ML20042B883
| ML20042B883 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 03/12/1982 |
| From: | Rausch T COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8203260239 | |
| Download: ML20042B883 (20) | |
Text
t
~
Commonwealth Edison
(
) One Firr,t Natioral Plaza. Chicago, Ilknois 7 Address R: ply to: Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690 As March 12, 1982 0U I'A0 In-l l,n
.y
~;NJ'T l
v&n 1
Mr. James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator g g g pggg Directorate of Inspection and O
- g 7
T Enforcement - Region III g
U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4
f N
799 Hoosevelt Road Q
,, qy,q;D g
Glen Ellyn, IL 60137
.,f
%R 2 5198F C
Subject:
Dresden Station Units 1, 2 and 3
- f. t yyj$f2Ef Response to Emergency Preparedness 15 Appraisal Appendix C Items g
g (Inspection Reports 50-10/81-16, e
y 50-237/81-27 and 50-249/81-20)
NRC Docket Nos. 50-10, 50-237 & 50-249 Reference (a):
J.
G. Keppler letter to Coroell Reed dated December 14, 1981.
Dear Mr. Keppler:
Attachment A to this letter provides the Commonwealth Edison Company response to deficiencies in the Dresden Site Specific Annex to the Emergency Plan (GSEP) which were identified in Appendix C to Reference (a).
Please direct any questions you may have concerning this matter to this of fice.
l Very truly yours, W
/
Thoma s J. Rausch Nuclea r Licensing Administrato r 1m cc:
NRC Resident Inspector 3629N 8203260239 820312 Id4R 1 6 1982 k
PDR ADOCK 05000010 0
i
- s ATTACIBelf A Dresden Station Units 1, 2, and 3 Response to Appendix C Emergency Preparedness Evaluation Report We have reviewed those deficiencies you identified during the Dresden Emergency Preparedness Appraisal which appear not to meet the planning standards of 10 CFR 50.47(b). The revisions which we are making to our Emergency Plan to resolve those deficiencies are discussed below. A copy of the proposed changes to our Table of Emergency Action Levels (EPIP 200-Tl) is also attached. The changes we are proposing to our Emergency Action Levels incorporate the wording from W REG-0654 directly, or they establish action levels which we believe are equivalent to those in NUR m-0654. In a few cases, there is no instrumentation installed at Dresden which can provide the information needed for the specific action levels which are recomended in tURW-0654, e.g. seismic instrumentation to detect and differentiate between Operating Basis Earthquakes and Safe Shutdown Earthquakes. We believe our Table of Emergency Action Levels is adequate to ensure safe operation and prompt notification of offsite authorities in these cases.
PIANNItG STANC3RD 50,46(b) (2) (CNSITE EMERGENCY OTCANIZATION)
Revision 3 of the Emergency Plan includes a description of the methodology used, including periodic drills, to meet the shift augmentation criterion of NURW -0654. The Dresden Site Specific Annex will be revised to include a discussion of the Duty Officer System and the notification " call-tree" that is used to meet our augmentation goals. Refer to our February 1, 1982 final response to item 2 of Appendix A for a description of actions already taken.
The Annex will also be changed to indicate which responsibilities of the Station Director may not be delegated (the appropriate implement-inc; procedure has been revised). These changes to the Annex will require approval Dy Unsite and Offsite Review.
It is currently scheduled for completion by June 30, 1982.
PIANNING STANDARD 50.47 (b) (4) (ENERGENCY CIASSIFICATIONS SYSTENS)
The Dresden Site Specific Annex and the Dresden Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures will be changed as discussed below to provide Emergency Action Levels (FALs) which agree with Appendix 1 of NUREG-0654, Revision 1.
The Appropriate Implementing Procedures will be revised by April 14, 1982 and the Dresden Annex change is scheduled for completion by June 30, 1982.
UNUSUAL LVINT a.
Condition 1 will be revised to be consistent with the proposed revision to 10 CFR 50.72.
I b.
Condition 8 adequately addresses the concerns of the NUREG-0654, Appendix 1 example. The presently installed instrumentation has no capability to differentiate between different design basis earthquakes, and, in fact, depends upon the development and in-terpretation of photographic film. The example of an earthquake felt in plant does not provide a sufficiently quantitative assess-ment for reporting purposes.
c.
A train derailment may or may not be a significant event for class-ification purposes.
To address the NUREG-0654 concern, train de-railment has been added under Condition 2 Hazardous Materials, of l
the Dresden Table of EAL's.
