ML20236A557

Safety Insp Rept 50-219/89-03 on 890117-20.No Violations, Deviations or Unresolved Items Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Licensee Emergency Preparedness Program

ML20236A557
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	03/03/1989
From:	Amato C, Lazarus W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20236A556	List: ML20236A553 ML20236A557
References
50-219-89-03, 50-219-89-3, IEIN-83-28, NUDOCS 8903170431
Download: ML20236A557 (11)

See also: IR 05000219/1989003

Text

.

.

. .

.

U. S. REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report No. 50-219/89-03

Docket No. 50-219

License No. DPR-16 Priority -- Category C

Licensee: GPU Nuclear Corporation

P~ 0. Box 388

Forked River, New Jersey 08731-0388

Facility Name: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station

Inspection at: Berkeley Townshia Forked River, Harvey Cedars, Lacey

lownship and Toms River, New Jersey

Inspection Conducted: January 17-20, 1989

Inspectors: (7 M, M ~ #4,/7///f

C. G. Amato, Amergency Preparedness Specialist, date '

Emergency Preparedness Section, FRSSB, DRSS

C. Z. Gordon, Emergency Preparedness Specialist,

Emergency Preparedness Section, FRSSB, DRSS

Approved By: / , WW

4r yazartis) chier, tmergency Preparedness

c5date

3 f7

Sect 4 n, FR558, DRSS

Inspection Summary: Inspection on January 17-20, 1989 (Inspection Report No.

5F-2T978923)

Areas Inspected: Routine, announced, safety inspection of the licensee's

emergency preparedness program conducted on January 17-20, 1989.

Results: No violations, deviations or unresolved items were identified.

8?03170431 sco3ag

h'DR ADOO: 03< ico 219

PDC

- _ .

- - - . -- _ _

'

m

l.

.

-

DETAILS

1.0 Persons Contacted

The following GPU Nuclear Corporation personnel were contacted.

• • R. Barrett, Director,

J. Barton, Plant Operations,k

Deputy Director, DivisionOyster Creek Division

Oyster Cree

• T. Blount, Lead Emergency Planner, Emergency Planning Section

• J. Bontempo, Lead Emergency Planner, Emergency Planning Section

( * K. Burkholder, Emergency Planner, Emerge:.cy Planning Section

• B. DeMerchant, Licensing Engineer, Plant and Nuclear Safety Department

W. Duda, Project Engineer, OC Engineering Projects, Technical

Functions Division

• R. Fenti, Manager, QA, Modifications and Operations Department

E. Fitzpatrick, Vice President GPU Nuclear Corporation and Director

OysterCreekDivision

• R. Hillman, Manager, Plant Chemistry Department

S. Kempf, Lead Offsite Emergency Planner, Emergency Preparedness

Department

• 'J. Kowalski, Manager, Plant Training Department, Training Division

• D. Mac Farlene, Oyster Creek Site Audit Manager, Quality Assurance

Division

S. Polon, Manager, Public Information Department, Communication

Division

• D. Ranft M

J. Sevilla,anager, Plant EngineeringSergeant, Oyster Creek Site Security Section

M. Slobodien, Director, Radiation Controls Division

R. Stintzcum, Site Security Manager, Oyster Creek

D. Wiegle, Sr. Environmental Engineer, Environmental Controls Section l

• J. Williams, Maintenance / Support Training Section Manager Site

TrainingSection,TrainingandEducationDivision

• K. Wolf, Radiological Engineering Section, Manager

• Denotes licensee personnel who attended the exit meeting.

The inspectors also observed the actions of, and interviewed other

licensee personnel.

2.0 Licensee Action On Previously Identified Items

The following items were identified during previous inspections.

Based upon observations, review of procedures and discussions with

licensee personnel by the inspectors, the following inspector follow

up items are closed.

(CLOSED) (50-219/88-05-07) Radio communications capability and radio

net control used by security should be reviewed. Channel avail

ability and radio net control were reviewed and determined to be

adequate.

(CLOSED A discrepancy may exist between the

Emergenc)y(50-219/88-05-08) Plan, it's Implementing Procedures and the site

Contingency Plan resulting in possible delayed updating of the NRC l

i

i

!

