IR 05000382/1988007

Insp Rept 50-382/88-07 on 880321-25.One Violations & No Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Emergency Facilities, Equipment,Instrumentation,Supplies,Organization & Mgt Control & Independent Reviews/Audits

ML20153E343
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	04/25/1988
From:	Fisher W, Hackney C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20153E330	List: IR 05000382/1988007 ML20153E327 ML20153E332
References
50-382-88-07, 50-382-88-7, NUDOCS 8805090464
Download: ML20153E343 (5)

Text

~

F

. .

.

.

. .

APPENDIX B U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

NRC Inspection Report: 50-382/88-07 Operatit.g ' icense: NPF-38 Docket: 50-382 Licensee: Louisiana Power & Light Company (LP&L)

317 Baronne Street P.O. Box 60340 New Orleans, Louisiana 70160 Facility Name: Waterford 3 Steam Electric Station (SES)

Inspection At: Waterford 3 SES site near Killona, Louisiana Inspection Conducted: March 21-25, 1988 Inspector: bm h .-

hCharles A. Hackney, Einergency Preparedness V[4T/W Datd Specialist Approved: h , %

William L. Fishev, Chief, Nuclear Materials V !o26YI Date and Emergency ?reparedness Branch Inspection St.ngnary Inspection Conducted March 21-25, 1988 (Report 50-382/88-07)

Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of: eme gency facilities, equipment, instrumentation, supplies, organization and management control, and independen'. reviews / audit Results: Within the areas inspected, one violation and no deviations wer's identifie o 8805090464 880505 PDR ADOCK 05000382 o DCD

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

,; , . - . - -

g ,. . . - - . .

n .

c( * s

\

t

,q, 2

c; DETAILS ,

r Persons Contacted

+

! Licensee ,

i

• Barkhurst, Vice President, Nuclear -

.

• F. Englebracht, Emergency Planning Manager

• J. Zabritski, Operations Quality Assurance Manager a

_* Alleman, Quality Assurance Manager '

• P. Prasankumar, Assistant Plant Manager.

i *D.-Packer, Assistant Plant Manager, Operations'and Maintenance

'

• J. Lewis, Onsite Emergency Planning' Coordinator ,

- ,

Other

• T. Staker, NRC Resident Inspector

• Denotes attendance at exit intervie .

The NRC inspector also held discussions with other station personnel in the areas of emergency detection and classifications, prot & tive action ;

'

recommendations, notification and communications, staffing and  :

eugmentation, health physics, operations, and emergency response ,

organizatio I Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures 02.01

]

The NRC inspector reviewed licensee documentation to determine whether

major changes to the emergency preparedness program may have affected the j overall emergency program adversel .

The NRC inspector reviewed the licensee's changes to the emergency plan

and implementing procedures, safety committee review, management approval, and licensee submittal to the NRC as required by 10 CFR 50 Appendix E.V.

, The licensee stated, in writing, that plan and procedere' changes were-l reviewed to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 50.54(n). The inspector noted ,

t that the Plant Operations Review Committee (PORC) had reviewed emergency' I

plan and procedure changes. Additionally, the PORC had conducted the l emergency plan review and sent the;results of the review to'managemant as

'

i required by the Technical Specifications. Licensee emergency response i i facilities were inspected to determine whether any facility changes had l l occurred and whether changes had been inr:orporated into the Plan and l

Procedures. NRC Region IV did not receive for review any changes that j decreased the effectiveness of the Plan. The inspector reviewed cha wes to plan and procedures and the submittal of changes to the NRC. Licensee j

,.

( records' indicated that appropriate changes had been revised and submitted to the NRC in the required 30 days. The inspector determined that the licensee did have a written procedure for submitting procedure changes to

>

.

_

_ _ ._ __

+ ... ,

u . < ,s  :

.

3 *

m ,

.

