IR 05000369/1988005

Insp Repts 50-369/88-05 & 50-370/88-05 on 880201-05.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Operational Readiness of Site Emergency Preparedness Program

ML20196H919
Person / Time
Site:	Mcguire, McGuire
Issue date:	02/23/1988
From:	Decker T, Gooden A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20196H832	List: IR 05000369/1988005 ML20196H827
References
50-369-88-05, 50-369-88-5, 50-370-88-05, 50-370-88-5, NUDOCS 8803140107
Download: ML20196H919 (8)

Text

_ _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _

__

_ *

.

-

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

-/" @Qtog

REGION il S ,j 101 MARIETTA STREET, * c ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323

'

• %, *

• • .* -

J FEB 2 31988 Report Nos.: 50-369/88-05 and 50-370/88-05 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Docket Hos.: 50-369 and 50-370 License Nos.: -NPF-9 and NPF-17 1 Facility Name: McGuire r

Inspection .onducted: February 1-5, 1988 Inspector: r r-d % F - /9 - BB A. Gooden Date Signed Approvedby: N Decker,SectionChief n - n ', - A'6 T Date Signed Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection was to assess the operational readiness of the site emergency preparedness program; and to determine if changes to the emergency preparedness program since the March 1987 inspection ,

meet NRC requirements, commitments, and the affect of changes on the overall  !

state of emergency preparedness. In addition, a review was conducted of i

licensee action on previously identified inspection findings, and followup on reportable events by the license Results: No violations or deviations were identifie I PDR ADOCK 05000369 o DCD

- - - - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ -

__

'

.

'

.

.

.

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees L. Abernathy, Shift Supervisor M. Goodman, Shift Support Technician

• B. Hamilton, Superintendent, Technical Services

• R. Leonard, Station Emergency Planner M. Maston, Shift Support Technician

• E. McCraw Compliance Engineer W. Sample, Superintendent, Integrated Scheduling R. Stutts, Supervisor, Instrument and Electrical '

Other licensee employees contacted included engineers, technicians, operators, security office members, and office personnel, i

NRC Resident inspectors

• R. Croteau

• D. Nelson

• W. Orders

• Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on February 5,1988, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 abov The inspector described the areas inspected and informed the licensee that there were no new items identified during this inspectio The licensee did not I identify as proprietary any of the material provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspectio . Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (Closed) Violation (50-369, 370/87-10-01): Failure to -provide annual l

, retraining to personnel assigned to the station emergency organizatio During the March 1987 inspection (Report Nos. 50-369,370/87-10), records of training for key members of the onsite and offsite emergency organization were reviewed. It was noted that three members of the emergency organization, designated as Alternate Performance Technician ,

had not received the required annual retraining for station emergency ;

response personne As a result, a Notice of Violation was issued for failure to provide annual retraining to emergency response personne The inspector reviewed the licensee's response to the Violation (dated May 5, 1987) and reviewed training records for the period March 1987 - October I

. .. _ - _ _ . - -

"

.

'

.

.

g

.

.

1987. The inspector noted that the licensee had provided training during i j

'

April 1987 to each of the three Performance Technicians. . In addition, annual emergency response training for randomly selected personnel i currently assigned as primaries and alternates to the Technical Support-

, Center was reviewed. No problems were noted. It appears as though the licensee had taken' action in accordance with .the response to the Violatio i j Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures (82701)

Pursuant to 10CFR50.47(b)(16), 10 CFR 50.54(q), and Appendix E to 10 CFR 50, this area was reviewed to determine whether changes were made to the program since the last routine inspection (March 1987) and to

,

assess the impact of these changes on the overall state' of emergency j preparedness. The inspector discussed with a licensee representative the I licensee's program for making changes to the Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures. The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedures (Section 4.0 of the Station Administrative Policy Manual, Section 13.0 of

.

the Compliance Manual, and Section P of the Emergency Plan) governing the ,

review, approval, and distribution of changes to the plan and procedure ;

The inspector verified that changes to the plan and procedures were reviewed and approved by management. It was also noted that changes were being distributed to copy holders in a timely manner, as evidenced by the  !

"

logbook containing dates for returned acknowledgement sheets and  :

"

discussions with select personnel shown on the distribution list found in Appendix 6 of the McGuire Emergency Plan. According to the procedure s governing the distribution of plan and procedure changes, all changes are

'

distributed by cover lette However, the inspector noted that the

,

licensee did not retain copies of the cover letter forwarding changes to

)

the NRC as documentation that revisions were submitted to NRC within 30 <

days of the approval date as required by 10 CFR 50.54(q). Licensee personnel when questioned regarding this matter, indicated 'that cover ,

letters were not maintained on file; once copy holders acknowledged ,

receipt of transmittals, the acknowledgement slip (containing information i such as procedure approval date, date of transmittal, date change made, ,

etc.) was discarded. The licensee further stated that the effective date l

, on the procedure cover sheet is also the date of distributio The !

inspector reviewed the following NRC copies for verification that  ;

j submittals were made within 30 days of the approval date:

i q No. 23 (Resident's copy of the Implementing Procedures)

"

RP/0/A/5700/01 dated 8/26/87, mailed to NRC August 31, 1987 RP/0/A/5700/02 dated 8/26/87, maiicd to NRC August 31, 1987 RP/0/A/5700/03 dated 8/26/87, mailed to NRC August 31, 1987 RP/0/A/5700/04 dated 8/26/87, mailed to NRC August 31, 1987

'

Station Directive 3.8.2 and Enclosures 1, 2, and 3, mailed August 31, 1987

l l

i

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

'

.

