IR 05000413/1990013

Insp Rept 50-413/90-13 & 50-414/90-13 on 900604-08.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Observation & Evaluation of Annual Emergency Preparedness Exercise

ML20044B087
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	06/21/1990
From:	Rankin W, Sartor W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20044B086	List: IR 05000413/1990013 ML20044B085
References
50-413-90-13, 50-414-90-13, NUDOCS 9007170289
Download: ML20044B087 (14)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:y _j ' ' ' . _ V$ g fri

j:

< + '# - , bi H' Z. c. . , ' ' WgM V ' ' ga ist . UNITED STATES ' < ,' ,' . NUCl. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION : , $ ' ' 3 *g ' REGION H ' a4 - I" ' l

• ~,101 MARIETTA STREET,N.E

+ v kI &J ' ATLANTA GEORGIA 30323 d

f'[', f ' ' \\ x , .;.s w @, JUN 2 6 3800. ' ' . '. ReportTNos.: ;50-413/90r13 and.50-414/90-13 - ' '

E Ucensee:- '. Duke Power Coiipany ' ' 422:Scuth Church Street.

' ' R .' Charlotte, NC 28242- _; j' . U '" ' Docket Nos.:50-C 3 and 50-414 ' License Nos.: -NPF-35 and NPF-52 < g .

<l Facility _Namei' Catawba 1 and 2 " Inspection Conducted:. June 4-8, 1990 , ? nspector: h M t MD, $ /23/f8. I I W. M. Sartor, Jr. ~7 ~ Ddte Sig'nW _l ~ ~~~ ,m q E ' Team _ Members: F.EKa'ntor, NRCI ' ' _ S.-Ninh, NRC >

G.=4 Arthur ;PNL l

L, (- Approved by: 67.

h+b 3/2//90 A __ __ U- ' f k W. H. Rankin, Chief-Dste Signed v Emergency Preparedness Section EmergencyzPreparedness and Radiological ! ' Protection Branch- . _ q ' ,

Digision

of-Radiation' Safety and Safeguards

, - y ' 4; > SUMMARY ! ~. 7' IScope: " - ., x Thiscroutine, announced _ inspection involved the observation and evaluation of

, the annual Jemergency preparedness exercise.

Selected staffing and response of1 u ' thel emergency ' organizations in the Simulator (Contbol: Room), Technical Support ' _ ,,

i n," Center, Operational Support Center,' Emergency Operations Facility, and Joint > Information Center were observed.

The exercise was initiated at 1:00 p.m.-and j W . terminated at 6:10 p.'m. on' June 7, 1990.

, j ,. p4gi -Results: i < - ! .Inithe areas ' inspected, violations or deviations were not identified.

. 6 %, - '; Licensee'si performance as, observed was ' fully satisfactory for identifying and 'y classifying: the simulated events, making protective action recommendations, and < . mitigating, the accident.

The scenario was adequate to address the exercise Lobjectives;s however, it was not a difficult and challenging scenario regarding , i ' >

the, timing and play of operational events.

This was a full participation i

exercise with.NRCl Region ll participating with both a base and site team.

, ... - . - o ..

..

t y,

, p1 , i:- J.= 7. E < o".

{ , ,

i l < zi , . m i ' REPORT DETAILS q , i 1.y; Persons Contacted' , , . y! Licensee Employees

I 1*W. Barron', Director, Operations Training-d

'*RD Bowman; Manager, Power Group Communications

• DLBrewer,/ Design Engineering Supervisor
• B.lCaldwell', Superintendent Ftation. Services
• J. Cox, Manager, Catawba-Nuclear Station Training

. )*T;'Crawford, Superintendent -Integrated Scheduling

• J.'Forbes, Superintendent', Technical Services

' ,

• J. Glenn, Nuclear Production Engineer

' *W..Haller, Manager, Nuclear Tachnical Services "

• R. Harris, Manager, Nuclear Erergency Preparedness l
• C; Hartzell, Compliance Manage.-
• B.l Hasty McGuire Nuclear Production Specialist II 1 *D.;Kimball, Lead Shift Manager i

- J.1 Knuti, Operations' Support Manager

, J*P. McNamara, Health Physics Staff Scientist J . B'.;McRee, Corporate Emergency Planner

• GL Mitchell,. Catawba Nuclear Production Specialist II L

• T."0 wen, Catawba-Station Manager
• G. -Savage, Comunications Specialist

1*D. Simpson, Emergency Planner i*Mb Tuckman, General Manager, Nuclear Support ? 0ther[ licensee employees-contacted during this inspection included engineers, operators, mechanics, security force members, technicians, and.

i - administrative personnel.

