ML20087J112
| ML20087J112 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1994 |
| From: | Federal Emergency Management Agency |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17291A819 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9505050280 | |
| Download: ML20087J112 (47) | |
Text
.
- =_.
T '. -
- s CONNELL HIGH SCHOOL / ROBERT OLDS JR. HIGH SCHOOL 1994 EMERGENCY WORKER ASSISTANCE CENTER DRILL State of Washington WNP-2 NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DRILL REPORT Drill Date:
June 25, 1994 i
PARTICIPANTS:
1 Franklin County Emergency Management Benton-Franklin Counties Chapter of American Red Cross Washington State Department of Health / Division of Radiation Protection CONNELL HIGH/ ROBERT OLDS JR. HIGH School Officials Organization of Radiation Protection Technicians General Public - Evacuees and Emergency Workers Prepared by Federal Emergency Management Agency Region X Bothell, Washington December 1994
s TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
111
SUMMARY
OF RECOMMENDED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS iv VERIFICATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTIONE v
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 1.1 Exercise Background.
I 1.2 FEMA Evaluators 4
1.3 Summary of Exercise Scenario 5
1.4 Extent of Play Agreements 7
1.5 Significant Events Log 10 l
1 2.0 EXERCISE EVALUATION 12 2.1 CONNELL Emergency Worker / Assistance Center 12 3.0
SUMMARY
OF DRILL INADEQUACIES 25 l
APPENDICES APPENDIX A:
PRE-EXERCISE CORRESPONDENCE A-1 APPENDIX B:
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS B-1 ii
o EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
On June 25, 1994, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Region X staff evaluated an Emergency Worker and Assistance Center (EWAC) Drill at the connell High School / Robert Olds Jr. High School in Connell, Washington.
Hereafter, in this report referred to as Connell High School.
This drill was conducted in accordance with FEMA's regulations con-cerning the exercise of State and local Radiological Emergency Plans and Preparedness contained in 44 CFR 350.9(a).
FEMA evaluated the following operations to demonstrate their capabil-ity to respond to a radiological incident at the WNP-2 nuclear facil-ity which would require the activation of the designated EWAC:
Benton and Franklin (B/F) Counties:
EWAC operations.
Washington State Department of Health (DOH):
Personnel monitoring, vehicle monitoring, and decontamination process.
American Red Cross (ARC) (B/F Chapter):
Shelter operations (limited).
The purpose of an Assistance Center (AC) is to provide a facility at which the following functions (services) are provided to the public:
1.
Register evacuees (name, address, and status of monitoring).
If contamination is found, document the monitoring results and decontamination ef-forts.
2.
Receive assistance in contacting others and re-uniting with others.
l 3.
Receive referral and direction to Congregate Care Centers / Shelters.
4.
Monitor and decontaminate persons and vehicles.
Previous EWAC drills held in B/F Counties were:
January 13, 1985; August 12, 1985; January 22, 1986; May 16, 1987; April 9, 1988, May 19, 1990; and May 9, 1992.
iii
i e
The June 25, 1994, drill demonstrated that B/F Counties and the ARC are capable of activating and staffing the EWAC in accordance with their Procedures and the Extent of Play Agreement.
B/F Counties demonstrated the capability to setup the ENAC and coordinate EWAC activities.
1 The ARC demonstrated the capability to staff a designated shelter and provide services to persons who need shelter and related assistance.
a Washington State monitoring personnel demonstrated adequate monitor-ing techniques for vehicles and individuals and the knowledge of j
proper decontamination procedures.
I
SUMMARY
OF RECOMMENDED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FEMA Region X recommends corrective actions for the following drill findings.
Participants have agreed to implement corrective actions and provide a time frame for completion.
(See Section 3.0 for details.)
FEMA found that:
The Shelter Manager needs to be more knowledgeable of the operational Plan and Procedures for the specific EWAC Congregate Care Center / Shelter.
State and B/F County Plans do not specify what range of self-reading dosimeters are to be issued to Emergency Workers.
One monitor needs additional training on the proper use of self-reading dosimetry.
The outside Radiation Health Physicist (RHP) had an out-dated Plan.
A survey instrument which was not operating correctly was used for initial monitoring.
Information sheets were distributed to evacuees long after their arrival, which were at that point of little value.
