ML17298B256

Summary of 840730 & 31 Meetings W/Util in Phoenix,Az & at Site Re Emergency Planning Issues,Including Augmented Shift Staffing & Emergency Action Levels

ML17298B256
Person / Time
Site:	Palo Verde
Issue date:	08/28/1984
From:	Licitra E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8409190128
Download: ML17298B256 (26)

Text

~

~

'ocket Nos.:

50-528, 50-529 and 50-530 QUQ 38 584 Applicant:

Arizona Public Service Company Facility:

Palo Verde, Units 1, 2 and 3

Subject:

Summary of Heeting to Discuss Emergency Planning Issues, A meeting was held with the applicant to discuss the remaining issues on emergency planning.

On July 30, 1984, the meeting was held at the applicant's office in Phoenix, Arizona to discuss the issue of augmented staffing to handle" emergencies.

On July 31, 1984, the meeting was held at the Palo'Verde site to discuss the subject of Emergency Action Levels (EAL).

tleeting attendees are shown on Enclosures 1 and 2.

The meeting is summarized as follows.

Jul 30, 1984 (Au mented Shift Staffin

)

In a letter dated July 19, 1984, the applicant had discussed how Palo Verde deviated from the requirements, stated in Supplement No.

1 to NUREG-0737, for augmented shift staffing following an emergency.

The staff stated that, based on its review of the July 19 letter, the infor-mation submitted by the applicant did not provide sufficient justification for the deviations, nor did it fully describe the measures that would be taken to compensate for the deviations taken.

The staff requested, and the applicant agreed to provide, a revised response to address the above, concerns.

Jul 31, 1984 (EALs The applicant had recently revised its methodology for establishing EALs from an event specific approach to a symptom based approach.

In preparation for the meeting, the applicant had provided the staff with an advance copy of its formal submittal on this subject, which is incorporated into Revision 4 of the Palo Verde Emergency Plan (in Chapter 5).

The staff had reviewed the package so that comments could be provided during the meeting.

The comments are included as Enclosure 3.

At the start of the meeting, the staff informed the applicant that its symptom based approach is an adequate method for establishing EALs.

Then each of the 19 comments in Enclosure 3 were discussed.

F PDR ADOCK 840828 840'>>90>Z 05000528 PDR

~ h ~

r I'

))

)

I III

4) ~ "% )

Ig lr eh

.I'>>

w I'.

I

~ ) ).

I I'

-r I

l M

il' Er,

~ 4't lr I

i I k f

K rl I M M

Mr I Mp r)r

>>E J rh Iik,r I

r& I 1 Mel eh hi

)') <<'>>

li 1 j 4t I i4 -e he)

)'

)e

,r I ii' A

P

~

g)4ll Elf hh

)1 I

M l

h)1 klh hr

)'4'>>'Pht

'I

'r lh )

I'

~

IMJ e' I N>> ~')yI I

h I

II I

)4 h)i 4 i)1' li [I I'

hk. Kgr '(

I

)

I I

.I ) fh)E 444>> ',4 4'k,r r

r i

I MI I) e e

K e

As a result of the applicant's discussion of the EALs, the staff determined that no further action is required of the applicant regarding comment numbers 9, 10, 14 and 18.

The applicant agreed to address the remaining comments in a revised submittal.

QRQlgALQQgQ If Enclosures (3):

As stated cc:

See next page E. A. Licitra, Project Manager Licensing Branch No.

3 Divis ion of Licensing E

DL:LB¹3 3

MLicitra/ch ghton 8/pg/84 8/

84

~

~

~

~

I

~ l yI

~

h

~,I

~ I

Palo Verde Mr. E.

E.

Van Brunt, Jr.

Vice Pres'ident - Nuclear Projects Arizona Public Service Company P. 0.

Box 21666 Phoenix, Arizona 85036 Arthur C. Gehr, Esq.

Snell 8 Wilmer 3100 Valley Center Phoenix, Arizona 85073 Mr. James M. Flenner, Chief Counsel Arizona Corporation Commission 1200 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Charles R. Kocher, Esq. Assistant Counsel James A. Boeletto, Esq.

Southern California Edison Company P. 0.

Box 800

Rosemead, California 91770 Ms. Margaret Walker Deputy Director of Energy Programs Economic Planning and Development Office 1700 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Kenneth Berlin, Esq.

Winston 5 Strawn Suite 500 2550 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20037 Ms. Lynne Bernabei Government Accountability Project of the Institute for Policy Studies 1901 gue Street, NW Washington, DC 20009 Ms. Jill Morrison 522 E. Colgate Tempi, Arizona 85238 Mr. Rand L. Greenfield Assistant Attorney General Bataan Memorial Building Santa Fe, New Mexico 87503 Resident Inspector Palo Verde/NPS U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0.

Box 21324

Phoenix, Arizona 85001 Ms. Patricia Lee Hourihan 6413 S. 26th Street Phoenix, Arizona 85040 Regional Administrator - Region V

U.

S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1450 Maria Lane Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596

~

~

l I

I g

D.

Gamma exposure measurements will be performed at 1

m above the floor surface throughout the areas.

Additional direct measurements and smears will be collected from

pipes, ledges, etc.

Paint samples and residue from drains will be collected where applicable.

V.

Data and Sam le Anal ses Direct measurements will be evaluated on-site to determine if additional decontamination is needed.

Smears will be returned to the ORAU laboratories for analysis of gross alpha and gross beta activity.

Results will be compared to the guidelines established by the NRC for release of this site.

H 0

IJ

Steven Robert Frost Gary E. Clyde Bob Page Perry D. Robinson Manny Licitra Art Gehr Don Karner Palo Verde Augmented Shift Staffing Meeting of July 30, 1984 Enclosure 1

ORG/TITLE

APS, Nuc Lic-Supervisor

APS, Nuc Lic-Lic. Engr.

APS NRC-DEPER/EPB NRC-DL-LBk3 SNELL 5 HILMER APS Nuclear Production

Palo Verde Emergency Action Levels Meeting of July 31, 1984 Enclosure 2

NAME Gary Clyde Manny Licitra David H. Schultz Perry D. Robinson Sharyn Eklund Dennis Swan Bob Page ORG/TITLE

APS, Nuc Lic/Lic Engr NRC-NRR-LBg3 COMEX-US NRC-OPS Eng NRC/DEPER/EPB

APS, Emer.

Planning APS, Assist. Shift Sup.

APS, Emer.

Planning

I I

II l

REVIEW CQIII.IENTS f~VNGS EMERGENCY PLAN AND EMEf"GENCY CLASSIFICAT1QN EP1P 02 ENCLOSURE 3

EMEPGENCY PLAN TABLES (SUCH AS 5,3-1),

AND EP1P 0.r TABLE 4.0 CONTAIN NUPEG-06"4 STATEMENTS CONCERNING EXPECTED PADIOACTIVE NATEPIAL PELEASES FOR ALERTr SITE AREA ENERGENCYr AND GENEPAL ENERGENCY CLASSIF'ICATIONSr BUT NQ SUCH STATEMENT FOR NOTIFICATION OF UNUSUAL EVENT CLASSIFICATION.

THE LICENSEE SHOULD CONSIDER INCORPORATINGr WHERE APPROPRIATEr THE RELEASE DESCP IPT ION OF NUREB-0654.

ENERGENCY PLAN TABLE 5. 1-2 INDICATES THAT A LICENSEE ACTION IS TO "DISPATCH FIELD MONITORING TEAMS WITIH ASSOCIATED COMMUNICATIONS WAPPANT" (TYPO WRITTEN HERE AS IN E/P)

~

LICENSEE SHOULD CLARIFY THAT "FIELD MONITORING TEANS" INCLUDES ON-SITE NONITOP INB TEANS IN ACCORDANCE W 1 TH GUIDANCE OF NUF EB-0654.

