ML20247K199

Insp Repts 50-498/89-12 & 50-499/89-12 on 890424-28.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Licensee Performance & Capabilities During Annual Exercise of Emergency Plan & Procedures

ML20247K199
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	05/17/1989
From:	Everett R, Terc N NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20247K175	List: ML20247K171 ML20247K199
References
50-498-89-12, 50-499-89-12, NUDOCS 8906010239
Download: ML20247K199 (7)

See also: IR 05000498/1989012

Text

p- -

.

+ 1

h; ,

,

.; . v

.

APPENDIX

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

NRC Inspection Report: 50-498/89-12 .0perating Licenses: NPF-76

50-499/89-12 NPF-78

'

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

I Inspection At: STP,'Matagorda County, Texas.-

Inspection Conducted: April 2 -28, 1989

~

1

l Inspector: b

N. M. Terc, Emergency Preparedness Anal st

]

1. ~ ~ U

Date

(NRC Team Leader) e

".1

- Accompanying. , , < 1,

J. Tapia, Senior'NRC Resident Inspector, STP

'

Personnel:

Unit 1 ,

'

,

J. Sears, Comex Corporation

D. Schultz', Comex Corporation *

>

Approved: [ I[

R. J. Everett, Chief, Security and Emergency

5~//7/89

Date

Preparedness Section

Inspection Summary

Inspection Conducted April 24-28, 1989 (Report 50-498/89-12; 50-499/89-12)-

o

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

and capabilities during an annual exercise of the emergency plan and

procedures. The NRC inspection tean observed activities in the Control

'

Room (CR), Technical Support Center (TSC), the Emergency Operations

Facility (EOF), and-the Operations Support Center (OSC) during the exercise,

e9060gh

PDR

bh l

Q i

1

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

e7-,-~- ; ~- ,=---- ,

+

a

. <

s

-

t

.

.-

. +

2

',

P

Results: Within.the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were

identified. -Four exercise weaknesses were identified by the NRC inspection

team (paragraphs 4-6). Weaknesses identified include inadequate personnel

accountability methods, inattentiveness to personnel safety _during the medical

emergency scenario, errors in notification messages, and inaccurate dose

projections. Generally, the licensee's response was adequate to protect the

health and' safety of the public.

o

,

---

x--_____-______-___ - - - - - - - - __ __

.

, '

-

% S QQ ,

e .

'

N'

y .v., ,

,. . -

, .,

lh . i1 '

-

/

' ' _ .' y '

, ,

g j

-

3

,

-

1

!

I

L DETAILS-

. l

,

. ..

.1. Persons Contacted.

.HL&P

• W. H.: Kinsey, Plant Manager

L' *G. E. Vaughn, Vice' President, Nuclear Operations

'

• M. A.'McBurnett, Licensing Manager

• W. A. Randlett, Security Manager . .

_

.

• S. L. Rosen; Vice President, Nuclear Engineering'& Construction

• J. A. Brady,' Manager, Emergency Preparedness

• S. M. Head, Supervising Licensing Engineerc

.

g- *C. G. ; Walker,. Site Public Affairs Manager

.*P. L. Walker,- Senior Licensing Engineer

,

• M.-R. Wisenburg, Plant Superintendent, Unit 1 .

• D; ~ A.- Leazar, Reactor Support Manager

• J. E. Geiger, General-Manager, Nuclear Assurance

,, *J. R. Loven, Technical Services Manager

NRC

• J.-Bess, Senior Resident Inspector, STP, Unit 2

The NRC inspection team also held discussions with other station and'

corporate personnel in the areas of security, health physics, operations,

training, and emergency response.

• Denotes'those present"at the exit interview.

2. Followup on Previous Inspection Findings (92701)'

(Closed) Exercise Weakness (498/8842-01; 499/8842-01): Ineffective j

Control Room Communicator - The NRC inspection team noted_that the control '

room communicators had been retrained and demonstrated their proficiency

during.the 1989 exercise.

'

(Closed) Exercise Weakness (498/8842-02; 499/8842-02): Delay of Repair

Teams - During the 1988 exercise, a repair team was delayed due to the

lack of personnel exposure data. The NRC inspection team noted that

during the 1989 exercise, repair teams were not delayed for lack of

. personnel exposure data. A new method for obtaining personnel exposure

histories was in: place. This method provides necessary data to allow a

higher emergency exposures.

...

1?

'

_ '!

_.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

.a

.

'

4

1

3. Program Areas Inspected i

i

The NRC inspection team observed licensee activities in the CR, TSC, OSC, l

and E0F during the exercise. The NRC inspection team also observed

emergency response organization staffing; facility activation; detection,

classification, and operational assessment; notifications of licensee

personnel; notifications of offsite agencies; formulation of protective

action recommendations; offsite dose assessment; in plant corrective

actions and medical rescue; Security / Accountability activities; and

recovery operations. Inspection findings are documented in the following

paragraphs.