State and B/F County Plans are inconsistent in the personnel contamination forms specified, r
'V
e.
VERIFICATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTIONS In addition to the pre-established exercise objectives, FEMA evaluat-ed the implementation of corrective actions for the following outstanding issues identified in previous drills.
1.
C90-7, ARCA - No periodic briefing at CCC - remains open.2 2.
C90-9, ARCA - No distribution of information sheets - closed.1 3.
B/F92-1, Planning Issue - Insufficient dosimetry kits - closed.
4.
B/F92-2, ARCA - Improper use of self-reading dosimeters -
closed.
5.
B/F92-3, ARCA - Inadequate monitoring performance - closed.
6.
B/F92-4, ARCA - Inadequate monitoring performance - closed.
7 B/F92-5, ARCA - Inadequate monitoring performance - closed.
8.
B/F92-6, Planning Issue - Inadequate trigger levels - closed.
9.
B/F92-7, Planning Issue - Incomplete Procedures - closed.
10.
- 3 / F92-8, ARCA - Inadequate survey in women's decontamination area - closed.
11.
B/F92-9, ARCA - Inadequate documentation survey forms - closed.
12.
B/F92-10, ARCA - Inadequate vehicle monitoring process - closed.
13.
B/F92-11, Planning Issue - No Alerting Procedures for monitors -
remains open.
1 The "C" in ARCA C90-7 and C90-9 indicates B/F County.
ARCA:
Areas Requiring Corrective Action.
CCC:
Congregate Care Center.
See Appendix B " Acronyms and Abbreviations" for more definitions.
v
r i
\\
l
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Exercise Background On December 7, 1979, the President directed FEMA to assume the lead responsibility for all offsite nuclear planning and response.
FEMA's responsibilities in radiological emergency planning for Fixed Nuclear Facilities ( FNF) include the following:
1.
Taking the lead in offsite emergency planning and in the review and evaluation of Radiological Emer-gency Response Plans developed by State and local governments, 2.
Determining whether such Plans can be implemented on the basis of the observation and evaluation of exercises of the Plans developed by State and local governments, 3.
Responding to requests by the U.S. Nuclear Regula-tory Commission (NRC) pursuant to the June 17, 1993 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between NRC and FEMA relating to Radiological Emergency Plan-ning and Preparedness, 44CFR Part 353 (September 14, 1993), and 4.
Coordinating the activities of Federal agencies with responsibilities in the radiological emer-gency planning process:
U.S.
Department of Commerce U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency U.S.
Department of Energy U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services U.S. Department of Transportation U.S.
Department of Agricultare U.S.
Department of the Interior Representatives of these agencies serve on the Regional Assistance Committee (RAC), which is chaired by FEMA Region X.
The exercise participants employed their Plans of record.
The fol-lowing Plans and Procedures were used by FEMA in evaluating the per-formance of the participants:
1.
B/F Counties Fixed Nuclear Facility Emergency 1
Response Plan Implementing Procedures, Section IP-12 dated May 18, 1994.
1
2.
Washington Department of Health, Division of Radi-ation Protection (DOH/DRP), Response Procedures for Radiation Emergencies, Section 9 EWACs, pages 9-0 through 9-27, dated May 1994.
This exercise was conducted in accordance with the Exercise Scenario and Extent of Play Agreements.
The Scenario presented a hypothetical accident at WNP-2 that was to trigger offsite response activities as well as various offsite conditions and contingencies.
The Extent of Play Agreements between FEMA and the emergency response organizations define the manner in which a particular response function will be demonstrated by the players.
The agreements were designed to test the ability, of the FNF Emergency Response Plan Implementing Proce-dures to be implemented under simulated emergency conditions.
Where no Extent of Play Agreement existed, FEMA evaluated the observed activities as if the Plans and Procedures were to be followed in their entirety.
The criteria utilized in the FEMA evaluation process are contained in NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1 (November 1980); FEMA-REP-14, Exercise Manual; FEMA-REP-15, Exercise Evaluation Methodology (EEM) (September 1991) effective January 1, 1992; and those expected actions called for by the participants' Plans and Procedures.
FEMA's EEMs provide a standard set of objectives for use in evaluat-ing exercises pursuant to 44 CFR 350 and 10 CFR 50 (NRC).
