IR 05000387/1984037
| ML17139D035 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 03/06/1985 |
| From: | Cohen I, Harpster T, Woltner E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17139D034 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-387-84-37, 50-388-84-48, NUDOCS 8504050035 | |
| Download: ML17139D035 (5) | |
Text
U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
50-387/84-37 Report No.
50-388/84-48 Docket No.
50-387/50-388 License No.
NPF-14 NPF-22 Pri ority Category C
Licensee:
Penns lvania Power & Li ht Com an 2 North Ninth Street Allentown Penns lvania 18101 Facility Name:
Sus uehanna Steam Electric Station SSES Inspection At:
SSES Columbia Count EOC Luzerne Count EOC and Siren Locations within the 10 mile EPZ Inspection Conducted:
November 13-16 1984 Inspectors:
Approved by:
I. Cohen, mergency Preparedness Specialist E. Woltner Emerge y Preparedness Specialist T.
L.
arpste
, Chief, Emergency Preparedness ection, DETP Feb>w~
J.o I 9$ )
da e
d te d
e Ins ection Summar:
Ins ection on November 13-6 1984 Re ort Nos. 50-387/
84-37 50-388/84-48 A~:
R paredness including Emergency Detection and Classification, Protective Action Decision making, Notification and Communication, knowledge and performance of duties and previosuly identified open items.
The inspection involved 50 hours5.787037e-4 days <br />0.0139 hours <br />8.267196e-5 weeks <br />1.9025e-5 months <br /> onsite by two NRC Regional based inspectors.
Results:
No violations were identified.
85OOO5O0S5 SSOS<a PDR ADOCK 05000387
PDR j
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
"J. J.
Graham, Senior Compliance Engineer
"H.
W. Keiser, Superintendent SSES
- D. J.
Thompson, Assistant Superintendent, SSES
- R. J.
Prego, gA Supervisory Ops.
- P.
E. Taylor, Lead, S AT.A.
- J. White, Superv.
Training Support
- J. Rizzo, Emergency Planner W. Taber, Radiation and Environmental Technician W.
E. Wint, Executive Director, Emergency Prep.
Luzerne County J. Siracuse, Dep. Director, Emergency Prep.
Luzerne County J.
Lex, Emergency Prep.
Instructor C. J. Sevison, E.D. Columbia County M. D. Edwards, Document Control Specialist P. Bartel, Shift Supervisor R. Halm, Shift Supervisor
- Denotes attendance at exit meeting.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Findin s
a.
Closed (387-83-29-02)
Review certain changes to the Emergency Plan as shown within the inspection report.
The inspector held discussions with licensee personnel and noted that the licensee had reviewed the identified changes and determined that changes to the Emergency Plan were not necessary.
b.
Open (387/84-27-01) Violation:
Failure to provide annual training to two primary contact members of the current TSC/EOF On-Call List.
The licensee responded to the violation in a letter dated October 12, 1984 and indicated that the individuals identified were subsequently trained.
The licensee also indicated that a control system scheduled for completion by March 31, 1985 would prevent future occurrences.
This area will be re-inspected during a future inspection.
3.
Areas Ins ected a.
Emer enc Detection and Classification IE Procedure No.
82201 The inspectors reviewed the licensee's emergency classification sys-tem as shown in Procedure EP-IP-001 and noted that initiating condi-tions consisted of inplant, onsite and offsite measurable and observ-able events.
The inspectors noted that the licensee provides for having an individual onsite at all times to classify events and to initiate emergency respons ~
~
The inspectors conducted walkthroughs with two shift supervisors (initial emergency directors until relieved) which consisted of presenting certain degraded plant conditions and requesting their responses.
The inspectors noted that the shift supervisors were able to promptly determine the classification of the emergency by referring to Procedure EP-IP-001 and were able to provide an appropriate response based upon the proposed conditions.
- Based upon the above findings, no violations were identified.
Protective Action Decision Makin IE Procedure No. 82202 The inspectors reviewed Procedure EP-IP-033, Dose Assessment and Protective Actions and noted that authorities and responsibilities are assigned to assess an accident and to provide recommendations for protective actions for the public and for onsite personnel.
The inspectors conducted walkthroughs with two shift supervisors which consisted of presenting conditions requiring protective actions to protect the public and noted that appropriate protective action recommendations were identified based upon the proposed weather and plant conditions.
The inspectors toured the Luzerne and Columbia County Emergency Opera-tion Centers, held discussions with the County Emergency Directors and noted that offsite officials are capable of initiating prompt corrective actions for the public.
Based upon the above findings, no violations were identified.
No'tifications and Communications IE Procedure No. 82203 The inspectors held discussions with licensee and County Emergency Management personnel, reviewed the SSES Alert Notification System Plan and the public information pamphlet entitled Emergency Information for Columbia and Luzerne Counties.
In addition, the inspectors wit-nessed an unannounced communication drill between the licensee's EOF and County EOCs both by dedicated phones and radio, inspected a ran-dom sample of siren locations throughout the EPZ and reviewed oper-ability tests and test records of the siren system.
The inspectors determined that the licensee is maintaining a capability for notify-ing offsite authorities and the population within the EPZ in the event of an emergency.
The inspectors noted that the SSES Emergency Response Plan did not discuss the means for providing prompt alerting and notification of response organizations and the population as shown in NUREG-0654 Appendix 3.
However, a complete description appears in the SSES Alert Notification System Plan.
(Open 50-387-84-37-01; 50-388-84-48-01), this matter will be reviewed during a future inspection.
Based upon the above findings, no violations were identifie d.
Knowled e and Performance of Duties Trainin IE Procedure No. 82206 The inspectors held discussions with licensee training personnel, reviewed training records of shift supervisors in regard to the adequacy of their training and noted that a training program is established and maintained.
The two shift supervisors interviewed indicated that they would benefit from additional training in the following areas of emergency response;
~
.additional hands on dose assessment determination;
~
interface with other Emergency Directors; and
~
interface with off-site officials'ince all shift supervisors were not interviewed the inspectors recom-mend that they all be asked to identify those areas where additional training would be desirable to assist them to be effective as an Emer-gency Director during all classes of emergencies and that these areas be considered for inclusion within the training program (Open 50-387-84-37-02; 50-388-84-48-02),
this matter will be reviewed during a
future inspection.
Based upon the above findings no violations were identified.
4.
~Ei On November 16, 1984, the inspectors met with the individuals listed in paragraph 1 and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspectors.