IR 05000482/1985033: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
{{Adams
| number = ML20136F611
| number = ML20153F047
| issue date = 11/07/1985
| issue date = 02/19/1986
| title = Insp Rept 50-482/85-33 on 850819-23.Violation Noted:Ltrs Not Sent to Recipients of Emergency Plan & Records of Evaluation Changes Submitted to NRC on 850515 & 0627 Not Maintained
| title = Ack Receipt of 851213 Ltr Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Rept 50-482/85-33
| author name = Hackney C, Yandell L
| author name = Gagliardo J
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
| addressee name =  
| addressee name = Koester G
| addressee affiliation =  
| addressee affiliation = KANSAS GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
| docket = 05000482
| docket = 05000482
| license number =  
| license number =  
| contact person =  
| contact person =  
| document report number = 50-482-85-33, NUDOCS 8511220155
| document report number = NUDOCS 8602250287
| package number = ML20136F544
| package number = ML20153F050
| document type = INSPECTION REPORT, NRC-GENERATED, INSPECTION REPORT, UTILITY, TEXT-INSPECTION & AUDIT & I&E CIRCULARS
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, NRC TO UTILITY, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| page count = 5
| page count = 2
}}
}}


Line 19: Line 19:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:. '.
{{#Wiki_filter:. _ _ _ _ _ - _ .
.
  '
APPENDIX B U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
  -
 
FEB l 91986
==REGION IV==
NRC Inspection Report: STN 50-482/85-33  License: NPF-32 Docket: STN 50-482 Licensee: Kansas Gas and Electric Company P. O. Box 208 Wichita, Kansas 67201 Facility Name: Wolf Creek Generating Station Inspection At: Wolf Creek Site, Burlington, Kansas Inspection Conducted: August 19-23, 1985 l
Inspector: du h -
    'dA/ Il-$-Y[
C. A. Hackney, Emergency Preparedness Analyst Date Approved: (b id  ll-7-ff L. A. Yandell. Chief, Emergency Preparedness Date and Safeguards Programs Section Inspection Summary Inspection Conducted August 19-23, 1985 (Report STN 50-482/85-33)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the licensee's emergency preparedness program in the areas of changes to the emergency preparedne s program, knowledge and performance of duties and program review. The is.=pec-tion involved 36 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspecto Results: One violation was ident'fied (failure to follow procedures, paragraph 2).
 
l pg AD E p G
<
 
  *
. .
.
    -2-DETAILS Persons Contacted
*F. Rhoades, Plant Manager
*K. Moles, Supervisor Emergency Planning
*R. Hoyt, Emergency Planning Administrator
* Rathburn, Manager, Licensing & Radiological Services S. Austin, Shift Supervisor
*J. Good, Licensing J. Weeks, Supervising Operator T. Fraker, Nuclear Station Operator R. Grant, Director Quality M. Hall, Lead Engineer T. Conley, Health Physics Technician III M. Brownfield, Document Control Clerk V. Hofford, Administrative Clerk II P. Redding, Document Control Clerk D. McDaniel, Document Control Supervisor B. Herrin, Document Control Clerk II J. Dagenette, Training Specialist J. Houghton, Operations Coordinator, Operations
~
D. Melville, Technical Document and Control Supervisor D. Hooper, Document Control Clerk III M. Schrieber, Engineering Specialist III NRC
*J.'Cummins, Senior Resident Inspector
*B. Bartlett, Resident Inspector The NRC inspector also held discussions with other station and corporate personnel in the areas of quality aseurance, communications, document control, changes to the emergency pseparedness program, and emergency respons * Denotes those present at the exit intervie . Changes to the Emergency Program The NRC inspector reviewed selected sections from the emergency plan and emergency plan procedures (EPP) to determine that the documents had been reviewed and submitted according to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(q)
and 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, paragraph The NRC inspector determined by review that there had not been any changes to the emergency plan since the licensee had received the operating license March 11, 1985. There were, however, changes made to EPP 01-1.1 m
 
!
l
  .
  .
* -
In Reply Refer To:
p _
Docket: STN 50-482/85-33 Kansas Gas and Electric Company ATTN: Glenn L. Koester Vice President - Nuclear P. O. Box 208 Wichita, Kansas 67201 Gentlemen:
*
Thank you for your letter of December 13, 1985, in response to our letter and Notice of Violation dated November 14, 1985. We have rrwiewed your reply and find it responsive to the concerns raised in our Nottu of Violation. We will review the implementation of your corrective actions curing a future inspection to determine that full compliance has been achieved and will be maintaine
!
i
[    -3-I'
>
L on May 13, 198 The revised EPP was sent to the NRC on June 27, 1985.