The EEM is structured so that any given objective can be addressed for any rele-vant activity, whether facility-or field-based.
Therefore, the ob-jectives are evaluated based on the organization of activities re-gardless of whether these activities are demonstrated at one level /
one location or multiple levels / multiple locations.
Section 2.0 of this report contains the exercise evaluation.
Each objective contains a statement of the objective, the outcome of the evaluation (met /not met), and a narrative summary of our observations which served as the basis for our evaluation.
Where applicable, the narrative is followed by one or more exercise issues classified as Def.iciencies, Areas Requiring Corrective Action (ARCA), Plan Issues, or Areas Recommended for Improvement (ARFI).
Each of these categories is defined below:
Deficiencies:
Deficiencies are demonstrated and observed inadequacies that could cause a finding that offsite emergency preparedness is not adequate to provide rea-sonable assurance that appropriate measures can be taken to protect the health and safety of the public living in the vicinity of a nuclear power plant in the event of a radio-logical emergency.
This inadequacy could be an exercise related issue regarding inadequate Plans and Procedures or the ability to implement Plans.
Because of the potential 2
c i
impact of Deficiencies on emergency preparedness, they are required to be corrected within 120 days through appropri-ate remedial actions.
Areas Requiring Corrective Action:
ARCAs are demonstrated and observed inadequacies of performance.
. Although correction is required by the next scheduled biennial exercise, they are not considered in and of themselves to adversely impact public health and safety.
Plan Issues:
Plan Issues are observed or identified issues during an exercise which do not involve participant or organizational performance, but rather involve inadequacies in an organization's existing Plan and/or Procedures.
Plan Issues are required to be corrected through the revision and update of the appropriate state and local radiological emergency response Plans and/or Procedures during the annual plan review and update and reported in the Annual Letter of Certification.
Areas Recommended for Improvement:
ARFIs are observed issues that are not considered to adversely impact public health and safety.
While not required, improvements in these areas would enhance an organization's level of emergency preparedness.
When Exercise or Plan Issues are identified in this report, they are listed with a brief description of the issue, a reference to the applicable NUREG-0654 element, and the type of issue.
If the issue is a Deficiency, ARCA, or Plan Issue, a tracking number is assigned to identify the issue.
Section 3.0 gives a summary of all identified Deficiencies, ARCAs, and Plan Issues.
Areas Recommended for Improvement (ARFIs) were discussed at the evaluators' out-briefings with participants and are included in the narrative summaries.
However, ARFIs have not been specifically identified and listed in this report.
il i
a 3
1.2 FEMA Evaluators The 1994 Connell High School EWAC drill was evaluated by the RAC Chairman and evaluators drawn from FEMA,
EVALUATOR ASSIGNMENT LIST - CONNELL HIGH SCHOOL EWAC DRILL JUNE 25, 1994 Larry E. Moore, RAC Chairman and Manager of the Evaluation Team LOCATION EVALUATOR ORGANIZATION Parking Lot Melissa Coon INEL/WINCO Vehicle Monitoring Jill Cox INEL/WINCO Coordinator's Office Gerry Gibeault INEL/WINCO Emergency Worker /
Joe Keller INEL/WINCO Evacuee Monitoring Vehicle Monitoring Brad Salmonson INEL/WINCO Decontamination Frank Bold ARGONNE Monitoring ARC Shelter Maria Plancich ARGONNE ARC Shelter Martha Gebhardt ARC Registration Eleanor Castle FEMA 4
^
1.3 Summary of Exercise Scenario INTRODUCTIONS This Emergency Worker Assistance Center (EWAC) drill involved a simulated accident at WNP-2.
As a result of the accident, evacuation of Section 1 from 2-10 miles was initiated and the EWAC at Connell High School activated.
Volunteers from the community were processed through the EWAC to test the various capabilities including personnel and vehicle simulated decontamination, traffic control and congregate care (American Red Cross).
SCENARIO At 0755, on June 25, the WNP-2 Control Room receives a turbine trip and numerous fire alarms from the 501' elevation of the Turbine Generator (TG) building.
The reactor automatically scrams due to the turbine trip, and the Main Steam Relief Valves (MSRV) opens to control reactor pressure.
A declaration of ALERT is declared at 0800.
