Text

Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted During Insp 50-458/89-09.NRC Understands That Incumbent Recovery Manager Will Demonstrate Command & Control Abilities During 890621 Exercise Drill
	ML20244C884
Person / Time
Site:	River Bend
Issue date:	06/05/1989
From:	Callan L; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:	Deddens J; GULF STATES UTILITIES CO.
References
	NUDOCS 8906150189
	Download: ML20244C884 (2)
	v • d • e

_ .__ . . . _ . . . __ _, _ _ _ _ __

_ , _ = _

J

a . .

. 'O.

- *

, .

I In Reply. Refer To: : JIK- 5 W

Docket: 50-458/89-09

L

Gulf States' Utilities

ATTN: Mr . James C. Deddens

. Senior.Vice President (RBNG)

P.O. Box 220 .

_

St. Francisv111e, Louisiana -70775 ;4

L

Gentlemen:.

Thank you for your letter of.May 5,1989;.'in response to' our letter and .

inspection report dated April 5,-1989. We have reviewed your reply and. find it;

.]

responsive to the concerns raised 'in our insp.ection .re~ port. iWe will ~ review the: ,

'

.i

implementation of your corrective actions.during a . future. inspection. ]

l

In reference to Exercise' Weakness 50-458/8909.-02, it is our understanding, ,

1

after holding telephone conversations, that the 'ncumbent i recover 9 manager will .j

i

demonstrate his command and control abilities during the ~ June'-21,1989 drill. d

'

Sincerely,-

i

l

Tul%kW

L. J.' Callan, Director

i

'

Division of Reactor Projects

!

CC* -

Gulf States Utilities {

ATTN: J. E.. Booker, Manager- -- I

River Bend Oversight l

P 0. Box 2951 l

Beaumont, Texas 77704 j

Gulf States Utilities

' ATTN: Les England, Director

Nuclear Licensing - RBNG ;

P.O. Box 220

St. Francisville,' Louisiana 70775

i

cc's continued).

-

S C:SESPk, D S :DRPy

JEverE.t C:RPBd

BMurray

r

hBE h JCallan :

S /3f /89 4 / t /89 g/ - 9/89 G /t /89 6 /J./89 .

j

,

I.. gO6150289390605 / ~i 1

O ADOCK 0500045s" i

PNU;r ,

'

c _ - o

- - _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ - _ _

.. .

I

Gulf States Utilities -2-

Chief, Technological Hazards Branch

FEMA Region 6 g

- Federal Center- '

800 North-Loop 288 '

)

Denton, Texas. 76201-3698

Louisiana' State University,.

Government Documents Department

Louisiana Radiation Control Program Director j

bec to:DMB (IE35) l

l

bec distrib. by RIV:

R. D Martin, RA DRP

Resident Inspector j

- Section Chief, DRP/C

Lisa Shea, RM/ALF l

MIS System !

DRS

RSTS Operator i

RPB-DRSS

RIV File ]

Inspector l

Section Chief

B. Murray

B, Beach

R. E. Hall.

Project Engineer, DRP/C

W. Paulson, NRR Project Manager

l

,

g. _ _ _ - _ _ _ m._____m_.-___.__

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

. . .

O O

. .

-

GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY

fg

POSTOFFICEDOM 29S1 BEAUMONT. TEXAS 77704

'

AREA CODE 409 838 6631

May 5,1989

RBG- 30800

File Nos. G9.5, G15.4.1

l

"

Ik hh 6

- L,l/ ;6

!' l.

!

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission !' MAY I 61989 ,1;

Document Control Desk

Washington, D.C. 20555

j);4l

> ' " ' - -~h' ',

'

~ ~

Gentlemen:

River Bend Station - Unit 1

Refer to: Region IV

Docket No. 50-458/ Report 89-09

Pursuant to 10CFR2.201, this letter provides Gulf States Utilities

Company's (GSU) responses to the exercise weaknesses noted in NRC

Inspection Report No. 50-458/89-09. The inspection was performed by Mr.

N. M. Tere during the period of March 1- 3 , 1989 of activities

authorized by NRC Operating Licensing NPF-47 for River Bend Station -

Unit 1. GSU's responses are provided in the attachments. This

completes GSU's responses to these items.

Should you have any questions, plesse contact Mr. L. A. England at (504)

381-4145.

Sincerely.

.f M9

J. E. Booker

Manager-River Bend Oversight

River Eend Nuclear Group

JEB/L JWC/ch

Attachments

cc: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Region IV

611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000

Arlington, TX 76011

NRC Senior Resident Inspector

P. O. Box 1051

St. Francisv111e, LA 70775

. - - . _,

j >&<> ) / w- Q' p - QJ

f4-74-/ 43

-

r ---.

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

'

. ,

., ,

.

.; ATTACMENT 1

*

Response to Weakness 50-458/8909-01

REFERENCE

Letter . L. J. Callan letter to J. C. Deddens,. dated April 5,1989

DESCRIPTION:

The NRC inspection team noted that no information feedback protocol

exists to ensure that directives are clearly understood. On one

occasion, for example, the Shift Supervisor ~ directed his staff to secure

the hydrogen purge, but this directive was ignored. As a consequence,

the release of radioactivity. to the environment continued for 15

minutes.

GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY'S RESPONSE

-Two procedures were in place at the time of the exercise to provide

instructions for Operations to effectively communicate. Administrative

procedure ADM-0022 " Conduct of Operations", states:

" Communications between operating personnel shall be clear and

concise, utilizing repeat-backs or written direction whenever

possible. When evolutions are completed, personnel. should report

this, so verifications of plant or system responses can .be

observed."