- _ _ _ -_--____--___ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .  :

_ __ - - _ _ . _ __ . _ _ _ ._

_ _ _____ _ _ __ __

.

.

. .

3

.

I

i

as to the progress of security events. Plans and Procedures as well 1

as coordination meetings between Security and the Emergency

Preparedness Section staffs ensures procedures are in place and l

understood ensuring timely NRC updates. l

(CLOSED) (50-219/88-05-10 An inconsistency may exist within

emergency classification p)rocedures with respect to the

classification of security events. Revision 5 to classification

procedure 9473-IMP 1300.01 states the bases for classifying  ;

security events.

(CLOSED) (50-219/88-06-01) Three areas in emergency preparedness

training require improvement. A computerized data base for tracking i

emergency training status is functional and in use, the number of

rescheduled emergency preparedness training sessions has been

significantly reduced. Emergency Directors and Emergency Director

Assistants are trained in core damage mitigation. 1

i

3.0 The Emergency Preparedness Organization

To determine if the licensee has developed, maintains and implements

an emergency preparedness program (EPP

which meets the standards of 10 CFR 50).47(b) and Section IV ofrequired by

Appendix E to 10 CFR 50, or

personnel were interviewed,ganizational structure

and EPP activities werewas studied,

identified, j

3.1 The EPP was transferred to the Radiological and Environmental

Controls (R&EC) Division during 1988 and the present Divisional

Director-Vice President a) pointed October 1988. He devotes

about 20% of his time to EPP activities and regularly briefs

the GPUNC President about emergency preparedness. The

President is a qualified OC Alternate Emergency Support

Director.

3.2 EPP operations are assigned to a Department; The Department

office is staffed by a manager and three emergency planners. OC

EPP responsibilities are assigned to a section staffed by a i

manager and four professionals with backgrounds in nuclear

engineering, health physics and reactor operations. A senior

off site emergency planner located at the OC EP Section office i

reports to the Emergency Preparedness Department manager.

3.3 Each OC EPP Section member is assigned lead responsibility for  !

one of four on going activity areas which encompass over thirty

l activities including 12 special project and 20 improvement

activities. The EP Secti u Manager maintains close liaison with

the Deputy Director of the OC Division and the OC Training

Section.

Based on the above findings, this portion of the licensee's

emergency plan is acceptable.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ]

- _ _ ___ _ _

.

.

..

4

.

i

4.0 Emergency Preparedness Training (EPT)

.

In order to determine if emer  !

compliance with 10 CFR 50.47(gency preparedrass training is inb)(15) and Sj

to 10 CFR 50, the inspector reviewed EPT activities, trainin  ;

records, lesson plans, Emergency Response Organization (ERO)g

qualification roster, and the training matrix, and interviewed  :

Training Section staff.

4.1 The OC Section of GPUNC's Training and Education Department

(TED is responsible for EPT. EP Table 23 correlates EPT scope

with)emerc ency response organization (ERO) positions. EPT

reflects ;ob task analysis and is performance based. Various

training modalities are used including classroom instruction

and drills. Attendance is checked and where feasible numerical

grades are assigned. Three new a

introduced. One is a programmed,pproaches have been

self paced sequence and or will be

another makes use of audio cassettes followed by an open book

examination. These innovative approaches are currently limited

and do not cover all of EPT. Weekly training drills will begin

in the near future. i

1 on shift; 2 initial

4.2 The ERO is and

response: divided into three groups: Training matr)icas have bee)n

3 support.

developed for eac)h group. Lessons plans are current and

attendance is tracked using a computerized data base. About  ;

300 Oyster Creek staff are currently qualified including

alternates. At least three personnel are qualified for each

ERO position. The need to reschedule EPT has been reduced to

one rescheduling within a year as a result of an OC Director i

'

golicy requiring his office to be notified whenever there is a

no show".

1

4.3 Accident Management Training (AMT) is given by another TED  !

section and an OC unit including trainia l

Assessment, and Core Damage Mitigation. g in Core DamagePlant Engi

Department personnel are trained in Systems Engineering

including systems classified as engineered safety features.

