ML20199B617
| ML20199B617 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1998 |
| From: | Dapas M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Walter MacFarland ILLINOIS POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20199B622 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-461-98-27, NUDOCS 9901140003 | |
| Download: ML20199B617 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000461/1998027
Text
.
..
..-
-
.
,
?
..
t
!
December 31,1998
l Mr.' Walter G. MacFarland IV
!
-
Senior Vice President
j!
! Clinton Power Station
lilinois Power Company
- Mail Code V-275.
, P. O. Box 678
i
Clinton, IL161727'
!
. SUBJECT:
. NRC CLINTON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS EXERCISE INSPECTION
REPORT 50-461/98027(DRS)
Dear Mr. MacFarland:
On November 20,1998, the NRC completed an inspection of an emergency preparedness
_
,
exercise at the Clinton Power Station. The purpose of this inspection was to evaluate the
performance of your emergency response organization during the exercise. The enclosed
j
report presents the results of that inspection' .
.
. Areas examined during the emergency preparedness exercise are identified in the report.
'
< Within those areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and
. representative records, observation of performance, and interviews with staff. The objective of
the inspection was to determine whether the Clinton Power Station Emergency Plan was
!
adequate and if station personnel properly implemented the Emergency Plan in accordance
'
.with NRC requirements during the exercise. Based on the results of this inspection, no '
- violations of NRC requirements were identified.
~ '
i
We are concemed that, while minimum regultdory requirements were met, several basic
' problems were evident regarding the performance of the operating crew, and the staffs in the
)
Technical Support Center, Operations Support Center and Emergency Operations Facility.
Two Exercise' Weaknesses were identified during this inspection. An Exercise Weakness is a
I
. finding that the licensee's demonstrated level of preparedness could have precluded effective
-1
implementation of the Emergency Plan in the event of an actual emergency. The Weaknesses
are summarized in the Appendix to this letter. As required by 10 CFR 50,' Appendix E (IV.F),
i
any Weaknesses that are identified must be corrected.
l
In a letter dated December 4,1998,'which is enclosed, you informed us of your planned
. corrective actions for the weaknesses and other performance issues that were identified during
L the_ exercise. Your planned corrective actions are acceptable. Therefo. . , no response to our
.
letter is'necessary.; However, due to the Exercise Weaknesses and your plans to conduct
additional drills before the end of the first quarter of 1999, the NRC Clinton Restart Plan's
Case Specific Checklist item Vll.1, " Develop and implement Emergency Preparedness
. improvement initiatives", will remain open.
i
,
1
9901140003 981231-
o
PDR. ADOCK 05000461
i
_'G
,
w
--
, .
-
-
_ _ _ - _ .
- ___ -
-
$
n
W. MacFarland
-2-
In accordancc with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its
_ enclosures will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR).
Sincerely,
original signed by ?!. Dapas
,
Marc Dapas, Deputy Director
' Division of Reactor Projects
Docket No.:
50-461
License No.: NPF-62
Enclosures:
1. Appendix, Exercise Weaknesses
2. Inspection Report 50-461/98027(DRS)
3. Ltr dtd 12/4/98, titled ' Corrective Actions for the 1998 Clinton
Power Station Emergency Response Organization Integrated
Graded Exercise"
cc w/encis:
G. Hunger, Station Manager -
R. Phares, Manager, Nuclear Safety
and Performance Improvement
J. Sipek, Director - Licensing
M. Aguilar, Assistant Attorney General
G. Stramback, Regulatory Licensing
Services Project Manager
General Electric Company
Chairman, DeWitt County Board
State Liaison Officer
1
Chairman, Illinois Commerce Commission
W. Curtis, FEMA V
.
DOCUMENT NAME: G:DRS\\CLl98027.WPD
To ,eceive e copy of this document, Indicate in the bos: 'C" e Copy N etts:tmenvadomse T = Copy wm atta.. . .:;
a, sire
"N" = No copy
OFFICE
Rill
6 Rlli
l6 R!ll
Rlli
JE
,,
,
_
NAME
Foster /Ploski:JpTf
Creed 7]//7
Kozak M / V Dapas s p 9
DATE
12/1/98
12/1//98
12/3//98 ~ ~
12/N/98 ~
V
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
-
-_a
, ..
.
.
_ .
. _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ . . . . _ . _ _ _ . . . _ . _ . _ . . . _
-
, -g t :
-
.o
,
[
s
.W. MacFarland
-3-
- Distribution:
RPC (E-Mail)
'
Project Mgr., NRR w/encls
J. Caldwell, Rlll w/encls
C Pederson, Rill w/encls
. B. Claytog,' R!Il w/encls -
,
SRI Clinton Wiengis
,
t . DRP w/encis-
,
.TSS w!encls
"
' DRS (2) w/encls
Rlli PRR w/ enc!s
' PUBLIC IE-35Wencis M
+:
-
' Docket File w/encis
'
' GREENS
LEO (E-Mail)
DOCDESK (E-Mail)
.
9
{ :
. .L
)
y
- -
130100
.
'IN
=
-.-
.
-
p
.
EXERCISE WEAKNESSES
l
l
During the evaluated exercise conducted on November 18,1998, the following Exercise
Weaknesses were identified. As required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix E (IV.F), any. Weaknesses
that are identified must be corrected.
1.
Emergency Plan implementing Procedure RA-02, " Protective Action
' Recommendations," identified the default minimum Protective Action Recommendation
(PAR) upon the declaration of a General Emergency to be as follows: " Evacuate 0-2
mile radius and 2-5 miles downwind unless conditions make evacuation dangerous and
advise the remainder of plume Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) to go indoors [ shelter)
to monitor EAS [ Emergency Alert System] broadcasts." However, Illinois Nuclear
!
Accident Reporting System (NARS) message number 4, issued from the Technical
l
Support Center (TSC) staff to the Emergency Operations Facility (EOF) staff and to
i'
offsite officials upon declaration of the General Emergency, did not contain a
recommendation to shelter persons in the remainder of the EPZ.
l
EOF personnel evaluated the PAR and, after a delay of approximately 20 minutes, the
.
l
EOF's Emergency Manager determined that the TSC staff had provided an incorrect
'
PAR and that the correct PAR was to " shelter" all portions of the EPZ that were not
l
being evacuated. The failures of TSC and EOF staffs to provide the appropnate initial
i
and revised PARS in a timely manner after a General Emergency was declared was
determined to be an Exercise Weakness which will be tracked by inspection Followup
Item 50-461/98027-02.
!
2.
Technical Support Center (TSC) personnel assigned priorities for Operations Support
Center (OSC) tasks using " Priority 1" for approximately half of the OSC teams. At one
point, the inspectors noted that 6 of 10 OSC tasks / teams were designated as
" Priority 1." This resulted in inefficient use of resources on the most critically important
'
i
tasks. For example, a sense of urgency was not exhibited when repair teams were
l_
dispatched from the OSC. This was determined to be an Exercise Weakness which will
!
be tracked by inspection Followup item 50-461/98027-03.
.
l
L
,
p
1
i
,
.--