'

.

.

.

No. 49.12 (Region II's copy of the Emergency Plan)

Revision 21 dated May 5, 1987, transmittal date May 15, 1987 Revision 22 dated June 1, 1987, transmittal date June 8, 1987 Revision 23 dated November 23, 1987, transmittal date December 4, 1987 No problems were note All submittals were made within 30 days of the approval date. Subsequently, the inspector informed the licensee that there is no regulatory requirement for retaining copies of the dated cover sheet; however, the current procedure does not reflect industry practice for documenting that plan and procedure revisions are being submitted within 30 days of the approval date. The licensee representative agreed with this finding, and was informed that this matter would be considered as an inspector followup ite The licensee committed to revising Section 4.0 of the Compliance Manual to require retention of the cover letters fomarding changes to the NRC as a means of verifying that revisions were submitted within 30 days. The inspector was provided a copy of the approved, revised procedure (original date May 30, 1985, revision dated February 4,1988) prior to attending the exit intervie Consequently, this matter will not be tracked as an inspector followup item. During subsequent inspections, the implementation of this procedure will be examine No violations or deviations were identifie . Emergency Facilities, Equipment, Instrumentation, and Supplies (82701)

Discussions were held with a licensee representative concerning modifications to facilities, equipment, and instrumentation since the last inspection. The inspector was informed that the Crisis Management Center (CMC) had been relocated from the Wachovia Building in downtown Charlotte to the Duke Power Building. In addition, a dedicated Technical Support Center (TSC) has been approved and included in the budget for 198 ;

According to licensee representatives, it is anticipated that construction of this facility will be completed around July 199 An inspection and operability check was made of selected equipment and support items used for emergency response in the Control Room and TS In i the Control Room and TSC, the inspector observed the operability of the l meteorological data recording system and the Data Acquisition System, ho i problems were noted. In addition, the inspector requested and observed l communication checks from the Control Room using the Selective Signaling Phone (State and local warning points), and the Emergency Notification l System (NRC Operations Center). A two-way radio system to the local l government warning points was checked from both the Control Roem and TS j in assessing the operational status of the emergency facilities, the i inspector verified that protective equipment and supplies were operational J

and inventoried on a periodic basi Emergency kits from the Centrol .

Room, TSC, and Operational Support Center (OSC) were inventoried and  !

randomly selected equipment was checked for operabilit Selected

!

- - - - _ ___ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ._ _ _ _ _ _ __-_ -. ._ _____ _ _ __ _ - __ _ __\

.

.

.

equipment operated properly and displayed current calibration sticker By review of applicable procedures and documentation for the period of March 4, 1987, to December 14, 1987, the inspector determined that emergency equipment (e.g., emergency kits, meteorological system, and connunications equipment) was being checked in accordance with procedures governing such tests (PT/0/A/4600/11. IP/0/B/3260/23, and PT/0/A/4600/79).

The inspector also verified that copies of the Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures in the Control Room and TSC were curren No problems were note The licensee's management control program for the Alert and Notification System (ANS) was reviewe According to licensee documentation and discussions with a licensee representative, the current system consists of 53 fixed sirens (with local emergency vehicle sirens as a backup). During the period of the inspection, all 26 sirens located in Mecklenburg County failed to operat The licensee attributed this failure to wiring <

problems associated with the encoder and transmitter. As a followup retest, a silent test to ensure signal transmission to the siren sites was successfully conducted on February 5, 1988. No problems were noted with the signal transmission. A review of licensee records verified that the system, as installed, was consistent with the description contained in the Emergency Plan and Appendix 3 of the Crisis Management Plan. System maintenance was performed by the licensee's Teleconnunications Divisio The inspector reviewed siren test records for the period March 1987 to 1 January 198 The records indicated that tests were conducted in accordance with Appendix 3 of the Crisis Management Pla Documentation was available to verify that corrective action was prompt and timely in response to siren failure No violations or deviations were identifie . Organization and Management Control (82701)

The inspector's discussion with licensee representatives disclosed that no significant changes had been made to the licensee's emergency organization. However, according to licensee representatives, changes are contemplated involving the Compliance Engineer position to which the Station Emergency Planner report At an undetemined date, the individual currently serving as Compliance Engineer will be reassigned to a different position at the station, and will be replaced by an individual from the Duke Power corporate office. This reassignment will not affect the reporting chain and authority for emergency planning. The Station Energency Planner had been assigned the following additional responsibility since the last inspection: (1) responsibility for planning

'

.

and coordinating response activities to events involving other types of hazardous materials at the station, and (2) serve as the Duke Power Company representative for the Local Emergency Planning Ccmmittee (LEPC).