(SEE ALSO APPROPRlATE TABLES/ ENTRIES FOR SITE Af>EA EMERGENCY AND GENFPAL ENEPBENCY.)

ENERGENCY PLAN TABLES 5. 1-4, 5.2-4, AND 5.3-1 SI'Al'E "LICENSEE ACTION GUIDANCE PECQNMEND TQ THE STATE THAT CONSIDERATION OF APPROPRIATE PPOTECT1VE ACTIONS BASED ON ACTUAL OR PROJECTED DATA IS WARRANTED i.e.

EVACUATING WITHIN A 2 MILE RADIUS OF THE PLANT 5 WITHIN 1 0 MILES IN AF FECTED SECTORS r AND SEEK ING SHEL.TER WITHIN A

10 NILE RADIUS QF THE PLANT; CONSIDER SHELTERING IN AREAS WHERE EVACUATION CANNOT BE COMPLETED PPIQR TO PLUME APRIVAL."

LICENSEE SHOULD CONSIDER CONTENTS OF'E INFORNATIQN NOTICE'O ~

8 -28:

CRITEPIA FOR PROTECTIVE ACTION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GENERAL ENERGENC IES r dC d 4

MAY 1 '383 r REGARD ING CONS IDERATI ON OF'PECUPSOPS OF A PELEASE BEFOPE RECOMMENDING AN EVACUATION'.

E/P 'ABLE

5. 1-4 LICENSEE ACTION GUIDANCE FOR A

GENERAL EMERGENCY STATES "PPOVIDE A DEDICATED INDIVIDUALFOR PLANT STATUS UPDATES TO OFFSITE AUTHOPITIES. "

PEF EPENCE TO SITE AF.'EA ENEPGENCY LICENSEE ACTIONS OF NUREB-0654 SHOWS A

SINILAR REQUI PEMENT WH ICH IS ABSENT FRON E/F'ABL;ES

5. 1-3

~ "".'-. -

AND

5. 3-1 LICENSEE ACT1ONS F'R A SIlE AREA EMERGENCY.

TfIE LICENSEE SHOULD CONS IDEP.

INCORPOPATINB THIS GUIDANCE FOR THE SITE AREA EMERGENCY AS IS DONE FOR THE GENERAL EMERGENCY.

5.

THE LICENSEE ACTION GUIDANCE FOR E/P TABLES FOR THE SAME EMERGENCY.CLASSIFICATION IS NQl'ONSISTENT ~

FQR EXANPLEr TABLE 1

1 r NQT IF ICATI ON OF UNUSUAL EVENT r BASE@

QN A

RECOVERY PROCEDURE INPLENENTED STATES THAT A 'CErNSEE ACTION IS "BASED QN THE SITUATION, RECOMMEND THAT NO PPOTECTIVE'ACTION IS NECESSARY OR TQ STANDBY FQR AN UPDATE."

1HIS REQUIRED ACTION IS ABSENT FROM TABLE

5. 2-1, NOTIF ICAT ION Of.

UNUSUAL

EVENT, BASED ON CHALLENGE/FAILUPE OF SAF ETY FUNCTION.

THE LICENSEE SHOULD REVIEW ALL TABLES TO.ENSURE ALL LICENSEE REQUIRED ACTIONS ARE INCLUDED FQR THE SANE EMERGENCY CLASSIF ICATIONr PEGARDLESS QF THE SOURCE OF THE CLASS IF ICATION.

(THE LICENSEE SHOULD REVIEW EPIP 02r TABLE 4 0 F OR APPLI CABILIlY OF THE ABOVE'TEMS. )

EMERGENCY ACT1QN LEVEL REV1EW

<.ABSENCE QF CQMMEN1 INDICATES IS ADEQUATE.'OTIFICATION OF UNUSUAL EVENT 6 ~

INITIATING CONDIl 1ON NQ.

1 EMERGENCY CORE CQOLI NG (ECCS)

INITIATED AND DISCHARGE TO VESSEL.

