ML20129F510

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Insp Rept 50-213/96-07 on 960813-16.No Violations Noted.Nrc Enforcement Action Being Considered Due to Two Exercise Weaknesses Identified
ML20129F510
Person / Time
Site: Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png
Issue date: 10/23/1996
From: Wiggins J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To: Feigenbaum T
NORTHEAST UTILITIES SERVICE CO.
Shared Package
ML20129F473 List:
References
EA-96-407, NUDOCS 9610290146
Download: ML20129F510 (4)


See also: IR 05000213/1996007

Text

. _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _

____ ___..__ _ _ _~ _ _ _ __

.w

.

Y

,

.

i

October 23, 1996

EA No.96-407

!

Mr. Ted C. Feigenbaum

Executive Vice President and

4

Chief Nuclear Officer

Northeast Utilities Service Company

I

c/o Mr. Terry L. Harpster

P.O. Box 270

Hartford, CT 06141-0270

!

SUBJECT:

NRC-EVALUATED EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS EXERCISE -

HADDAM NECK PLANT; INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-213/96-07

i

Dear Mr. Feigenbaum:

j

This letter refers to the NRC-graded, biennial, emergency preparedness exercise inspecion

!

led by Mr. J. Lusher, at Haddam Neck Plant, Haddam, Connecticut, during the week of

August 13,1996. The inspection evaluated the performance of your site emergency

response organization (SERO) during the August 14,1996, Haddam Neck, full-participation

exercise. The inspectors discussed the findings of this inspection with Mr. J. LaPlatney

and others of your staff on August 16,1996.

During the exercise, two weaknesses were observed: 1) failure to recognize the need for

. an Alert declaration early in the exercise (which consequently was prompted by the lead

controller) and confusion with the use of emergency action level tables prior to the

declaration of the General Emergency; and 2) failure to implement protective actions for

the SERO at the Emergency Operations Facility and site personnel, and consider protective

action recommendations beyond the 10 mile emergency planning zone, based upon the

dose projections used in support of those protective actions.

We also observed that: 1) the overstaffing of key SERO positions with two and three

individuals very early in the exercise caused confusion and problems for other individuals

initially assigned to the SERO, and made it extremely difficult for the NRC inspectors to

assess the performance of the SERO as described in your emergency plan and

implementing procedures; and 2) the over-staffing also affected our ability to assess the

~ SERO in the area of effective communications within and among the emcrgency response

facilities and with the State. The overr,taffing issue severely limited our ability to

determine if the SERO could effective 9 implement the emergency plan and implementing

procedures. The exercise revealed weaknesses that need to be addressed rigorously.

'

\\

~

9610290146 961023

PDR

ADOCK 05000213

O

PDR

Ei35'

___

_

_ _

_ _ _ _ _ _

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

a

)i-

.

b

Mr. Ted C. Feigenbaum

2

.

At the completion of your staff's critique, your staff committed 1) to take timely and

appropriate corrective action for the weaknesses identified, 2) to have a management

f

meeting at the NRC Region I office to discuss those corrective actions, and 3) to perform a

[

drill onsite of sufficient scope to demonstrate the effectiveness of those corrective actions

!

prior to the restart of the Haddam Neck Plant.

.

Based on the results of this inspection, and in particular, the repetitive nature of the two

exercise weaknesses that were identified, those weaknesses are being considered for

enforcement action in accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for

'

NRC Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600. Those weaknesses

potentially constitute violations of 10 CFR 50.47(b) and Appendix E. Accordingly, no

i

Notice of Violation is presently being issued for these inspection findings because we plan

!

to discuss these weaknesses with you during a pre-decisional enforcement conference.

The decision to hold a predecisional enforcement confarence does not mean that the NRC

has determined that a violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be taken. This

,

conference is being held to obtain information to enable the NRC to make an enforcement

!

decision, such as a common understanding of the facts, root causes, missed opportunities

to identify the weaknesses sooner, corrective actions, significance of the issues and the

need for lasting and effective corrective action. In addition, this is an opportunity for you

[

to point out any errors in our inspection report and for you to provide any information

i

concerning your perspectives on the severity of the weaknesses. The conference will also

allow you to iulfill your commitment to meet with us.

!

