ML20052E645
| ML20052E645 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 11/16/1981 |
| From: | Engelken R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Papay L SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20052E632 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8205110304 | |
| Download: ML20052E645 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000206/1981038
Text
.
,
" . g*%,h
APPENDIX A
- g
g
UNITED STATES
y
n
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
ti
j
REGION V
S
4
1450 MARIA LANE. SUITE 260
Y
WALNUT CREEK, CAUFORNIA 94596
g ***** ,o'
November 16, 1981
Docket Nos. 50-206, 50-361, 50-362
Southern California Edison Company
.
P. O. Box 800
2244 Walnut Grove Avenue
Rosemead, California 91770
,
Attention: Dr. L. T. Papay, -Vice President
Advanced Engineering
Gentlemen:
Subject: Emergency Preparedness Appraisal, Confirmation of Actions Being
Taken on Significant Findings
During the period October 26 - November 6, 1981, representatives of the
NRC's Office of Inspection and Enforcement conducted an onsite appraisal
of your state of emergency preparedness at San Onofre.
A preliminary discussion
of the findings was held at the San Onofre site on November 6, 1981 following
completion of the onsite appraisal. On November 9, 1981 Region V staff
held an additional telephone discussion with SCE personnel at Rosemead
and San Onofre concerning the finding related to monitoring releases in
the Unit 1 plant stack effluents.
In addition, on November 12, 1981 Mr.
R. F. Fish of my staff held a telephone discussion with Messers. Wes Moody
and Dennis McCloskey of your San Onofre staff regarding the intent of Item
J.5 in NUREG-0654, Rev. 1, and the resulting appraisal finding related
to onsite accountability during an emergency.
Based upon the November 6 discussion of the appraisal findings and the
November 9 and 12 telephone conversations, it is our understanding that
you will take the corrective actions described in the enclosure to this
letter. The times expected for completion of these corrective actions
have also been stated in the enclosure.
If our understanding of the actions as described in the enclosure are not
correct, you should contact this office promptly. Also, please inform
this office in writing when these corrective actions have been completed.
Sincerely,
F
R. H. Engelken
Regional Administrator
cc w/ enc:
H. Ray, Station Manager
San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station
.
8205110304 820324
PDR ADOCK 05000206
0
a
.
.,
s
,
-
,
ENCLOSURE
The appraisal disclosed that the procedures for determining the noble gas,
iodine and particulate release rates in the Unit 1 plant stack effluents
during an emergency were not included in the Emergency Plan Implementing
Procedures that were completely reissued on October 6, 1981.
Also the
former procedures did not appear to provide information or instructions
,,
for converting the meter readings to release rates. The evaluation of
. . , .
the capability of the present interim, extended range noble gas monitor
for the plant stack effluents indicated there may be a problem with its
sensitivity and range for the present location and shielding.
!
With respect to the capability to determine noble gas, iodine and particulate
release rates in the Unit 1 plant stack effluents during an emergency, including
use of the interim system used to satisfy Item 2.1.8.b of NUREG-0578, procedures
related to such determinations will be reimplemented by November 13, 1981.
Also these procedures will receive a review for technical adequacy and
basis and appropriate changes and/or additions incorporated by November 20,
1981.
In addition there will be a technical review of the extended range
monitor's capability and recommended changes resulting from this review '
will be initiated by December 1,1981. A permanent high range effluent
monitoring system will be installed and operable by January 1, 1981 unless
specific approval for an alternate date has been obtained from the NRC.
<
l
I
l
1
.
-
.
-
-.
_
'
s
&
_ APPENDIX B
APPRAISAL IMPROVEMENT AREA _S
Based on tlie results of the NRC's' appraisal of thefSan Onofre Nuclear Generating
Station Emergency Preparedness Program conducted on October 26 - November 6,
l
1981,1the following items should be considered for improvement:
(References
'
are to Sections in the Office of Inspection and Enforcement Report Nos.
50-206/81-38,50-361/81-31,50-362/81-08).
1.
A program for instructing ambulance and offsite fire support personnel
who might enter the site should be instituted.
Records of such
instruction should be maintained. -(See Section 3.1.1 and 3.2).
2.
A systematized method for keeping records related to emergency
preparedness training and retraining, . including identification
of those' persons to be. trained or retrained, should be established.