The Control Room notifies the Emergency Dispatch Center (EDC) of the ALERT classification via CRASH call and faxes a copy of the Classification Notification Form (CNF) as required.
Through the appropriate call tree emergency notifications, the EWAC Coordinator is advised to put the necessary EWAC staff on stand by.
During reactor cool down, problems are experienced with the feedwater pumps providing coolant to the reactor.
At the same time, there is indication that several of the MSRVs are stuck open allowing steam to flow to the Suppression Pool.
Consequently, reactor water level is slowly dropping.
At 0820, feedwater is lost entirely, and reactor water level drops below the Top of Active Fuel.
A declaration of Site Area Emergency (SAE) is declared due to anticipated fuel failure.
In addition to the automatic Protective Action Recommenda-tions (PAR) the Supply System recommends sheltering to 10 miles in Section 1 due to the current wind conditions.
Because of this, the B/F County Emergency Operations Center (EOC) notifies the Connell EWAC Coordinator to activate the EWAC.
Due to workers failing to properly secure equipment when evacuating the reactor building, a pipe is sheared and reactor coolant water is released into the reactor building at a high rate.
The reactor building HVAC Exhaust Plenun Monitors immediately activate causing the building exhaust system to isolate and at the same time activat-ing the Standby Gas Treatment (SGT) system.
Down stream monitors indicate that noble gases are being released out of the plant.
(No iodine since the SGT is operating.)
As the accident and offsite release progress, the Meteorological and Unified Dose Assessment Center staff at the Supply System's Emergency Operations Facility (EOF) performs dose projections, indicating that 5
c
\\
l an estimated 1 REM total effective dose equivalent exposure at the 1.2 mile site boundary will be exceeded.
The Supply System declares i
a General Emergency at 0845.
An additional PAR is issued recommend-ing evacuation of Section 1 to 10 miles.
The bi-county EOC then implements the Protective Action Decision to evacuate the general public in Section 1,
and directs them to go to the Connell High School EWAC.
The EWAC Coordinator prepares to deal with the anticipated evacuees.
The release from WNP-2 continues until 1000, when emergency crews restore feedwater flow to the reactor and recover the fuel.
The offsite release is terminated when the ruptured pipe is secured shortly thereafter.
The Emergency Classification is downgraded to an ALERT at 1010.
Contaminated vehicles and evacuees will be directed to the Decontamination Area.
One female and one male evacuee will be decontaminated (simulated).
Documentation will be on appropriate forms as per Procedures.
All other evacuees will be directed to the ARC Shelter to register after monitoring has determined there is not significant contamination.
Evacuees will be registered and shelter and food (snacks) will be provided.
6
+
e 1.4 Extent of Play Agreements GENERAL EXTENT OF PLAY AGREEMENTS:
1.
Evacuation of Section 1, 2-10 miles will activate only the Connell High School EWAC.
Notification and development of staffing rosters for the other two EWAC's will not be exercised in this drill.
2.
The drill will be exercised in real time.
Connell high School will not be in session on this date.
School staff involvement will be limited to an EWAC Facility Manager.
3.
The radiological release will not contain radioactive lodine.
4.
Public concern / disaster welfare inquiry phone teams will be simulated.
5.
A larger number of evacuees will be portrayed by a few controllers, each portraying several evacuees.
6.
Emergency Broadcast System will not be activated.
7 Post-decontamination clothing, cots and bedding will not be sent to the EWAC, but provisions for it will be available.
8.
The American Red Cross will not fully staff the shelter.
9.
Decontamination of
- people, belongings, vehicles and facility will be simulated.
10.
Some volunteers will portray both evacuees and Emergency Workers during the drill.
11.
Snacks will be provided by a food service vendor.
12.
Traffic control demonstration will be confined to the school property.
No traffic control measures will be demonstrated on routes leading to the EWAC.
13.
The EWAC will be set for full operation.
Each designated initial monitor will consecutively monitor six evacuees.
14.
EWAC staff are not considered Emergency Workers.
15.
The B/F County EOC will not be activated.
Communication to the EOC will be through the Control Cell.
7
16.
EWAC personnel will be prepositioned.
Response time will be waived for the purpose of the exercise.
17.
Individuals with contamination levels above the action levels will not be transported to a medical facility.