A train derailment is considered an un-usual event if hazardous materials are involved which may affect plant operations, d.
Condition 4 adequately addresses the loss of offsite power or the loss of onsite AC power capability. Technical Specifications re-require specific offsite power and onsite power capabilities for startup and operation. If either offsite power capabilities or onsite power capabilities are lost, Technical Specifications re-quire a shutdown.
l e.
Condition 10 of the Table of Emergency Action levels found in the Dresden GSEP Annex will be updated to include the primary system total leakage as specified by Technical Specifications. The current revision of the Table contained in our Emergency Implementing Pro-l cedures already contains this parameter, f.
The Emergency Action Level Table will include under Condition 3, Loss of Plant Systems, an EAL to deal with the loss of accident assessment or offsite dose assessment capability.
l g.
Condition 11 has been revised to include a coolant activity sample
> 20 pC1/mi total iodine (Technical Specification limit) as an Un-usual Event.
l h.
The Table of EALs does not address high offgas activity at the air ejector monitor. Two air ejector offgas monitors are provided.
These monitors cause an isolation of the offgas line when their trip point is reached. The trip settings are set so that Tech-nical Specification release rates are not exceeded. The Table of EALs already contains action levels based on actual effluent releases at the Unit 2/3 Chimney.
l The offgas monitor alarm and trip only provide indications of poss-ible fuel damage. In addition, main steamline radiation monitors initiate a Group I Isolation and reactor scram in the event of gross fuel failure. With the addition of the Catalytic Recombiner and the Charcoal Beds, the holdup time to reach the Unit 2/3 Chimney is days as opposed to minutes. For this reason, the declaration of an event l
based on offgas monitor readings is not desirable, and would not represent effluent releases.
l l
I
j ALERT a.
Response is the same as Item h under Unusual Event, b.
The Table of EALs will be revised to include the unplanned loss of most or all annunciators on either Panel 902(3)-5 or Panel 902(3)-3 for greater than thirty (30) minutes. Although there are many annun-ciators in the Control Room, the annunciators of primary concern are located on Panel 902(3)-5 and Panel 902(3)-3. The term unplanned is used because, for example, procedures for troubleshooting DC grounds require de-energizing annunciators for short periods of time. The greater than thirty (30) minutes qualification is added because re-dundant power feeds can allow restoration of power that may be caused by blown fuses or breaker trips. In addition, sufficient instrument-ation is available for the operators to monitor the reactor core and ECCS system status during the loss, c.
Condition 10 will be revised to address a Group I Isolation which in-cludes closure of the Main Steam Isolation Valves, on I-area high temperature with a failure of a MSIV to isolate. If the isolation is complete, no particular significance would be attributed to the event. The setpoint of the high temperature isolation RID's is low enough to detect leakage of 5 to 10 gpm. Inboard MSIV leakage would result in an increased leakage rate to primary containment, Condition 10, or an increased primary containment pressure, Condition 11.
d.
Condition 18 will be revised to address a change in ARM readings that would indicate a severe degradation in control of radioactive material.
Condition 4 is equivalent to the example given in NUREG-0654, Appendix e.
1.
If all onsite and offsite AC power is lost, a Cold shutdown as de-fined by the Technical Specifications can not be achieved nor main-tained. If the loss is sustained for greater than 15 minutes, a Site Emergency is declared.
f.
Condition 5 will be revised to list the loss of all 125v DC power to Unit 2 or Unit 3 as an Alert.
g.
Condition 6 will be revised to address a fire potentially affecting safety systems.
h.
Condition 8 provides an EAL equivalent to the concerns of Example 10 and 17 as listed under the Alert conditions of NUREG-0654, Appendix 1.
Present instrumentation can not indicate a specific value for OBE until a photographic film is developed.
1.
Condition 16 will be revised to address a turbine failure causing casing penetration.
- j. Condition 13 provides an adequate EAL for Alert and Site Emergency.
It is not the purpose of the EAL to describe the conditions which lead to evacuation of the Control Room. Ihe table provides guidance l
as to what classification of EAL should be declared once Control Roon evacuation is deemed appropriate.
I k.
Condition 18 will be revised to address other plant conditions that warrant precautionary activation of the TSC and placing the near-site EOF and other key emergency personnel on standby.
SITE AREA EMERGENCY Condition 18 will be revised to address other plant conditions that a.
warrant activation of emergency centers and monitoring teams or a precautionary notification to the public near the site as a Site Emergency.
b.
