IR 05000352/1985031
| ML20133F924 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 07/31/1985 |
| From: | Amato C, Harpster T, Rich Smith, Vito D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133F906 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-352-85-31, 50-353-85-08, 50-353-85-8, NUDOCS 8508080488 | |
| Download: ML20133F924 (4) | |
Text
r
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report Nos.
50-352/85-31 and 50-353/85-08 Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353 License No. NPF-27 Priority --
Category C CPPR-107 Licensee: Philadelphia Electric Company 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19101 Facility Name:
Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At:
Limerick, Pennsylvania Inspection Conducted: July 17, 1985 Inspectors:
8.
7bf f((
D.J.Vito,pniorEmergencyPreparednessSpecialist
'date'
&%k erhurr C.G.Ampto,EmergencyPreparednessSpecialist date Mww
,h W R'.H[ Smith,/EmergencyPreparednessSpecialist dath
[
w_.=:s -
Approved by:
b, X)"
"
l
T. L. Harpst6r, ief grat/
Emergency Prepa noss Section Inspection Summary:
Inspecti on July 17, 1985 (Inspection Report Nos. 50-352/85-31 and 50-353/85-08)
Areas Inspected:
Special, announced inspection of an EP accountability and evacuation drill at the Limerick site.
The inspection involved 12 inspection-hours onsite by three region based inspectors.
Results: No violations were identified.
8508080488 850802 PDR ADOCK 05000352 G
.,.
-
,
.
DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted Philadelphia Electric Company G. Bailey, Limerick EP Coordinator R. Kankus, Director, Emergency Preparedness G. Leitch, Station Superintendent Drill Controllers In-Plant J. Connelly J. McElwain J. Moore A. Mount R. Naugle K. Schlecker W. Shych TSC J. Basilio J. Tucker V. Warren Personnel Processing Building J. Keenan Bechtel G. Guffin
.
J. Thomas
All those listed above attended the exit meeting on July 17, 1985.
2.0 LGS Accountability and Evacuation Qrill 2.1 Scope of Review
The inspectors witnessed an emergency preparedness drill for account-l ability and evacuation at the Limerick Generating Station on
,
July 17, 1985. The drill was evaluated to determine if site account-ability could be adequately demonstrated at Limerick Unit I while
'
concurrently demonstrating the evacuation of construction personnel from Limerick Unit 2 for protective action purposes.
i
[
r
-
.
-
.
2.2 Reference Documents Emergency Plan Implementing Procedure EP-305, Site Evacuation,
Revision 5,'3/25/85 Emergency Plan Implementing Procedure EP-110, Personnel
Assembly and Accountability, Revision 6, 3/14/85 Bechtel Job Rule 8031-JR-S-15, Site Evacuation, Revision 0
2.3 Scenario Content The scenario involved an escalating fire in the Power Generation
-
Control Center (PGCC). As the danger to plant safety-related equipment increased, the event classification was progressively increased to a site area emergency. The scenario proved to be adequate in allowing the demonstration of event classification abilities, Limerick Unit 1 personnel assembly and accountability, and Limerick Unit 2 construction personnel evacuation. TSC activation, fire fighting capabilities, and search and rescue were also demonstrated.
2.4 Drill Observation Three inspectors observed the drill from respective positions in the Limerick Unit 1 Central Alarm Station (CAS), the Limerick Unit 1 Tech-nical Support Center (TSC), and with the group of Limerick Unit 2 construction personnel designated for evacuation. These positions were the most strategic for the evaluation of accountability, assembly and evacuation activities.
In the Central Alarm Station, the inspector noted that the security personnel were disciplined and familiar with their functions during the event sequence in general and particularly with regard to controlling personnel accountability and assembly. Accountability of the designated Limerick Unit 1 drill participants (approximately 100 people) was accomplished in 23 minutes.
The inspector commented that this time could have been reduced had the security guards not written down the badge numbers of everyone in the areas being evacu-ated, including those people who did not have badges designating them as a drill participant. The controller stated that this was a common practice during drills for fear that a drill participant will forget to wear his/her drill badge. The inspector acknowledged this concern and suggested that, in the future, the security guards may want to add a notation to the role lists for each person who is wearing a drill badge.
If all drill participants remember to wear their drill badge, comparison of the role lists to the computer generated list would be facilitated and reduced in duration. The licensee stated that this would be considere **
..
In the TSC, the inspector witnessed activation of the TSC, TSC personnel accountability and movement of evacuees from the TSC. The TSC was activated in a timely and efficient manner and the TSC director exhibited command and control throughout the exercise.
Personnel accountability was performed in a timely manner and in accordance with procedures.
The evacuation of TSC personnel was performed adequately.
The inspector noted however, that the public address system announcements in the TSC evacuation area were almost unintelligible. The licensee agreed with this and stated that the problem would be looked into.
The evacuation of 91 persons from Limerick Unit 2 was performed in a timely manner (18 minutes) and in accordance with the Bechtel evacuation procedure (Job Rule 8031-JR-S-15).
Communications were adequate and personnel were knowledgeable in their assigned duties.
The inspectors concluded that accountability and evacuation of Limerick Unit 1 personnel and evacuation of Limerick Unit 2 construc-tion personnel can be conducted simultaneously and in a timely and efficient manner and that the existing procedures are adequate to effect the performance of these functions.
Personnel are well trained and familiar with their functions during an emergency.
3.0 Licensee Critique The ' licensee held a meeting with the exercise controllers immediately after the drill to discuss any problems encountered. The controllers noted the same problems identified by the NRC inspectors (roll calls, PA system problems). The controllers also commended the drill players for recognizing the problems and performing remedial actions in a timely fashion.
4.0 Exit Meeting The inspectors held a meeting immediately after the licensee critique to discuss the scope and findings of the inspection as delineated in this report. At no time during this inspection was written information provided to the licensee.
-