SPECIFIC EXTENT OF PLAY AGREEMENTS BY OBJECTIVE:
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 5 - Emergency i ' rker Exposure Control:
Demonstrate the capability to continuously monitor and control radiation exposure to Emergency Workers.
1.
The Offsite Response Organization (ORO) utilizes appropriate dosimetry for Emergency Worker radiation exposure control.
4.
All activities described in the demonstration criteria for this objective are carried out in accordance with the Plan, unless deviations are provided for in the Extent of Play Agreement.
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 18 - Reception Center - Monitoring, Decontami-nation, and Registration:
Demonstrate the adequacy of Procedures, facilities, equipment, and personnel for the radiological monitoring, decontamination, and registration of evacuees.
1.
The reception center has adequate space available for the monitoring, decontamination and registration of evacuees and is activated and operational in a timely manner.
2.
The reception center has adequate and appropriate resources, is set up in logical order for its operation and control of contamination, and has trained staff and Procedures sufficient to accomplish monitoring of evacuees within the time frames established in the organization's Plan.
3.
Procedures and equipment for monitoring and decontamination of evacuees are adequate.
4.
Evacuees are properly registered.
5.
Vehicles and evacuee's possessions, arriving at reception centers, are monitored for contamination and decontaminated, if necessary.
8 i
6.
All activities described in the demonstration criteria for this ob]ective are carried out in accordance with the Plan, unless deviations are provided for in the Extent of Play Agreement.
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 19 - Congregate Care:
Demonstrate the adequacy of facilities, equipment,
- supplies, personnel, and Procedures for congregate care of evacuees.
2.
Managers of congregare care facilities demonstrate that the centers have resources to provide services and accommodations consistent with American Red Cross planning guidelines.
Managers demonstrate the Procedures to assure that evacuees have been monitored for contamination and are uncontaminated prior to entering congregate care facilities.
3.
All activities described in the demonstration criteria for this objective are carried out in accordance with the Plan, unless deviations are provided for in the Extent of Play Agreement.
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 22 - Emergency Workers, Equipment, and Vehicle Monitoring and Decontamination:
Demonstrate the adequacy of Procedures for the monitoring and decontamination of Emergency Workers, equipment, and vehicles.
1.
Resources and facilities for monitoring Emergency Workers and equipment (including vehicles) and for contamination control are adequate and appropriate.
2.
Emergency Workers are monitored for radioactive contamination and decontaminated as appropriate.
3.
Vehicles and equipment are monitored and decontaminated as appropriate.
4.
All activities described in the demonstration criteria for this objective are carried out in accordance with the Plan, unless deviations are provided for in the Extent of Play Agreement.
Appendix A of this report contains copies of pre-drill correspondence including those related to establishing the objectives and Extent of Play for the drill.
1 9
1.5 Significant Events Log Connell High School EWAC Drill, June 25, 1994 EXERCISE TIME EVENT OR LOCATION EVENT DESCRIPTION 0745 Evaluators begin to arrive at Connell EWAC.
0010 ALERT Franklin County Emergency Management Di-rector (EMD) / Controller notifies Connell EWAC Coordinator of ALERT.
(Coordina-tor's calls to place EWAC staff on alert are simulated.)
0830 SAE County EMD/ Controller notifies EWAC Coor-dinator of SAE and instructs that EWAC be opened.
(Coordinator's calls to activate staff are simulated.)
0846 Staff Arrive Staff begin arriving at EWAC.
0855-General Emergency County EMD/ Controller tries unsuccess-0902 Notification (GE) fully to notify EWAC Coordinator of GE and evacuation order.
0905 Supplies Arrive Supplies for EWAC operation begin to ar-rive.
0933 Staff begin setting up male and female decontamination areas.
0950 Shelter Activated Congregate care center / shelter activated.
l 0958 EWAC Activated EWAC, including shelter, declared acti-vated.
Minimum required staff are pres-ent.
1001 Shelter Manager receives copy of first EBS message (precautionary evacuations).
1015 First vehicle arrives to be monitored.
(Found to be contaminated.)
l 1
1020 Male and female decontamination areas operational.
10 4
j
EXERCISE TIME EVENT OR LOCATION EVENT DESCRIPTION s
1024 Shelter Manager receives copy of second EBS message.
(Evacuation of Section 1.)
