IR 05000440/1990003
| ML20011E342 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 02/01/1990 |
| From: | Foster J, Snell W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20011E341 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-440-90-03, 50-440-90-3, NUDOCS 9002130267 | |
| Download: ML20011E342 (11) | |
Text
-
,
<
.
..
'.
-.
s
,
-
,x.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E
REGION III
l
,y'
n
Report No. 50-440/90003(DRSS)
i K
Docket No. 50-440 License No. NPF-58-
'
is Licensee:- - Cleveland-Electric Illuminating Company-Post.0ffice Box 5000 p
Cleveland, OH 44101
.
h
.
.
/
Facility Name:
Perry Nuclear Pcwer Plant, Unit 1-
p Inspection At:
Perry Site, Perry, Ohio r
Inspection Conducted: January 22-26, 1990
4'
g % $ f l"
'
Inspector: James E. Foster 1 2Aho
<
Date L,d h b~d0 Approved By:
'
'
William Snell, Chief
~ _/i ho
,
Radiological Controls and Date
,
Emergency. Preparedness Section
?
Inspection Summary
'
.t
,
- Inspection on January 22-26, 1990 (Report No. 50-440/90003(DRSS))
. Areas Inspected:, Routine announced inspection of the following areas of the
Perry Nuclear Power Plant emergency preparedness program:
Licensee action on previously-identified-item (IP_92701); fo.llowup on actual emergency plan l,
activations (IP 92700); and operational status of the emergency > preparedness
--program (IP 82701). The inspection involved _one NRC inspector.
Results:.No violations, deficiencies 1or deviations were identified during D
this inspection.
The Emergency Preparedness program continues to have-excellent management support.
The Perry plant has excellent onsite emergency
-
facilities and equipment, a well implemented emergency preparedness maintenance program, and assigned personnel who continually seek ways to-
,'
further-enhance the overall program.
'
i
}
?
9002130267 900201
%
.-
PDR ADOCK 05000440 g
F DC,
,
- - -.
-
-
-- - -
p rs
.
,
,
..
,
!
'
>
,
.
'
..
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted-
- J. Anderson, Onsi_te Emergency Planning Coordinator
- R. Farrell, Director, Perry Services Department
.
- Ri Vondrasek, Manager,: Community Relations Section-
- M. Roseum, Supervisor of Emergency Planning
.
- A. Kaplan, Vice President, Nuclear
- L. Corrice, Training Coordinator
- D. Igyarto, Training Manager
- J. Bahleda, Lead Quality Engineer
- L. Yager, Emergency Planner
- D. Perko~ Emergency Planner
..
'
,
- J. Koski, Emergency Planner
- W. Coleman, Manager, QAS
- F. Stead, Director, NSD
.
- V. Concel. TS Manager
- D. Mackovsak,- System Engineer
- D. Conran, Operations Engineer
,
- The above personnel attended the January 26, 1990 exit interview.
The inspector also contacted other members of the licensee's staff during.
the course of the inspection.
2.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Item (IP 92701)
(0 pen) Open Item No. 50-440/89025-01: This item was assigned to track the actions taken to improve.the-reliability of the Emergency Operations Facility (E0F) Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) equipment.
Reviews.of system operation had been performed by the Carrier company.
In addition, an evaluation study of the EOF HVAC was performed by Pfitzenmaier & Jablonski, Inc., an independent engineering organization.
Their report, dated January 1990, is still under review.
Recommended changes in the consultant's report included' replacement of a-single return-exhaust fan with two fans, providing these fans with variable frequency drives, and installation of a Direct-Digital-Control (DDC)
system.
These recommendations remained under review at the time of the inspection.
Licensee personnel indicated that the present system had been " tuned" to the extent practicable without design changes.
As noted in NRC Inspection Report No. 50-440/89025, it was intended that the EOF.HVAC system demonstrate its operability in the recirculation mode by extended operation (2-3 hours) during the 1989 Exercise. Due to a misunderstanding, the system was switched back to normal mode in that Exercise, and should be demonstrated in the recirculation mode during the 1990 Exercise. This item will remain open until the system's capability and reliability are determined.