Other Organizations

• R.fBaldwin, Carolina Power and Light Emergency Preparedness Specialist
• D.L. Cameron, Project Manager, North Carolina Municipal. Power Agency

.J Number 1 <*R.;Indelicato, Carolina Power and Light Emergency Preparedness Specialist y Nuclear Regulatory Commission . q /

• K. Jabbour, NRR

' " "

• W. Orders, Senior Resident Inspector

.J. Zeiler, Resident Inspector " ~* Attended exit interview - . - - - - - - - -

.. ., 'b

n

pp , , .. .

, 2n ' Exercise Scena '02) The' scenario for the emergency exercise was reviewed'to determine that- , . provisions.had been'made to. test the integrated capability and a-major- ~ '- portion of the basic elements existing within the licensee, State, and - local emergency plans and organization as required-by-10 CFR_ 50.47(b)(14), 10 CFR 50, Appendix E. Paragraph IV.F and specific criteria in NUREG-0654,

.

Section II.N..

. The ' scenario was-reviewed in advance of the scheduled ' exercise date and was Ediscussed!with licensee representatives.

The scenario developed for-this-exercise was adequate to fully exercise the onsite and offsite-emergency' organizations of the licensee and provided sufficient emergency information. to the StateJand local government agencies for their full . participation in the exercise.

- While: no-major-problems. with the scenario were identified during the review, one inconsistency became apparent during the exercise but did not

detract from the overall performance of the licensee's emergency organization.

The inconsistency was the inability of the. Control Room. shift in the simulator to quantify the initial leak for. the Alert - declaration ~ prior to the controller providing a contingency message to - maintain-the timeline desired by offsite agencies.

Scenario problems were . discussed -by management representatives during the exercise critique on o . June 8,:1990.

= No violations or deviations were identified.

3.' LAssignment of Responsibility (82301) This area was1 observed to determine that-primary responsibilities-for emergency response by the licensee have been specifically established and ' that adequate' staff is available to respond to an emergency as required by 10 CFR'50,47(b)(1),10 CFR 50,' Appendix E Paragraph IV.A, and specific

criteria 11n NUREG-0654, Section II.A.

TheLinspector verified that the licensee has made specific assignments.to the emergency; organization.

The inspector observed the activation; ,

staffing, and operation of the. emergency organization,in the Control Room-(Simulator), Technical Support Center (TSC), Operational 1 Support Center

-(OSC),L and.the Crisis Management Center (CMC). 'At each of' these centers, the' assignment of responsibility and staffing appeared to.be consistent .with theclicensee's approved procedures.

No violations'or deviations were identified.

4.

Onsite Emergency-Organization (82301) The licensee'.s onsite emergency organization was observed to determine th'at 'the responsibilities for emergency response were unambiguously defined, that. adequate staffing was provided to insure initial facility , u ....

' ' p1 [W f- ' p,,cgg e, ,y :,, o I; T ' ' .,. b & a 3: j, < , , , i p ' accident response in: key functional! areas at all times, and that the' interfaces -were specified as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(2),10.CFR 50, Appendix E.

Paragraph IV.A. and specific criteria in NUREG-0654, - g ~ w Section II.B.;

The inspector observed that the initial onsite emergency organization was ~ " well; defined and that adequate staff was available to fill' key' functional positions, wit'in the emergency organization._ - Augmentation of thtinitial '{~ > p emergency, resp.,nse organization was accomplished through mobilization.of- ' F off-shift personnel.