Senior reactor operators now assigned to the TSC fill various

positions. The licensee plans to classify currently or

formerly licensed senior operators assigned to the TSC as

Emergency Director Assistants, establish a fourth duty roster i

and provide required training. Severe accident a..alysis

training is not given to engineers assigned to the TSC.

4.5 Licensed operators receive four hours of EPT which includes

classification, notification procedures and Protective Action

Recommendations.OnsimulatortrainingIsnotyetprovided.The

on site OC simulator will include, upon completion a complete

and functional replica of Emergency Command Center

communication systems. This will permit hands on training and

conduct of drills and exercises from the simulator.

Based on the above findings, this portion of the licensee's emergen-

cy preparedness / training program is acceptable.

i

i

--m___ _ _.____ ._ _

. _ _ _ _ -- _ _ .

,

-. '

'

'

I'

, , LR .i. ']

5 j

- . .

5 ,

i. >

' j

5.0- Audit / Review

An inde)endent' audit / review is required at least every twelve months

by 10 C:R 50.54Lt) including determination of adequacy of the

' licensee / Stater.ocal government interface and availability of the

.

results of this study to State / local government (s). To ascertain if-

l these requirements are met, the Quality Assurance evaluation report -

i

for the OC. Emergency Pre

correspondence checked. paredness-Program (EPP) was reviewed and

,

5.1 The OC Site Audit Section undertook the required audit.from

January to March 1988 using GPUNC Quality Assurance Procedures

(QAP

those). The audit

noted above.encompassed ten-EPP

- The OC Director hasactivities including

established a policy

callin

chair.g for weekly QA meetings whichand he recommendations

or the Deputy Director

Resolution of all QA findings is

. required before an audit report may be tabled at a weekly QA

meeting.

Findings

5.2 Results of the EPP

recommendations audit

were were' satisfactory. interface adequacy was .and

resolved

evaluated, and report copies w,ere sent to the New Jersey State

and Ocean County.0ffices of Emergency Management.

5.3 The entrance meeting for the 1989 audit was hcid during the

inspection period and was attended by the inspectors. Audit

plan references were complete and a matrix was developed. For

the first time, two members of the audit' team, at the

suggestion of the Oyster Creek EPP manager, were drawn from

another nuclear utility.

Based on the above findings, this portion of the licensee's

emergency preparedness / audit program is acceptable.

,

6.0 Plans and Procedures

Plans and Procedures' were reviewed to determine if they meet the

requirements of 10 CFR 50.47(b)(16) and 50.54(q), and Section IV G

of Appendix E to 10 CFR 50.

6.1 The EP was revised by GPUNC to reflect the altered status of

THI Unit 2 and submitted to NRC for review. GPUNC res)onded to

NRC concerns and the EP was reissued as Revision 1. Tie EP

required changes to OC EPIP 9473-lMP-1300.02, Exhibit 2,

" Direction of Emergency Response". The revision wa; made and

the EP and EPIP agree with respect to Protective Action Recom-

mendation development.

6.2 EPs and EPIPs in each Emergency Response Facility were surveyed.

to find out if the current and correct PAR logic diagram was

inserted. Results indicated current EPs and EPIPs were in

place and contained the current PAR logic diagram.

!

_ _ _ _ _ _ - -_

l

,f . .,

1:

p: a . . g

y 3

l

k' 6.3 Section 2.2.2 of the EP identifies related Plans and Procedures

,

and their coordination with the EPIPs. These plans and proce-

for example, the Site Security Flan Emergency

Operation Proce

duresinclude,dures-(EOPs)fandtheEmergencyPub1I

tion Plan.. E0Ps contain re errals to Emergency Action Level .

(EAL) classification A sampling check indicated

the other procedures, procedures.as appropriate, were available.

Based on the above findings, this portion of the licensee's emergen-

cy preparedness program is acceptable.