There were no findings for the CR, TSC, or OSC during the exercise.

4. Emergency Operations Facility (82301) (3)

The NRC inspection team noted that dose projections performed after the

Loss of Coolant Accident did not take into consideration high range

containment monitor readings indicating core damage. As a consequence,

dose projections underestimated radioactive releases by an order of

magnitude. The NRC inspection team also determined that

Procedure OPEP02-Z6-0007, " Coolant Activity and Radionuclides Trend for

Failed Fuel," which correlates core damage to high range containment

monitor readings was not implemented either by the TSC staff or by dose

assessors at the EOF. As a consequence, dose projections were not based

on the extent of existing core damage. This was due, in part, to the fact

that this procedure does not specify implementation duties and

responsibilities.

The above is an exercise weakness. (498/8912-01; 499/8912-01)

Several errors were noted on the Site Area Emergency (SAE) and General

Emergency notification messages as folicws:

SAE Message No. 4, sent at 9:52 a.m., stated, in Block 8 that the

message included new radioactive release information. Block C

reflected a release was in progress with an expected duration of

8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> which started at 8:39 a.m. However, the pathway to the

environment did not occur until 9:30 a.m. due to the failure of the

containment auxiliary hatch, and the EOF staff was not made aware of

the leak to the environment until 9:54 a.m. based on a visual report

of steam leaking f rom the hatch.

SAE Message No. 4 stated, in Block 9, that projected offsite doses l

were not available because the release rate was too low, at

9:41 a.m., to generate dose projections. However, licensee's dose

projections available at the.t time reflected a child thyroid dose of

2.3 rems.

The above is an exercise weakness. (498/8912-02; 499/8912-02)

No violations or deviations were identified in this program area.

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

_

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

% .9

t ,

,

-

.

,

e

5

5. Corrective Actions / Rescue and Medical Team (82301) (7) and (10)

The NRC inspection team noted that during the medical emergency 1 scenario,

the medical team did not establish priorities properly.. The extent of the

simulated injuries was of such a nature'that the medical team should have

immediately recognized their precedence over the. radioactive contamination

on the victim. Instead of providing the victim with urgently needed

medical attention, the responders gave priority to matters pertaining to.

contamination. In addition, the medical' team did not properly secure the

stretcher, nor the victim, and did not take proper precautions with the

oxygen bottle when transporting the victim. Furthermore, several

responders failed to observe proper radiological controls and

cross-contaminated themselves, the victim, and equipment.

The licensee identified this item as a weakness in their critique with the

NRC.

The above is an exercise weakness. (498/8912-03; 499/8912-03)

No violations or deviations were identified in this program area.

6. Security / Accountability (82301) (8)

The NRC inspection team noted that during the site evacuation, the

licensee was unable to promptly provide adequate accountability of

personnel'that remained onsite. Site evacuation was started at 9:45 a.m.

At'10:15 a.m., the security staff at the East Gate Security Gate reported

that 65 persons were still unaccounted for. This delay in accountability

during site evacuation was noted in the previous exercise. The licensee

identified this item as a weakness in their critique with the NRC. In

addition, the NRC inspection team noted that continuous accountability of

essential OSC personnel after the site evacuation was poor.

The above is an exercise weakness. (498/8912-04; 499/8912-04)

No violations or desiations were identified in this program area.

7. Exit Interview

The NRC inspection team met with the NRC resident inspectors and licensee

representatives indicated in paragraph 1 on April 28, 1989, and summarized

the scope and findings of the inspection as presented in this report. The

licensee acknowledged their understanding of weaknesses and agreed to

L examine them to find root causes in order to take adequate corrective

actions.

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

, * 1

,

NRC FORM 7e6 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION FRINCIPAL INSPECTOR (Name, last, /ust, and mickfie snsha?

lEu'E,osas ' ~

rege ' aj gm e eJ Af.

INSPECTOR'S REPORT ,Ey,EwtR

Office of Inspection and Enforcement A L g,.f g

l INSPECTORS

Tesc . $? cort .DSA , StkVL ra ,E w pue) r

TRA SA ION REPORT NEXT INSPEC DATE

LICENSEE / VENDOR yp DOCKET NO.18 digilsl OR LICENSE

NO (BY PRODUCTil13dets) NO. SEO MO. YR

~

hlk O fo 0 0 y 9 f P Q / L A

M - MODIFY g y p o p y 7 9 p 9 f t n

D - DELETE C

R - REPLAC[ D

'i 2'  ; 14 15 is

l PERJOD OF ! INVESTIGATION / INSPECTION INSPECTION PERFORMED BY ORGANIZATION (.OCE OF REO!ON/HO CONDUCT-

INO ACT1VITY (See IEMC 0530 ' Manpower Report-

l FROM TO / 1 - REGIONAL OFFICE STAFF a -Week Manpow4w R9 othry " Ant code)

