ML20211Q483
| ML20211Q483 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 10/20/1997 |
| From: | Murray B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Randolph G UNION ELECTRIC CO. |
| References | |
| 50-483-97-13, NUDOCS 9710220317 | |
| Download: ML20211Q483 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000483/1997013
Text
b'6
a
9
UNTED STATES
y-
'g .
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{
g$
REGloN IV
~ . 'g+9 *+0'[
611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE. SulTE 400
.
October 20, 1997
Garry L. Randolph, Vice President and
Chief Nuclear Officer
Union Electric Company
P.O. Box 620
Fulton, Misscuri 65251
SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT 50-483/97-13
Dear Mr. Randolph:
Thank you for your letter of October 2,1997, in response to the exercise
weaknesses identified in NRC Inspection Report 50-483/97-13, dated September 4,1997.
We have reviewed your reply and find it responsive to the concerns raised in our inspection
report. We will review the implementation of your corrective actions during a future
inspection.
.
Sincerely,
WQ
%v
-
Blaine Murray, Chief
Plarit Support Branch
Division of Reactor Safety
_ . .
,
Docket No.: 50-483
,l
License No.: NPF-30
cc:
Professional Nuclear Consulting, Inc.
19041 Raines Drive
. Derwood, Maryland 20855
Gerald Charnoff, Esq.
Thomas A. Baxter, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge
2300 N. Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037
l hfh h ,5 ,
9710220317 971020
ADOCK 05000403
G
. - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ - - - -
cJ ,
..
- Union Electric Company
- 2-
_H. D. Bono, Supervising Engineer
Site Licensing-
Union Electric Company
P.O. Box 620-
Fulton, Missouri 65251
Manager - Electric Department
Missouri Public Service Commission
301 W. High
P.O. Box 360
Jefferson City, Missouri 65102
Ronald A. Kucera, Deputy Director
Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 176
Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 -
Otto L. Maynard, President and
Chief Executive Officer
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation
P.O. Box 411
Burlington, Kansas 660s9
Dan 1. Bolef, Prosident
Kay Drey, Representative
t
Board of Directors Coalition
for the Environment
6267 Delmar Boulevard-
'
/*
University City, Missouri 63130
Lee Fritz, Presiding Commissioner
Callaway County Court House
__
10 East Fifth Street
i
Fulton, Missouri 65151
e
Alan C. Passwater, Manager
Ucensing and Fuels
. Union Electric Company
P.O. Box 66149
,
St. Louis, Missouri 63166-6149
,
J. V. Laux, Manager
Quality Assurance
Union Electric Company
- P.O. Box 620
Fulton, Missouri 65251
-
_ - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . - - _ _
.
.
Union Electric Company
-3
DISTRIBUTION w/ cony of licensee's letter dated October 2.1997:
DCD (IE35)
Regional Administrator
Resident Inspector
DRP Director
DRS-PSB -
Branch Chief (DRP/B)
MIS System
Project Engineer (DRP/B)
RIV File
Branch Ch:ef (DRP/TSS)
G. M. Good, PSB
Al File (97 G-112)
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ REPORTS \\CW713AK.GMG
To receive copy of document. Indicate in box:"c" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy with enclosures "N" = No copy
RIV:PSB/SEPA -
C:DRS/PSB -
GMGood:nh GM6r
BMurray 9%-
10/1797
10/q97
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
_ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
y.
.
Union Electric Company
-3-
DISTRIBUTION w/conv of licensee's letter dated October 2.1997:
DCD (IE35)
Regional Administrator
Residerit inspector
DRP Director
DRS-PSB
Branch Chief (DRP/B)
MIS System
Project Engineer (DRP/B)
RIV File
Branch Chief (DRP/TSS)
G. M. Good, PSB
Al File (97-G-112)
..
i
&*
f
I!
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ REPORTS \\CW713AK.GMG
'
To receive copy of document. Indicate in box:"C" = Cooy without enclosures "E" = Copy with enclosures "N" = No copy
RIV:PSB/SEPA
C:DRS/PSB
GMGood:nh GN%r
BMurray @
10/I'/97
10/1797
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
s
,
l
,
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
. - - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Callaway Plant
.
