ML19353A429
| ML19353A429 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 08/25/1980 |
| From: | Parker W DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton, Youngblood B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19353A428 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8101090154 | |
| Download: ML19353A429 (15) | |
Text
r n
(V
)
DT"KE PowEn COMPANY Powen Bett.arxo 422 Socin Causcu. Srazer. Carat.oriz. N C 2sa42 9
m...- e===
ca...
August 25, 1980
. c r.cs.:c.
c.c..:... c. u s. a.e:a e-2 2.a 3 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Co sission Washing:ca, D. C.
20555 Attention:
Mr. 3. J. Youngbloed, Chief Licensing Projects 3 ranch No. 1 LTl ? ?. f.
I'.. l a.M T I O N DELI ~
,I s,sa r, t i d IliI
(]
Re: McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 aiid 2-M W 2 ^-~ulon ACI L
V Docket Nos.30-369, 50-370 s-
Subject:
McGuire Nuclear Sta: ion E=ergency Plan
Dear Sir:
Enclosed are 20 copies of the McGuire Nuclear Station Emergency Plan. This plan reflects current require:ents in the for= of 10CFR 50 Appendix E and the criteria of iUREG-0654 It also incorporates our response :o the com-cents of :he NRC review team as defined in a letter from Mr. Robert L. Tedesco dated July 23, 1980. To help in the review process a cross reference from NUREG-0654 to the E=ergency Plan is included
'.n the Plan and a cross refer-ence to the review team cc =ents is attached to this letter.
rm()
With regard to Criterion 3.5 and Table 3-1, the information submitted with this plan provides for the addition of 26 station staff personnel within one hour rather than 30 minutes. This is based first on the consideration that all personnel cannot receive notification and drive to the station within 30 minutes because of the distance and traffic conditions between their homes and j
the station. Secondly, it is based on the consideration that the personnel on shift are qualified and sufficient in nu=ber to handle emergency situations Doj en:11 supplementar'f personnel are available.
l 5
Wi:h regard to Criteria E.6, Duke Power Company has initiated a study of the jh plume exposure pathway Emergency Planning Zone around the McGuire Nuclear Station to determine the design of an acceptable early warning system.
It is MD' '
aur intention to provide for the purchase, installation and testing of a
$ @,,.n iI system meeting the criteria of NUREG-0634 Appendix 3 to be functional by July 1 Theenclosedplandescribesthewarningsystemarrangementswhichhav'MEb6yI I 1981.
e l
been made pending the availability of this system.
33,,o L?D2 4?D2 C7 h/. /c T. Fs /$y Q mum m m, usun03 so-;haJ.w ents:tD n c:ww, :.n:H IUI yyJ.E c.i Li n. UILU ACT 8101090 g
7 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director August 25, 1980 Fage Two Wi:h regard to Criterion H.S and :h+. clarifica: ion in Appendix 2 the Plan reflects use of presently existing meterological equipcent at the site which provides data through char: recorders and the plant computer to the control roo= and provides data through the plant computer to the Technical Suppor: Center. Backup meterological information is available from the National Weather Service office at the Charlotte airport 15 miles from the McGuire Nuclear Station and from the North Carolina Air National Guard facility at the same location. Plans for refinements in the =eterological monitoring capability are being made and will be submitted by January 1, 1981.
Meterological data and other data transmission is by telecopier from the Technical Support Center. Duke Power Co=pany is participating in industry-( )
wide development work toward enhanced data transmission capability. This future capability will improve the transmission of =eterological and other v
data.
Included in the plan are procedures for use of a Class A (per NUREG-C654 Appendix 2) type transport and diffusion model for accidental radioactive releases. Work is underway :o cc:puterize this model to make it easier to use in an emergency. This program is planned to be available by July 1, 19S1. The more detailec Class 3 model develop =ent has been started. No completion date can be assigned at this ti=e.
Bis plan is currently being used for operator training at the McGuire Station and.it will fors the basis of our response to the exercise planned with the State of North Carolina and with five coun:les surrounding the l
McGuir e: Station for later this year. Copies of State /and local plans were sent to the Regional Advisory Committee for their review in early August, 1930.
Q The copies provided for your review are uncontrolled copies. Upon final V
approval of the plan, it is our intention to issue a limited number of con-trolled copies to the appropriate regulatory authorities.
It would be helpful if in your approval letter you would identify those persons / organizations with-in the NRC to whom controlled copies should be sent.