Regarding changes to the offsite emergency organization, the inspector was informed that the former Director of the Mecklenburg County Emergency Management Agency had been reassigned to the position of Fire Chief for

!

' i

-

-

l

, q

. 1

.

the City of Charlotte. No other changes had been made in the organization and staffing of the offsite support agencie l l

No violations or deviations ware identifie l Training (82701)

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(15) and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.F. this area was inspected to determine whether emergency response personnel understood their emergency response roles and could perform their assigned function The inspector reviewed Section 0 of the Emergency Plan and Station Directive 2.3.1 for a description of the training program and training procedure In addition, selected lesson plans were reviewed and a member of the instructional staff was interviewed. Based on these reviews and the interview, the inspector determined that the licensee had established a formal emergency training progra The inspector conducted walk-through evaluations with selected key members of the emergency organization. The individuals were given various hypothetical sets of emergency conditions and data and asked to respond as if an emergency actually existed. Interviewees demonstrated familiarity with emergency procedures and equipment, and no problems were observed in the areas of emergency detection, classification, and protective action recomendations, in addition, interviews were conducted with two individuals designated as Offsite Comunicator for the Control Room. The interviewees demonstrated familiarity with all available comunication systems and the responsibility as a comunicator. Further, excellent net control was demonstrated by comunicators during the operability test of the Control Room communication equipmen Training records for a small sample of key members of the onsite emergency organization for the period March 1987 to October 1987 were reviewed. No problems were noted. Training was provided in accordance with Section 0 of the Station Emergency Pla No violations or deviations were identifie . IndependentReviews/ Audits (82701)

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14) and (16) and 10 CFR 50.54(t), this area was inspected to determine whether the licensee had performed an independent review or audit of the emergency preparedness progra Records of audits of the program were reviewed. The records showed that independent audits of the program were conducted by the Audit Division of the licensee's Quality Assurance Department on the following dates:

December 8, 1986 through March 2, 1987 (documented in Audit Report No. NP-86-23), and August 18, 1987 through September 17, 1987 (docurented in Audit Report No. NP-87-16). The period of September 11-12, 1987, l

_

.- .

.

.

l

.

included an audit of the McGuire emergency exercis The aforementioned i audits fulfilled the 12-month frequency requirement for such audits. The audit records showed that the State and local government interfaces were evaluated. Audit findings and recommendations were presented to plant and corporate managemen A further review regarding the corrective actions for resolvirg audit findings disclosed that several items have been resolved, and remaining items have been assigned various completion date From a total of 55 items ' identified during the 1987 exercise, as of 2/1/88, 22 items is. Deen completed according to licensee documentatio The licensee's program for followup action on audit, drill, and exercise !

findings were reviewe Licensee procedures required followup on deficient areas identified during audits, drills, and exercise The licensee had established a tracking system known as the "McGuire Action Directory (MAD)" for use as a management tool in following up on actions taken in deficient area In addition, the System Emergency Planner maintains a tracking system. The inspector reviewed a printout entitled

"Crisis Management Action items Status Sumary." It was noted that items were assigned to various individuals with a tentative completion date, source of finding, brief description of finding, and status of item (open/close). In several instances the items were completed prior to the assigned completion date. It appears that appropriate, corrective actions are being taken in a timely manne No violations or deviations were identifie . Onsite Followup of Written Reports of Nonroutine Events at Power Reactor ;

Facilities (927M) Units 1 and/or 2

'

During the period of inspection, the inspector reviewed the licensee's response to the following Notifications of Unusual Events: (1) April 16, 1987, due to loss of meteorological indications (both units), (2) August 16, 1987, due to a safety injection and reactor scram (Unit 1),

(3) September 17, 1987, due to a loss of offsite power (Unit 1), and (4) November 19, 1987, due to a reactor coolant system leak, i Documentation provided to the inspector disclosed the following:

In each of the aforementioned events, the appropriate classifications I were made in accordance with the licensee's Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedure *

Working cc 'ies of the appropriate Implementing Procedures used for i making the 'ffsite notifications we'e complete and in accordance with notification methods and procedures described in Section E of the McGuire Emergency Plan. No problems were noted with the message i forms (initial or followup messages), i l

All notifications were in accordance with requirements in 10 CFR 50, l l Appendix E.Section IV.D. Section E of the McGuire Emergency Plan and '

'

Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures RP/0/A/5700/01, Notification l

!

!

,

..

.

.' 7 of Unusual Event, and RP/0/A/5700/10, NRC Immediate Notification Requirement Based on documentation provided by the licensee, it appears that appropriate administrative controls were employed throughout the events.