[
1028 Moni tor Area Crews complete set up of the initial Set Up monitoring area including instrument checks.
1035 EWAC Operational EWAC, including shelter, declared opera-tional.
1040 Initial Monitoring The first group of evacuees arrive at the Begins initial monitoring area.
(Passengers of contaminated vehicle.)
1043 Second vehicle monitored.
(Found to be clean.)
1050 Registration The first group of evacuees arrive at the Begins shelter for registration.
All have green
" monitored" stickers on.
1053 Third vehicle monitored.
(Found to be clean.)-
1055 Fourth vehicle monitored.
(Found to be clean.)
1059 Female First female arrives for decontamination.
Decontamination 1105 GE Notification Shelter Manager receives reply from EWAC Coordinator that a GE had been declared at 0855 and an evacuation was in prog-ress.
1132 Male First (and only) male arrives for decon-Decontamination tamination.
1132 DWI shelter receives a Disaster Welfare In-quiry (DWI).
1150- Monitor Shift Decontamination monitors brief and 1155 Change monitor incoming staff.
1158 Drill Terminated 11
.n.
2.O EXERCISE EVALUATION 2.1 Connell Emergency Worker / Assistance Center Ob]octive 5:
Demonstrate the ability to continuously monitor and control radiation exposure to Emergency Workers.
Evaluation:
Met Narrative Summary:
Emergency Workers assigned to the EWAC were re-quired to sign in on a status board and were then given position specific binders consisting of job instructions, forms, and an Emergency Worker Kit.
The Emergency Worker Kit contained a TLD, a self-reading dosimeter (0-20 R), a bottle of potassium iodide (KI), and KI instructions.
Neither Section 9.of the State Plan nor Implementing Procedure (IP)-12 of the B/F County Plan specifies the range of the self-reading dosimeter to be issued.
Work-ers were observed to properly check the reading on the self-reading dosimeter and to record the appropriate dosimeter information and readings on the forms supplied.
Several workers were asked to explain the action they would take if a dosimeter was found to read 1/3 or 1/2 scale at the time it was first removed from the Emergency Worker Kit.
All asked said that they would re-zero the instru-ment.
No one suggested that the dosimeter might be bad or that another dosimeter should be used.
There was no physical evidence that the dosimeters were calibrated or leak checked.
Franklin County staff later provided a record of the inspection and electrical leak check of the dosimeters, by serial number, that had been accomplished the month prior to the Drill.
However, it is recommended that a copy of this record be placed in the EWAC Kit or in some way provide evidence of the most recent in-spection and electrical leak check on or with the dosimeters.
Field staff should not have to assume that since the TLD and survey instruments in the kit are within the current inspection period that so are the dosimeters.
Dosimeter chargers were provided as part of the initial supplies used to activate the EWAC.
The chargers were used as necessary to zero the self-reading dosimeters.
In addition to the Emergency Worker Kits contained in each position binder, 15 additional emergency kits 12 i
i u
r were available at the Connell EWAC.
If more than the 15 kits would be required, the EWAC Coordinator stated that he would obtain.the required kits from the B/F EOC.
The availability of required Emer-gency Worker Kits closes a previous planning issue B/F 92-1.
Emergency Workers were provided with written in-structions to check their self-reading dosimeters at 1/2 hour intervals or as directed by a Radiation Health Physicist (RHP).
Additionally, the Public Information Officer made announcements each half hour to " check and record your documentation."
This announcement was intended to make the emer-gency workers read the self-reading dosimeters.
Several Emergency Workers did not understand this announcement and failed to properly check their self-reading dosimeters and record the readings.
With the exception of one Emergency Worker in vehicle monitoring area, all remaining Emergency Workers demonstrated the ability to properly read their self-reading dosimeters.
They were aware of the requirement to report doses of 2.5 R and were aware of the 5 R turnback limit.
The demonstrated Emergency Worker knowledge closes a previous ARCA, B/F 92-2.
The one worker in the vehicle monitoring area removed his self-reading dosimeter and placed' it on a table.
He also wore his TLD on an inappro-priate portion of his body (well below his waist).
At the end of the exercise, Emergency Workers were required to return their dosimeters to the Dose Tracker in accordance with Plan requirements.
