IR 05000454/1987019

Special Insp Repts 50-454/87-19 & 50-455/87-18 on 870413-27. Violations Noted:Licensee Did Not Adequately Inform NRC That Alert Declaration Already in Effect When Reporting Correction of Abnormal Plant Conditions on 870408

ML20213H042
Person / Time
Site:	Byron
Issue date:	05/08/1987
From:	Ploski T, Snell W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20213G993	List: IR 05000454/1987019 ML20213G992 ML20213G998
References
50-454-87-19, 50-455-87-18, NUDOCS 8705190116
Download: ML20213H042 (4)

Text

- - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ - - _ _ - _ _ _ . _ _ _ __ _.=._ . . _ . _ _ .

.

.

l

!

l U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

l REGION III l

Reports No. 50-454/87019(ORSS);50-455/87018(DRSS)

Docket Nos. 50-454; 50-455 Licenses No. NPF-37; NPF-66 Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company P.O. Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name: Byron Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Byron Site, Byron, Illinois Inspection Conducted: April 13-27, 1987 Inspector:

$$

T. Ploski c' C I #7 Date Approved By:

(4). L S$

W. Snell, Chief r/~ p/s7 Emergency Preparedness Date Section Inspection Summary Inspection on April 13-27, 1987 (Reports No. 50-454/87019(DRSS);

No. 50-455/87018(DRSS))

Areas Inspected: Special, announced inspection of the following areas of the licensee's emergency preparedness program: licensee action on previously identified items, and the April 8, 1987 Emergency Plan activation. One NRC inspector performed the inspectio Results: One violation of NRC requirements was identifie PDR O ADOCK 05000454 PDR

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

. . . _ _ ._ _ _ _ _-. _ _ _ . _ _ _ _

.

i

DETAILS

Persons Contacted R. Ward, Service Superintendent T. Joyce, Assistant Superintendent, Technical Services M. Whitemore, GSEP Coordinator W. Pirnat, Regulatory Assurance Staff

The above personnel attended the April 27, 1987 exit interview, i Licensee Action on Previously Identified Items (Closed) Items No. 454/86030-01 and No. 455/86026-01: The licensee must improve inventory or equipment accountability procedures to ensure that out of calibration or expired equipment is not left in emergency kit The inspector examined checklists used in periodic inventories of Health Physics supplies kept in the Emergency Operations Facility (EOF) and the j local hospital. The inventory checklists had been revised since the i

1986 routine inspection to require that the technician record the i calibration dates of survey equipment included in these supplies. The checklists also contained provisions for periodically replacing film

badges, pocket dosimeters, and batteries. This item is closed.

j Emergency Plan Activation The inspector examined licensee and NRC records associated with an Alert

.

declaration made on April 8, 1987. These records included: a cassette I tape and written transcript of the taped conversation between the NRC Headquarters Duty Officer and a licensee caller; Nuclear Accident Reporting System (NARS) forms used to document the initial notification, event termination, and message verification calls with appropriate State i

agencies; the Shift Engineer's Log, "GSEP Log," and the "NRC Red Phone"

log that were completed by Control Room (CR) personnel during the period in question; and the Event Notification Worksheet, which has been proceduralized as BAP 1250-T4 and was used by CR personnel to document '

the initial notification message to the NRC Operations Cente ,

On April 8, 1987, Unit I was in cold shutdown for refueling. Core reloading had been completed. At about 5:25 p.m. local time, the 1A component cooling water pump tripped because of low water level in its surge tank. The IB pump was switched off at the time of the event, although it would also have tripped due to the low surge tank leve ! At 5:40 p.m., the Shift Engineer (SE) correctly classified this situation 1 as an Alert, in accordance with the Station's Emergency Action Levels (EALs). By about 5:42 p.m., licensee personnel had diagnosed the cause I

) of the pump trip and had adequately refilled the surge tank. This

'

terminated the Alert condition. Nevertheless, since an Alert EAL had

>

been satisfied for about 17 minutes, CR personnel proceeded with the

,

t

!

-, ._ . . ,. - . - . - . - - - , , , - - - - - -. .-- - .. - -~ - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - . - . . - - - -

- -

.-

.

.