The second procedure, OSP-0009, " Author's Guide / Control- and Use'of

Emergency Operating Procedures", states:

"The most important ' ingredient' is the dialog between the Control

Operating Foreman and the Nuclear Control Operator (s). Each person

must know what is required to be done, what has been done, and' what

cannot be done.

The instruction should be repeated back to the Control Operating

Foreman to assure correct communication occurred."

The following actions are utilized to reinforce the philosophy of the

above procedures:

a. The importance of communication is reinforced continually in the

simulator and critiqued with each scenario the crew is subjected

to.

b. The Operations Supervisor has personally provided each crew with

guidance en communication via video tape training called,

" Closed Loop Communication".

Page 1 of 2

_ _ - _ - _ . _ _

... ..

..

O. O

-

.. ATTACMENT 2

'

Response to Weakness 50-458/8909-02

REFERENCE

Letter - L. J. Callan letter to J. C. Deddens, dated April 5, 1989

DESCRIPTION

The NRC inspection team noted that the TSC was. unable to fulfill its

required function during the simulated emergency. One of the factors

contributing to this problem.was-inadequate information flow to.'and from

the CR, and also. deficient information flow within the TSC. The NRC-

inspection team noted that, in general, command and control by the

Recovery Manager in the E0F was poor. Various specific findings were

noted that characterize these observations.

GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY'S RESPONSE

Gulf States Utilities is currently taking those actions as previously

outlined in our letter from J. C. Deddens to Mr. Robert D. Martin' dated

March 17, 1989.

As of April 12, 1989 the position of TSC/CR Communicator was created and

three qualified SRO or SRO certified individuals have been assigned to

the River Bend Station Emergency Response Organization. The initial

responsibility of this position is to communicate with the NRC Incident

Response center via the ENS. Once the TSC is operational, the TSC/CR

Communicator's sole function will be to provide the updated plant status

and operations shift actions to the TSC and the EOF.

Prior to revising the RBS Emergency Plan and appropriate Emergency

Implementing Procedures (EIPs), a rapid-paced / challenging drill.will be

conducted to determine the effectivess of these changes' to the

I

organizational structure. This drill will be conducted in July, 1989

with necessary changes to the Plan and EIPs to be completed by Sa tember

30, 1989.

In reference to the poor command and control exhibited by the Recovery

Manager, the deficient items were addressed with the Recovery Manager

during the critique and correct actions were reinforced. GSU feels that

this was an isolated case. GSU will demonstrate correct command and

control during the July, 1989 drill.

l

Page 1 of 1

_ _ _ _ _ _

-. . '

,, .,

L .: . .

. lO; 'Oi

..- <c, c '. Training 'and Operations: have:and will: continue to require proper .

.

connunicationsl be utilized in all evaluations.<

The ability to-effectively connunicatei direction andiorders will be'

.+ demonstrated -'during: a rapid-paced / challenging drill: to be conducted in

July 1989.

'

~'

.

,

'k

k

i h

1

,

s

q

.

s

l

l l

-1

-

I

Page 2 of 2 e

i

'

o

J

.

- -_ _

.,

-

. . .. .

O O

a

ATTAC K NT 3 '

,

' '

Response to Weakness 50-458/8909-03

REFERENCE

Letter - L.'J. Callan letter toJJ. C. Oeddens, dated April.5, 1989'

DESCRIPTION

The NRC inspector noted that the OSC Coordinator dispatched one team to -

perform maintenance activities in-plant without a . radiation protection

technician. This is contrary to. Procedure EIP-2-017. " Operation Support-

Center-Support Function," which requires radiation protection . support

when teams are dispatched.to radiological control areas.:

GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY'S RESPONSE

A. review. of' EIP-2-017 Section 6.1.1, Step ~ 12 indicates that this

- requirement is. unduly restrictive in that it does not' allow the OSC

- Coordinator to not send 6 Radiation Protection' Technician .with

-

maintenance activities when conditions do not warrant'. such coverage.

This procedure will be revised to allow this flexibility. This revision -

will be completed by September 30, 1989.

]

I

'l

i

!

.

!

l

'

l

I

f

Page 1 of 1

-

-_~_---_._---__.-.__._.L_-.__ --

- - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _

l: -

<..+. o O.

i- *

ATTACMENT 4 {

! w . I

Response to Weakness 50-458/8909-04 j

REFERENCE

I

Letter - L. J. Callan letter to J. C. Deddens, dated April 5,1989

DESCRIPTION

The NRC inspection team noted that the licensee's first attempt to

identify and characterize exercise weaknesses .during their formal

critique with the NRC was deficient in that it . did not -properly

characterize the findings according to their significance. However, the

licensee continued their efforts immediately following their critique

and properly' identified and characterized many of the significant

I findings by the NRC inspection team.

1'

GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY'S RESPONSE

At the time of our exercise, GSU did not fully appreciate the need to

characterize. our findings during our verbal critique process. GSU has

issued a formal evaluation report delineating those areas identified as

weaknesses or needing improvement and assigning responsibility for

implementing corrective actions. In addition, the following actions

have been taken:

, - GSU met with all Region IV plants to discuss their methods for

l conducting exercise weaknesses and characterizing events.

- Observed the exercise including the critique process at Arkansas

Neclear One.

- Reviewed the requirements of 10CFR50 and NUREG-0654 for

drill / exercise critiques.

As a result of the above actions we now have a better understanding of

this need and will characterize our findings in the future. _ This will

be demonstrated as a part of our 1990 NRC evaluated exercise to be

conducted in February 1990.

l

'

l

!

Page 1 of 1 !

!

l

J

ML20244C884

Text

Navigation menu

Search