,
-
- -
... - - -
. -
- -
-. - -
-
- -
.
.
.
- -.
.. - -
.
,
_.
!
.
..
-
.:.
s
,
4;
_.-
,
,
Based upon the above findings, this portion of the licensee's program was acceptable.
'3.
Emeroency Plan' Activations (IP 92700)
~ Licensee and NRC records of actual emergency plan' activations for the period December.1988 through January 1990 were reviewed.
These records included (as applicable):
summaries generated by NRC Duty Officers;-
Licensee Event Reports (LERs); Control Room logs; initial notification
. message forms to State and NRC officials; followup message forms prepared
-
by onsite personnel; event termination notification message forms; and evaluations of licensee records for each event.
During.this time period, the licensee declared three Unusual Events. All these situations were correctly classified per the licensee's Emergency Action level (EAL). scheme, or per the discretion of the Shift Supervisor.
All emergency declarations were made in a timely manner.
Records generated by onsite personnel for each declaration were sufficiently well detailed to facilitate later reconstruction of their emergency response activities.
Initial notifications of State, local and NRC officials were completed within the regulatory time limits following each declaration.
On December 21, 1988, an Unusual Event was declared at 2207 hours0.0255 days <br />0.613 hours <br />0.00365 weeks <br />8.397635e-4 months <br /> due to the failure of the off gas loop seals, which vented the Off gas System into the Off gas and Turbine Buildings.
Elevated radiation. levels in these areas did not reach the levels requiring classification of the event under the licensee's EAL scheme.
The Shift S'apervisor used his discretion in classifying the event, based on anticipated local government and media interest.
Such discretion is allowed, and the shift supervisor's judgement appeared to have been-prudent.
The event was terminated at 0447 hours0.00517 days <br />0.124 hours <br />7.390873e-4 weeks <br />1.700835e-4 months <br /> on December 22, 1988.
On November 14,1989,-an Unusual Event was declared at 1803 hours0.0209 days <br />0.501 hours <br />0.00298 weeks <br />6.860415e-4 months <br />, due to a fire in_the Service Building Annex lasting more than ten minutes. A security guard had noticed smoke odors in the Service Building Annex at
<
1734 hours0.0201 days <br />0.482 hours <br />0.00287 weeks <br />6.59787e-4 months <br />, and at 1736 hours0.0201 days <br />0.482 hours <br />0.00287 weeks <br />6.60548e-4 months <br />, a member of the plant fire brigade was dispatched to the aret. The full fire brigade was activated and the Perry Township Fire Department was contacted at 1740 hours0.0201 days <br />0.483 hours <br />0.00288 weeks <br />6.6207e-4 months <br />.
The plant fire brigade was at the building by 1749 hours0.0202 days <br />0.486 hours <br />0.00289 weeks <br />6.654945e-4 months <br /> with the Perry Fire Department arriving at the scene at 1751 hours0.0203 days <br />0.486 hours <br />0.0029 weeks <br />6.662555e-4 months <br />. The fire was then located and extinguished at approximately 1824 hours0.0211 days <br />0.507 hours <br />0.00302 weeks <br />6.94032e-4 months <br />.
The Unusual Event was terminated at 1835 hours0.0212 days <br />0.51 hours <br />0.00303 weeks <br />6.982175e-4 months <br /> on the same date.
On January 7,1990, An Unusual Event was declared at 1143 hours0.0132 days <br />0.318 hours <br />0.00189 weeks <br />4.349115e-4 months <br />, based on the unplanned initiation of the High Pressure Core Spray System (HPCS).
The event was terminated at 1228 hours0.0142 days <br />0.341 hours <br />0.00203 weeks <br />4.67254e-4 months <br /> on the same date.
Evaluations of records associated with these actual emergency plan activations were thorough, including documentation of event critiques and any identified problems and associated corrective actions.
In addition, a written summary report had been provided to local government officials and the NRC within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of each event, as provided for by the Emergency Plan.
,
.
{
,
<
.
,e.
'.
,
s e
-
Based upon;the above fihdings, this portion of the licensee's program was y
. acceptable.
,
4.