SYS'f El'!

PVNGS EAL "SAFETY INJECTION ACTUATES" (NO ENTRY IN EPIP 02)

(AS LISTED IN E/P TABLE)

DISCUSSION LICENSEE SHOULD CONSIDER INCLUDING INDICATIONS OF FLOW IN QNE OR MORE OF THE ECCS SYSTEMS NOT AS A

RESULT Qf:

TESTING OR OTHER DESIPED S1TUATION.

LICENSEE SHOULD INCLUDE EAL IN THE EPIP 02 SINCE QPERATOPS WILL PPOBABLY NOT PEFER TO THE E/P g ONLY THE EP lP.

7.

INIT1ATING CONDIl'10N NQ ~

2 PAD1OLQGICAL EFFLUENT TECHNICAL SPECIF ICATIQN LIMITS EXCEEDED.

PVNGS EAL SAME; AND "PROJECTED DOSE AT SITE

<lmR/hr."

SEVERAL MONITORS APE LISTED WITH SETPOINTS.

BOUNDARY DISCUSSION LICENSEE SHOULD CONS I DEP.

OTHER MONITORS SUCH AS LIQUID WASTE STEAM GENERATOR BLOWDQWN SYSTEM ETC.

THAT MAY GIVE WARNING OF OTHEP. RELEASE PATHS TQ THE ENVIRONS'.

INITIATING CONDITION NO.

4 ABNORMAL COOLANT TEMPEPATURE AND/QR PRESSURE OR ABNORMAL FUEL TEMPERATURES OUTSIDE QF TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS.

" PVNGS EAL SUSTAINED Tc

> 568 DEGREES F

(NOT INCLUDED IN EPIP (AS LISTED 02)

IN E/P TABLE)

DISCUSSIQN THE ABOVE EAL IS LISTED ALONG W1TH OTHERS TN TABLE 5 2-1 1

2*

AS A SAFETY FUNCTION EAL UNDEl,'CS HEAl REMOVAL~

THE EAL IS ABSENT FPOM THE EPIP 02 ~

THE LICENSEE SHOULD CONSIDER INCLUDING,HE EAL IN THE EPIP SINCE OPERATORS WILL PROBABLY NQT REFER TQ THE E/P.

9.

INI T 1 AT1NG COND I7 1QN NO.

5 EXCEEDING E Il'HER PRIMARY/SECONDARY LEAf', PATF TECHNICAL SPECIFICA7 ION OR PRI MARY SYSTEM LEAK RATE TECHNICAL SPECIFICAl ION.

PVNGS EAL NONE LISTED FOR THIS EAL.

DISCUSS1ON LICENSEE HAS ADDf?ESSED THIS EAL ONLY FQR THE ALERT CONDITION AS "SMALL LOCA"

'ONE FISSION PRODUCT BAPRIER CHALLENGED OP.

LOST";

"PCS PPESSURE DECREASING>

RCS LEAKAGE 50GPM".

FOR THE MAGNITUDE OF LEAKAGE OF

>50 GPMg IT 1$

APPROPRIATE THAT THE EAL NECESSITATES ALERT DECLARAT1ON.

HOWEVEP.,

IT IS THE INTENT OF CONDITION NO.

5 TO ADDRESS RELATIVELY SMALL LEAKAGE SUCH'S

>1 GPM UNIDENTIFIED FQP HOURS 10 BPM IDENTIF IED LEAKAGE FQR HOURS ETC ~

s AB ADDRESSED BY TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS.

THE LICENSEE SHOULD RE-EVALUATE THE ABSENCE OF SMALL-SCALE LEAt(-

ABE FROM THE NOTIFICATION OF UNUSUAL EVENT CLASSIFICATION AND INCLUDE SUCH AN EAL IF CPITEPIA ARE PFOVIDED IN TECHNICAL SPECI-FICATIQNS REGARDING SMALL IDENTlFIED/UNIDENTIflED LEAKAGE RATE.

10.

