ML20128C868

Forwards Draft Matl for Public Safety Evaluation for Plant, Covering Conduct of Operations & Technical Qualifications

ML20128C868
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	06/28/1972
From:	Knuth D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:	Skovholt D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 9212040553
Download: ML20128C868 (8)

Text

.-~.o...... .. . ~ . . -

. .$ .  %. p.c~. orr g n ,. , , ,. , f .. 3 -

bv) nY A[4,NA gLgh QY ., :

• y s

ll.

?

, dlf* * 'h*[ .L*

t a ' ' ~ c' '

i. -

-f l

.o g ,- g74 i

jg... , + ~

. i.w ev y gg .-..r p .%,-

3 D. J. Skovbolt, Assistaat DirecNr for Operating Beestore, L INPUT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY EVALU ATION FOR THE HONTICEL14 WDCLEAR GENERATING PLANT UNIT 1 Enclosed is draft material for the public safety evaluation for Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Unit 1, covering Conduct of Opera-tions and Technical Qualifications.

Originni Signed by Donald F. Knuth a

D. F. Knuth, Assistant Director for Reactor Safety Directorate of Licensing Enclosure As stated Plant Nemes Monticelle Nuclear Generating Plant Unit 1 Licensing Stage: Ceaversion to FTL Decket No.: 50-163 3 ranch & Project Leader Requesting Assistance: J. Shea, L10RS 2 Technical Review Branch: L088 Requested Completian Date: ASAP Description of Review Input for Public Safety Ivaluation Review Status: Complete l ccw/encli[ Distribution

8. R. Hanauer, DRTA h Suppl. .g

! Jr.k. Hendrie LITE L LReading . .t i

D.(L'. Zieses. L10RB=1 r. OSB ReadingJ, 7g .

i J.'Shea,1lihB-2 .

j D. Thompsoe', . L:065 ' < : '

} J.'R. Sears. L 063~ .m 1 ,

y ~

ec w/o one1 ,,;

if :s x

ig ,y .

i W. Mcdonald0PS (i L~ a.

t & f, -

omce> ... .N B ...;........ .L.,@, Lj,R!i .. . ,,,,,,,,, , , , ,

h,/,h.d SURNAME > ,Y, .e a r8,; c $,,,,DThotopson D, t,,,,,,,,,, _

,,,,,,,y kk om > 0726/72

) i :*m AEC-m (Rev.9 54 AECM ONO ,

6/26/72 - 6 3 ,72 , , ,

c. s. myrmm ra eso orrwt meo . ano.m j , ,,,_,, , , _ , , , , _ , , , , , , , , ,

9212040553 720628 "' - " ' -

~

- ~ -

"" ~ ~

PDR ADOCK 05000263-P PDR

~F# ,

~

~.- s .*

b Q Northern States Power Company Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Docket No. 50-263 License No. DPR-22 Public Safety Evaluation - Full teria license a

1. Organization Performance

'I A letter dated October 18, 1971 from the Director, Division of Reactor Licensing, to Northern States Power Company (NSP) stated the following:

"In reviewing the operation record of the Monticello Nuclear Cencrating Plant since the provisional operating license No. DPR-22 was issued, we note that there have been a number of unusual occurrences that have saf,ety implications. The handling or resolution of many of these itans does not appear

. to have been adequate, which Icads us to conclude that your Operations Connittee and Safety Audit Comnittee have not I

functioned properly in discharging their responsibility to assure the high level of operational competence required."

The letter concluded with a request that NSP submit plans and programs to rectify the operating deficiencies and to improve the management und control system and overall technical surveillance.

NSP replied to the specific connents in a letter to the AEC dated

. October 29, 1971 that included the following policy statement, "Significant operating events, such as those referenced in the October 18, 1971 DRL letter, result in prompt attention by several groups as soon as they occur or'are recognized.

The plant staff takes innediate action to assure safety of people and equipment. They also keep che NSP General Office L_, . a. . ._ . __

4

. .;j - .

u . . . , . , - . - ~ . . . ~ . . . . . ....:.......--.:-. .

- . (~1 <~1

• . 2

, ic

}~ technical staff and management regularly advised on plant 1

and safety status as a result of the event and solicit the I

4 l help of specific talents f rom that group as needed; they keep

}-

the Compliance group posted as appropriate; they solicit advice from Safety Audit Committee members and independent consultants as required; and of course, prepare the necessary reports and documentation of these occurrences."

In a letter to DRL, dated December 3,1971, NSP submitted the following

~ additional information relative to one of the unusual occurrences referred to in the AEC letter:

"It is possible that the operator accidentally reset Group I a

while attempting to reset Group III. The Operations Committee i i concluded that this must have occurred on September 5,1971, a conclusion reached only af ter inspections and tests had i eliminated every other known possibility.

j The following steps were taken to prevent a recurrence:

1. The procedural errots were discussed with the individuals involved.

2. A memo was distributed to the plant operators. This memo summarized the Operations Comittee conclusion and re-emphasized that the isolation must not be reset until it can be definitely determined that system isolation is M .

I

. . e u e . 0. ; . . . 9 .., +:.......-....,....,,nv.a., . as , . , - .. . . . a,a b.

. -3 not required. (This memo was posted on the control

. room bulletin board for a period of about four weeks and

~!

{

has been initialed by all shif t supervisors and control j room operators.)