It is requested that these plans be reviewed in light of current requirements for emergency planning and that this pir.n as well as the State and local plans and the scheduled exercise be considered an adequate e=ergency planning basis for issuance of a full power l
license for McGuire.
'Tery truly yours, f
f s
S&LjN& $
& n/
t Willian 0. Parker, Jr.
GAC:scs Inclosures (20)
5 4
DUKE POWER COMPm Powen Duit.orso m SorTu Curucu STarET, Ciunt.oTTE, N. C. 28m w t L LI AM O. PA A M E R, s R.
August 25, 1980 ViC F Pett Dras1 TC t*wC%E A#EA 704 Straa. Faco.cwo=
3'3-4083 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Attention:
Mr. B. J. Youngblood, Chief gt$M
&[l$gQ&bggy*,k p1M I
Licensing Projects Branch No. 1 C)
Re: McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-369, 50-370
Subject:
McGuire Nuclear Station Emergency Plan
Dear Sir:
Enclo sed are 20 copies of the McGuire Nuclear Station Emergency Plan. This
(
plan reflects current requirements in the form of 10CFR 50 Appendix E and the criteria of NUREG-0654.
It also incorporates our response to the com-ments of the NRC review team as defined in a letter from Mr. Robert L. Tedesco dated July 23, 1980. To help in the review process a cross reference from NUREG-0654 to the Emergency Plan is included in the Plan and a cross refer-
[ ;
ence to the review team comments is attached to this letter.
v With regard to Criterion B.5 and Table B-1, the information submitted with this plan provides for the addition of 26 station staff personnel within one hour rather than 30 minutes. This is based first on the consideration that all personnel cannot receive notification and drive to the station within 30 minutes because of the distance and traffic conditions between their homes and the station.
Secondly, it is based on the consideration that the personnel on shift are qualified and sufficient in number to handle emergency situations until supplementary personnel are available.
With regard to Criteria E.6, Duke Power Company has initiated a study of the plume exposure pathway Emergency Planning Zone around the McGuire Nuclear Station to determine the design of an acceptable early warning system.
It is our intention to provide for the purchase, installation and testing of a system meeting the criteria of NUREG-0654 Appendix 3 to be functional by July 1, 1981. The enclosed plan describes the warning system arrangements which have been made pending the availability of this system.
Imm.W JIMO M IICU DELEIED 13 ECORDlZE ilIH IEE FFIEDOM OF II;f OKnTIO:; ACT
V Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director August 25, 1980 Page Two With regard to Criterion H.8 and the clarification in Appendix 2 the Plan reflects use of presently existing meterological equipment at th. site which provides data through chart re orders and the plant computer to the control room and provides data through the plant computer to the Technical Support Center.
Backup meterological into mation is available from the National Weather Service office at the Charlatte airport 15 miles from the McGuire Nuclear Station and from the North Cat: lina Air National Guard facility at the same location. Plans for refinements in the meterological monitoring capability are being made and will be submitted by January 1, 1981.
Meterological data and other data transmission is by telecopier from the
(]
Technical Support Center. Duke Power Company is participating in industry-(/
wide development work toward enhanced data transmission capability. This future capability will improve the transmission of meterological and other data.
Included in the plan are procedures for use of a Class A (per NUREG-0654 Appendix 2) type transport and diffusion model for accidental radioactive releases. Work is underway to computerize this model to make it easier to use in an emergency. This program is planned to be available by July 1, 1981. The more detailed Class B model development has been started. No completion date can be assigned at this time.
This plan is currently being used for operator training at the McGuire Station and it will form the basis of our response to the exercise planned with the State of North Carolina and c'th five counties surrounding the McGuire Station for later this year.
Copies of State /and local plans were sent to the Regional Advisory Committee for their teview in early August, 1980.
-m
(
)
The copies provided for your review are uncontrolled copies.
Upon final approval of the plan, it is our intention to issue a limited number of con-trolled copies to the appropriate regulatory authorities.
It would be helpful if in your approval letter you would identify those persons / organizations with-in the NRC to whom controlled copies should be sent.
It is requested that these plans be reviewed in light of current requirements for emergency planning and that this plan as well as the State and local plans and the scheduled exercise be considered an adequate emergency planning basis for issuance of a full power l
license for McGuire.
Very truly yours, b
L-1 e'
l William O. Parker, Jr.
y[
GAC:scs Enclosures (20)
Duke Power Company McGuire McGuire Nuclear Station mergency Plan Section Definitiens 1.