INITIATINB CONDITION NO ~

9 LOSS QF ENGINEERED BAFEl Y FEATURE OR FIr-".E PPOTECTION SYSTEM FUNCTION REOUIRINB SHUTDOWN eY TECHNICAL SPECIF ICATIQNS~

PVNSS EAL MAINTENANCE OF VITAL AUXILIARIES (AUX FEEDWATER CONDENSATE Tf-;ANSF ER)

ESSENTIAL CHILL WATER, ESSENTIAL COOLINS WATER ESSENTIAL'PRAY PONDS AC/DC POWEP.

SOURCES).

FAL LCO'S FQR ENBINEEPED SAI ETY FEATUPES EXCEEDED PER TECH SPECS.

DISCUSSION THE LICENSEE SHOULD CONSIDER LISTING THE FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM AS ONE OF THE VITAL AUXILIARIES~

AND SHOULD CONSIDER LISTING THE APPLICABLE SECTION OF THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR EASY REFEPFNCE.

11.

INITIATINBCONDITION NO.

iC' FIRE WITHIN THE PLANT LABl'ING MORE THAN 10 MINUTES PVNSS EAL (a)

OBSERVATION OR

<b) FIRE DETECTION DEVICE ALARM WITH CONFIPMING OBSERVATION (INDICATING A FIPE LASTING MORE THAN 10 MINUTES.

DISCUSSION THE LICENSEE SHOULD CONBIDER ADDING THE WORDS "OF FIRE LASTING MORE THAN 1C ffINUTEB" TO (a)

ABOVE TU BE CONBIS-TENT WllH NUREB-0654 AND (b)

ABOVE.

INIT IATINB COND Il ION NO. 1 -

NATURAL PHENOMENA.

BE INB EXPERIENCED OR PROJECTED BEYOND USUAL LEVELS.

PVNSS EAL 4.)

NATUPAL PHENOMENA AND OTHER HAZARDS (i.~.:

EAPTHQUAf(Eg TORNADO ~

AIRCPAF T CRASHr TOXIC OR FLAMMABLE SAS RELEASEg ETC.)

DISCUSSION LICENSEE SHOULD ADD WORD/

REF LECTINS LOCATION OF OCCURENCE (ON SITE) g IF INSTRUMENTATIQN OF'BSERVATIONr AND MAGNITUDE IF APPROPRIATE' 1..

INITIATING CONDITION NO.

16 TRANSPORTATION OF CONTAMINATED INJURED INDIVIDUALF ROM SITE TO OFFSITE HOSPITAL.

f

PVNGS EAL 3.)

TRANSPORTATION OF AN OVEREXPOSED At"D/QR EXTEPNALLY CONTAMINATED INJUPED 1NDIV1DUAL F"ROM THI=" SITE TO A

HOSP I 1 AL.

, ~ r D ISCUSB ION THE INTENT OF THE NUREG EAL IS WITHOUT PESARD 1 Q LQCAl EON QF CONTAMINATION.,

THE LICENSEI'HOULD CONSIDER REMOVING THE QUALIFYING ADJECTIVE "EXTERNALLY" SUCH THAT AN INTERNALLY CONTAMINATED PERSON IF'PANSPORTED WARRANTS CLABSIF ICATIQN ALSO.

THE LICENSEE MAY WISH TQ CONSIDER CHANGING HOSPITAL TO "MEDICAL FACILITY".

SEE EP IP C'2 ALSO.

ALEPT 1 6 ~

INITIATING CONDITION NO. 2 RAPID Sl":OSB FAILURE QF ONE STEAf"i GENERATOR TUBE WITH LOSS OF OFFSITE POWEP..

PVNSS EAL 1.)

(AS L1BTED IN E/P)

S/G TUBE RUPTURE VERIFIED'CS LEAKAGE )5C'GPM 1.

SIAS PZP.