3. A plastic cover has been placed over the isolation reset i

switch to prevent inadvertent operation."'

i NSP's letter of December 3,1971, also includes the following information:

"On November 17, 1971 additional operating procedures for the review and documentation of the investigation of operating

+

disturbances were issued. The proce'dures require the com-3 pletion of a checklist which is designed to assure that a i

thorough review is performed. Equipment malfunctions, procedures inadequacies, and operating errors identified by the review must be listed and a separate followup record form must be completed for ev'ery such itesn. Prior to a plant restart the checklist and records of corrective actions .

1 taken must be reviewed and approved by the Plant Results Engineer and the. Operations Supervisor... The NSP System

. Operation Department was advised on November 3,1971, that in the event of a Monticello plant trip, the assumption will

~

be made that it will be at least twenty-four hours before the unit will return to service and to arrange for replacement d power on that basis. This was done to minimize pressures for an early plant restart and to assure time for a thorough investigation."

l l L_ .. a ... __ ._

f

.. -o.,-,- s. m , ,, . . .

( ,.

O A'

~

., l 4

1 i  ;

i .

i l On November 5 and November 19, 1971 and on March 9,1972, NSF submitted 1

further information on personnel ch.anges in its organisation. A special

. 4 7 *

i on-site management inspection by AEC Regulatory personnel was made in i

)_ t May 1972 that confirmed the information in these letters. Effective I l January 1,1972, the fomer Vice President-Engineering, who had been i

actively involved with the Monticello project during the construction l! period, is the new President of NSP.

j I

The Power Production Department has been reorganized. Formerly nuclear

) 6, fossil plant ope' rational responsibility, was' all contained in one group.

l The operating and technical responsibility for nucicar plants has now i

l been separated from fossil plant activities with both groups reporting ,

I directly to the Manager of Power Production. The Power Production i

i Maintenance group within the Power Production Department, has been assigned additional responsibilities for quality assurance and for i training and has acquired an individual with broad experience in metallurgical and welding problems.

A Nuclear Support Services group has been formed consisting of 5 engineers with nuclear experience, whose responsibility is the review and resolution of plant operating and technical situations and correction t

of equipment deficiencies. The Director-Nuclear Support Services is

" also the Chr.irman'of the Safety Audit Consmittee.

t ._ . . w., , . _ ~ . ,

q

. . . . . ... . . ~. e ... ...,....,.w.. ., ,u..... - . _ a.;u..

f3 C u 5 i The Monticello Plant operating or8anization has been reorganized. The i

f q

purpose of the reorganization was to relieve key supervisors of the number of functions that they must direct, to provide additional supervisors, to split some positions of the organization into smaller functional groups and to assign additional technical personnel to the plant staff. The Plant Manager now has two major groups reporting tu him through their respective superintendents, the Opcia tions and Maintenance group, and the Plant Engineering and Radiation Protection group. The latter> group will also employ a plant quality, assurance engineer.

Eight plant technical support engineers have recently been added to the

! plant staff and are being assigned to various support functions. They have all recently been licensed as Senior Reactor Operators.

The Safety Audit Committee now reports directly to the Group Vice President-Power Supply who in turn reports directly to the President.

l The Chairman of the Safety Audit Committee is also the Director of the Nuclear Support Services Group and is independent of day-to-day line responsibility for plant operation. The independent nuclear consultant, who had formerly served only as a part-time consultant to the Safecy Audit Committee is now a reg'315 sember of the Committee.

We believe that the personnel and administrative changes described above are responsive to our concerns and will help to stren3then the organizations r_esponsible for operation, technical support and review and audit of the Monticello plant. ,

m _ . . . . _

.. v . . .. g a . .s . .

.s . . . . . . . . . . . . , .

b

2. Emergency Plan l The Monticello Dnergency P*an was submitted as a part of the public 4

record during the hearing for an operating license. The Plan complies 1 with the requirements of 10 CFR 54(b)(6)(v) and Appendix E.

Implementing procedures for the Dnergency Plan are contained in Volume E of the Monticello Plant Operating Procedures. They include classification of emergencies, action levela. 1ponse by individuals, organization for coping with ecergencies, communications, responsibilities of evacuation support groups, criteria for reentry, dee,cription of emergency supplies, method of contacting and capabilities of state and local agencies, l hospital assistance plan, and medical tre.atment of radiation casualties.

The Technical Specifications will require that drills on the Emergency Plan, including a check of cournunications with support agencies,be performed semi-annually.

3. Industrial Security Monticello's original Industrial Security Plan included a lighted perimeter fence, control of ent'ry ways by a lock and key system and liaison and consnunication with local law enformeement agencies. In addition to

, these provisions, Monticello now employs two armed guards on shif t

?

at all times. One guard is stationed at the guardhouse at the main entrance to the security area. The second guard, who is in direct

.(

radio contact with the guardhouse, is a roving guard in a four-wheel drive vehicle who patrols the area inside the security fence and NSP property outside the fence, including, for example,the main switchyard.

1

-n-.,- . . . . a .m. x; x. - - - -- .- -. - -- -

_3.: w .

4

[14 t ,

0 ,

e i

l .

t,*

{ ,i .

1-I We believe, with hourly surveillance by the roving guard, and with all I

exterior doors to the reactor plant. locked, that adequate security- .

l 's provisions have been inade for the Monticello plant.

.I i

l

?

?

1' .

i t e l

r

(

e

• s

• 4

}

i j-e

+-

5 g

i t

I i

i i'

i ,

i k l 1

't -

(

e j .. -

m T' -.-w(v

--t' *- y t- go i--g 3 ,ga&,p q+>tqs w- i.,wm y y-w-.- -w-,,-,-y-v yysig,w--w y- ry gt -etrW 1 + w g<e