'
Sincerely,
The licensee had discovered that the document had not been submitted to
% fsinal stened byt R. E HAL1."
.the NRC in the required 30 day period and had taken immediate corrective action. On June 28, 1985, a letter was written implementing the correc-tive actio On May 5, 1985, EPP's 01-3.1, 01-3.4, 01-3.5, and 02- were revised and submitted to the NRC on May 15, 1985. _ According to EPP 02-1.1, Section 4.3.2.1, an evaluation was to be performed and docu-mented on all changes to the emergency pian and procedures.


<
J. E. Gagliardo, Chief Reactor Projects Branch cc:
>
Kansas Gas and Electric Company ATTN: Otto Maynard, Manager of Licensing
The NRC inspector determined that an evaluation of the May 15, 1985 and
. P. O. Box 309 (Sharp Road)
'
Burlington, Kansas 66839 Forrest Rhodes, Plant Superintendent    ;
June 27, 1985 submittals was performed to the requirement of 50.54(q);
Wolf Creek Generating Station    i P. O. Box 309 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Kansas Radiation Control Program Director bcc: (continued next page)
however, the evaluation was not documented according to EPP 02-1.1, Section 4.3. The NRC inspector reviewed a distribution matrix for EPP, emergency plan, and piping and instrumentation drawings. It was determined that the reviewed documents had been properly distributed; however, it was deter-mined that document control procedure KP-1032, titled, Distribution Control System, sections 7.3.5-7.3.7 required controlled documents to have an acknowledgement sheet returned to the document control cente Failure to respond, after having received two requests for the acknowledgement letter, required that the party be removed from the controlled document lis Further, each letter was to be reproduced and retained on file until resolved. The NRC inspector determined that the procedure was not being followed in that delinquent persons were being called on the tele-
'
[ phone rather than being sent a lette One person had not responded to I
RIV:EP& C:EP&S D SS CAHackney LAYandell Rida art RPS/Bh- [JEGagliardo DMHunnicutt 02/tt/86 02/li/86 02/g/86 02/C/86 [/02/f3 /86 9602250287 8602 ADOCK O
telephone calls concerning documents transmitted to them on April 2, 198 These two examples of a failure to follow procedures are a violation against Technical Specification 6.8, " Procedures and Programs" (50-482/8533-01).
  -
      / /,l-PDR  pg o
  - .-- ,  _  .