The on duty Shift Supervisor assumed the duties of Emergency Coordinator promptly upon the initiation of. the simulated R emergency;and-directed the response until: relieved by the Station Manager, j \\ No violations or deviations were identified.

' !

5.. -Emergency;ResponseSupportandResources(82301) This area was observed to determine that arrangements for requesting and y effectively using> assistance resources have been made, that: arrangements

9, to accommodate State and local staff at the licensee's CMC have been made,- ! .and that' other organizations capable of augmenting (the planned response.

n

~ ~ - have been identified as required by 10 CFR 50.47 b)(3), 10 CFR 50,

-Appendix E, Paragraph IV. A. and specific criteria ~ in NUREG-0654, q Section-~II.C.

.; ! North Carolina and South Carolina staff personnel were accommodated at the CMC.

Licensee contacti with offsite organizations was prompt and

assistance resources from various~ agencies were prepared to assist in the-simulated emergency.

]' No violations or deviations were identified.

6.

~ Emergency Classification System (82301) l This - area was observed to determine that' a standard emergency ) classification and action level scheme was in use by the nuclear facility

licensee as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(4), 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, ' ' Paragraph IV.C, and specific criteria in NUREG-0654, Secten li.D.

q q An inspector observed that the emergency classification system was in effect as stated in the Catawba Nuclear Station Emergency Plan and'in the

- Catawba Station - Implementing Procedure RP/0/A/5000/01; The system appeared to be adequate for the classification of the simulated accident, i and' the = emergency procedures provided for initial.and continuing , y" mitigating. actions. during the simulated emergency.

As previously referenced in Paragraph 2, the use of the contingency message to classify.

the Alert condition was considered to be an exercise artificiality and not a problem with the emergency classification system.

No violations or deviations were identified.

i

. 'i ' ,

~ y ' . . n ' '

t < R; %[[xj,' '% * <f.. , .%, - s

i

' , M "r

7..

N.ification Methods and Procedures (82301) w E This' area was observed to determine that procedures had been established

A for' notification by the licensee of State and local response organizations , "; and emerger.cy. personnel, and that_ the content-of initial and followup _ y ' messages to response organizations had been established; and-means:to . provide; early notification to the populace within the plume exposure-pathway were established as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(5), '10.CFR 50, Appendix. E.

Paragraph 'IV.D. and specific? criteria in : NUREG-0654, g ,;Section II.E.

An ' ins sector observed that notification methods and procedures had been.

established and were used to provide information concerning the simulated < . emergency conditions to Federal, State, and local response organization .. ' ^ and - to alert the licensee's augmented emergency response organization.

- Notifications were timely w:t'n i,he exception of the. Site Area Emergency notifications to the State of South Carolina and Mecklenburg County. The licensee identified this issue as a deficiency for corrective action.

o L The prompt notification system (PNS) for alerting the public within the plume exposure pathway was in place and operational.

The system was

activated during this exercise to simulate warning-the pubitc of- . , ! significant events occurring at the reactor site.

No violations or deviations were identified.

8.. Emergency Comunications (82301)

. . 't ' This area was observed to. determine that provisions existed for prompt ' , o communications among principal response organizations and emergency-personnel ~as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(6),10 CFR 50, Appendix E, , Paragraph IV.E, and specific criteria in NUREG-0654, Section II.F.

Comunications among the licensee's emergency response facilities (EP.Fs),

within"the licensee's e,nergency organization, and between the licensee's emergency response organization and offsite. authorities were good, f6 t' > communications related problems were identified during this exercise with j the exception of the-Site Area Emergency notificatica addressed in the ' previous paragraph.

l No violations or deviations were identified.

'9.

Public Education and Information (82301)

This crea was observed to determine that information concerning the simulated emergency was made available for dissemination to the public as , J required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(7), 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, i aagraph IV.D, and L specific criteria in NUREG-0654, Section II.G.

!= L l

^ yf .g , , y y', ' , , y, s,.:

y.

, ' ;; [

, , ' o- . ' Information was provided to the media and the public in advance of.the exercise.