> l i the NRC.- A_ procedure did exist for distributing procedures and 1 maintaining records. During the inspector's review of documents in the -

'

~ back-up Emergency Operations Facility, it was noted that a person's name had been removed and a new name inserted by pe Emergency , i Procedure EP-3-050 Revision 4, Section 5.3.1.2.1.b states that all changes ;

shall-be made with a black ball point pen, dated, and initiale l Additionally, the inspector determined that the document had not been-updated as required. This was an apparent; violation of Technical *

Specification 6.8. The licensee's management took,immediate corrective

l

'

action by scheduling a training session with the staff to review the procedure requirement Additionally, other management _ resource documents l were checked for' initials, dates, and completeness. This is an apparent a violation of Technical Specification 6.8 requirements. (382/8807-01) 1

.l One apparent violation and no deviations were identified in this program i are '

l

' Emergency Facilities, Equipment, Instrumentation, and Supplies 02.02 i

<

The NRC inspector reviewed key facilities and equipment.to determine I whether the facilities were raaintained and whether any facility changes  !

had been incorporated into the emergency plan and implementing procedure '

I Additionally, facility, equipment, and supply changes were reviewed for l adverse affect on the emergency preparedness program. Emergency facilit'es, equipment, instrumentation, and supplies were reviewed to determine the state of readiness and accessibility. Selected conaunication and emergency vehicle equipment was tested for operabilit The equipment functioned as required. The inspector noted that licensee procedures specified that emergency vehicles were to have the vehicle radio

'

in the "cn" position whenever the vehicle was in use. All vehicles which were observed by the inspector had their radios switched to the "off" position; however, the vehicles were not in use at the time. The inspector selected equipment kits'and determined that the kits were as ,

described in the emergency plan. The inspector noted that the back-up facilities did not have any emergency lighting and the.back-up Emergency Operations Facility (EOF) did nct have a clock in the area. The inspector noted that the Emergency Notification System (ENS) telephone had not been installed in the EOF. Installe. tion of the ENS telephone is an NRC and AT&I interface concer The inspector discussed the following observations with the licensee during the exit interview:

'

The licensee should consider installing emergency lighting in the Corporate Cormand Center and the back-up EOF, -(Licensee notified

-

inspector that lights and a clock were installed in the emergency respanse facilities the follewing week).

=

,

, . , -

,

. . - . -

-

.

,

>

, .-. o

'

- , . .

i

,

..-

s- ,

- ,

The licensee should consider leaving vehicle radios ~in the "on" l

' position if the radio is wired to tuin off with the-ignition switch to avoid inadvertently forgetting to turn the radio on when the '

,

vehicle is in service, 1, s

No violations or deviations were identified in this program are ,,

! Organization and Management Control 02.03- l

,

The NRC inspector reviewed the documents listed below and interviewed- ,

licensee represent.atives to determine if changes had been made to the  ;

emergency organization and/or management control systems and, if so, the '

rasulting program effect. Additionally, the inspector determined whether j changes had been incorporated into the Plan and Procedure (10 CFR 50.54(b)(1)) i

'

Documents Reviewed:

Emergency Management Resources Emergency Response' Plan - Organization A change to the emergency response organization resulted' from changes to key station management positions. The inspector reviewed the emergency  ;

management resource book. Personnel changes did not appear to have  :

decreased the effectiveness of the emergency response organizatio l No violations or deviations were identified in.this~ program are . Independent Reviews / Audits 02.05(I)'

The NRC inspector reviewed the documents listed below and interviewed licensee representatives to determine whether annual independent reviews or audits of the emergency preparedness program had been performed in accordance with the requirements of-10 CFR 50.54(t).

Additionally, the inspector determined whether the licensee had a corrective action system for deficiencies and weaknesses identified during drills and exercises and whether corrective actions'had been appropriate H and timel The Quality Assurance Department had performed the 12-month Emergenc I Preparedness Program review; however, the review hed not been finalized 1 for distribution to licensee management. The inspector discussed areas that had been reviewed by licensee auditors and. general comments made by the auditor team. The inspector will review the final report during a future inspection, j (I) denotes that inspection was not complete ;

'

No violations or deviations were identified in this program are l

.

.

l

-

. .---

Fg '. . ;. .- "

'e *. .. .

4-

'

,

,

. .-

5 ,

.

e . Inspector Observations ,

An inspector observation is a matter discussed'with the licensee during the exit' interview. Observations are neither violations nor unresolved

. items. Observations are suggested for the licensee's consideration, but ,

have no specific regulatory requirement. Observations are identified in paragraph 3 of this repor .

' Exit Interview

,

The NRC inspector met with the NRC resident inspector and licensee  :

representatives denoted in paragraph 1 on March 25, 1988, and summarized '

the scope and' findings of the inspection.as presented in this' repor ,

!

,

P i

!

,

i

e

-

,

.l l

l l

l

!

i

_