(See Section 3.2).
3.
Some or all of the emergency kits should include a selection of
hand tools.
(See Sections 4.1.1.5, 4.1.1.7 and 4.2.4.1).
4.
Consideration s"uld be given to-improving the Unit I laboratory
,
l
counting facilities, particularly with respect to providing a
l.
convenient acuss between the detector and the rest of the equipment.
E
(SeeSection4.1.1.5).
!
l
S.
Consider the need to have a 11ealth Physics Technician a'ccompany.
4
the Chemistry Technician when the latter is collecting post accident
'
l
' coolant and containment air samples.
(See Sections 4.1.1.5, 4.1.1.6
-
and 4.1.4).
6.
Consider the need to heat trace the Units 2/3 vent sample lines.
(SeeSection4.1.1.7).
l
7.
Complete the formal arrangements for a backup laboratory analysis
capability.
(See Section 4.1.1.8).
9
Consider the advisability of having Units 2/3 contractor. personnel
assemble at one or two locations outside the protected area rather
l
,
than the " gang" boxes. as presently. required.
(See Section 4.1.2.1).
9.
Reexamine the equipment ~and supplies k'ept in the "First-Aid Treatment
!.
Center" and provide additional items to assure an adequate supply
l
of first aid materials.
(See Section 4.1.2.2).
!
10.
Develop and institute a care and maintenance program for first
,
'
aid equipment.
(See Section 4.1.2.2).
1
1
,
i
1
l
l
_
-
-_ _
--
- , _ _ _ -._ .
_ _ _
_
__
- . - _ _
_ _ ,
- .--
1
4
-2-
11.
Determine whether the present location of the area monitor in the
Unit I radwaste building could be improved.
(See Section 4.1.1.7)-.
12.
Consider removing equipment trailers, discarded material and parked
cars within 150 feet of the base of the primary meteorological
tower.
(See Section 4.2.1.4).
13. Develop a firm schedule for respiratory qualification of emergency
response personnel so that present respiratory protection equipment
can be used as intended.by such persons during an emergency.
(See Section 4.2.2.1).
14
Evaluate the need for an additional supply of self contained respiratory
~
protection equipment outside the protected area.
(See Section
4.2.2.1).
15.
Improve the capability for communication between onsite and offsite
monitoring teams and their bases so as to eliminate dead spots
to the extent possible.
(See Sections 4.2.3 and 4.2.5).
16.
Arrange for the base radios in the-Control Rooms to be connected
to circuits that will be supplied with emergency power.
(See
Section 4.2.3).
17
Review Sections 5.2 and 5.4 of the appraisal report and make appropriate
changes to the emergency plan implementing procedures.
(See Sections
5.2 and 5.4).
18.
Prepare written guidance or a procedure for use by security personnel
when they account for onsite personnel during an emergency.
(See
Section 5.3).
19. Provide a means to identify visitors onsite but not in the protected
area so that they can be directed to an assembly area during an
I
emergency and be identified during the accountability process.
l
(See Section 5.3).
20. Provide an improved system for the maintenance of records associated
with drills and exercises.
(See Section 7.1).
l
!
I
t
l
. . - _
- - - _ - ..
_
,
,
APPENDIX C
OPEN ITEMS
The following is a list of Open Items identified during the October 26 -
November 6,1981 emergency preparedness appraisal. These items, except
for Item 5, must be completed prior to loading fuel into Unit 2.
Item 5
must be operational prior to operating the Unit 2 reactor at power levels
above 5.0% of full power.
1.
The emergency prenaredness training of essential response personnel
had not been completed. Also, a program for providing site visitors
with instructions regarding their response to an emergency signal
had been initiated during the week of flovember 2,1981.
2.
The emergency preparedness training for contractor personnel working
at Units 2/3 was being examined for adequacy in terms of responding
to er,argencies at Unit 1.
3.
The Units 2/3 Technical Support Center had not been completed
and equipped so as to be operational.
4.
The area to be used as the Units 2/3 Operational Support Center
had not been completed and turned over to the operating staff.
5.
The Units 2/3 Post Accident Sampling System has not been completely
installed and tested.
6.
The Units 2/3 laboratory counting equipment has not been completely
installed and calibrated.
7.
The process and effluent monitors for Unit 2 have not been conoletely
installed, tested and calibrated.