Past Othce Box 620
.
.-
Fulton. Missoon SS25I
.;
.
- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ *
'
f,
y rl R N Il li h
n-
.
t
"
cT
6!997
'.
1
.. l
i
{. INION
ELECTRIC October 2,1997
~~
~~
'd3
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Attn Document ControlDesk
Mail Stop P1-137
Washington, DC 20555-0001
ULNRC-3648
Gentlemen:
REPLY TO EXERCISE WEAKNESSES
INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-483/97013
CALLAWAY PLANT
This responds to Mr. Howell's letter dated September 4,1997, which transmitted two
Exercise Weaknesses for events discussed in Inspection Report 50-483/97013. Our
response to these weaknesses are presented in the attachment.
None of the' material in the response is considered proprietary by Union Electric.
If you have any questions regarding this response, or if additional information is required,
please let me know.
,
Very tmly yours,
..
e>
. V.Laux
Manager, Quality Assurance
JVUMAR/tmw
Attachment: 1) Response to Exercise Weaknesses
,
e
C
g)/b~n iIk
pi
-
- - - - - - - _
- - - - - - -
-___
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
,
-
.
,
ULNRC-3648
'
October 1,1997
Page 2
cc: Mr. Ellis W. Merschoff
Regional Administrator
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
RegionIV
611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400
Arlington, TX 76011-8064-
Senior Resident Inspector
Callaway Resident Office
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
8201 NRC Road
Steedman,MO 65077
Mr. Barry C. Westreich(2 copies)
Acting Licensing Project Manager, Callaway Plant
Office ofNuclear Reactor Regulation
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Mail Stop 13E16
Washington, DC 20555-2738
Manager, Electric Department
Missouri Public Service Commission
PO Box 360
j.
Jefferson City, MO 65102
_
Mr. Thomas A. Baxter .
. Shaw, Pittman, Potts, & Trowbridge
i
2300 N. Street N.W.
Washington,DC 20037
Manager, Plant Support
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation
PO Box 411
Burlington,KS 66839
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ - _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ .
._ __ _.
.
...
--
.-
~
Attachment to
ULNRC-3648
October 1,1997
Page1
During anNRC inspection conducted on August 11-15,1997, two exercise
waha=~ were identified.
A.
Statement of Weakness
The inspectors observed several programmatic ccmplications associated with offsite
agency notifications following the alert declaration. The combined effect
inappropriately and unnecessarily delayed offsite agency notifications. Inspectors
made the following observations:
The alert declaration time was logged when the control room anno mcement was
made (7:43 a.m.) rather than when the shift supervisor made ihe decision to
declare the alert (7:41 a.m.). The shift supervisor was distracted by other
activities for 2 minutes.
- Pertinent to this observation, Appendix 1 to NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1,
" Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response
Plans and Preparedness in Support ofNuclear Power Plants," Revision 1, states -
that, "The time (prompt notification) is measured from the time at which
operators recognize that events have occurred which make declaration of an
emergency class appmpriate." Accordingly, the inspectors determined that the
alert was declared at 7:41 a.m. when the shift supervisor recognized that the -
',
conditions for an alert were met.
.
Control room personnel did not begin offsite notification form preparation until a
communicator arrived (about 10 minutes after the announcement). The licensee
""
stated that the communicator was " pre-positioned" within the training centerd
near the control room simulator. The communicator's arrival was delayed to
account for the normal travel time to the control room from the individual's
normal worklocation.
. The communicator was not familiar with the SENTRY software (a new
electronic system for making offsite notifications) and did not know where to
obtain information needed to complete the form (meteorological conditions and
emergency action level text). As a result, several more minutes elapsed before
- the notifications were transmitted electronically at 7:58 a.m.
The inspectors determined that the above programmatic factors caused a delay in
making timely offsite agency notifications (i.e., within the 15-minute regulatory
limit). In response, the licensee considered the notification timely based on the alert
.. - _ __
_ _ _ _ _ _ ._
_____
_-__
_ _ _ _ _ _ .
.
.
-
,
l
<
.
<
.
.