A definition of the Crisis Management Center shculd be included in the 1.12 plan.
It is suggested that this center be identified as an Emergency Operation Facility (EOF).
Table 2.
Revise plan to show those organization which have 24-hour per day response 2-1 including 24-hour per day manning of communication links.
Show primary rm U
and backup means of co cunication.
4.1,1.
3.
In Section 4.1-1 under the Emergency Action Level notification of an unusual event, line 6, the word " prompt" should be placed before
" notification" according to the requirements of NUREG 0610.
l 4.2,2.
4.
Section 4.2, the Alert Action Level, Part 2 of Section 4.2, line 12 in 6.1,b,(7),(b) the section.
In the sentence starting with " periodic plant status en
't) updates," there should be an insertion after updates: "(at least every I
15 minutes)" according to NUPEG 0 5', page 1-6, Licensee Action No. 5.
l Table 4.5-3 5.
Section 4.3, Site Emergency, Part 3.
Item Letter K in the plan.
Item K ends with three underlined words for actual 3teorolocv while page 1-10 of NUREG 0654, example 12a refers to adverse ceteorology.
The plan should specify adverse meteorology according to NUREG 0654.
W Table 4.5-3 6.
After Item No. K, there are notes 1 and 2 in the plan.
There is no reference in the text to these notes.
How do the notes relate to the initiating examples for this section?
Table 4.5-4 7.
Section 4.4, General Emergency.
There's no discussion of the FSAR accidents explicitly in any of the emergency action level discussions in the plan.
Appendix 8.
The table of contents in the plan says that in Section 10.3 of the 10.2 Appendix, plots of containment radiation monitor versus time for each s
( )
v emergency classification is given.
The plots in the Appendix 10.3 are labeled Release of Reactor Coolant Activity. Release of Gap Activity, and the Design Basis Accident.
The plan should make a clear and unambiguous reference to the proper emergency action levels enumerated and annunciated in NUREG 0654.
Each of the plots of containment monitor reading should correspond to source terms as described under Release Potential for each of the emergency classe; in NUREG 0610 except for Notification of an Unusual Event.
(_.
4.4.2 9.
The plan must provide for direct notification of responsible officials j
within 15 minutes of detecting a " general" emergency condition.
This notification must include the protective actions recommended by the site.
5.2,2.
10.
The plan must designate an individual as emergency coordinator who shall be onsite at all times and who shall have the authority and responsibility to immediately and unilaterally initiate any emergency actions, including 2
l L
providing protective action recommendations to authorities responsible for implementing offsite emergency measures.
11.
Among functional responsibilities assigned to emergency coordinator that 5.2,2 cannot be delegated is the decision to notify and make recommendations to authorities responsible for offsite emergency measures.
5.5 12.
Plan must specify the onsite emergency organization of plant staff Table 5.1-1 personnel for all shifts and its relation to the responsibilities and l
duties of the normal staff in accordance with Table B-1 of NUREG 0654.
,3,O Table 5.1-1 13.
Staffing must be available within Y2 following the declaration of an (1 hr. vs.
emergency as indicated in Table B-1.
1/2 hr.)
5.0 14.
Plan must specify by positions or title the qualifications to be met by the persons assigned to the functional areas of emergency activity.
Appendix 15.
Plan must be revised to resolve the following criterion from Section E (V7 10.5 Notification, Methods and Procedures from NUREG 0654:
Appendix 10.5 Criterion 3, Page 38, NUREG 0654 is not satisfied.
Appendix 10.5 Criterion 4, Page 38, NUREG 3654 is not satisfied.
Appendix 10.6 Criterion 6, Page 39, NUREG 0654.
There's no mention or discussion of the physical means and the time required in the Emergency Plan.
3
w Appendix 10.5 There's no satisfaction of Criterion 7, page 39 of NUREG 0654.
16.
Plan must be revised to resolve the following Criterion from Section H.
Emergency Facilities and Equipment from NUREG 0654:
Definitions Criterion 2, Page 44, NUREG 0654.
There's no discussion of an alternate and EOF.
Is the technical training center within one mile of the station?
5.6,1.,(3)
The technical training center is referred to in Section 7.1-2a lines 2 and 3.
7.3,a,(4)
Relating to Criterion 6b, page 45 in NUREG 0654.