PRESS LOW PZR LEVEL LQW DISCUSSION THE LICENSEE HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE COMPOUNDED PROBLEM OF LOSS Ol= OFFSITE POWER IN THIS EAL BET RATHER PVNSS HAS MADE THE SPECIFIC LEAKAGE ANOTHER TYPE OF PRIMARY COOLANT LEAK THIS ACCIDENT HAS GREATER BESN1'FICANCE IN THAT, EF Tl".E LEAKAGE' S y u

g g

49 GPM y CHARS INS CAPACITY WOULD KEEP UP WITH THE LEAK THUS NO SIAS OR LOW PPESSURIZER PRESSURE OP. LEVEL WOULD BE INDICATED HOWEVERS WITH THE LOSS OF QFFSITE POWERS IT NIGH BECOME NECESSARY TO DUMP CONTAMINATED STEAM TO THE ATMOSPHERES THE LICENSEE SHOULD CONSIDER THE COMPLIC*TING EF FECT OF THE LOSS OF POWER FOR A TUBE LEAK QF LESS THAN 50 GPM ~

'ONSIDEPATION SHOULD ALSO BE GIVEN TQ A WORD LESS RESTPICTIVE THAN "VERIFIED"z SINCE A SMALL LEAK MAY REQUIRE A LONG TI I iE 1'0

'ERIFY THE EPIP C2 EAL APPEAPB ADEQUATE IN THAT IT INCORPORATES CONSIDERATEQN QF A LOSS OF

POWER, OP.

LOSS OF SECONDARY COOLANl OUTSIDE QF CONl AINMENT.

15.

INETIATINS CONDITION NO.

8 LOSS QF ALL QNBITE DC POWER PVNSS EAL ADEQUATE IN THE EMERGENCY PLAN TABLES BUT ABSENl' F QM EP IP 0>

DISCUSSION THE LICENSEE SSHOULD CONSIDEP.,

1NCLUDINS THE "LOSS OF ALL VITAL ONBITE DC POWER" WHEPE APPROPRIATE IN EPIP "02 SINCE IT IS NQT OBVIOUS BY PEFEPENCE TO LISTED EVENTS (APPLICABLE TQ OTHER CLASS IFICATI ONSET BUT NOT REPEATED) 16.

INITIATING CONDITION NO-12 FUEL DAMAGE ACCIDENT WITH RELEASE OF RADIOACTIVITY TO CONTAINMENT OR FUEL HANDLINS BUILDING.

INITIATINS CONDITION NQ.

15 RADIOLOGICAL EFFLUENTS GREATER THAN !.0 TEMLS TECHNECAL SPEC IFICAl ION INSTANTANEOUS L It'IITS.

0

PVNGS EA<

E/f.

'! ABLL, ".

~

g~i SHEg.- f 3 OF

) LIST+

SPECIF'ONITOR DESIGNATIQNSr LOCATIONS'ND INSTRUMENT READINGS>

SUCH AS:

SQN-RU-145 FVEL BUILDING VENT EXH*UST

)"QR = 3.5 E-3 uCi/cc DISCUSSION SPECIFIC INSTRUMENTS AND PEADINGS SUCH AS THIS ARE ABSENT FROM EP IP -02.

IN AS MUCH AS THE OPERATORS WILL USE THE EPIP Sg PROBABLY WITHOUT REFERENCE TO THE E/Pg THE LICENSEE SHOULD CONSIDEP.

INCLUSION OF SPECIFIC INSTPUMENTS/READINGS WHERE APPLICABLE IN EPIP -02.

THIS DISCUSSION IS APPLICABLE TQ OTHEP.

CLASSIFICATIONS SUCH AS SITE APEA EMEPGENCY BUT IS NO REPEATED.

17.

INITIATING CONDITION NO.

1Ei ONGOING SECURITY COMPROMISE PVNGS EAL INCLUDED VERBATIM IN E/P TABLE 5. 3-1

4. i SHEET 4 OF 7.

THE EXAMPLE INITIATING CQNDITlQN IS ABSENT FROM EPIP -02.