The procedure for classification and response to an incident involving Hazardous Materials, EPIP 200-2, will be revised to include reference to the Hazardous Materials Tables listed in Title 29, Title 33, Title 40, and Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
c.
The entry of uncontrolled flannable gases will be included in Condition 2 during the procedure revision mentioned in Item b.
d.
Example 12 of Site Area Emergency as listed in NUREG-0654, Appendix 1, details a scenario approach to EAL's versus a symptomatic approach, and there seems to be many scenarios which might be included. To adequately cover the range of possible scenarios, the following note shall be placed at the beginning of the Table:
"If more than one distinctive EAL of dif-farent classification levels, e.g. an EAL for Alert and an EAL for Site Emergency, are reached; ensure that the highest class-ification level reached or a higher class-ifcation level is declared.
If more than one distinctive EAL of the same classification level, e.g. two EALs for Site Emergency are reached; consider classification at a higher classification level."
GENERAL EMERGENCY a.
Condition 11 will be revised to require containment activity of 2 x 103 R/hr and imminent loss of Primary Containment as a criteria for declaring a General Emergency. The Site Emergency EAL will be revised to include Primary Containment activity greater than 4 x 102 R/hr.
I b.
The BWR sequetwes described in NUREG-0654, Appendix 1, detail a scenario approach to EALs as opposed to a symptomatic approach.
The concerns of the sequences appear to deal with combinations of EALs previously acated. The BWR sequences will be addressed by the notes provided under Item d. of Site Area Emergency.
l t
PIANNING STANDARD 50.47 (b) (5) (NOTIFICATION METHODS AND PROCEDURES)
The Dresden Site Specific Annex will be changed to include a discussion of the administrative and physical means and the time required for notifying and providing prompt instructions to the public within the ten mile Emergency Planning Zone. This change to the annex is scheduled for Onsite and Offsite approval by June 30, 1982.
A description of the prmpt notification system was provided to you in our January 15, 1982 subnittal.
PIANNING STANDARD 50.47(b) (8) (EMERGENCY FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT)
As comitments for facilities and equipment are cmpleted and fully implemented, the Plan will be revised to reflect these changes, e.g. installation of Ibst-Accident Monitoring and Sampling Systems, TSC and EOF as-built diagrams, etc. These changes will be added during the periodic updates of the Dresden Site Specific Annex.
A revision to the Dresden Site Specific Annex will be prepared to include a discussion of the equipnent which is available to measure hydrological and seismic parameters frm offsite sources, as well as hydrological parameters from onsite sources. This change to the plan is scheduled for Onsite and Offsite approval by June 30, 1982. The appropriate Implementing Procedure will be revised by April 14, 1982 to include referrals to offsite hydrologic and seismic information sources.
The Dresden Site Specific Annex will also be changed to indicate the method by which the EOF will become functional within one hour of the decision to activate it, as specified in Criterion 4.3 of NURDG-0696. This change is scheduled for Onsite and Offsite approval by June 30, 1982. Refer to our February 1, 1982 final response to item 3 of Appendix A for a description of actions already taken.
PIANNING STANDARD 50.47 (b) (14) (EXERCISES AND DRIILS)
Comunciations drills with continuous states are discussed in the CECO. Generating Stations Emergency Manual. After a thorough review of the criteria for ecmnunications capabilities, Ceco and the state of Illinois have concluded that Indiana should not be properly included within the Dresden Emergency Planning Zone, and no ccmnunications drills are required.
1 The Dresden Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures have already been changed to require a test of comunications with NRC Headquarters and the Region III Operation Center frm our TSC, EOF, and Control Rom on a monthly basis, as required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, Section IV.E.9.d.
A change will be prepared to the Dresden Annex to sumarize this testing requirement. The changes is scheduled for Onsite and Offsite approval by June 30, 1982.
EPIP 200-T1 Revision 3 EPIP TABLE 200-T1 CLASSIFICATION OF GSEP CONDITIONS NOTES If a GSEP declaration is made refer If more than one distinctive EAL of different If more than one distinctive EAL to EPIP 100-C1 or EPIP 300-1 for GSEP classification levels, ie. an EAL for Alert of the same classification level, responses.
and an EAL for Site Emergency, are reached; ie. two EAL's for Site Emergency, ensure t)at the highest classification are reached; consider classifi-reached is cation at a higher classification declared (or a higher classification leve It is the prerogative of the Station level.