0_perational Status of the Emergency Preparedness Program (IP 82701)
~
a.
Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures By letter dated' July 14, 1989, NRC Region III staff documente'd their'
review and approval of Change No. 2' to Revision 9 to the Emergency Plan for Perry Nuclear Power Plant, which had'an effective date.
of-June-13, 1988.
Review of the revisions'made to the emergency preparedness program indicated that major changes had not been made, and these' changes had not adversely affected the overall state of
,
emergency pteparedness.'
Licensee personnel were aware that changes to the Emergency Plan determined to decrease the effectiveness of i
the plan could not be implemented without prior NRC approval.
Review and updating of the Emergency Plan is covered in general
.
fashion in Section 8.2, " Review and Updating of the Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures". The inspector reviewed the procedure (0M1A: PAP-0507, Revision 8) directing review,. modification and approval of changes to. the licensee's Emergency Plan and Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures. Attachment 2 to this procedure is:a matrix'which indicates the responsible parties review for plant documents, including the Emergency Plan, Emergency Plan Implementing procedures, and Preparedness Support Procedures.
Temporary changes to instructions were covered in Procedure PAP-0522.
Site procedures provide-for the appropriate distribution of plan modifications onsite, and plan change transmittal to the NRC within 30 days of approval.
The inspector verified that current copies of the Emergency Plan
,
and. Implementing Procedures were available in the onsite Emergency Response Facilities (ERFs) and the Control. Room.
.
.
During discussion'with licensee personnel regarding the Emergency Action Levels (EALs), a question developed as to.the correct interpretation of the EAL dealing with failure of the RPS system to initiate a scram which brings the reactor suberitical (0.11.2),
-
and should the initiation of Standby Liquid Control (SLC) be a determinant of whether to declare an emergency condition.
This EAL should~be reviewed and clarified.
Based upon the above findings, this portion of the licensee's program was-acceptable, b.
Emergency Response Facilities (ERFs), Equipment, and Supplies The onsite ERFs (Control Room, Technical Support Center, Operational Support Center, Emergency Operations Facility) were toured and were as described in the Emergency Plan and relevant Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures (EPIPs).
All facilities appeared to be in
,
-
~,,
&1 i,;
,%.
(
- ...
7..
-
.-
.
an acceptable state of operational readiness.
Emergency Notification'
l System telephones-(NRC " Red Phones") were successfully tested in the E0F, TSC, and the Control-Room._ Inspection of a small, representative sample of essential equipment, instrumentation and supplies did not revea' any. problem areas.
,
Changes have been made in the Operations Support Center (OSC) to
.
improve the layout of the facility and reduce the number of personnel required in the conference room.
Carpeting has been installed.in the conference room, and sound reducing material is to be installed
"
on the walls in the future. Additional-space in the OSC' conference room was provided by moving supply lockers to the lunch room area.
A status board has been modified to provide a place for organizing
tasks per priorities. Assigned equipment-for the OSC has been increased so that six-teams can be outfitted with equipment available from the OSC'without need to replenish inventories.
A " surrogate tour system" is now available in the OSC lunchroom area. This is a personal computer controlled laser disk interactive imaging system which allows an individual to see high-detail digitized images of various plant areas.
The' system can be utilized to view various locations and pieces of equipment. This could_be valuable in planning for equipment repair teams or fire brigade needs.in an emergency.
The system presently.does not cover all plant areas or systems, but licensee personnel indicated that upgrades to the system are planned.
During an EOF facility review conducted in 1989, emergency lighting in the E0F and adjacent rooms was. determined to be deficient in that the system was intended for safe egress from the building in case of power failure, rather than minimum lighting for performing emergency duties.
The lighting systems have been upgraded to allow minimum work lighting by providing a 90 minute battery reserve for individual ceiling fluorescent lights.
The E0F now has a status board which depicts the utility recommended protective action recommendation (PAR), the state PAR, and the actions actually implemented by local county governments, which may not be the same. A map depicts the status of county actions.
A backup Site Operator Station has been developed in the EOF.
If a site evacuation were necessary, the site telephone operator could relocate to this station, within the shielding and air envelope of
the E0F, and continue site telephone operations.
