ML20198G317
| ML20198G317 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 01/06/1998 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20198G312 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-263-97-16, NUDOCS 9801120294 | |
| Download: ML20198G317 (1) | |
See also: IR 05000263/1997016
Text
a
i
event was professional and calm. Communications were clear and teamwork was
effective. Noise levels in the TSC were generally low.
The TSC staff briefings were frequent and effective. The ED gave adequate
notifications to the staff of upcoming briefings and indicated his expectations for the
types of information to be presented. TSC staff members were well prepared for
briefings and presented their information in a very efficient manner. The ED presented
a succinct summary of the information provided at the end of each briefing. The ED
requested that phone calls be discontinued during the briefing sessions, which
contributed to their effectiveness, but also delayed some Information reaching the TSC
from other areas.
The turnover of responsibilities for offsite communications, offsite assessment, and
protective action recommendations to the Emergency Operations Facility was
conducted in an especially controlled manner and was extremely effective. The ED
gave adequate time for his staff to prepare for the turnover and directed them to insure
that no offsite notification activilles were ongoing at the time of turnover.
The ED made effective use of the TSC staff to provide information, projections, and
suggestions. He evaluated their inputs and then made rapid decisions which were then
plainly communicated. The ED was clearly in charge of the facility.
The TSC staff made good use of their resources, effectively tracked plant status, repair
teams, offsite conditions, and other relevant information. They performed their tasks
efficiently and anticipated infometion that would be needed by the ED. Personnel and
equipment resources in the TSC were adequate with the exception that there were not
enough self reading dosimeters available.
The TSC staff and ED properly prioritized mitigation tasks and made action decisions
that were well supported technically. At times, there were deficiencies in communicating
these decisions. The ED decided the single rod trip test procedure did not need to be
performed during the reactor shutdown. He asked the superintendent of nuclear
engineering to prepare a ' Volume F Memorandum" (temporary procedure change) to
delete the requirement. However, that decision was not passed on to the CRS
i
'
operating crew and they proceeded with the rod trip testing. This had little effect on the
shutdown sequence,
b.3
.Qantational suooort Center LQ10)
l
The overall performance of OSC management and staff was generally competent,
despite some examples of inconsistent c mmunication which did not impact OSC
effectiveness.
The OSC was fully staffed and operational very quickly following the Alert declaration. A
personnel status board was effectively used to track the availability of personnel to
participato in the emergency response teams. The personnel status board was an
excellent tool which enabled OSC management to accurately track personnel by
6
9001120294 900106
ADGCK 05000263
G
-
.
.