With the exception of the one Emergency Worker discussed
- above, all observed actions were performed in accordance with Plan requirements outlined in the State of Washington and B/F Emergency Plans.
Issue 1:
Dosimeter Range Not Specified.
Planning Issue.
(B/ F94 - 3 )
(K.3.a.)
Discussion:
Neither Section 9 of the State Plan nor IP-12 of the B/F County Plan specifies the range of the self-reading dosimeter to be issued.
Recommendation:
Revise both portions of the Plan (State Section 9 and B/F IP-12) to specify what range of self-read-ing dosimeter (s) are to be issued to the Emergency Workers at the Connell EWAC.
13
Issue 2:
Improper use of dosimetry.
ARCA.
(B/ F94 - 4 )
(K.3.a.)
Discussion:
One worker in the vehicle monitoring area removed his self-reading dosimeter and placed it on a table.
He also wore his TLD incorrectly.
(Below the waist.)
Recommendation:
Provide additional training to the specific indi-vidual who did not follow appropriate Procedures.
Objective 18:
Demonstrate the adequacy of Procedures, facilities, equipment, and personnel for the radiological moni-toring, decontamination, and registration of evacu-ees.
Evaluation:
Met Narrative Summary:
Activation:
The EWAC Coordinator received notification of the SAE from the B/F EOC (simulated by controller) at 0830 and notified staff to report to the EWAC.
All staff were prepositioned in accordance with the Extent of Play Agreement.
The first staff arrived at the Connell EWAC at 0846 and immediately started preparations for receiving evacuees.
Necessary supplies for facility setup began arriving at 0905.
The EWAC was activated at 0958, after the minimum required staff had arrived.
The facility was declared operational at 1035 when radiological monitoring capabilities were established.
Vehicle Monitoring:
The vehicle monitoring area was staffed by four monitoring personnel, an RHP supervisor, a recorder and two vehicle parking attendants.
Additionally, one fire department staff member and fire truck were available to assist in vehicle decontamina-tion.
The vehicle monitoring RHP reported to the EWAC Coordinator's area at 0935, signed in, picked up Procedures and an Emergency Worker Kit, and proceeded to the vehicle monitoring and decontami-nation area where he inventoried the contents of a monitoring supply trunk which had been delivered to the area.
No survey instruments were in the supply trunk.
The vehicle monitoring RHP radioed a re-quest to the personnel monitoring RHP to send survey instruments to the vehicle monitoring area with a vehicle monitor or a runner.
Four CDV-700s 14
I were promptly delivered and instrument checks were performed.
Batteries were installed, the calibra-tion date was checked (May 8, 1994), and instru-ments were checked for proper operations by compar-ing check source readings on the X10 scale taken with the beta shield fully open to the range of readings posted on the instrument label.
For contamination control, the instrument probes were wrapped in thin plastic bags and, after having been told by the PHP, the vehicle monitors wore gloves.
The CDV-700s were equipped with earphones.
The vehicle monitoring and decontamination area was set up with a table to hold checklists and supplies and traffic cones for traffic control.
The vehicle monitoring staff utilized the CDV-700 instruments for initial vehicle monitoring.
A Ludlum Model 12-survey meter was available and used for vehicle surveys in the decontamination area.
The Ludlum Model 12 was within its calibration time and the RHP checked the instrument's response to a CDV-700 check source.
The Ludlum instrument did not have a check source response range posted on the instru-ment.
The Procedures (IP-12 and Section 9 of the State Plan) do not mention the use of the Ludlum Model 12 instrument for vehicle monitoring.
The vehicle monitoring personnel followed their checklists for activating the vehicle monitoring area.
The proper use of these checklists corrected a planning issue from a previous exercise (B/F 92-6 7).
Initially, the RHP was using draft Procedures, r
which were different from the Procedures the vehi-
~
cle monitors were using.
The controller provided a correct version of the Procedures to the RHP.
The first vehicle arrived at 1015.
Although the vehicle monitoring and decontamination area was prepared to receive vehicles, the EWAC had not been declared operational.
After contacting the EWAC Coordinator, the RHP was informed by radio that vehicle monitoring could begin because the remain-der of the EWAC would be operational by the time evacuees arrived at the personnel monitoring area.