'~
In response to an exercise critique suggestion, supplies of accountability / evacuation guidelines and maps of site evacuation routes and assembly areas are now in highly visible locations at i
the guardhouse and other locations where personnel might begin evacuation from the site.
.
l
l.
~
-
-
-
- -
-
W
.x g-
+
,
'
'j;
-Q
\\
'
f x
'
-
j Accountability card-readers have been installed near the Technical Support Center and Control Room. - These were utilized in the 1989 f
emergency exercise, simplifying' accountability.
The control room simul'ator was utilized for evaluated exercise-purposes for the first time in 1989, and it is planned to utilize the-simulator for future exercises.
In preparation _for the exercise, efforts were expended to ensure that the simulators Emergency Response Information System (ERIS) display was consistent with that in the Control Room.
Modem communications allow the simulator's computers to drive computer 1 displays in other facilities in a " drill mode", enhancing the. realism of an exercise scenario.
It is planned to rep _ lace the simulator in it's entirety in 1991 as a part of a simulator upgrade program.
In response to a recommendation made by the State of Ohio Emergency Evacuation Review Team (EERT) report, a Nuclear Data System became operational between the State of Ohio and the Perry and: Davis-Besse O
plants during February 1989.
For the Perry plant, this system provides fif teen minute averaged meteorological conditions (wind direction and speed, delta temperature, sigma theta, and stability
,
class) and vent flow / radiation monitor outputs.
In addition, every fifteen minutes, instantaneous values for reactor power level, i
reactor water level, reactor pressure, and containment pressure are -
sampled-The information is transmitted to a VAX computer provided
.
to the Ohio Emergency Management Agency, which archives the information and formats it into appropriate displays.
The displays are then transmitted to two terminals in the State Emergency Operations Center and one dial-up terminal in the Public Utilities Commission.
Software on the VAX-computer includes alarm setpoints-for each parameter, and a State duty officer is contacted (by pager if off-hours) when alarms-are generated or the data is not provided (telephone line or sensor failure).
The portion of the Nuclear Data System which provides for a fifteen minute averaged meteorological condition and vent flow / radiation monitor output has been in service since approximately 1985, and
'
remains in service, providing printouts in the Ashtabula and Lake County Emergency Operations Centers.
Presently, Radiation Monitoring Teams (RMTs) utilize plant radio channel 2 for communication.
Because of crowding problems with radio channel 2, access to the utility 800-Mhz radio system has been provided, allowing the use of portable radios. This should
' provide a significant improvement in radio communications.
The
'
equipment is in place, and personnel are to be trained on the i
equipment in the near future.
Use of the equipment will be tested D
in the next exercise, and the old equipment discontinued if the anticipated improvements are evident.
In addition, the licensee plans to purchase several Chevrolet S-10 vehicles for RMT use, and l_
daily use by offsite planners performing training.
1^
l-l l
!
E
-
- -
,
,
-
.y go
,
-
.,
Discussion with licensee personnel indicated that consideration would be given to possible relocation'of the backup Emergency
.
Operations' Facility.
The Emergency Planning Unit utilizes the' Repetitive Task program (PAP 0903) to schedule periodic emergency preparedness activities such as-equipment inventories. Appropriate inventory checklists addressed periodic. replacement of perishable items, verification of the current calibration of survey instruments and air samplers, and functional tests of battery powered equipment.
Inventory procedures included provisions for conducting inventories after use of the
+
supplies or following discovery of an unsealed supply container, in addition to the periodic-inventory requirement.
A selective review of completed checklists for the period January
.
1989 through. January 1990 indicated that the licensee had completed all procedurally required periodic communications-equipment checks, first aid' supplies inventories, and-inventories of Health Physics and office supplies reserved for use by emergency responders.
Locations addressed in these checklists included:'the Control Room,
"
onsite ERFs,- Perry Township ambulance, the OSC and E0F decontamina-tion rooms, and of fsite dosimetry-(2. kits).
Inventory checklists specified minimum quantities of items and required verification of the supplies' locations and completeness.