The information included details on how the public would be q notified an:1 what initial cc:tions they should take in an energency., A ~ . rUF rfControl program Was also In plate.

An Emergency News Center (ENC) %

hoc been established and was ull equipped and coordinated.

301 Emergency Facilities and Equipment (82301).

l , This area was' observed to determine that adequate mergency facilities and [ , equipment to support an emergency rsspcme were provided and nintained at

required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(8),10 CFR 50, Appendix E Paragraph IV.E, and

,m' specific criteria irLNUR'EG-1)654, Section il.H.

' j \\ c' The inspector observed the activation, staffing and operation of the ERFs, - and evaluated equipment provided fcr emergercy use during the exercise.

, a.

Control. Room - An inspector observed that Control Room personnel . located in the Simulator acted prootly to initiate emergency response. to the simulated emergency.

Emergency procedures were

readily available and the response was prompt.and effective.

b.

. Technical Support Center (TSC) - The TSC was Etivated and staffed " , promptly~-upon. notification-by the Emergency Coordinator of the . simulated emergency conditions leading -to an Alert - emergency classification.- The TSC 2,taff appeared : to be knowledgeable concerning, their emergency responsibilities and TSCl operations " - o> proceeded smoothly.

The TSC appeared to have adequate aquipment for the support of the assigned staff,

c.

Operations Support Center (OSC)L-The OSC was staffed promptly upon m activation by the. Emergency Coordinator.

The OSC was located in the Service Building on the 574 elevation and had adequate supplies as observed during this exercise.

An inspector observed that teams were formed promptly, briefed, and dispatched efficiently, ' d.- Crisis Management Center (CMC) - The CMC was located at the Charlotte ' General Office.

The facility appeared to be adequately _ designed, equipped, and. staffed to. support an emergency response.

11. - ProtectiveResponses(82301)

' This area was observed to determine that guidelines for protective actions-during the emergency, consistent with Federal guidance, were developed and- + in-place, and protective actions for emergency workers, including required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(personnel, were implemented promptly as evacuation of nonessential H 10), and specific criteria in NUREG-0654, 'Section II.J.

An-inspector verified that the licensee had developed and implemented emergency procedures for formulating protective action recommendations for offsite populations within the-10 mile EPZ.

The licensee's PARS were .

i ') I !

g yg( l N T4, ' ' "' " 9+,,,. ?' ' ] %flf 3 ' ( yff,' "

' ' ' by g, -g b ; N,

, ,* !, .6 ' yy,,,

>

. .i Jconsistent with the EPA and oth.er criteria, and notifications were made to '

the' appropriate State.ond local authorities within the 15 minute criteria.

' 'An -inspoctor. observed 'that protective actions wet e instituted for onsite ' , , emergency workert which included periodic radiation surveys in the . , facility, evecuation of nonessential personnel, and continued

• ~

<,y' j;ccountability;of emergency response personnel.

," No. violations or deviations were identified.

! .12.

Radiological Exposure Control (82301)

,

-This area was observed to determine that means for controlling-l 4 ' radiological exposures, in an emergency, were established and implemented ' - < for. emergency-workers and that they included exposure guidelines '! , consistent with EPA recommendations as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(11), ' and specific criteria in NUREG-0654, Section II.K.

j " An inspector noted that radiological exposures were controlled throughout the exercise by radiation protection personnel and by per_ iodic, surveys in ' - the ERFs; Exposure guidelines were in place for various categories of _ emergency. actions - and adequate protective clothing and respiratory ' , . protection were available.

, No violations or deviations were identified.

• 13..ExerciseCritique(82301)

< The ilicensee's critique of.the emergency exercise we observed tc.

- determine that deficiencies identified as a result of tne exercise-and weaknesses noted in the licensee's emergency response organization wer_e- - .. formally presented to 4 licensee management for corrective attions as required by _10 CFR 50.47(b)(14),10 CFR 50, Appendix E. Paragraph IV.E, , and specific criteria in NUREG-0654, Section II.N.

Exercise player critiques'were held immediately after exercise termination , - in the -licensee's ERFs.