.7.0 Emergency Response Facilities

The inspector conducted an tour of the Emergency Response Facilities

(ERFs

50.47)bto determine if they

and-(b)(9), meetIV

Section the

of requirements

Appendix E.toof10

10CFR

CFR50,

' Supple (me)n(8)1

t to NUREG0737 and Regulatory Guide 1.97. Equipment,

status boards, communications systems, plans, procedures and access  ;

control provisions were checked for the Emerg ncy Command Center

'

(ECC), the Emergency Operations Facility (E0F , the Technical

Support Center (TSC) and a support facility, he Remote Assembly

Area (RAA).

7.1 The ECC is within the the Control Room area. The ECC is

.' equipped with meteorological, radiological and plant system

parameter readouts in acdition to access to all plant communi-

cation systems'. The ECC was maintained-in a state of readiness.

7.2 The Technical Support Center (TSC) is located within the

protected area. Status boards, maps wall boards, plans,-

proceduresandequipmentweremaintaInedinastateofreadi-

ness. Provision has been made to project real time data from

the plant com

System (SPDS)puter' including the Safety Parameter DisplayThis capa

.

meteorological variables.specified in Regulatory Guide 1.97.

>

Plant records, drawings etc. are also available. Thirteen

communication systems link the TSC with other ERFs and off site >

'

entities including NRC's Health Physics Network (HPN) phones

which were functional.

7.3 The Emergency Operations Facility (EOF) is a non-dedicated

facility located within the auditorium of a Jersey Central

Power & Light business office 19 miles from the site.

Provision has been made for the projection-of real time data

from the plant computer system. Recent upgrades to.the

-

facility have been made - the Emergency Support Director's

(ESD) Office has been enlarged and the Environmental Assessment

Command Center where projected ' doses are calculated has been  !

moved to a room providing more space. A communicator's room

will also be provided. Provision has been made for an NRC

office and conference room. Space is provided for personnel of

the New Jersey Bureau of Nuclear Engineering. Fifteen

communication systems tie the E0F to other ERFs and off site

emergency response centers. Both HPN phones were operative. A

!

1

J

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

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

1

'

, ,

,.e .

. . .

7

.' l

'

i

'

.  ;

Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for the building  !

housing the E0F. .j

e 7.4 The' Remote Assembly Area (RAA) is equipped with monitoring.and  !

decontamination equipment and a-security phone. Space is-

adequatetoaccommodateslteevacuees. Signs directing

evacuees to the RAA and the RAA assembly area are in place.

Based on the above findings, this portion of the licensee's emergen-

cy plan is acceptable.

8.0 Emergency Action Levels (EAls)

To determine if the EALs meet the standard of 10 CFR 50.47(b)(4),

the requirements of Section IV B of' Appendix E to 10 CFR 50, the

'

guidance of NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement Information

Notice No.' 28 of 1983 (I&E IN 83-28), and Planning Standard D and

Appendix 1 to NUREG-0654, Rev. 1, EALs were reviewed and discussed

with EPP personnel.

" Classification of

Revision

Emer ency5 Conditions"

of procedure 9473-IMP-1300.01,he

was compared with t standard, requirements

and uidance. Classification is based on events, defined. Guidancesymptoms, brea

barr ers and projected doses. Barrier breech is

of I&E IN 83-28 is applied. EALs were sent to the New Jersey Office

of Emergency Management; the licensee plans to meet with

representatives from the New Jersey Bureau of Nuclear Engineering to-

discuss the EALs.

Based on the above findings, this portion of the licensee's emergen-

cy plan is acceptable.

9.0 Protective Action Recommendations (PARS)

The standard and requirements for PARS are given in 10 CFR 50.

b 10

'47(da)n(ce)is

gui found in I&E IN 83-28 and. Planning Standard J ofand Section I

NUREG-0654, Rev. 1. To determine if the standard and requirements.

are met and PARS are consistent with federal guidance, PARS were  !

r reviewed, and discussed with licensee's staff I

PARS are based on Figure 24 of the GPUNC EP and Exhibit 2 of the OC

classification procedure. The licensee advised the N.J. Office of  !

Emergency Management of the revised PAR logic diagram during August

1988, i

Based on the above findings, this portion of the licensee's emergen-

cy plan is acceptable.

I

i

I

I

_ : _- __ - ._._-_-. - _ _ _ - - - - .