Director to upgrade the condition classification as he deems necessary.
AIRCRAFT CRASH Page 12 LOSS OF FISSION PRODUCT BARRIERS Page 7 CONTROL ROOM EVACUATION Page 11 LOSS OF PLANT SYSTEMS Page 4 EARTHQUAKE Page 6 LOSS OF PRIMARY COOLANT Page 6 EXPLOSION Page 5 OTHER CONDITIONS Page 13 FIRE Page 5 PERSONNEL INJURY Page 2 FLOOD Page 12 RADI0 ACTIVITY EFFLUENT RELEASE Page 8 FUEL HANDLING ACCIDENT Page 6 SECURITY THREAT Page 12 HAZARD 0US MATERIAL Page 3 TORNADO OR SUSTAINED WINDS Page 11 LOSS OF AC POWER Page 4 TRANSPORTATION ACCIDENT Page 14 LOSS OF DC POWER Page 5 OM.Y 1 of 14
EPIP 200-T1 Revision 3 SITE CENERAL CONDITION UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT EllERGENCY EMERGEt:CY Class Description.
Events in progress Events in progress Events in progress Events in progress or have occurred which or have occurred which or have occurred which or have occurred which indicate a potential involve an actual or involve actual or involve actual or degradation of the potential substantial likely major failures imminent substantial level of safety of degradation of the of plant functions core degradation or the plant.
level of safety of needed for protection melting with potential the plant.
of the public.
for loss of contain-ment integrity.
1)
Personnel One of the following:
Injury.
(1) Any on-site fatality or injury involving.
radiation and requiring transport to an off-site medical facility for treatment.*a*
(2) Any personnel radio-active contamination g ' ;n Q p 'r] p 7
{
requiring extensive on-l 1. !' 's j e
3 outside assistance.*b*
lj j
site decontamination or y
Mh M
g h la E
..,. :4
- a* An injury involving radiation is one in which the body is contaminated, the injured person is wearing contaminated clothing at the time of transport, or injury is related to radiation exposure.
cb* Personnel contamination that can be readily removed using routine decontamination procedures need not be reported.
2 of 14
~
EPIP 200-T1
~
Revision 3 SITE GENERAL CONDITION UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT EMERGENCY EMERGENCY
- 2) Hazardous One of the following:
Uncontrolled release of Uncontrolled release of Material.
(1) Uncontrolled release toxic gas at life threaten-toxic gas at life threaten-of toxic gas at life ing levels within the ing levels within the vital threatening levels protected area.
areas.*c*
near or on site.
(2) Uncontrolled situat-ion involving a substance or material in a quantity and form which may pose an unreasonable risk to health and safety or property.
gg (3) Notification or visualf observation of on-M+ ' or near-site *d* train derail-ment involving large quantities of flammable, explosive or toxic material such that plant operation
~ " " ' " ' ' '
FOR INFORMAT ON ONLY l
- c* Vital areas are:
U-1 Sphere, U-1 Turbine Bldg., U-2/3 Reactor Bldg., U-2/3 Turbine Bldg., Control Room, U-1 Cribhouse, U-2/3 Cribhouse, Control Alarm Station (CAS), Secondary Alarm Station (SAS), U-1 Fuel Puilding.
l
- d* Near-site: Within 5 miles.
l l
3 of 14
j Revision 3 i
SITE GENERAL CONDITION UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT EMERGENCY EMERGENCY
- 3) Loss of Plant One of the following:
One of the following:
Equipment is degraded Systems.
(1) Equipment described in (1) Equipment is degraded such that neither a Cold l
the Technical Specifi-such that a Cold Shut-Shutdown *e* condition nor cations is degraded such down*e* condition can-a Hot Shutdown *e* condition that a Limiting Condition not be achieved or can be achieved or main-l for Operation requires maintained.
tained; and Safety Limits *e*
a shutdown.
(2) Technical Specifica-may or will be exceeded.
(2) Loss of instrumentation tions Safety Limits *e*
such that accident
- exceeded, assessment or off-site (3) Failure of the Reactor dose assessment can-Protection System not be made.
Instrumentation to initiate and complete a SCRAM which brings the Reactor subcritical once a limiting safety system setting as specified in the Tech-nical Specifications has been exceeded.
(4) Unplanned loss of most or all annunciators on either Panel 902(3)-3 or Panel 902(3)-5 for greater than 30 minutes.
Power.
described in the Technical degraded such that a (1) AC power sources Specifications are de-Cold Shutdown *e* con-are degraded such graded such that a dition cannot be achieved that neither a Cold Limiting Condition for or maintained.
Shutdown *e* condi-Operation requires a tion nor a Hot Shut-shutdown.
down*e* condition can be achieved or main-T NFCRMATBON Ed?"'
(2) Loss of all AC power to f
Unit 2 or 3 for greater than 15 minutes.
- s" Cold Shutdown, Hot Shutdown and Safety Limits are defined by the Technical Specifications.
4 of 14
EPIP 200-T1 Revision 3 SlTE GEi1ERAL C0f1DITI0ft UtlVSUAL EVEtiT ALERT EMEilSEriCY EftERGENCY
- 5) Loss of DC DC power sources as One of the following:
One of the fo Wowing:
Power.
described in the Technical (1) DC power sources are (1) DC power sources Specifications are de-degraded such that a are degraded such graded such that a Cold Shutdown *e* con-that neither a Cold Limiting Condition for dition cannot be achieved Shutdown *e* condi-Operation requires a or maintained.
tion nor a Hot Shut-shutdown.
(2) Loss of all 125vDC down*e* condition can power to Unit 2 or be achieved or main-3.
tained; and Safety Limits *e* may or will be exceeded.
(2) Loss of all 125vDC power to Unit 2 or 3 for greater than 15 minutes.
6)
Fire.
One of the following:
One of the following:
Equipment is degraded such (1) Requiring off-site (1) Equipment is degraded that neither a Cold Shut-assistance, such that a Cold Shut-down*e* condition nor a Hot (2) Equipment described in down*e* condition Shutdown *e* condition can be the Technical Specifi-cannot be achieved achieved or maintained; cations is degraded or maintained.
and Safety Limits *e* may such that a Limiting (2) In Shift Supervisor's or will be exceeded.
Condition for Operation opinion safety systems requires a shutdown, are potentially affected.
7)
Explosion One of the following:
Equipment is degraded Equipment is degraded such causing damage. (1) Requiring off-site such that a Cold Shut-that neither a Cold Shut-assis tance.
down*e* condition cannot down*e* condition nor a (2) Equipment described in be achieved or main-Hot Shutdown *e* condition the Technical Specifi-tained.
can be achieved or main-cations is degraded tained; and Safety Limits *e*
such that a Limiting may or will be exceeded.
Condition for Operation requires a shutdown.
Geo Cold Shutdown, Hot Shutdown and Safety Limits are defined ic 5 of 14 l
EPIP 200-T1 Revision 3 SITE GENERAL CONDITION UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT EMERGENCY EMERGENCY 8)
Earthquake has Equipment described in Equipment is degraded Equipment is degraded such occurred or the Technical Specifica-such that a Cold Shut-that neither a Cold Shut-is being tions is degraded such down*e* condi tion cannot down*e* condition nor a Hot experienced.
that a Limiting Condition be achieved or main-Shutdown *e* condition can be for Operation requires a tained.
achieved or maintained; shutdown.
and Safety Limits *e* may or will be exceeded.
9)
Fuel Handling One of the following:
Refuel Floor ARM reads Refuel Floor ARM reads Accident.
(1) Dropped irradiated
> 100 mR/hr.,
>100 mR/hr ard fuel assembly.
Standby Gas Treatment Standby Gas Treatment (2) Fuel Handlers report System is operational and System is not operational damage to an irradi-Secondary Containment or Secondary Containment ated fuel assembly Isolation is effective Isolation is incapable which results in an or is capable of being of being effected within increased reading on effected within 15 15 minutes.
Refuel Floor ARM.
minutes.
- 10) Loss of Primary One of the following:
One of the following:
One of the following:
Coolant.
(1) ECCS initiation (not (1) A >,50 gpm leakage (1) A >100 gpm leakage Imminent core melt.
spurious).
rate increase rate increase (2) Failure of a Primary as indicated by as indicated by i
System Safety or Relief surveillance.
surveillance.
P Valve to close.
(2) Group I Isolation (2) A Main Steam Line (3)
Total leakage rate to on X Area High break outside contain-Primary Containment is Temperature with a ment without the capa-greater than Technical failure of an MSIV bility of effecting Specifications Limiting to isolate.
isolation.
Condition for Operation (25 gpm).