]OTHER _,.,, R LGIDN 7 VISON BRANCH

DAY YR. MO. DAY YR. 2 - RESIDENT INSPECTOR

l MO.

l0lv 2l4 Pl9 #lY 47 fl1 3 - PEMORMANCE APPRAISAL TEAM h 8 8

'

,'. 25 26 ; i;31 32 4 33' l 34 ) 35

l 20 / , ,

l'

TYPE OF ACTIVITY CONDUCTED IChgCh one bou DolVI

REGIONAL ACTION

I (Check one bon onlyl y' 02 - SAFEfv 06 - MGMT.VISif 10 - PLANT SEC. 14 - INOVIRY

1 - NRC FORM 591 03 - INCIDENT 07 - SPECIAL 11 - INVENT VER. 15 - INVESTIGATION

V 2 - REGIONAL OFFICE LETTER 04 - ENFORCEMENT 08 - VENDOR 12 - SHl' MENT / EXPORT

05 - MGMT. AUDIT 09 - MAT. ACCT. 13.-IMPORT

lJ s s ' c.38 L '

L 37 38 f,

l N, oN) hN TOT AL NUMBER ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE REPOR T CONI AlN 2190 LETTER OF REPORT TRANSMITTAL DATE

OF vrOLATIONS AND HELD INFORMATION -

lA B C D DEVIATIONS N AC FORM 5f.1 REPORT SENT

l/ / 1 - CLEAR

h

OR REG

LETTER 45 iUED

TO HO FOR

ACTION

l 3 - DEVIATION A B C D AlB C D A B C D p J DQ (yp MO DAY YR.

l 4 - VIOLATION & DEVIATION , , , , l 1 - YES 1 -.YES ,

M '[ f[ Q[ l l l

i i

1 39 .5 ,

40-41 c. 42 " 43f 44l ' 19 50

-

55

l MODULE INFORM ATION MODUtf INFORMATION

E

"R

O MODULE NUMBER INSP yg 9 MODULE REO FOLLOWUP g MODULE NUMBER INSP 6, O VODULE REO FOLLOWUP

h$$,5n ;::

iS #5

8s

8e

Ef

h$$,5

E

9Ee #9

8s.

5

- . #5 8: - s .

c

ow e e<

-

a . 2

c. _.

. _ #9

am c. , e

om n . < s m a s

2

E. o

m , _,

m

!

- 3,

d

r =Eu .I !. ,.3 E.3m g Ya636y ~p 538 .$ .I >vE 2

. ,3 E.

I

-

$

, I

.

I!

>v r,3 E.e

3

e

5

a65$gm

~1

e38

.v -

e

5

c

E.I

=u  !. ,3 E

m

. -

u -

B i 23,o,2l ^

ici4 1,0i o 6 3

l,,l 8 , i liil ^

i i , i i liiI

isa iN o- i liiI a

i i i i i li,I

'

I i i i i il i I

'

I i i i , l1 1 I

o

i , i i i liil o

i i i i i Iiil

^

!. ? 5 vi13iil 2 ol a

i l3

i l ioi e t i iiil e i i liil i i i i i liiI

" I,il

i is

i t ie, c t i liil e

i i i i i

'

i i i i i liil '

i i  ! i i liil

o

i i i , , I,,1 o

i , , , , I,,1

l= -} 5 3io17:o131 isi2 i i i 1 -i i l s i i Iiil '

i i i i i IiiI

isa , i i liil a

i i i i iiti!

'

,i

i e i lii! -

i i i , i li,1

D

I I l I I lI i l D

I l l ! i ll  !

j

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

IW10I! i ,*__ l@I li'i e M f tl3 0 tl i i g_ l lg l l ^

_ ii  ; i j ll l l

8

isii e i ., o v 5 r ,21sic a l e

, i i , , IiiI

ii , , i Iiil l i , i i l1 i l

RCLE SEQUENCE IF l l

L ATION OR DEVIATION l l l l l l l

l l l l l

s- - 40 12 is : ms u . is u 20 n. r 2s th 3l 4 ls.  : iO u is 55 is ie ite >> n 25

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

. . ,

REPO4T MODULE NUMBER + ..

NRC FORM 705 A DOCKET NO.18 delis) OR LICENSE

18 NO,18Y PRODUCT)(13 cigits '* '

NO. SEO. l l l l l l .

^ v' ' ' " " ?!" "" " " ""* " " J'If.

'

INSPECTOR'S REPORT 3

8

(Continuation) 1 2 3 . s e

ya c

Office of Inspection and Enforcement "; R .d o Z

u a

VIOLATION OR DEvlATION (linter up to 2400 characters for each stem. H the test exceeds this number, it will be necessary to paraphrase Limit tones to 50 t haracters each.)

1.

2

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10-

11,

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20

21

22.

23

24.

2S

26

j 27

1

,

-

30.

--

32

_

N

.

- 3# -

,

as

l 6

2

U.S. NUCLEAR Rf GULATORY COMMISS