. - _ _ _ _ _

.  !

.

8 3

.

10.0 Notification an ' " communications

'

Communications . ,cems were checked to ascertain if the requirements

of 10 CFR 50.47(b)(5 and (b Sections IV D.1 and IV E. 9 of

AppendixEto10CFR)50,and){6),IN86-97weremet.

i&E

10.1 Sixteen communication systems were identified. These systems

include independent, redundant and diverse capability. Ten

phones are provided at the E0F for N.J's Bureau of Nuclear '

Engineering. Operability was checked on a sampling basis and

found to be satisfactory.

I

10.2 Emergency duty roster personnel are called in using an

automated system consisting of a commercial pager system and

verification system. Site Security activates both systems.

The verification system checks call backs and in the event an

acknowledgement is not received automatic. ally goes down the

roster until the position is filled or the list is exhausted.

The inspector observed a drill and concluded the system was  !

rapid and effective. I

\

Based on the above findings, this portion of the licensee's emergen-

cy preparedness plan is satisfactory.

11.0 Public Information

The Public Information Department Manager was interviewed and

printed material distributed to the public studied to determine if i

the requirements of 10 CFR 50.47(b)(7) and Section IV D.2 Of '

Appendix E to 10 CFR 50 are met.

11.1 One staff member is sent to the ECC when the initial EAL is

declared. Three staffers report to the E0F at the ALERT. A

senior OC station engineer is assigned to the Media Center . A

duty roster has been established. Monthly training is given to

writers, information gatherers and technical briefers. All

Media Center charts are being simplified.

11.2 An annual media briefing is held one week before the annual

exercise. Invitations are extended to radio, television and

newspaper personnel.

11.3 The public is advised as to emergency proceduras by mailed

brochures, phone book inserts and newsletters. Eighty thousand

brochures are sent two weeks before the annual exercise

to the residents living within the ten mile Emergency Planning

Zone. To

to hotels, provide

motels information

and camp sites. to transients,

A single pagebrocnures

insert are sent

appears

on the inside. of the last page of the Ocecn County phone book

containing a summary of essential information. The brochure is l

revised annually.

11.4 Two quarterly newsletters are mailed, one to residents within

! the EPZ and the other to off site, governmental emergency

workers. The latter newsletter is always sent three weeks

before the annual exercise.

4

L____-_______________ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ . ._ _ _ _ _ _ _

--_.

-

.

.

.

9

.

l

Based on the above findings, this portion of the licensee's emergen-

cy plan is acceptable. I

12.0 Off Site Activities

To determine if the standards of 10 CFR 50.47(b)(5) and (b)(12) and

the requirements of Sections IV D.3 and IV F of Appendix E to 10 CFR

50, are wt, the lead off site emergency planner was interviewed and

appropriate records reviewed.

12.1 Off site, governmental personnel are trained by the State of

New Jersey which sends an annual training certification letter

to U.S. FEMA-II. j

1

12.2 Community fire comoanies and ambulance squads were offered >

training. Three fire companies sent personnel. Emergency

medical training was given by a contractor to first aid squad

members during October 1988. ,

12.3 A medical training session and drill were held at the primary

'

and secondary hospitals. The primary hospital medical facili- '

ties were inspected. Procedures were current, supplies met

inventory listings and equipment was functional and within l

calibration. Hospital staff interviewed were well versed in

the procedures for treating contaminated / injured persons.  ;

12.4 A remote verification system is being installed at all sirens )

locations. Siren freezing has not recurred following heater 1

installation. Corroded carbon steel base plates are being l

replaced at 19 locations. Siren availability during 1988 was l

99.8% A letter certifyin

U.S. FEMA-II by the N. J.g availability will be sent toOffice of Emergency M

,

'

12.5 Evacuation Time Estimates are being updated; the revised

values should be available by iate summer 1989.

Based on the above findings, this portion of the licensee's

emergency plan is acceptable.

13.0 Security-Emergency Preparedness Interface

To determine if the requirements of Section II.D.59 of Appendix B to

10 CFR 73 are met, NUREG/CR3251 was consulted and security

personnel were interviewed.

13.1 Security Officers are radiation worker qualified, respirator

trained and fitted. Additional training is given in Emergency

Preparedness, search and accountability, and activation of the

call-in pager and verification system.

.

13.2 An area monitor and a continuous air monitor are located within

the Main Gate House. Twenty " chirpers" stored there are

l are available fcr security officer use. A Guard House evacua-

tion exposure rate has been established and fall back locations

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

-

10

identified. Radiation Control support will be provided upon

request. The Guard House ventilation system is not filtered

and may be sealed if necessary. Anti-contamination clothing is

available at the Operations Support Center (OSC). .

1

13.3 Security-emergency preparedness interface meetings are held, i

There are provisions for Security-EP drills and the 1988 l

exercise was security driven. If a security event results in

l

declaration of an eat., security information is transmitted to i

the Emergency Command Center which will provide the NRC with '

updates.

1

Based on the above findings, this portion of the licensee's

emorgency plan is acceptable.

14.0 Dose Assessment

The standard, requirements and guidance for dose assessment are

, Sections IV B and IV E.2 of Appendix E,

given

Section in 10 NUREG-0654,

1.23 andII.f.1(2)

1.97 and

CFR 50.47(b)(9)0737(V

of NUREG-

RE , Appendix 1 Supplement

To determine if 1)2.,

the licensee is in compliance with these standards and guidance,

facilities were inspected, records were cbcked and personnel

interviewed.

14.1 Plant releases are monitored by the radioactive gaseous i

emission monitoring system (RAGEMS) at the stack base and from

multiple points in the Turbine Building. RAGEMS collects

particulate samples and iodines and monitors noble gas exposure

rate. Both these are being upgraded during an outage and their

satisfactory completion is part of the Restart Certification

.

package.

14.2 RAGEMS upgrades include an improved cartridge retrieval system, ,

a heat traced stack sample line and a cartridge retrieval box o

'

external to the RAGEMS stack house. Rain water had collected

in the retrieval box; the licensee was aware of this and will

take corrective action. Before OC restart, the Restart

Certification requirements must be completed including RAGEMS

details. RAGEMS items include approval of revised operating

procedures, training of Chemistry Technicians in these, '

calibration, and retrieval box correction. The resident i

inspector will follow up on this matter.

14.3 There are three meteorological towert including one primary

tower and two supporting towers. All are enclosed within

locked fences. Only the primary tower is equipped with a

backup power supply. The other towers serve as backups and

provide data used to determine the presence and magnitude of a

sea breeze effect. Tower sensor and associated electronic

calibration records were reviewed. Calibration was current and

effected using approved procedures.

_

. _ _ - .

-. , - - _ - - _ -- - - _ -_ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - -

L-

.o a.

.>

,

q .. ,

+ -

,

,

,

11,

e 1

,

f-

'i

'

< m 14.4'The licensee has re' viewed the methodology for collecting. iodine' '

P

'off site and concluded the system in use should be replaced.

.

.

The licensee plans to use silver zeolite cartridges; the.

required sample volume will' be. collected in_ five minutes.

'

.14.5 Projected thyroid dose commitments are calculated using;known

')

iodine release rates. If RAGEMS data are. not available,

conservative default iodine to noble gas ratios will be used to

estimate the iodine release rate. Projected dose calculational 'j

.r methods- are detailed in an Emergency Dose Calculations Manual.

(EDCM).-The licensee has reviewed the EDCM and removed many~

,

conservative values but has not changed the iodine to noble gas

F

ratio. The ratios in use are being reviewed by tta licensee.

,

15.0 Exit Meeting

An exit meeting was. held'with the licensee personnel identified in

Section 1 of this'reporttto discuss the exercise findings.' The-

licensee was advised no violations were identified.- The inspector-

also discussed some areas for improvement. Licensee management.

acknowledged these findings and indicated they would evaluate them. o

and take. appropriate corrective action regarding.the items

identified.

, At-no time during the course of the inspection did the inspectors .,

provide,any written material"to the licensee,

' l

1

.'

>

l

). <-

.i

,

'fs'

..

.

s!'

..

,

.