training is fif teen months 1(' twelve months withia :" grace period"LofL
.
three months)'after which an individualiis' dropped from the'~
'
Emergency ResponseLTelephone Directory.
The Davis-Besse Emergency P.lan, secti_on 8.-l.2'" Drills and Exercises"
_provides_for periodic drills'.and exercises to be conducted "injorder to test the overall state.of, emergency preparedness'."
.
The Emergency Plan drill and exercise program is defined lin:
Emergency Plan; Administrative Procedure HS-EP-00200 (Revision 12,.
-
..
dated March-7, 1989). This procedure comprehensively defines the Emergency Plan drill and exercise program;; including planning,_
objectives,-scheduling, conduct, post-drill-' activities, and~
preparation of resultant reports.' A six year Exercise Program Plan a
and= annual drill program plan'are attachments to the procedure, as
well as checklists and eval' ation forms for various' dri11s/ exercises
- l u
and facilities.
-
1l
.
.
'j A review of the procedure was conducted.. Information contained-in
!;
NUREG 0654 is properly: referenced;as guidance. :It wasEnoted that
,
exercisr planning objective number 10 relates to. the" conduct of -
an unannounced annual exercise as a requirement 11n NUREG 0654, Criterion N.1.b.
Recent interpretations of this: portion of the NUREG indicate that conduct of' an unannounced ' annual exercise' is not a requirement.
!
>
- (.
d u
,
.
,
.
+
,
,
'c m
-
m'
.
'
~
s.; " >
-
,
.
,
.
..
-m
'j
-
i
..
,. -
a i
, _
,
,. _
[
- Drills provided for 'by-the ' procedure -include: - Communication l dril:1 s.:'
J fire drills, health physics drillsL medical drills i radiation '
-
~
.
monitoring drillsp and staff augmentation drills., Dri11 stare.
provided for, in the following frequencies-
!
. Communication-drills:
d
"
with-local government-
? monthly, j
.with Lfederali organizationsi
'quarterlyc
'
with'the;NRC (HQ_and RIJI).
-monthly **:
-
'
Fire-drills:
drill ~each. brigade
.
.quarterlyi
.[
announced brigade dr11:13
'semiannuallyi
S drill. on backshift f
1 semiannually
"
,
-drill evaluation :to NRC:
- onceLevery three years]
'
.....
'
. Heal th' Physi c s : Dri.1_15 :
.
.
.
,
it
.
. simulated airborne / liquid, semiannually-'
'
'1 l post accident sampling 1 system:
annually ~'
.
d
. Medical! Emerge'ncy Drillsi:
.
,
,
contaminated individual
_ annual-ly
. Radiological. Monit.oring ( Drill si
...
...
j
'
-plantuand;environsi-annually ***
.;
l
<
- Staff augmenh tion Drills:
.
s
^off-hours" augmentation, ssemiannuallyi j
- Discussion wit'h'.the RIII Incident Response.Ceordinator,:
I indicated that telephone checksito the RIII Incident Respon'sek
- -
a Center had notLbeen made.
I
.
.
L
'.. L
--
.
. -....
.
- The Lemergency : Plan indicates 3that Rad _iologicall Monitoring-Drills'will be conducted on ausemiannuallbasis.~
'~
.t
>
'
<
.
.i Section 8.1.2.c.3 of therEmergency Plan:(!'CommunicationsJLinks -
Tests"), in part~,! indicates-that communicatio,ns"betweent'the1Nuclears Regulatory Commission'(i.e. NRC; Headquarters (and,the' Region,III
- (
0perations Center) and the TSC, ECCJand Control? Room w1111be~ tested-
-
d
'
at'least monthly.
Asinoted'above;Lthis-ac. tion. Tis also reflected in:
the Implementing' Procedures. This has.not :been a' desired action Lon;
the-part of the licensee or7the NRC, and has not<beenl performed for some time.
It appears that this'has been overlookednin seve'ral
"
'
i annual Emergency Plan ~ reviews.
This.portioniof:the. Plan and -
j Implementing procedures should be deleted'in'the'next: revision.
This is an Open Item 346/90011-01.
,
.l w
,
,,
, -
'Section. 8.1.c.5.b of the. Emergency Plan -indicates that ' Radiation
. -
- i
.
.
f
' Monitoring Team -(RMT) drills will be conducted semiannually.
L However, Emergency Plan Administrative Procedure HS-EP-00200
'
l_
indicates that such drill will -be held on an annual basis.