Records reviewed indicated that all problems identified during inventories and communications equipment checks had been corrected
.
in a timely manner, l
' Based upon the above findings, this portion of the licensee's-program was acceptable.
c.
Organization and Management Control j
i Overall organization and management control of the Emergency-
'
Preparedness program is unchanged from the last routine inspection a
(NRC Reports No. 440/88019, No. 441/88007). No major changes have
]
been made in the responsibilities,- authorities and staffing of key emergency response personnel, or interfaces and coordination between onsite, offsite, and corporate organizations.
The Onsite Emergency Planning Coordinator. reported to the Supervisor,
!
Emergency Planning Unit, who in turn reported to the Community
'
l Relations Section Manager.
The Community Relations Section Manager reported to the Director, Perry Services Department. The Emergency
,
i Planning Unit also -includes planners for nearby counties and the individual who coordinates Joint Public Information Center (JPIC)
a functions.
There are presently eighteen people assigned to the Emergency Planning Unit.
9
y
,
,
.
';
m.
.
s
,
The formal andsinformal corrective action tracking systems in place during the. previous inspection remained 4 use during 1989-1990.
The formal tracking systems encompassed onetime and periodic action items.
Adequate numbers of personnel have been identified for specific lead and. support positions in the onsite ERO.
Administrative systems were-in use to ensure that ERO members and their supervisors were informed of the formers' ERO membership.
The callout procedure for the onsite ERO has been updated on a quarterly basis. The emergency response telephone directory now also lists anticipated response e
time for each individual.
t Baseo,, a the above findings, this portion of the licensee's program was acceptable.
,;
-
t d.
Training The required annual EP training program for members of the onsite Emergency Response Organization (ERO) consisted of classroom sessions.and required readings of Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures (EPIPs) and sections of the Emergency Plan relevant
'
to specific ERO positions.
The Emergency Response Telephone directory is utilized as the official list of those currently qualified for emergency response positions. The listing is updated quarterly, based on a review of the assigned positions and printouts from the Individual Training Report Matrix.
The requalification period for e.nergency response training is fifteen months (tweive months with a " grace period" of.three months) after which an individual is dropped from the Emergency Response Telephone Directory.
If an individual leaves the site, an interim change or pen and ink change can be initiated prior to the quarterly revision.
.
-The inspector reviewed the records of twelve individuals in detail, l-and compared them with telephone directory listings. Also, approximately one third of the Individual Training Report printouts were reviewed.
No discrepancies were noted. Two individuals, both with emergency positions in the EOF, 'were interviewed to determine their knowledge of general emergency preparedness and their emergency position in particular.
Both individuals demonstrated excellent understanding of their positions and responsibilities,
,
and emergency preparedness in general.
l The Emergency Preparedness group has developed a requalification
'
training guide which provides supplemental training objectives and
'
augments the requirements for the EP training module.
In addition, emergency response personnel were polled as to which subjects should be included in, or receive additional emphasis during EP requalification training. Annual EP requalification training for 1990 was scheduled to start in March 1990.
m
=
-
-
-
--+
.
'
.
.
,
The licensee has determined that fitness-for-duty (FFD) training applies to TSC' and EOF personnel (control room and OSC personnel-are-already covered by FFD training per plant access requirements).
EP procedures and training requirements are being modified to include:
FFD information.
The following onsite EP drills took place during 1989, per Section 8.5.4 of the Emergency Plan:
semiannual Health Physics drills, annual medical drill; and' semiannual staffing response time drill.
The annual radiological monitoring drill, combined with one of the semiannual Health Physics drills, had been conducted on August-16, 1989.
Records indicated that all required EP drills had '
been successfully conducted, critiqued, and adequately documented during 1989.
The inspector reviewed the 1989 Emergency Preparedness Exercise report (EPER-89)..The report was detailed and complate, containing critique items and references to tracking systems for the 38 items
,
tracked as possible program improvement items.
j i
An Institute for Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) Casualty Control'
'
drill was held on December 5, 1989.
This drill tested the plant's response to multiple /related equipment failures, with the' goal being prevention of fuel cladding damage.
Realism was accomplished through the use of equipment mock-ups and free play by exercise participants.