! A formal licensee critique - of the emergency exercise was held on - June -8, :1990, with exercise controllers, key exercise participants, licensee management, and NRC personnel _ attending. The licensee's critique : was thorough and addressed two deficiencies identified as a result of'this , exercise.

Followup of _ corrective actions taken by the licensee will be a accomplished through subsequent NRC inspections.

14.. Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on June 8,1990, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1.

The inspector described the areas inspected and -discussed in detail the inspection results.

Proprietary , > , K

yJ,; * - , , Jy;l-p i f.,d}-~ ).! ! li ,.

..z . ., 's-:. l'

g w ' , , information'is not contained in=this report.

Dissenting comments were not received from the licensee, - 15.' Federal Evaluation Team Report f A ' l'

and Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region IVr staff) concerning; the iThe; report by the Federal _ Evaluation Team (Regional Assistance Coninittee activities of-o'ffsite agencies during the exercise will be forwarded by separate correspondence, it -

, i e . Attachments-

l j . Scope and Objectives and' " ' Event Sequence l

.. - i ' . , ! (.. ' ?l , ! 'I i ! ':j _ 1[ ' i !

.e .:

't, --l s a ' i

i s .l I '

, . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . A y, o- ~ . - - - , , , ' ,.

p.

t ' ' + , ., s.

-

, , , , ,. lI. - SCOPE ANDLOBJECTIVES' ' ' A.

Scope'

is .The Catawba' exercise,_to be conducted on June 7, 1990, ~ designed ; to meet. the exercise requirements of 10CFR50; Appendix: E, _Section IV.F.

The State of North Carolina, j m ' York,- Gaston' and Mecklenburg Counties, and the Crisis- ' Management LCenter will be full participation.

The StateL ~ of South ~ Carolina will be limited participation from SEOC - only.' .Ai formalL critique involving Duke Power and ' NRC willh be Y held on June 8, 1990, at 10:00 a.m.

at Catawba Nuclear-i ' Station., This critique.will be closed to the public.

=B.. Exercise Objectives (Duke Power Company Emergency Organization) g Emergency Management 'k 1.

. Demonstrate'the ability to declare nEEi[ejg g i ~ oce'dures.

KT&fslficatiiegin accordance with aTt~e~r'~ Tecta ~iTn~g~Q Stiate57ad D.emonstrgte the ability Lo notifyifie 2.

[Countiesf.L within

minuEes an ior-after changing the , emergency.

> emsrgein6y ~ ' s classification.-

.

l 3.

Demonstrate proper use of the message. format ' and' authentication. methodology. for messages transmitted- .to States and' Counties.

• ert noliQ,-~ard s3dl

\\1 'a'ftier feliT&ddg~'a'n Xfe[rt.

4.

Demonstrate it)1e.. Ahi.lAty,,.t o.

u ~ . ! Sfe~WSC'. aiIid. 08C."facJ. lit T or higher emergency _: class; '

' (' , 5.

monstrate.. ecise, and clear Lransf'eT$7off Super Tso'r ~i~n the spoTsTEl'1 from the Shift v ~ y bntrol Room.

o the Emergency Coordinator in' the-

p , TSC.

i Demonstrate the ability to h 6 M not later than [ 6.

' I hour after declaring one of the emergency classes'. " ff ,n,st ate hemb,lJ pf.stAtigpJetsonnel_WTtli.

. 7 ' - - - - - n,30 t,4 7.

DegLo in a simulated emergency and provfde y l Tccobii bility for any not present at the assembly l

.

locations.

,.

Demonstrate access control measures to the plant

8.

site, CMC, News Center, and Media Center.

ij L ,

' i h

.. . _.. _. _ . - -. _ _.- _._._~___ _ _ _ .t

i 'l . , - a . .

? o ions:and

i intircoms.. l ' . - 10. f!'est off1EEi5Isiunications equip ~iehy to the County "ana' 5Eiit'eiNafning: p61nis,"Codnty 'and State emergency ' operations centers and -to NRC including the Selective: Signaling System and the.NRC Emergency Notification , , . t System, ~ he adequacy and operability of emergency, t 11.-. Te st-e'quipmen t / supplie s. 12.