There were no stated changes decreasing the effectiveness of the emergency plan or EPPs submitted to the regional NRC offic '
The NRC inspector inspected the licensees onsite and offsite emergen'c'9 N _
response facilities. Specifically the Emergency Operations Facility (EOF), Operational Support Center (OSC), and Technical Support Center (TSC). The facilities were as stated in the emergency plan with the exception of the EOF. The EOF had furniture and displays that were not in the emergency plan. It was determined that the training department was moving to the training center and the furniture storage was temporar There had not been significant changes to the emergency response organ-
; ization since March 11, 198 The duties of the onsite and offsite
' emergency planning coordinators have remained the same since March 11,
'
1985. There were no additional key personnel added to the emergency response organizatio No other violations or deviations were identified.
L
:-
I '*
, s
.
    -4-3. Knowledge and Performance of Duties The NRC inspector reviewed training records for selected emergency response team personnel. The training records were difficult to audit from the training matrix. The computer printout did not indicate required training, retraining requirements, test scores, titles, or if the person was still qualified to remain on the emergency team. Training was assigned according to each persons position in the emergency organization; however, some essential training was being given that was not identified as being required for operations personnel, e.g. , emergency detection and classification, and dose assessmen *
The NRC inspector noted as an area for improvement, the need to consol-idate the emergency personnel training records and to use the computer to track personnel training records. Additionally, it was suggested that
' essential personnel training requirements should be reviewed and appro-priate essential training should be assigned as required trainin Interviews were held with selected emergency response personnel to determine their understanding of their role in the emergency organization, and their duties and responsibilitie It appeared that those persons interviewed were knowledgeable of their duties and responsibilitie '
Walkthroughs were conducted with selected emergency response personnel which included duty emergency director, shift supervisor, supervising operator, nuclear station operator, and health physics. The persons interviewed were asked questions as they applied to their team assignmen Operations personnel were interviewed in areas of emergency detection, classification, protective action recommendations, notifications, emergency response facilities, shift staffing, and authoritie The health physics technician was interviewed in areas concerning offsite radiological monitoring, communications, monitoring areas, reporting data, equipment, and interfacing with the state radiological monitoring teams. The response f rom each team member appeared adequat No violations or deviations were identifie . Audits The Quality Assurance department had performed the 50.54(t) 12-months emergency program review, however, the report had not been finalize This area will be reviewed during a future inspectio No violations or deviations were identifie . Exit Interview The exit interview was conducted on August 23, 1985, with Mr. F. Rhoades representing the license Mr. J. E. Cummins and Mr. B. L. Bartlett, m * ~'
. , .
  .
  .
    -5-NRC resident inspectors were present, Mr. C. A. Hackney, the NRC inspector, summarized the inspection findings. It was noted during the
.
  -
Kansas Gas and Electric Company -2-bec to DMB (IE35)
  ; inspection that the licensee's letters of agreement were inconsistent in their review cycle. This area was discussed as an item for improvemen The licensee stated that they would review the letters of agreement
bcc distrib. by RIV:
-
RPB  Myron Karman, ELD, MNBB (1)
annually and update the letters every 2 years. The licensees response appeared acceptabl The NRC inspector stated that there was one violation with two examples for failure to follow procedure .
Resident Inspector R. D. Martin, RA Section Chief (RPB/B) DRSP R&SPB  RSB RIV File  C. A. Hackney MIS System  L. A. Yandell RSTS Operator R. L. Bangart D. Weiss, LFMB (AR-2015)
 
9
 
4
      - . _ _ - _ _ - - - - - - -----
}}
}}

Revision as of 00:18, 24 October 2020

Ack Receipt of 851213 Ltr Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Rept 50-482/85-33
ML20153F047
Person / Time
Site: Wolf Creek Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation icon.png
Issue date: 02/19/1986
From: Gagliardo J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To: Koester G
KANSAS GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
Shared Package
ML20153F050 List:
References
NUDOCS 8602250287
Download: ML20153F047 (2)


Text

. _ _ _ _ _ - _ .

'

-

FEB l 91986

.

In Reply Refer To:

Docket: STN 50-482/85-33 Kansas Gas and Electric Company ATTN: Glenn L. Koester Vice President - Nuclear P. O. Box 208 Wichita, Kansas 67201 Gentlemen:

Thank you for your letter of December 13, 1985, in response to our letter and Notice of Violation dated November 14, 1985. We have rrwiewed your reply and find it responsive to the concerns raised in our Nottu of Violation. We will review the implementation of your corrective actions curing a future inspection to determine that full compliance has been achieved and will be maintaine

Sincerely,

% fsinal stened byt R. E HAL1."

J. E. Gagliardo, Chief Reactor Projects Branch cc:

Kansas Gas and Electric Company ATTN: Otto Maynard, Manager of Licensing

. P. O. Box 309 (Sharp Road)

Burlington, Kansas 66839 Forrest Rhodes, Plant Superintendent  ;

Wolf Creek Generating Station i P. O. Box 309 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Kansas Radiation Control Program Director bcc: (continued next page)

'

RIV:EP& C:EP&S D SS CAHackney LAYandell Rida art RPS/Bh- [JEGagliardo DMHunnicutt 02/tt/86 02/li/86 02/g/86 02/C/86 [/02/f3 /86 9602250287 8602 ADOCK O

-

/ /,l-PDR pg o

- .-- , _ .

.

.

Kansas Gas and Electric Company -2-bec to DMB (IE35)

bcc distrib. by RIV:

RPB Myron Karman, ELD, MNBB (1)

Resident Inspector R. D. Martin, RA Section Chief (RPB/B) DRSP R&SPB RSB RIV File C. A. Hackney MIS System L. A. Yandell RSTS Operator R. L. Bangart D. Weiss, LFMB (AR-2015)