Does the dosimetry (yes) meet the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position for the Environmental Radiological Monitoring program?
7.3,1.,b,(1)
Page 46, NUREG 0654, Criterion 8.
There is no provision noticed in the plan for providing alternative meteorological information from other sources as required for Criterion 8.
Do the procedures and equipment satisfy the criteria expressed in Appendix 2?
1
(~';
5.3,3.
Criterion 9, Page 46, NUREG 0654.
There's no discussion of ventilation cand shielding for the onsite operational support center or a full discussion of the equipment to be contained in it.
l l
8.3,2.
Page 46, NUREG 0654, Criterion 10.
The plan does not provide for the inventory, iner2ction and operational checking after each use as specified in the Criterion.
4 l
N-
V Appendix 10.4 Criterion 11, Page 46, NUREG 0654.
rammunication equipment is not mentioned in the Appendix 10.5 general category list.
5.3,2.
Page 4E of NUREG 0654, Criterion 12.
Plan gives no detailed discussion 5.6,1.,(3) of a central point for the receipt and analysis of all field monitoring data.
17.
Plan must be revised to resolve the following criterion from Section I.
Accident Assessment from NUREG 0654:
()
yes Relating to Criterion 1, page 47 of NUREG 0654.
Are the parameter Table 4.5 values and corresponding emergency class in the emergency procedures as required in Criterion l?
Design and Criterion 2, Page 47, NUREG 0654.
Do the post-accident sampling capability, Procurement Underway radiation and effluent.nonitors, inplant instrumentation, and containment radiation monitoring conform with the requirements spelled out in l
NUREG 0578 with regard to extended range, discrimination from ncble gas, p/
noise, etc?
x_
Table 4.5 -
Page 47 and 48 of NUREG 0654, Criterions 3 and 4.
There is not really Appendix 10.2 clear correlation between curves in Appendix 10.2 and specific instrument readings.
No magnitude of the release of radioactive materials based on plant system parameters and effluent monitors is given in the plan.
Page 48 of NUREG 0654, Criterion 5.
Do the meteorological data and equipment meet the criteria of Appendix 2? Are there readouts for the 5
5.3,2.
meteorological information at the nearsite Emergency Operations Center, Technical Support Center, the Control Room, and for the offsite NRC Center?
Appendix 10.2, Page 48 of NUREG 0654, Criterion 6.
There's no discussion of the Note for methodology for determining the release rate of projected doses if the projected dose "l -
Y instrumentation used for assessment is off scale or inoperable.
- 6. 2,1. (d) (1)
Page 48 of NUREG 0654, Criterion 7.
In the plan, there's no mention of O
the capability to measure reeio iceiae coaceatreticas ia the - r ta the
-8 vicinity of the site as low as 5 x 10 micro curies per cc under field conditions in any kind of weather regardless of the interference from the presence of radioactive noble gas and background radiation.
6.2,;.,(d),(1) Page 49 of NUREG 0654, Criterion 9.
There's no mention of communication equipment or the estimated deployment times.
i l
18.
Must establish procedures which describe mutually agreeable bases for O
Appendix 10.5 notification of offsite authorities consistent with NUREG 0610.
These l
procedures must include means for verification of messages.
l
,.opendix
- 19. Must establish the contents of the initial emergency messages to be 10.5 l
sent from the plant.
I 20.
Your plan must describe the public notification system to include:
l l
6 i
i t
6.6,3..a.
a.
The initial offsite contact who will be responsible for notifying the affected population.
(Either the specific organization or individual.)
6.6,3.,a.
b.
The capability for 24-hour per day notification.
(To offsite,
authorities. )
Appendix 10.6 c.
The physical alerting system to be used, sirens, NOAA weather of Note 10.6,1,(a),(2) emergency alert, telephone automatic dialers, aircraft with loud-Letted enc 1.
speakers.
(Which will be used to alert public.)
O (10 db above average daytime ambient background is a target level fer design of an adequate siren system.)
'Dista.nce
% Notified in 15 Minutes 5 miles 100%
5 to 10 miles 90%
O The desi a ob5ective for the remaiaia9 to or the pubiic withia 9
10 mile zone is notification within 45 minutes after notification of local officials.
l d.
The basic for any exceptions (e.g., for extended water areas with Appendix 10.6,3,1 transient boats or remote hiking trails must be documented.
l Every year, op'erator must tape a statistical sample of the residents e.