Evaluate the adequacy-of the following assessment ' tools, as applicable: s 1.

Drawings , 2.

' Data Display Boards 3.

Maps 13.

Demonstrgte the ability to art, notify, 'and s'tafff ~ , a IEe~ ~ Area ~ EmergencyT6ri he CMCJaf ter declaring i Igher ' emergency class (or after a decision by the i Recovery Manager during-an Alert).

14.

Demonstrate precise and clear transfer of responsibility ;from the Emergency Coordinator in the-TSC to the Recovery Manager in the CMC.

t 15.. Demonstrate 'the, ability-to provide accurate .information to the news media in a timely. manner and to provide ef fective rumor control according to the Crisis Management' Implementing Procedures.

16.

Demonstrate the ability to coordinate information with State and County public information officers [ prior _to its release.

Accident Assessment i Demonstrate.the. ability.to gransiit dei lsii ~the' [risisManag,ementDataTransmittalSystemih'"q~~~ 17.

aEcorefaM~wfth~pieceddre's' and"to distilbute < this data throughout the CMC according to the Crisis ' Management' Implementing Procedures.

18.

Demonstrate the ability to provide data to the TSC and OSC in accordance with station procedures.

g -. 'u'f hid?, sim 19.

emQn_strat hth,q,, Ability,.~to >' locate a L / adioactive plu _a.n_d tm mea=== - tha qi.f,-fte, . + L adiation 1_evgle,- p i ! 20.

Demonstrate adequate radio communications between the off-site monitoring teams and the TSC/ CMC.

[ L-1 . .. .. . _ .. __ _ __

4mm . , , p kf,; '

• '

;

. $e ' !). , W*.n . 7 y Q ' J '.v wa - - ~ gjv r;..

i, '

21.-- Demonsp a+= the ability; to-e f ' ' " ;N, fro 3EctCanmM n:accordance with roce ures.

B.

T - . 22.

Demonstrate the ability to collect soil, water .and vegetation samples inLaccordance with- " ' ' , procedures.

' g\\} ,

., "P t23.

Demonstrate the ability to continuously monitor and

' -control emergency worker exposure.

' ' ,m ' F;. " 24.

Demonstrate the ability to _ determine on-siteL radiation levels and: ' airborne-radioiodine.

, x . concentrations.

( ,., i O' Protective Action Recommendations > , t k 25. ~ Demonstrate _ the ability _ to, gravi 8e~ Tinidly Tn8] d kppropriate protective action.

recommendationsF" to ' "bffr ite officials in accordance ' ' w~ith~~ station ~ a

procedures or the Crisis. Man'agement Implementing , , Procedures.

"' m&

_

<l ' ' Plant Operations J p 2 6. - ' m5iistraEe The~abi'lllE~to7si[sitO Tn~'i'd'ent Trif '~' ~ ~~ c ~ !- rovide mit.igation strategigg/. _- - _ , , Othe r_ , 27.

Demonstrate resolution: of previous exercise findings.

" E (weakne s se s, deficiencies) identified by evaluators, QA', Lor NRC, as applicable.

' ,

I.

t .4

l i o ' o t " q.

> , , ' .'p{ g ~, ' p,w ' ' ,.pmm n '; ' j ,' ) .I'. (c:\\cns\\ scop &obj.901) Rev. 1 / 03-12-90 "' ,

1. g m

iI

[i i

', b i:. e I;

? {.- q. -il it , l0. $:. ', . . '

n'.w .. x . , ' ' + > i x, .. , m ' .,,. -

qu ,. . j m.. . 1 9:

CONFIDENTIAL ' ~,gr

, 4m CATAWBA EXERCISE EVENT SEQUENCE ,;

u c

. JUNE 7,1990 l ~ .. , m l{.l.

K lims.

l Initial Conditions . Unit 1 is at 1.00 % power and 280 effective full

' . power days with a continuous run of 125 days, j '

y

' ' - Valve 1ND1B has a disk rupture which has not-h ' bee'n detected.

' , l - ND (residual heat removal) train B is tagged out, j~ ' including valve 1N11848.