Attachnwnt to
-
UL.NRC-3648
October 1,1997
Page 2
declaration log entry (15 minutes versus 17 minutes). The inspectors concluded that
there were progrunmatic reasons for the dehys: (1) a lack of clear understanding
.
about when the noti 6 cation period starts, (2) the use of communicators who were
not stationsed in the control room, and (3) a lack of familiarity with the new
electronic notification system. Due to the programmatic factors, the inspectors
identified the failure to make timely offsite agency notifications as an exercise
weakness (50-483/9713-01).-
Reason for the Weakness
Union Electric concurs with the reasons for the notification delays as stated in the
inspection report.
Cerrutive Stens Taken and Results Achieved:
A corrective action document was initiated to track completion of corrective actions.
,
Corrective Stens to Avoid Further Weaknesses:
Each reason is listed below followed by the action to be taken to address the concern.
0
-
"(1) a lack of clear understanding about when the nctification period starts"
Training regarding declaration and noti 6 cation time ' equirements will be included in
r
Operations requalification cycle 97-5;
..
.
"(2) the use of communicators who were not stationed in the contrel room"
,'
Shift Supervimrs are being trained on use of the Sentry Notification system durin,g
the current training cycle. This will allow the Control Room to complete the initial
c:
notification, if necessary, prior to personnel designated as Communicators arriving at -
the ControlRoom.
"(3) a lack of familiarity with the new electronic nedfication system"
An operator aid will be developed for use of the Sentry Notification system to assist
Communicators in collecting the necessary information and completing the on-line
form.
-
-
. -.
.. . . .
,
. .
_ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ .
4
p
I
.
.
Attachment to
ULNRC-3648
October 1,1997
Page 3
Date when Full Comoliance will be Achie'ved:
The operator aid will be available for use by Communicators by October 15,1997. Full
compliance will be achieved upon colapletion of training by December 22,1997.
B.
Statement of Weakness
Technical support center access controls were established but were periodically
ineffective in maintaining positive control of those who exited. A security officer
wu assigned to control center access and ensure that all personnel who entered the
center walked through the portal monitor. Personnel who exited the center were
logged out by the secority omcer.
Although the process worked most of the time, when the security officer interfaced
with the administrative group or the security coordinator, opportunities occurred for
personnel to exit the center without being noticed by the security officer. During the
exercise, at least three individuals left the technical support center without logging
out with the security officer. As a resuh, continuous accountability was not
maintained.
/
In addition, there was no process to establish and communicate radiological
precautions to those who exited the center once the radiological release started
(except inplant response team members). As a result, the three individu.ds who left
the center were not informed of areas to avoid, routes to take, or personal protective
.
measures. In a related matter, the inspectors observed limited coordination with i
security personnel concerning radiological precautions; however, the licensee
informed the inspectors that radiologicel precautions were taken for security _
personnel. Due to the impact on personnel safety, the failure to establish effective
technical support center access controls was identified as an exercise weakness
(50-483/9713-02).
Reason for the Weakness
Controls for dispatch and tracking of emergency teams from the Technical Support Center
are adequate to ensure continuous accountability and proper radiological controls for
emergency team members. However, existing programmatic controls are inadequate to
s
ensure others leaving the facility will be adequately briefed and accounted for.
__
' '
.
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. . .
-
. ..
..
a
,
.
.
,
,
.
,
'
Awhenant to
'
ULNRC-3648
October 1,1997
Page 4
Corrective Steos Taken and Re'sults Achieved:
A corrective action document was initiated to address the weakness identi6ed in the
exercise. Exits &om the Technical Support Center have been c!carly posted with
appropriate signs to remind personnel to establish radiological precautions with Health
Physics personnel and maintain accountability with Security pdor to depaning &om the
Technical Support Center. Expectations for radiological centrols_ and continuous
acewatability in the Technical Suppon Center have been communicated to all emergency
response personnel.
Corrective Stens to Avoid Funber Weaknaaan:
Specific programmatic requirements for all personnel leaving the Technical Support
Center will be established to strengthen continuous accountability and radiological
controls for personnel who are not assigned to emergency teams.
Date when Full Comoliance will be Achieved:
Changes to affected emergency response procedures to implement pm.arammatic changes
will be completed by November 10,1997.
>
-
e
e..
%>
_
_ _ _ _ - . - _ _