DISCUSSION THE LICENSEE SHOULD INCLUDE lHE INITIATING CONDI I IQN lN THE

• LERT SECT IQN QF TAB 4 p

EP I P 0 " AS IT I S IN THE E/P

'TABLEy FOR THE SAME REASON GIVEN IN COMMENT 15.

ABOVE.

SITE AREA EMERGENCY PVNGS EALS

(*S LISTED IN E/P TABLE)

LOSS OF FOPCED FLOW AND NATURAL CIPCULATION.

OR CET TEMP

> 700 DEGREES F

OR DEGRADED CORE PARAMETERS:

(1)

GAP ACTIVITY IN PRIMARY COOLANT ()"-'00 uCi/cc)

OP.

(2)

CORE OUTLET PLENUM EMPTY AS INDIC*TED BY RVLMS INDICA fING 0/.

(EPIP 02 DOES NOT INCLUDE THE LOSS OF FLOW CONSIDERATION) 18.

INITIATING CONDITION NO.

2 DEGRADED CORE WITH POSSIBLE LOSS OF COOLABLE GEOMETRY (INDICATORS SHOULD INCLUDE INSTRUMENTATION TQ DETECT INADEQUATE CORE COOLING'OOLANT ACTIVITY AND/OR CONTAINMENT RADIOACTIVITY LEVELS)

DISCUSS IQN PVNGS EALS OF "LOSS QF FLOW OR

~

~.

OP..... "

W ILL CQNSERVATlVELY FULLFILL THE INTENT QF THE NUREG-0654 INITIATING CONDITION.

HOWEVER, THE LICENSEE SHOULD NOTE THAT THE EXAMPLE CONDITION IS:

(1)

DEGRADED CORE AND ("WITH")

(2)

POSSIBLE LOSS OF CQOLABLE GEOMETRY

,r THE LICENSEE SHOULD CONS IDEP.

AN EAL SET INDIC*TI NG A

DEGRADED COPE

.(SUCH AS ABOVE)

AND AN EAL SET INDICATING LOSS OF FLOW THAT WHEN COMBINED CONSTITUTE A SITE AREA EMERGENCY'

19. INC I IATING CONDI I IQN Nu.

I '.

b.

l."'i"Si OQSL" i"'.A!

i."'RQJECTFD BASED ON OTHER PLANT PARAMElER'R ARt'EASURED IN ENVIRONS ~

~ 4 PVNGS EAL PAD PROTECTION CONFIRMS EFFLUENT MONI1ORS DETECT LEVELS EQUIVALENT TQ

> 5C rnR/HR WB FOR 30 MIN AT SITE BOUNDARY ETC.

DISCUSSION THE LICENSEE SHOULD INCLUDE EALS WHERE APPPOPRIATE THAT PEFLECT RESULTS QF ONSITE/OFFSITE MONITORING(OTHER CLASSIFI-CA1'IONS AFFECTED IN SIMILAR FASHION TO THIS DISCUSSIQN)

EA' CURPENTLY REFLEC ONLY PROJECTIONS BASED ON EFFLUENT MONITORS'ND MAY BE IN ERROR IF DOSE PPOJECTION MODELING IS INA CURATE;

'TC ~

GENEPAL EMEPGENCY

'EXCEPT AS NOTED ABOVE IN COMMENTS THAT ARE APPLICABLE TQ SEVERAL CLASSIFICATIONS, THE GENERAL EMERGENCY E*L'S APE ADEQUAI't:..

Ij Il il

~

~ 4

~

~

MEETING SUMMARIES Auc 28 1984 Docket'. Fi-1 e (50:.528,~52g j.530)&

NRC PDR Local PDR PRC System NSIC LB83 Reading J.

Lee Project Manager EALicitra

Attorney, OELD G.

W. Knighton W..Lovelace (Caseload Forecast Panel Visits)

OPA (Caseload Forecast Panel Visits) ~

NRC PARTICIPANTS MLicitra PRobinson

~ ~~

a

~

t l

f

!