I gid c
- e* Cold Shutdown, Hot Shutdown and Safety Limits are defined by g
ica K BJ!:ksddiht ka.1 $$ ~
ONLY S of -
EPIP 200-11 Revision 3 SIIE GENERAL CONDITION UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT EMERGENCY EMERGENCY ll) Loss of Coolant activity (1) Loss of one of the (1) Loss of two of the (1) Loss of two of the Fission sample >,20 uCi/ml following 3 Fission following 3 Fission following 3 Fisstor Product total iodine.
Product Barriers.
Product Barriers.
Product Barriers Barriers.
(a) Cladding.
(a) Cladding.
with imminent loss Grab sample activity Grab sample of the third equivalent to activity equival-Fission Product
>,300 uCi/ml of ent to >,300 Barrier.
uCi/ml of I-131.
(a) Cladding.
(b) Reactor Coolant (b) Reactor Coolant Grab sample System.
System.
activity
>f +2 psig drywell
>, +2 psig drywell equivalent to pressure and/or 4 -59 pressure and/or 4-59
> 300 uCi/ml inches vessel level inches vessel level of I-131.
during other than during other than (b) Reactor Coolan controlled evolutions.
controlled evolutions.
System.
(c)
(c)
>, +2 psig dry Containment pressure Containment pressure well pressure
- > 62 psig and/or
>< 62 psig and/or and/or f -59 Containment tempera-Containment tempera-inches vessel ture 4281*F.
ture >,281*F.
level during other than controlled evolutions.
F0E DU@MMTION EE ure >62 psig and/or Con-tainaent y
tempera ture
> 281,F.
2 2
3 (2)
) 2 x 10 R/hr (2) 44 x 10 R/hr.
(2)
>< 2 x 10 R/hr but Primary Containment 2
(4 x 10 R/hr activity and imminent Primary Containment loss of Primary activity.
Containment.
7 of 14 l
EPIP 200-T1 i
Reutsion 3 SlTE GENERAL CONDITION UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT EMERGENCY EMERGENCY
- 12) Radioactivity m
, - - m m r- -
--^mM Effluent Release g/gg gggggggggggg g ggg from the plant.
g[-
A. Noble gas releases.
- 1. Unit 1 Chimney. Gaseous effluent instant-Unit 1 is currently See Alert.
See Alert.
aneous release rate undergoing an extensive exceeds Technical modification and Specifications Limits decontamination outage, as measured by Wide Range Noble Gas Radiation Monitoring Monitoring Instrumen-Instrumentation:
tation will be installed Release rate and Emergency Action
> 5.6 x 10'uCi/sec Levels will be defined or prior to unit startup.
Monitor off scale due to a noble gas release.
- 2. Unit 2/3 Chimney.*f*
Gaseous effluent Gaseous effluent Gaseous effluent Gaseous effluent instantaneous release instantaneous release release as monitored release as monitored rate exceeds Technical rate >10 times the by Radiation Detection by Radiation Detectic Specifications Limits Technical Specifications Instrumentation Instrumentation as measured by Limits as measured corresponds to corresponds to Radiation Monitoring by Radiation Monitor-450 mR/hr for h
>,1 R/hr whole Instrumentation:
ing Instrumentation:
hour or ) 500 mR/hr body at the site (cont'd) of* High Range Noble Gas Monitoring Instrumentation capable of monitoring and providing control room indicatics of the releas rates corresponding to the Alert, Site Emergency and General Emergency categories will be installed by 1/1/824 Release i
i rate determinations in the interim period will be determined procedurally by local monitoring of efflueiit~ sample line exposure rates and conversion of results to gaseous effluent release rates.
8 of 14 l
EPIP 200-T1 Revision 3 SITE GENERAL CONDITION UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT EMERGENCY EMERGENCY
- 12) (cont'd)
Unit 2 or Unit 3 Unit 2 or Unit 3 whole body for 2 boundary (actual only (not both) only (not both) minutes at the meteorology).
site boundary for This condition Effluent release Effluent release adverse meteor logy.
exists when S
rate
> 7.0 x IO rate > 7.0 x 10" Q/u >, 4. 5 x 10' uCi/sec uCi/sec Effluent re] ease rate where Both Units 2 and Both Units 2 and
>< 1.3 x 10 uCi/sec Q = release 3 operating 3 operating for ),30 minutes rate in uCi/sec Release rate Release rate or u = mean wind
> 9.0 x 105
>,9.0 x 10 Release rate speed in mph 6
6 uCi/sec uCi/sec
.3 x 10 uCi/sec or 8
up y,2 minutes.