We will contact you to schedule the predecisional enforcement conference to discuss these

exercise wt;aknesses. At the conference, be prepared to address the identified exercise

j

weaknesus, in particular, discuss the status of your proposed corrective actions, root

causes and your plan for ensuring the corrective actions will be effective, including any of

those actions that address issues common to Northeast Utilities.

Exercise weaknesses, according to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E.IV.F.2.g, are inspection

findings that need to be corrected by the licensee. You are requested to provide this office

with a description of any additional corrective measures you have taken or plan to take and

'

your schedule for completing those actions within 30 days from the date of this letter or

prior to the pre-decisional enforcement conference, whichever occurs first.

l

in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter,

its enclosure and your response (if you choose to provide one) will be placed in the NRC

Public Document Room (PDR). To the extent possible, your response should not include

any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the

PDR without redaction. If personal privacy or proprietary information is necessary to

provide an acceptable response, then please provide a bracketed copy of your response

that identifies the information that should be protected and e redacted copy of your

response that deletes such information. If you request withholding of such material, you

myg1 specifically identify the portions of your response that you seek to have withheld and

provide in detail the bases for your claim of withholding (e.g., explain why the disclosure

j

l

I

)

Mr. Ted C. Feigenbaum

3

of information will create an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy or provide the

information required by 10 CFR 2.790(b) to support a request for withholding confidential

l

commercial or financial information). If safeguards information is necessary to provide an

acceptable response, please provide the level of protection, described in 10 CFR 73.21.

Sincerely,

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:

James T. Wiggins, Director

Division of Reactor Safety

{

Docket No. 50-213

i

Enclosure: Inspection Report No. 50-213/96-07

i

cc w/encI

B. D. Kenyon, President - Nuclear Group

l

F. C. Rothen, Vice President - Nuclear Work Services

J. J. LaPlatney, Haddam Neck Unit Director

L. M. Cuoco, Senior Nuclear Counsel

'

A. M. Callendrello, Licensing Manager - Haddam Neck

H. F. Haynes, Director - Nuclear Training

i

J. F. Smith, Manager, Operator Training

W. D. Meinert, Nuclear Engineer

N. S. Reynolds, Esquire

State of Connecticut SLO

Distribution w/ encl:

Region I Docket Room (with concurrences)

D. Screnci, PAO

J.Rogge,DRP

NRC Resident inspector

M. Conner, DRP

D. Bearde, DRP

D. Holody, ORA

Nuclear Safety information Center (NSIC)

PUBLIC

FEMA Region 1

,

-. ._.

.-

-. -

.

. - .

.

._ -

__ . - -

o

Mr. Ted C. Feigenbaum

4

Distribution w/enci (VIA E-MAIL):

,

W. Dean, OEDO

P. McKee, NRR/PD l-4

S. Dernbek, PM, NRR

J. Lieberman, OE

R. Jones, NRR

M. Buckley, DRS, SALP Coordinator

R. Correia, NRR (RPC)

R. Frahm, Jr., NRR (RKF)

Inspection Program Branch, NRR (IPAS)

T. Essig, NRR/PERB

D. Barss, NRR/PERB

M. Callahan, OCA

C. Miller, NRR/DRPM

j

R. Blough, DRS

R. Cooper, DRP

"

J.Rogge,DRP

'

D. Holody, EO

W. Kane, DRA

q

H. Miller, RA

D. Screnci, PAO

D. Chawaga, SLO

.

'

(

'W>0

pA

DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\EP&SB\\ LUSHER \\HN9607. INS

Ta receive a copy of this document. Indicate in the boa: "C" = Copy weehout attachment /enclosur

"E" = Copy with attachment / enclosure

"N" - No copy

0FFICE

RI/DRS

E

RI/DRS / l#

RI/DRP /

l

NRR/PERB

lh) .RI/RA/v,e #

,.,

NAME

JLUSHER f &

RKEIM V

JROGGE F

TESSIG Y &

HMIECER 9

DATE

h

10/1%/96

g

mass

10//g /96 F/

16/if/96

mas

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

aiin

INAfiE

JWIGGINS tnJ

7

,

l DATE

10/ 7 3/96 '

10/

/96

10/

/96

10/

/96

10/

/96

ij

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY