IR 05000498/1987067

Insp Rept 50-498/87-67 & 50-499/87-67 on 871019-22.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Implementation of Corrective Actions for Emergency Preparedness Appraisal Deficiencies

ML20236R337
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	11/06/1987
From:	Fisher W, Terc N NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20236R268	List: IR 05000498/1987067 ML20236R265
References
50-498-87-67, 50-499-87-67, NUDOCS 8711230230
Download: ML20236R337 (5)

Text

(-

l u.

h .

j APPENDIX U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY. COMMISSION )

REGION IV

!

NRC Inspection Report: 50-498/87-67 License: NPF-71'

50-499/87-67 Construction Permit: CPPR-129 Dockets: 50-498 50-499 Licensee: Houston Lighting & Power Company (HL&P)

P. O. Box 1700 Houston, Texas 77001 Facility Name: South Texas Project (STP), Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: STP, Matagorda County, Texas Inspection Conducted: October 19-22, 1987 l

Inspector: P ^ = ^-

, O' D O j N. M. Terc, Emergency Preparedness Analpst Date Nuclear Materials and Emergency Preparedness Branch Approved: ,, ,

1 n -6 'E 7 W. L. Fisher, Chief, Nuclear Materials and Date Emergency Preparedness Branch Inspection Summary Inspection Conducted October 19-22, 1987 (Report 50-498/87-67; 50-499/87-67)

Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of the licensee's implementation of corrective actions for ert.ergency preparedness appraisal deficiencie Results: Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were-identifie gh 8 G

l

.,

DETAILS Persons Contacted I

Licensee

• R. Frazar, Manager, Emergency Preparedness Department

• J. Brady, Division Manager, Emergency Preparedness

• C. Walker, Public Affairs Representative

• P, Walker, Senior Licensing Engineer

• S. Head, Supervisory Licensing Engineer

• 0enotes those present at'the exit intervie . Followup on Previously Identified Inspection Findings (Closed) Deficiency (498/8635-25; 499/8635-25): Non-Radiation Monitors Incomplete - The NRC inspector toured the control room and noted that non-radiation monitors needed to ascertain and characterize accidents were in place as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(9), Appendix E, IV.B, NUREG 0654,Section II.H, and the licensee's Emergency Plan, Section H, paragraph H.1.1.3. The NRC inspector also reviewed records which indicated that installation, testing, and turnover of non-radiation monitors used to determine emergency action levels based on plant conditions was complete l (Closed) Deficiency (498/8635-32; 499/8635-32): Incomplete Prompt I Notification System - The NRC inspector noted that the prompt notification i system consisted of 12 sirens and 1700 tone alert radio Documentation and testing of the sirens was specified in their station Procedure OEP902-ZA-0020, l

" Prompt Notification System / Testing-Documentation," dated April 6, 198 This procedure established the means to standardize the testing and documentation of the sirens, and requires weekly silent tests, as well as quarterly growl tests, and annual full tests of the siren Licensee's Procedure OEPP02-ZA-0021, " Distribution and Maintenance of Tone-Alert-Radios (TARS)," dated April 1, 1987, determines the distribution and replacement of tone alert radios and batterie The licensee stated that new radios, other than those specified in Procedure OEPP02-2A-0021 above, were being distributed. These new tone alert radios have rechargeable batteries. The procedure does not reflect this change in radios and, instead, requires a yearly replacement of batteries. The licensee stated that the procedure will be revised in the near futur A telephone conversation by the NRC inspector with a FEMA official revealed that a test of the entire prompt notification system was performed by FEMA and their contractor, International Energy Associated Limited on Tuesday, September 29, 1987, at 7:00 p.m. The NRC inspector noted that records indicated that licensee observers were also located near each siren during the FEMA test. The test activated all sirens, TARS, and the. Emergency Broadcast Network (EBN). The formal report on the

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

nu

results of these tests have not been published by FEMA. . Preliminary oral-reports by FEMA indicated that all sirens, the EBN, and a great percentage of TARS operated as expecte On October 7, 1987, the licensee issued a certified letter with return receipt'to all permanent residents who had not received a TAR. Out of the~

80 " permanent' residents" who had no TARS, 38 were actually outside of the siren range. Some of the remainder left the area with no forwarding address. The licensee continues to try to contact the The NRC inspector determined that the prompt notification system appeared to be in place and operating and that the licensee's. continuing effort.in this area was adequat (Closed) Deficiency (498/8635-55; 499-8635-55): Personnel Accountability During Site Evacuation The NRC inspector determined that the licensee conducted two evacuation drills on September 18 and October 2,1987, and as a result issued a field change revising their site evacuation-accountability Procedure OEPP01-ZA-0007, Revision 3, dated June 4,1987, entitled " Accountability / Evacuations." The NRC inspector also noted that Site Instruction 2.03, " Site Emergency Procedure,"

outlined means of increasing the effectiveness of evacuating the construction site workers. (See Allegation No. RIV-87-A-0009 in this ,

l report.) These changes incorporated learnings from the two evacuation drills. The licensee was able to evacuate 1030 workers efficiently from the Unit 2 construction site, in addition to 205 nonessential personnel from Unit '

Presently, the licensee is creating a new procedure _ to be used by security to incorporate the step-by-step methodology-utilized in the last drill, I when a successful Unit 1 protected area site evacuation and accountability.