NS (containment spray) pressure transmitter ' '

(NSPT5270) is failed to zero (does not give

permissive to open NS spray valve - B train inhibited annunciator due to permissive being

" ,s inoperable).

- Unit 2 is at :100 % power and 50 EFPD with a continuous ' d , run of 75 days, - Corrosive pitting on NS 1 A heat exchanger tubes

,,' observed by operations and maintenance (CMD) ' e:e personnel.

r f" .. . ' + 12:45 - Simulator out of freeze, and operators on station.

! m . 13:00.

A 0.5" break occurs in one of the drain lines on the B train '

.. . hot leg between 1ND1B and 1ND2A. This results in a L . >50 gpm leak to containment. (See diagram below).

H ' . - NV (chemical and volume control) valve 1NV294 fails { ' fas is". - W+ !i ' - I:'::: ND1 ND2

J

-B A ND 1 A ' - . ]'

• '

"" '.. hot- [ LEG B 'l f:h;f Su Q oN- , V I DG Dd I ll ' / !{!{! >50 gpm

' , +r,

.:.:

..

. ' i , .' x \\ ' , . {,( ' \\i' j j .u .

www ~ ^ ,, Ql fig;.$ [N,'.,. ' .,

g 7.:. @N Predicted Resoonsa j w ;;~ . (, h I I' ' $ (,; Piavers

y.. N i-i, , .

1. '

• "

% -- Shut down the reactor and initiate safety injection. ' .! yy' ' i 13:15.

Predicted Resoonse

,<c Plavers l p , , HT Implement RP/0/A/5000/0.1 (Classification of Event) by .i this time.- F - Implement RP/0/A/5000/03 (Alert) by this time due to NC ' , m leakage >50 gpm.

14:15 - A failure of the second ND valve (1ND2A) causes a pipe i ' ' m' break in the annulus. Due to the arrangement of the ' penetration, most of the water goes back into containment i y.

and some goes into the annulus. (See' diagram below).

. The leak is greater than ECCS (emergency core cooling system) capacity and causes a loss of subcooling.

" ' - High VE (annulus ventilation) delta pressure.

- Low flow (4000 cim) across VE.

f( High annulus pressure.

~ - All VE goes to the unit vent.

l - m Predicted Resoonse ! i ' Plavers . . - Implement RP/0/A/5000/13 (NRC Immediate Notification) s by this time, i o y - Implement RP/0/A/5000/04 (Site Area Emergency) by this L < time due to a loss of subcooling.-

, ND1 ND2~ 5' ' h B A U:I ' ' .l.; NO I A i HOT I I I I SUCTION .'._.

... ' ~., LEGB ,, . I DQ P <! -

1. -

_ t i ' J . ... , /'

l

' , ... r L ' SOME Flow To ANNULUS.

E' $ . '

l' h n .

y, a }~ g,

~ - ~ - -a , [,

• .y[ 'N,

1o 14:40 = FWST (Refueling water storage tank) collapses and' drains over a period of 5 minutes. A crane has fallen and pinched off the vents which caused the failure. The tank j ' collapse has blocked the suction line.

FWST puncture alarm.

NV and NI'(safety injection) pumps will fallif they are not taken off within 5 minutes. Otherwise, they are available.

for recirculation.

'! Valve NV188 falls and prevents use of the VCT (volume l' control tank).

m Predicted Resoonse , , q Plavers l - Attempt to return ND train B to service. ND train B will not j ' be available until about 17:00.

s a 15:15 - ND train A fails due to location of leak on suction line.

15:30- - Predicted Resoonse i Plavers. j , Implement RP/0/A/5000/05 (General Emergency) by this ' time'due to totalloss of ECCS.

15:45-Maintenance has returned control of ND pump B to j ~! ooerations.

' 16:00 - Core begins to uncover.

16:15.

Core damage begins.

' 6:45 ND train B returned to service

- Core quenched.

- Activity release stops.

, 18:00 - Exercise ends.

, Predicted Resoonse , Players - Conduct player critique.

- t.

1 }}