I L
4
+
c a
f
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
-.
-
-,,
i
-
<
,
,
,
,s
,
y
.
.
f yv
~
g.y
- Discussion _ with licensee personne1 rand a' review of recent. records
. ; e._
'
%
indicated that'the RMT drills;are held semiannually, and'the-procedure,should be revised.torbe consistent with the. Emergency-Plan.
m
!The licensee's internalifinal critique-for the 1989 Evaluated'
Emergency-Preparedness (Exercise was reviewed. Thi s report-details,.
by facility., controller comments, both positiveLandinegative,1andL items which may-need corrective actions.:< Comments' made by the NRC;
.
exercise evaluation tern had beeneincorporated into the; report.
'
An appendix to the. report cont'ained. lead, controller; evaluations,.
,
facility;1ogs, notification-forms and :other ' records generated during-the exercise.
Items"requirin'g tracking:were -placed on; eitherzthe -
. Emergency Planning _ Activity Scheduling: System.(EPASS)6 Ma'intenancet
,
'
Work Order System, Reoccurring: Activity; Tracking: System (RATS).
or the Toledo EdisonL Regulatory Management = System (TERMS).s ! The licensee had determined:that al1~ exercise: objectives 4ad beenLmeti, but:that. Search and rescue needs -to? beimore. fully' demonstrated in the-19901 exercise.-
,
The following onsite EP drills;took place during 1990,;per..
'
..(
-Section 8.1.2 of,the Emergency. Plan: semiannual;HealthiPhysics
"
drills, annual medical drill; ' semiannual RMT. drill, and: semiannuali
.
,
staffing response time drill.
Records-indicated that; required ER
'
. drills' had been successfully. c'onducted, critiqued,;and adequatelyi documented:during 1990.
'
e A meeting was held withl representatives?of the:0hio' EPA, Ohio:
Emergency Management Agency,c: and offthe: countiesf of Erie,i Lucas, -
a
.0ttowa, and;Sandusky on March 15,'1989,Jin accordance with'thei
requirements of 10 CFR 50,: Appendix E (IV;B).1 Copies of:the station's EALs (procedure.HS-EP-01500 " Emergency-'Classificatio'n") L.
.
used to classify abnormal planticonditions, were provided for;~ eview r
and discussion..
Based upon the above findings, this; portion of.the.11censee's1 program was acceptable,
.
e.
Independent Reviews / Audits
..
.
..
- c Quality Assurance (QA) Department records of-1990 audits and
~ !
surveillances of the Station's EP program ~were reviewed... A11~
-
L V
records were complete and readily available.. The 1990 audits-
satisfied.the requirements of '10 CFR 50.54(t), including ' he
t requirement to make portions of the audit: dealing with the interface.
j with of fsite authorities available to offsite : authorities.
Records -
. 1 indicated that corrective actions were planned for identified problems, i
.
The' inspector reviewed Toledo Edison-Quality Assurance Audit
'
AR-90-EMpRP-01, the annual audit of'the' Davis-Besse. emergency
preparedness program, dated March 21, 1990. ~This audit was y
J
a y
,
E...
~... -.... -...
...
..
. =-.........
.
.
--
.
. _ _
-
=-
'
-
-
--
.
- - ~ -
-.
,3 s
yi
+
.
,
,
y
_
r
'
l4 i
,
/m 4 s..
,
,
, (I ~
-(
transmitted to'the Director,-. Technical Support via memorandum dated
March 29',L1990.
The a'udit had been conducted by five individuals
+
'
,during February 26 through1 March 9,;1990.- The-audit concluded thats s
the program was:"overall, veryl good.. Implementation;of the program.
/
is ef.fective.",.and resulted in two audit. finding reports (AFRs) and
~
eight$observationsi.Due to the recent dater ofthelaudit.fcorrective.
~
actions-had not been; completed.
g 1 Discussion withlQA department personnel-l indicated'that;1 n addition j
to the annual audit'of-the~ program, surveillances offthe annuali a
exercise " dry run!'i and annual exercise are-planned.
In general,-oneJ
'3 or more surveillances.of the Emergency Preparedness program take m.
place per calendar ' quarter./
~
'
>
. :,
,
Surveillances-are' conducted per QA Department Procedure QA-DP-00351
(Revision;2,-dated ApriT 6,11989).:;Thi.s procedure.provides:forfthe'
N planing', conduct, and documentation ofisurveillances. ; Surveillances
-
- are. meant to: compliment the audit.'andLinspection,activitiessand cani
-be scheduled orjunscheduled;
'
't
,'
- L-The inspector. reviewed surveil,1'nce SR-89-EMPRP-01~,-dated AugustL21, a
,
1989? which reviewed activities duringithe 1989; Emergency t
Preparedness Exercise conducted.during August:8-9;(1989. 'This:
a surveillance resulted in. five' recommendations. sNo def.icienciesswere.
j observed.