Appendix 10.6,2,(B)(7) of all areas within the ten mile EPZ to assess the public's 7
~
+.
y_,
awareness of the prompt notification system and the availability of information on what to do in an emergency.
Appendix Plan must also include a provision for corregtive measures to 10.6.2,(b)(7) provide reasonable assurance that coverage apprcaching the design objectives is maintained.
Appendix 10.6 f.
The provisions for use of a public media system (Radio, T.V.) to provide clear instructions to the public.
a.
24-hour station - total plume coverage.
b.
Include in the plan the messages to be transmitted to the Appendix 10.5 public (cover a rangt. of protective actions.)
Appendix 10.6 It is the operators responsibility to ensure that the means exists see d
for notifying and providing prompt instructions to the public.
0 2)
O It is tne resPonsibiitty of the stete end iocai sovernments to activate the system.
21.
Plan must be revised to resolve the following criterion from Section J.
Protective Response from NUREG 0654:
I
- 6. 4,1. a, (2), (B)
Criterion 3, Page 50 of NUREG 0654.
There's.no discussion of providing for the radiological monitoring of people evacuated from the site in the Plan as requested and required in this criterion.
8
, - _ _, _. _ _. ~ _ - _. - -
6.4.1.,a,(2)(B)
Page 51 of NUREG 0654, Criterion 4.
There's no discussion of decontamination at or near the offsite location in the area of the Plan that describes evacuation of onsite personnel in the event of a site or general emergency.
6.4,1,a,(2)(a)
Page 51 of NUREG 0654, Criterion 5.
Plan does not provide for accountability of individuals within 30 minutes.
New Appendix Page 52 of NUREG 0654, Criterion 10.a. b, and c are not provided for in 10.8 e
an.
Appendix 10.7 Oigeeadix1o.5/1o.6 22.
Plan must be revised to resolve the following criterion from Section K.
Radiological Exposure Control:
- 6. 8.1. a, (1), (a) Page 57 of NUREG 0654, Criterion Sa.
No specific action levels for determining the need to decontaminate are given.
6.4,1.,b.(2)(b)
Criterion 5b.
Few details are given about the means for radiological decontamination onsite or offsite, but especially with regard to the offsite capabilities.
i 6.8,1.,a.
Page 57 of NUREG 0654, Criterion 6.
Regarding 6a, no details are given 6.8,1.b. (1) (d) relating to area access control.
Regarding 6b, no details are given 6.3.2a regarding the treatment of drinking water and food supplies.
Regarding j
6.5,1,a.
l
- 6. 8,1,a, (1) (c) 6c, no specific criteria for permitting the return of areas or items to
(
normal use are given.
l l
l 9
6.4.1,a, (2), (b) Page 58 of NUREG 0654, Criterion 7.
There's no discussion in the Plan of the capability for decontaminating relocated onsite personnel.
23.
Plan must be revised to resolve the following criterion from Section M.
Recovery and Re-entry Planning and Post-Accident Operations from NUREG 0654:
9.0,3n Criterion 1, Page 60, NUREG 0654.
There's no discussion of the means to relax protective measures in the plan.
9.0,2.
Page 60, NUREG 0654, Criterion 2.
Insufficient detail of the organization is given in the plan.
There are just one or two key positions that are discussed.
9.0,1.
Page 60, NUREG 0654, Criterion 3.
No discussion is given in the plan of
~
the means for informing members of the response organizations that a recovery operocion is to be initiated.
/'\\
(~J Page 60, NUREG 0654, Criterion 4.
The plan coes not establish a method 9.0,3,1.
l for periodically estimating total population exposure.
l 7.6 24.
Annual exercise must include both State and local personnel.
Must.
8.2,1.
conduct independent audits of the emergency preparedness prograr at least every two years.
Results must be documented and retained for a period of five years.
I i
l 10 I
25.
Expand your plan to provide for periodic dissemination of information 8.1,1.g.
to the public regarding how they will be notified and what their actions should be in an emergency, this should include:
a.
Educational information on radiation b.
Contact for additional information c.
Sheltering
()
d.
Evacuation routes Means for accomplishing this dissemination are:
a.
Informati'.o in telephone books b.
Periodic information in utility bills
(]}
c.
Posting in public areas 1
Information program is acceptable if the permanent and transient l
adult population within the 10 mile EPZ is provided an adequate opportunity to become aware of this information annually.
If the public information program is to be administered by local officials this must be stated in the plan.
l l
11
[
.