Q/u
>,1 x 10 h
5 elease rate
=
in uCi/sec u = mean wind speed in meters /sec.
3.
Unit 2/3 Reactor g
p e luent Gaseous effluent Building Vent-re ease yields a release yields a x
ilation Stack.*g*
monitor off-scale monitor off-scale high response as high response as indicated by indicated by recorder, with recorder, with Standby Gas Standby Gas Treatment System Treatment System operational and not operational Secondary Contain-or Secondary ment Isolation Containment capable of being Isolation not effected within capable of 15 minutes.
being effected (cont'd) within 15 minutes.
t I
Ogo Reactor Building Ventilation System automatically isolates at release rates more conservative than unusual event levels
( >, 9.0 x 104uCi/sec).
Reactor Building is then vented through the Standby Gas Treatment System to the Unit 2/3 Chimney <
However, High Range Noble Gas Monitoring Instrumentation will be installed on the Unit 2/3 Reactor Building Ventilation Stack prior to 1/1/82.)
,)
~
9 of 14 1'
3
i -
EPIP 200-T1 Revision 3 SITE GENERAL CONDITION UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT EMERGENCY EMERGENCY
- 12) (cont'd)
B. Particulate and iodine releases.
- 1. Unit 1 Chimney.
Summation of release Summation of release rates for halogens rates for halogens g
and particulates and particulates D.,.
with half lives with half lives greater than 8 days greater than 8 days
> 2.4 uCi/sec.
>,24 uCi/sec.
- 2. Unit 2/3 Chimney. Unit 2 or Unit 3 only Unit 2 or Unit 3 only g3 (notboth)
(not both)
)
Summation of release Summation of release Cd rates for halogens rates for halogens and particulates and particulates with half lives with half lives greater than 8 days greater than 8 days
> 3.5 uCi/sec. 135 uCi/sec.
Both Units 2 and 3 Both Units 2 and 3 t_ p operating operating
~
A.
Release rate Release rate f"
> 4.3 uCi/sec. 443 uCi/sec.
C7 g6k
- 3. Unit 2/3 Reactor Summation of release Summation of release Building rates for halogens rates for halogens Ventilation and particulates and particulates Stack.
with half lives with half lives greater than 8 days greater than 8 days
> 0.12 uCi/sec.
41.2 uCi/sec.
9 C.
Liquid effluents.
(cont'd) b I
10 of 14 Ji
~
EPIP 200-T1 Retfision 3 l
SITE GEtiERflL C0tlDITI0fl UtlVSUAL EVEtlT ALERT EMERGENCY EMERGENCY
- 12) (cont'd)
All Units Concentration of gross Concentration of gross Estimated activity Estimated activity (1, 2 and 3) beta activity in dis-beta activity in dis-of a liquid release of a liquid release charge canal (above charge canal (above
>,2,000 Ci but
>,20,000 Ci.
l background) in excess background) in excess
< 20,000 Ci.
of the Technical of 10 times the Specifications Limits TechnicalSpecifigations
( >l x 10 uCi/ml) unless Limits (>f 1 x 10 uCi/ml) discharge is controlled unless discharge is con-on a radionuclide basis trolled on a radionuclide in accordance with basis in accordance with Appendix B, Table II, Appendix B, Table II, Column 2 of 10 CFR Column 2 of 10 CFR 20 and note 1 thereto.
20 and note 1 thereto or Estimated activity of a liquid release
>,40 Ci but
<2,000 Ci.
- 13) Control Room Evacuation is anticipated Evacuation is required Evacuation.
or required with control and control is not established from local established from local stations.
stations within 15 min.
- 14) Tornado or Tornado within sighting One of the following:
One of the following:
severe winds distance (*5 miles) of (1) Tornado strikes or (1) Tornado strikes or being exper-the facility.
crosses within the crosses vital areas ienced.
(1) Control Room protected area.
- c* of facility.
informed by (2) Sustained Winds of (2) Sustained Winds of Load Dispatcher; or
).100 mph.
(100 mph
>,110 mph as confirmed (2) Control Room is max. metro tower by Weather Bureau, informed by capability.)
Station personnel k
[y,j -
who have made si visual sighting; or 1
(3) Shif t Supervisor infomed by Weather Alert.
EhMBU o o Vital areas are:
U-1 Sphere, U-1 Turbine Bldg., U-2/3 Reactor Bldg., U u
dg., Control Room, U-1 Cribhouse, c
U-2/3 Cribhouse, Control Alam Station (CAS), Secondary Alarm Station (SAS), U-1 Fuel Building.
