RBG-30800, Responds to Exercise Weaknesses Noted in Insp Rept 50-458/89-09 on 890301-03.Corrective Actions:Importance of Communication Reinforced Continually in Simulator & Critiqued W/Each Scenario Crew Subjected to

Responds to Exercise Weaknesses Noted in Insp Rept 50-458/89-09 on 890301-03.Corrective Actions:Importance of Communication Reinforced Continually in Simulator & Critiqued W/Each Scenario Crew Subjected to

ML20246M937
Person / Time
Site:	River Bend
Issue date:	05/05/1989
From:	Booker J GULF STATES UTILITIES CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
RBG-30800, NUDOCS 8905190302
Download: ML20246M937 (6)

Text

... ___ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ . . __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ._______ ____._ _.________._ _____________ __________ _ _ _

' s. - t

'e GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY P O S T O F F I C E D O X 2 9 51 DEAUMONT. TEXAS 77704 AREA CODE 409 838-6631 May 5,1989 RBC- 30800 File Nos. G9.5, G15.4.1 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 Gentlemen:

' River Bend Station - Unit 1 Refer to: Region IV l 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. Terc during the period of March 1- 3 , 1989 of activities c.uthorized 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, please contact Mr. L. A. England at (504) 381-4145.

Sincerely, l

f..

J E.F Booker 8e-ds Manager-River Bend Oversight River Bend Nuclear Group

) $

JEB/LAE/JWC/ch Attachments cc: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, TX 76011 NRC Senior Resident Inspector l P. O. Box 1051 /

I St. Francisville, LA 70775

[ ' '

8905190302 890505 8 ADOCK 050 gDR

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ .- - - - - . - - - - - - - - ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - . - - - - - - -___.-----J

ATTACIMENT 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 ADMv0022, " 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 'inaredient' is the dialog between the Control Operating Foreman and'the Nuclear Control Operator (s). Each person must know vhat 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 on communication via video tape training called,

" Closed Loop. Communication".

Page I of 2

c. . Training and Operations have and will continue to require proper -l

. . communications be utilized in all evaluations.

The ability to effectively communicate direction and orders will be demonstrated during a rapid-paced / challenging drill to be conducted in July, 1989.

I i

I i

b ]

i i

i l-l r

Page 2 of 2 i

J

. ATTACHMENT 2 Respoose 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, conmend 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 SR0 or SR0 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 l and operations shift actions to the TSC and the E0F.

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 organizational structure. This drill will be conducted in July, 1989 with necessary changes to the Plan and EIPs to be completed by September 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

r a .s

4. ..-

,... ATTACFMENT 3 Response-to Weakness 50-458/8909-03 l

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

-DESCRIPTION' The .NRC inspector noted that the OCC Coordinator dispatched one team to perform maintenance activities in-plant without a ' radiation protection  !

technician. This is conte ry 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 a 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

i Page 1 of 1

c.

4

, ATTACHMENT 4-l- .

l- Response to Weakness-63-458/8909 ;

4 l ' REFERENCE I Letter - L. J. Callan letter to J. C. Deddens, dated April 5, 1989 l

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 tollowing their critique

'and. properly identified and characterized many of the significant findings by the NRC inspection team.

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 Emet' with all Region IV plants to discuss their methods for conducting exercise weaknesses and characterizing events.

- Observed the exercise including the critique' process at Arkansas Nuclear 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.

1 Page 1 of 1 ,

_ ___-_-_____ _-__- - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ -