IR 05000413/1985029

Insp Repts 50-413/85-29 & 50-414/85-22 on 850624-28. Violations Noted:Personnel Assigned to Onsite Emergency Organization Prior to Receiving Special Training & Failure to Follow Procedure Re Semiannual Health Physics Drill

ML20134B178
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	07/22/1985
From:	Cline W, Gooden A, Kreh J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20134B167	List: IR 05000413/1985029 ML20134B164 ML20134B173
References
50-413-85-29, 50-414-85-22, NUDOCS 8508150538
Download: ML20134B178 (6)

Text

.

.

UNITED STATES

• [>$ 400,Do NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ,

[' n' REGION il l 3 j 101 MARIETTA STREET, * * ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323

%*****/ AUG 051985 Report Nos.: 50-413/85-29 and 50-414/85-22 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Churen Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Docket Nos.: 50-413 and 50-414 License Nos.: NPF-35 and CPPR-117 Facility Name: Catawba Nucle'ar Station Inspection Condu'ted: June 2 - 28, 1985 Inspectors: e . ODate7'/ 7- bI Signed

-

Jg.Kreh 0.odpnNo-e-k  ?- /B- 85~ ,,,,> - Date Signed Approved by . 'bv AJW 2A 3 W. E. Cline, Chief _ 'Date Signed Emergency Preparedness Section Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 66 inspector-hours onsite and 2 inspector-hours offsite in the area of emergency preparednes Results: Two violations were identified - (1) failure to provide specializad training to individuals prior to assignment to the onsite emergency organization, and (2) failure to implement procedure PT/0/8/4600/06 in connection with a semiannual health physics dril e50005 PDR ADOCK 05000413 O PDR

C'

.

.

'

,.

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licer.see Employees

• J. W. Hampton, Station Manager

• M. E. Bolch, Station Emergency Planner

• J. W. Cox, Superintendent of Technical Services

• H. B. Barron, Superintendent of Operations

• B. F. Caldwell, Superintendent of Station Services P. C. McAnulty, Training and Safety Coordinator

• G. Barrett, Training Supervisor

• G. LeRoy, Licensing Engineer

• H. Bradley, Quality Assurance

• F. N. Mack, Jr. , Projects Services Engineer

• F. Beaver, Performance Engineer

• E. Kimray, Associate Instructor

• T. Kiker, Jr. , Training Instructor

• 0. H. Robinson, Reactor Engineer J. M. Hill, Shift Supervisor S. S. Cooper, Shift Supervisor P. J. Loss, Shift Supervisor Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, operators, and office personne Other Organizations C. E. Howell, Director, Municipal-County Emargency Preparedness Agency of York County (SC)

W. R. Johnston, Chief, Bethel Volunteer Fire Department C. C. Johnson, Assistant Chief, Bethel Volunteer Fire Department NRC Resident Inspectors

• P. H. Skinner

• P. K. Van Doorn

• Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on June 28,1985, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. A violation described in paragraph 4 (failure to provide training to personnel prior to assignment to the onsite emergency organization) was discussed in detai Although station management representatives did not explicitly take exception to this finding, they indicated that further evaluation would be undertaken. An

>

,

,-

.

-

,

.

> -

.

r

unresolved item * described in paragraph 4 (lack of documentation to verify required emergency response training for Operations personnel) was also discussed.

l In a telephone discussion on July 16, 1985, the inspector informed the Acting Superintendent of Technical Services that a Region II review of the report details presented in paragraph 4 below indicated that a second violation (failure to implement procedure PT/0/8/4600/06) was identifie The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspectio . Changes to the Emergency Preparedness Program (82204)

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(16), 10 CFR 50.54(q), and 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, Sections IV and V, this area was reviewed to determine whether changes were made to the program since the Emergency Preparedness Implementation Appraisal (EPIA) in November 1983, and to note how these changes affected the overall state of emergency preparednes The inspector discussed the licensee's program for making changes to the Emergency Plan (EP) and Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures (EPIPs). The inspector reviewed the licensee's system (described in EP Section P) for review and approval of changes to the plan and procedures. The inspector verified that changes to the plan and procedures were reviewed and approved by managemen It was also noted that all such changes were submitted to NRC within 30 days of the effective date, as require Discussions were held with licensee representatives concerning recent modifications to facilities, equipment, and instrumentation. Such changes were reviewed during the EPIA follow up inspections in May and October 1984, 1 and no further significant modifications were made since the latter inspectio l The organization and management of the emergency preparedness program were reviewe Although there had been no significant changes at the Station level, a new System Emergency Planner was assigned in December 198 The inspector's discussion with licensee representatives disclosed that significant changes in the organization and staffing of offsite support agencies included the appointment of a new Director for York County's emergency preparedness agency and a number of new personnel in the State of !

North Carolina's emergency management agenc I

" Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve violations or deviation I

m ,

.

-

,

-

.

During the inspector's review of a draf t Revision 12 to Station Directive 3.8.4, "0nsite Emergency Organization", the inspector inquired about training for two individuals recently appointed to the positions of Superintendent of Operations and Superintendent of Integrated Scheduling (the latter position was newly created). Although the aforementioned draft would have designated the two new superintendents as first and fif th alter-nates, respectively, to the Station Manager for the position of Emergency Coordinator, neither of those superintendents had received the training specified in EP Section 0, nor were they scheduled to complete such training prior to their assignment to the onsite emergency organization. This matter is discussed further in paragraph The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for distribution of changes to the EP and the EPIPs. Selected document control records for the period February 1983 to February 1985 showed that appropriate personnel and organizations were sent copies of plan and procedural changes, as require No violations or deviations were identified in this program are . Knowledge and Performance of Duties (Training) (82206)

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(15) and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.F, this area was inspected to determine whether emergency response personnel had received appropriate training, understood their emergency response roles, and could perform their assigned function The inspector reviewed the description (in EP Section 0) of the training program, training procedures and records, and selected lesson plans, and interviewed members of the instructional staff. Based on these reviews and interviews, the inspector identified certain problems with the licensee's emergency training program, as discussed belo Records of training for key members of the emergency organization for the period August 1983 to June 1985 were reviewed. Of five persons newly assigned as alternates to principal Technical Support Center (TSC) positions by Station Directive 3.8.4, Revision 10, dated January 28, 1985, three had not, as of that date, received the training specified by EP Section 0 for those positions. These records and the licensee's acknowledgement of the above finding as not unrepresentative of the normal mode of operation, indicated that the licensee was not providing training in accordance with Section 0 of the Emergency Plan. This was identified as an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.54(q), which requires the licensee to follow an emergency plan meeting the planning standards of 10 CFR 50.47(b).

Violation (413/85-29-01): Failure to provide designated emergency response training to individuals prior to assignment to the onsite emergency organizatio Records of Operations training indicated that Shif t Supervisors were given training on the EP and/or EPIPs in August 1983, October 1983, August-September 1984, and February-March 1985. Generally, the records of these

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

r 1

..

,

..

training sessions were lacking in detail as to the type of emergency response training actually give Therefore, it could not be determined whether Shift Supervisors received the emergency response training specified in EP Section 0. The licensee was informed that this matter was considered unresolve Unresolved Item (<13/85-29-02, 414/85-22-02): Adequate documentation to confirm training of Shif t Supervisors and other Operations personnel in accordance with EP Section The inspector conducted walk-through evaluations with three Shif t Super-visors. During these walk-throughs, individuals were given various hypothetical sets of emergency conditions and data and asked to respond as f if an emergency actually existed. The individuals demonstrated familiarity with emergency procedures and equipment, and no significant problems were observed in the areas of emergency detection and classification, notifica- l tions, and protective action decision-makin I i

One violation and no deviations were identified in this program are . Licensee Audits (82210)

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14) and (16) and 10 CFR 50.54(t), this area was inspected to determine whether the licensee had performed an independent review or audit of the emergency preparedness progra Records of audits of the program were reviewed. The records showed that an independent audit of the program was conducted by the licensee's Quality Assurance Department on December 10, 1984 - January 8,1985 and documented in Audit Report No. NP-84-23(CH). This audit fulfilled the 12-month frequency requirement for such audits. The audit records showed that the State and local government interfaces were evaluated, and that findings concerning the interfaces were documented in corporate letters dated March 29,1985 to the States of North Carolina and South Carolin Audit findings and recommendations were presented to plant and corporate manage-ment. A review of past audit reports indicated that the licensee complied with the five year retention requirement for such report Licensee emergency plans and procedures required critiques following exercises and drills. The inspector reviewed documentation which verified that critiques were held following the annual exercise. Deficiencies were discussed in the critiques, and recommendations for corrective action were mad The licensee's program for conducting periodic drills was discusse According to licensee representatives a semiannual health physics drill was held on August 29, 1984; however, documentation of drill findings could not be produced by the licensee representatives. The !

licensee's emergency plan implementing procedure PT/0/8/4600/06, Emergency Drills, requires the documentation of drill finding The inspector informed the licensee that this matter represented a violation of Technical Specification 6.8.1 which requires implementation of the emergency plan and procedure i

-_ _ _

___ __ ,

,.

.-

Violation (413/85-29-03): Failure to fully implement the requirements of procedure PT/0/8/4600/06 in connection with a semiannual health physics dril The licensee's program for follow-up action on audit, drill, and exercise findings was reviewe Licensee procedures requirt.d follow-up on deficient areas identified during audits, drills, and exercise The inspector reviewed licensee records which indicated that corrective action was taken on identified problems, as appropriate. The licensee has established a tracking system as a management tool in following up on actions taken in deficient area One violation was identifie No deviations were disclose . Coordination with Offsite Agencies (82210)

The inspector held discussions with licensee representatives regarding the coordination of emergency planning with offsite agencies. Written agree-ments existed with those offsite support agencies specified in the EP, and the agreements had been renewed within the past three years, as require The inspector determined from licensee records and through face-to-face interviews with representatives of selected local support agencies that the licensee was periodically contacting those agencies for purposes of offering training and maintaining mutual familiarization with emergency response roles. Those interviews disclosed no significant problems related to the interfaces between the licensee and the offsite support agencies listed in paragraph . Inspector Follow-up (92701)

(Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item (IFI) 413/83-42-71, 414/84-35-71: Placing emergency signs at boat docks and other applicable locations. The inspector observed several public access points on Lake Wylie where the licensee placed signs which were clear and appropriately informative. The current visitor's guide to the Carowinds Theme Park contained a notice regarding the emergency warning system and the availability of Catawba emergency planning brochures.