11 of 14
EPIP 200-T1 Revision 3 SITE GENERAL CONDITION UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT EMERGENCY EMERGENCY
- 15) Flood.
One of the following:
Illinois River Level >,508' Illinois River Level
>,510' (1) Rupture of cooling (based on Unit 1 Cribhouse (based on 100 year flood levels pond dike affecting elevation 508'6").
of elevation 510'6").
off-site property.
(2) Flood occurring or projected.
- 16) Aircraft Crash Impacted on site but One of the following:
Impacted within the pro-or missiles outside the protected (1) Impacted within the pro-tected area and affecting from whatever area.
tected area but not vital areas."c*
source.
affecting vital areas.*c*
(2) Turbine failure causing casing penetration.
- 17) Security The following events Security Threat Imminent loss of physical Loss of physical Threat.
as described in the of increasing control of facility.
control of facility <
For other Security Plan:
severity that security events (1) Obvious attempt persists for more see Item 18.
to sabotage.
than 60 minutes.
(2) Internal disturbance (disturbance which is not short lived or is not a harmless outburst involving one or more individuals within the protected area).
(3) Bomb device discovered.
(4) Hostage.
g g
(5) Civil disturbance J
7
,l (spontaneous collec-g y
l tive group gathering which disrupts normal ggp{
operations.)
ii g k, q gb (6) Armed or forced pro-
/
tected area intrusion.
(7) Armed or forced vital area *c* intrusion, o o Vital areas are: U-1 Sphere, U-1 Turbine Bldg., U-2/3 Reactor Bldg., U-2/3 Turbine Bldg., Control Room, U-1 Cribhouse, c
U-2/3 Cribhouse, Control Alarm Station (CAS), Secondary Alann Station (SAS), U-1 Fuel Building.
12 of 14
EPIP 200-T1 Revision 3 a
SITE GENERAL CONDITION UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT EMERGENCY EMERGENCY
- 18) Any other con-A condi tion that warrants A condition that warrants A condition that warrants Im::linent core melt.
ditions of increased awareness on the precautionary activation activation of emergency equivalent part of the State and/or of Technical Support centers and monitoring magnitude to Local off-site officials.
Center and placing near-teams or a precautionary the criteria The following are examples site Emergency Operations notification to the public used to define of conditions that may or Facility on standby.
near the site.
the accident may not warrant classifi-The following are exan.ples category as cation as an Unusual of conditions that may or detemined by Event under GSEP:
may not warrant classifi-the Station (1) Conditions requir-cation as an Alert under Director.
ing Illinois GSEP.
Department of (1) Criticality accident Public Health in a Special Nuclear Notification per Materials area.
Section D.403 (2) Control rod drop of the Rules and occurs with reactor Regulations for power less than 20%
Protection Against as indicated by APRM's.
Radiation [see (3) Fuel pool level Section B of approaches or decreases Notifications below the Technical and GSEP Specifications Limit.
Response
(4) ARfi reading (s) indicate procedure a severe degradation in (EPIP 300-1)].
the control of radio-(2) Oil Spill.
active material.
(3) Bomb Threat.
(4) Attack Threat.
(5) Extortion (a
!!!!gis FOR INFORMA30N mands are followed, adverse action will be taken).
a,.
13 of 14
EPIP 200-T1 Revision 3 o
4 SITE GENERAL CONDITION UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT EMERGENCY EMERGENCY
- 18) (cont'd)
(6) Loss of Guard Force (e.g. strike).
(7) Security Coccunica-tions Failure.
(8) Conditions requiring NRC Notification per 10 CFR 50.72.
[ Refer to Sections B.2 and B.4 of Initial Noti-fications and GSEP Response procedure (EPIP 300-1)].
Transportation Accident A.
A vehicle transporting radioactive materials or non-radioactive Hazardous materials to or from a Commonwealth Edison generating station is involved in a situation in which:
1.
Fire, breakage or suspected radioactive contamination occurs involving a shipment of radioactive material or; 2.
As a direct result of Hazardous Lterials, (a) A person is killed; or (b) A person receives injuries requiring hospitalization; or (c)
Estimated carrier or other property damage exceeds $50,000.
B.
Any other condition involving Hazardous material transportation and equivalent to the criteria in Item A.
FOR INFORMATICN 1~ 1p my
,