This type of drill differs from the annual evaluated exercise, where fuel clad damage and radioactive releases occur to test other portions of emergency preparedness.
The Emergency Preparedness Unit, in cooperation with local counties and the Ohio Emergency Management Agency, has developed a Comprehensive Training Program (CTP). The CTP lists the offsite emergency positions, and provides a matrix of' training modules which y
should be taken for the listed positions.
Following review of the j
positions and training matrix, training modules will be developed to
complete the program.
Annual training for local hospitals on dealing with contaminated,
-'
injured onsite persons was conducted during March 27-30, 1989.
Copies of the station's EP program in its entirety, including EALs u
,
used to classify abnormal plant conditions, were provided to the j
State of Ohio and the counties of Ashtabula,-Geauga, and Lake on
'
June 14,.1989, in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50,
,
Appendix E (IV.B),
Review of the entire Emergency Plan beyond the i
EALs is not required, but licensee personnel stated that they have
found the complete review and comment beneficial.
l Based upon the above findings, this portion of the licensee's program was acceptable.
1 g
<
- -.
- -
- -.
g[
-
b
4 f-
~
,,
,
,. -
e.
Independent Reviews / Audits Nuclear Quality Assurance (NQA) Department records of 1989 audits-and surveillances of the Station's EP program were reviewed. All-
'
records were complete and readily available. The 1989 audits
,
satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(t), including the requirement to make portions of the audit dealing with the interface with offsite authorities available to offsite authorities.
Records indicated that timely and adeouate corrective. actions had been'taken on identified problems.
The inspector reviewed Audit Report No. PIO 89-10 " Emergency Plan" -
dated May 31, 1989. The audit had been conducted during March 27
'through May J, and May 11-16, 1989. Approximately 550 man-hours were required in audit preparation, performance and reporting. The audit concluded that the program was " excellent", and resulted in one Action Request and six Recommendations.
'
While the annual audit evaluated the interface with offsite
'
authorities as required by 10 CFR 50.54(t), later licensee review indicated that this portion of the audit should be strengthened by additional contact with State and Ashtabula county officials.
Surveillance Reports89-343 and 89-344 documented these additional contacts.
'
Licensee self-assessments of the Emergency Preparedness program were reviewed for 1989.
This assessment is one portion of the self-assessment quarterly report. The program was not rated for the first quarter, but was rated as " Excellent" for other quarters (the fourth quarter report was still in draft at the time of this
!
inspection).
The inspector reviewed Surveillance Report No.89-327, dated November 17,1989, '! Equipment Inventories", performed during i
November 6-10, 1989, which reviewed the adequacy with which
- i emergency equipment was inventoried. While the surveillance
!
-
identified only minor inventory discrepancies, it was determined j
that the Emergency Planning Unit staff would take responsibility for emergency equipment inventories to insure that the inventories
,
are performed in a timely manner and any discrepancies promptly.
i corrected.
Hasps and padlocks were also placed on some containers
to prevent tampering.
The following surveillances performed by the Nuclear Quality
'
Assurance Department (NQAD) were also reviewed:
No.89-342,
" Emergency Plan Drills / Exercises"; No.89-343, " Emergency Plan i
Interface with Local Government"; No.89-342, " Emergency Plan Interface with State Government"; No.89-349 " Emergency Preparedness Exercise - INP0 Casualty Control"; and No.90-017, " Fire Protection l
'
Consideration of OSC Modifications".
No deficiencies were observed.
l l
h
. t
-
.
-
-
'
o
- 37
.
.l.(
zi;
. =~
n
-
-
Based upon the above findings, this portion of the licensee's program was acceptable.
,
5.
Exit Interview (IP'30703)
On January 26,.1990, the inspector met with those licensee representatives
,
identified in Section 1 to present the preliminary inspection. findings.
The inspector provided his evaluation that the Perry plant has excellent onsite emergency facilities and equipment,-a well' implemented emergency
-
preparedness maintenance program, and personnel who continually' seek ways to further enhance the overall program.
,
The licensee indicated that none of the matters discussed during the exit j_
interview were proprietary, t
'
'l
l
--
..
I
j