^

initial notification calls that are required for any emergency plan activation. At about 5:51 p.m., appropriate State agencies were initially and adequately notified of the Alert declaration. Since the Alert condition had already been terminated, CR personnel then requested that the State agencies' duty officers remain on the dedicated NARS telephone line in order to complete a second message form associated with the Alert terminatio At 6:09 p.m. (44 minutes after plant conditions warranting the Alert declaration had begun and 27 minutes after they had ended) CR personnel called the NRC Operations Center using the Emergency Notification Syste At about 6:24 p.m., the Headquarters Duty Officer informed the NRC Region III Duty Officer of his conversation with the license The licensee's copy of the proceduralized Event Notification Worksheet associated with their call and the "NRC Red Phone" log indicated that their call was intended to inform the Headquarters Duty Officer that an Alert had been declared and had already been terminated, in addition to providing a technical description of relevant plant conditions. The licensee's Event Notification Worksheet contained an adequate technical description of the plant conditions that led to the Alert declaratio However, based on reviews of the verbal and transcribed conversations between the licensee's caller and the Headquarters Duty Officer, the inspector concluded the following. The licensee's caller characterized the purpose of the call as a " 1-hour 50.72 notification." While the licensee adequately described the plant conditions that warranted the telephone call and adequately answered the Duty Officer's questions, the licensee did not clearly state that an Alert had been declare Instead, on two occasions during the conversation, the licensee stated that a

" Generating Station Emergency" had been declared. The acronym "GSEP" (Generating Stations Emergency Plan) was mentioned once. The licensee also correctly stated that the " Generating Stations Emergency" was already over, that State agencies had already been notified, and that the NRC resident inspector would be notified. Nevertheless, it did not become clear to the Headquarters Duty Officer, and later to the Region III Duty Officer, that an Alert condition had existed for about 17 minutes at the Byron Station. The licensee's caller basically paraphrased the text of the prepared message documented on the proceduralized Event Notification Worksheet as he responded to the Duty Officer's question CFR 50.72 states, in part, that "each nuclear power reactor licensee licensed under 50.21(b) or 50.22 of this part shall notify the NRC Operations Center via the Emergency Notification System of: (1) The declaration of any of the Emergency Classes specified in the licensee's approved Emergency Plan." Furthermore, when making a report of an emergency declaration," the licensee shall identify (1) The Emergency Class declared."

-.. - - . ._. .-. - - - - . . _ _ - _ .- . .. . -

,

..

Contrary to the above, when the licensee initially notified the i NRC Operations Center of the plant conditions that warranted the Alert ;

declaration cn April 8, 1987, the word " Alert" was never used in the conversation. While the licensee informed the Outy Officer that a

! " Generating Station Emergency" had been declared, that it was already terminated, and that appropriate State agencies had already been notified, i the Headquarters Duty Officers did not understand from the licensee that an Alert condition had existed for about a 17 minute perio This is a Severity Level IV violation (Suppiement VIII).

l On April 27, 1987, the licensee provided the inspector with a copy of an

<

internal memorandum, dated April 23, 1987, to all licensed personnel at the Byron Station. The memo informed these personnel of the NRC's concern over the fact that the word " Alert" was not included in the notification

>

message to the NRC Operations Center that was made by CR personnel on

April 8, 1987. The licensee determined that the cause of this omission was the fact that the proceduralized Event Notification Worksheet was not read

-

verbatim to the Duty Officer, and that the acronym "GSEP," having a unique meaning to the licensee, was not understood by the Duty Officer as representing the fact that an emergency class had been declared. The licensee's memo instructed personnel that the Event Notification Worksheet

-

which is completed by the licensee before contacting the NRC Operations Center, must be read to the Duty Officer verbatim before any discussion of the incident is started.

Since adequate action has already been taken to prevent recurrence of the situation that led to this Violation, no reply to the Notice of Violation will be required.

1 Exit Interview On April 27, 1987, the inspector met with those licensee representatives

list 9d in Paragraph 1 to present the preliminary inspection finding The licensee did not indicate that any of the matters discussed were i 1 proprietary in nature.

!

,

l

4 i l

l

__ . . . . - -

- _.- -- -- - -

-