>
.
s Also reviewed was-Surve111an'ce. Report No;iSR-90-EMPRP-01, Dated)
,j
,
February 8,- 1990,'which reviewed activities during1the):1990.
j Emergency Preparedness Integrated Drill; held'.o'ncJanuaryc19,1990,
~
a i
The surveillance Eresultedlin Lfour) recommendations) ding: the'
10nelofcthe;
- }
recommendations was that discussions be Lheld1regar
,
po ssibili ty-of Equipment' 0perators: being: di spatchedi f rom: the ' Co'ntrol '
.
Room, not::the' Operations Support Center.' This recommendation lmay bel y
in error..After: the OSCiisLactivated;- best over all'coordinationiis:-
- !
accomplished when alliin pla'nt singletoperatorsorgteam' activities ('
7f are directed from theiOSC. :This relievesi the, Control Room.uf' the
- 1 additional burden of ' operatorbriefingi tracking,(and debriefing,
Some plants have allowed the Control-RoomLtoidispatch operators on'
i
'their cognizance.after the 0SC'has activated, but" exercise..
..
_
experience' has been that.this has often resulted in duplication.of f
effort or confusion as to whereLoperatorst are in the plant!
_
Also reviewed--(in final draft form) was' SR-90-EMPRP-20,Lwhich'
d reviewed radiological team monitoring training. lThe surveil. lance-
noted a minor procedural: deficiency, and. contained two; a
recommendations.
d W
Based upon the above findings, this portion of the licensee's i
program was acceptable.
-j
il 4-1;
.
,
i
- l q
-
- 10 i
g
-.t
-
o.
,
s
,
'
'
,.
k.
,,
e
g g,,,
,.
.
,:
n.-
- rw
<
-
m.
~e
- -
g
i
,m
' e.n,u -
~.
,
n:
+
-
'
,
- , a
.
,,
g,f;pgM
'3
'
'
t.
+,;.;
.
W
,'
-
c
>
'
y j
,,
.y
,
.m
<.,
m,; ;* s,
'
>
'
.. -
i
,
,
-
'\\ 4; f'_,
?
'
</ b
-;?
,
p
)
'
t
-.
,
L5... Exit interview (Ipt30703),3
s
- '
.
t
- . ;
. On May: 3,:1990', LtheD insp'ector<.' met with. thosellicensee' representatives J O
'
' identified c.in Section -1 to presenti. thel preliminaryn1.nspection findings.
The inspector.provided his' evaluation;that;the Davi's-BesseiNuclear Power k d
~
,
-
W.
Station emergency: preparedness program appears;to:beiwelll thought outland; y
-"
>
-
! adequately; maintained;-
'
-
d-Theilicensee ihdicated that' n'one' of'the matters-discussed duringithe exitj ~
,
q
.
.
.-
g.
..
W
..interviewfwere proprietary.3 j
,
q; h
- r
'
g Ts-
.i'
f s
.
>, -}t
'
s
s is n
g Y
$
!
s
-
'
t.
_
if
-
Ik.
j N,.
ij
'
,
-
M J:
,
d.'l k
,
A?
..
'k u
'
-e
- j
'
9;
,
t~
~
'
O
,,
5 i
+
s >
f.
y
.'T i '
T _*
b
- h h ;';
'
<
\\
At
.
"
'{
i s
>
,
.
. Yu
% f, f l
_3g-.
.
,
,
,
.
'
i
.n.
a
.
k c
w y
c.
[-
['i i x-f
,
V'
g' 3
>
- ,.
'
r
'y
.' I
)
Y
I a
-
u.
'
,
,
q
,
_
st
,F?
1 \\
.
.E r
-
l
,
ii
- l'
'
,
- !
'
i
.
~
I 1,g
7.
,
q-4 i
il M
,
,
a
,j,
f.}
(M@ n
%
'
g
,
,
3. J,s i
_ a' '
-
'.]
'~~
.
i O.'s
. i.
,
,
,,
,,,
.
.
., i,
.- '
'
,,
,.....
, L ',
,
--; /