ML20034B165

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests That Dec 1989 Draft Emergency Plan Be Revised to Comply w/10CFR50,App E Per Encl Comments
ML20034B165
Person / Time
Site: Reed College
Issue date: 04/18/1990
From: Michaels T
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Ruby L
REED COLLEGE, PORTLAND, OR
References
NUDOCS 9004260107
Download: ML20034B165 (4)


Text

-

  • April 18,1990 k

Docket No. 50-288 Dr. Lawrence Ruby, Director Reed Reactor Facility Reed College 3203 SE Woodstock Blvd.

Portland, Oregon 97202

Dear Dr. Ruby:

SUBJECT:

REED COLLEGE RESEARCH REACTOR EMERGENCY PLAN We have reviewed the draf t emergency plan, dated December 1989, for the Reed CollegeResearchReactoragainsttherequirementsof10CFR50.54(q)andused guidance criteria found in Regulatory Guide 2.6, NUREG-0849, " Standard Review Plan for the Review and Evaluation of Emergency Plans for'Research and Test Reactors," and ANSI Standard 15.16-1982. -Our review indicates that the draft emergency plan decreases the effectiveness of the currently approved emergency plan and does not maintain compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix E.

Please-revise your emergency plan in accordance with our enclosed coments.

If you have any questions, please call me at 492-1102.

Sincerely, Original signed by:

Theodore S. Michaels, Senior Project Manager Non-Power Reactor, Decommissioning and Environmental Project Directorate Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, Y and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

l As stated i

l DISTRIBUTION-RDocketdile :s TMichaels NRC & Local PDRs OGC PDNP r/f EJordan WTravers ACRS'(10) l

' EHylton-Plant file t

[TM LTR2 LRuby/2]

PO)NP PDNP:PMk PDNP:D l@ f n TMichaels:dmj SWeissi" l

47/ /90 4//f /90 4// y/90

/0 9004260107 900418 PDR ADOCK 05000288

/ \\

F PDC

,e if

UNITED STATES '

f

[g g

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.

j g

ij

- WASHINGTON, D. C,20666

. April 18; 1990

+*

Docket No.'50-288 Dr. Lawrence Ruby, Dirketor-Reed Reactor Facility Reed College 3203 SE Woodstock Blvd.

Portland, Oregon 97202

Dear Dr. Ruby:

SUBJECT:

REED COLLEGE RESEARCH REACTOR EMERGENCY PLAN We have reviewed the draft emergency plan,- dated December 1989,.for the Reed CollegeResearchReactoragainsttherequirementsof10CFR50.54(q)-andused guidance criteria' found in Regulatory Guide 2.6, NUREG-0849. " Standard Review.

+ ")

Plan for the Review and Evaluation of Emergency Plans for.Research and Test Reactors," and' ANSI Standard 15.16-1982.- Our review indicates that the draft emergency plan decreases the effectiveness of the currently approved emergency; plan and does not maintain compliance with 10 CFR'50, Appendix E.

Please

- revise your emergency plan in accordance with our enclosed coments.

If you have any questions, clease call me-at 492-1102.

Sincerely, d.

M

-Theodore S. Michaels, Senior Project Manager Non-Power Reactor, Decommissioning and l

Environmental Project Directorate Division of Reactor Projects --III..,

IV, Y and Special Projects.

Office of Nuclear ^ Reactor Regulation y

..l

Enclosure:

As stated 1

..a,

.i._

Enclosure 1

J Comments on the Reed Reactor Facility.

Emergency Plan (12/89 draft)

Section 3.1.

Removing written agreements with support groups from the 1

)

Emergency Plan is unacceptable. The plan should contain the~

j arrangements, confiriaed in writing with local support i

organizations that would augment and extend the capability of the f acility's emergency organization.

Section 3.0 Organization and responsibilities J

l The revised section on organization and responsibilities is confusing and unclear. The relationship between the-RRFj J

management and the Director of RRF is not defined. The person who has the non-delegable responsibility for notification'and 4

[

protective action decisions should-be specified.' A block diagram showing the organization would be helpful.

Section 3.1.1 An Emergency Notification Call' List (ENCL) with five positions is mentioned in the plan; however, only three of-the five posi-1 tions are given. The actual list with telephone' numbers is._not-provided nor is the reader directed to the location of the list.

Section 3.1.2 The ENCL mentions a Reactor Supervisor; however, the position is not mentioned in the role of. Emergency. Coordinator.

b

- 1 Section 3.1.7 The relationship between the RRF Reactor Review Comittee and the emergency organization is unclear.

-l Section 3.1.10 It is unclear as written what is " Reed College Comunity Safety."

- l l

.. m m,,

v-c.

<.p,,

]

+..

l-2

't s

Miscellaneous Removing emergency implementing procedures entirely from the i

plan is unacceptable. Emergency implementing procedures should J

be listed by title.in the annex to the plan. These procedures should include names, telephone numbers, specific equipnent, and supplies.

j The size of the EPZ should be addressed in the emergency plan.

i' 4-Section 8'.1 The location of the Emergency Support Center is not specified.

It is stated that.it is located in the Director's office which is not specified in the plan.

i t

f l

1

{

l L

4 ge 4

--