! (205 people) was accomplished in 30 minute (Closed) Deficiency (498/8635-70; 499/8635-70): Inadequate Offsite Training - The NRC inspector determined that the Bay City Fire Department and the Palacios Fire Department have been trained to enable them to provide the emergency support required by the licensee's emergency pla The NRC inspector noted that, according to licensee records, Bay City fire department personnel were given additional training in the.following areas: offsite notifications, site access procedures, basic ~ radiation protection, and fire fighting techniques. The above training was l performed from January 27 through April 1, 1987. In addition, the L licensee implemented a new procedure which describes and coordinates the training of offsite agencies, including the fire departments. This procedure, IP-8.2Q, " Emergency Preparedness Training Program," was approved and implemented on October 9, 198 (Closed) Unresolved Item (498/8724-01; 499/8724-01)i Adequacy of Dose Assessment Computer Program - The NRC inspector determined that the STAMPEDE program was presently fully developed, and showed good agreement with the IRDAM code and with other licensee means .for. performing Dose Assessment. The NRC inspector noted that a new procedure, OPRP01-ZA 0034',

c _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - . - - - _ _ _ -- _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ -_=______-__ _ _-

_

l e .. .

4-  !

Revision 0, " Health and Safety Services Division Computer Program,"- i effective on June 22, 1987, was created.to ensure that the adequacy and j distribution of changes to the computer.. code will:be controlle ~

(Closed) IE Bulletin 85-15 (498/8705-01; 499/8705-01): Availability of Emergency Notification System (ENS) - The NRC inspector determined tha backup power to the ENS was supplied by the TSC diesel generator, which is-connected in Room 316 of the Electric Auxiliary Buildin (Closed) Deficiency (498/8708-62; 499/8708-62): Procedure Inadequacy - l The NRC inspector determined that Procedure 1 POP 05-E0-FRH1, '.' Response to 'j L Loss of Secondary. Heat Sink," was . revised to include references to the-Emergency Plan Classification Procedure-(0EPP01-ZA-0001) entitled

" Emergency Classification" and indicated that step 9.0 represented a'

General Emergency conditio . Allegation Followup (RIV-87-A-0009)

The allegation stated that.the site evacuation alarm could not be heard >

within the site office buildings. .The alleger also turned this concern over to the STP Safe Team The NRC inspector noted that'the Safe Team' Report concluded that, in fact, the evacuation alarm could not be' heard in some locations within the ..

Unit 2 construction site As a consequence, HL&P management acted on the Safe Team recommendation that another siren be installed and activated near the warehouse area located on the west side of.the facilities under construction. At the present time, two sirens located in.the Unit 2- ,

construction site are sounded in addition to the evacuation alarm, which I is an electrically generated monotone transmitted over the Public Addres I System activated in Unit 1. The NRC inspector noted that during an evacuation of-the owner's area, which included both units, a

" Sweep-Search-Team" was used to go inside office buildings within the i Unit 2 construction site to advise personnel who for some reason were i lagging behind or did not hear the sirens. The licensee im revised Site Instructica 2.03, " Site Emergency Procedure,"toplemented reflect thisa new method of advising personnel located inside office buildings that a site evacuation is in proces f Additionally, the NRC inspector noted that Procedure OPFP02-CN-0009, Revision 0, dated May 27, 1987, entitled, '! Annual Public Address and Alarm j System Testing," was in place for testing the Public Address and Alarm  !

System, and requested personnel to report if they could not hear the alarm The NRC inspector determined that within the controlled area the licensee

'

added 50 additional speakers between April and June 1987 in order to extend the message to trailers located within~the protected are ,

'

'

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

i e. .

5 i will consider improving the effectiveness of -

The licensee stated that the Sweep-Search-Team usingthey' bull-horns" to warn personnel in building The NRC inspector found the allegation to be substantiated by the Safe Team and appropriate corrective action taken. This followup did not reveal any violations or deviation . Exit Interview The NRC inspector met with licensee representatives denoted in paragraph 1- 1 on October 22, 1987, and summarized the scope and findings of the 1 inspection as presented in this report, j l

'!

)

l ll

I

'

l l

___ _ -. - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - --_________-___.-________--a