Vehicle information, including the owner's name, vehicle license number, state, year, make, model, number of persons in the vehicle and whether decon-tamination was
- required, was recorded for all vehicles by a monitor assistant.
Two to four vehicle monitors checked each of the four vehicles processed during the drill.
The exterior of each vehicle was monitored, including the grill, wheel 15
areas and tires, bumpers, door handles, the hood, and the windshield.
A green vehicle tag was issued to the drivers of uncontaminated vehicles when monitoring was complete.
Contamination above the action level was detected on one vehicle and the driver was directed to " contaminated parking" where the vehicle was left for subsequent processing.
The vehicle monitors each demonstrated a slightly different monitoring technique.
The monitoring techniques ranged from good to needing improvement, i.e.,
moving the detector too fast or having the detector too close or too far from the monitored surface.
The RHP, however, was always alert and caught most of these survey prob-lems.
Any time the RHP noted the detectors coming into contact with the vehicle surface, he had the monitors check to see if the instrument's back-ground had changed or had them replace the plastic covering on the detector.
The use of appropriate monitoring techniques corrected an issue from a previous exercise (ARCA B/F 92-10).
All of the vehicle monitoring personnel were knowl-edgeable of the contamination limit of 60 counts per minute (cpm).
The addition of this contamina-tion limit to the Plan corrected a planning issue from a previous exercise (B/F 92-6).
However, the RHP used a limit of 100 cpm for the Ludlum instru-ment in the vehicle decontamination area.
This was not consistent with the vehicle decontamination sections of the Plan (it was appropriate for the evacuee decontamination areas).
If the Ludlum instrument is to be used in the vehicle decontami-nation area, it is recommended that the Plans and Procedures be changed to reflect this and specify the appropriate contamination limit in cpm to use with the Ludlum instrument.
All arriving vehicles were promptly monitored.
In the event of a backlog of vehicles, a parking area for unmonitored vehicles was available adjacent to the vehicle monitoring station.
Clean vehicles were issued stickers indicating they had been monitored and were allowed to continue to a parking area in front of the school while contaminated vehicles were directed to a parking area on the west side of the school ccmplex for decontamination at a later time.
Evacuees were given instructions on how to get to the reception area from the vari-ous parking areas by two parking attendants located 16
I' near the vehicle monitoring station.
However, the personnel traffic paths were not well marked.
One of the two parking attendants would better be utilized in the contaminated parking area to give further instructions to the evacuees.
Due to the temporary relocation of the vehicle monitoring area, the Extent of Play Agreement excluded this portion of the drill from evaluation.
Initial Evacuee Monitoring:
The initial monitoring area was set up in a hallway in accordance with the Plans and Procedures.
The inside RHP arrived at 0938 and began checking supplies which had been delivered previously.
Monitoring staff picked up a position specific binder which contained among other items, check-lists for their assignments.
The use of these checklists corrects a planning issue from a previ-ous exercise (B/F 92-7).
Monitoring staff began checking monitoring instruments and setting up the monitoring area at 1000.
Paper was placed on the floor to allow for easier decontamination and a step-off pad was established.
Radiation ribbon was strung to separate clean and potentially contami-nated areas.
Several CDV-700 instruments were available for use in this area of the EWAC.
All instruments were within calibration dates.
Batter-ies were installed and operational checks were performed.
During performance checks, one instru-ment was determined to be outside the ceopense range specified on the instrument label.
The monitor correctly made the decision that a particu-lar instrument should not be used.
The Dose Tracker overruled the monitor and issued an in-struction that the instrument was acceptable for use.
The Dose Tracker did not explain to the evaluators how this determination was made.
The probes on all instruments were encased in thin plastic and all instruments were used with ear-phones.
A table was set up to hold hand carried possessions during monitoring.
The inside RHP briefed the staff on trigger levels which would require decontamination.
All staff were aware of the trigger level of 60 cpm which is contained in the current Plan.
This corrects an issue from.a previous exercise (ARCA B/F 92-5).
Initially, one monitoring lane was established by two monitors who scanned each evacuee simulta-neously.
Three evacuees were processed in an 17
r j
average of 94 seconds each.
As additional evacuees arrived, a second monitoring lane was established by the other two monitors.
Processing of evacuees required 67 seconds and 69 seconds respectively.
The time demonstrated was in excess of that speci--
fied in the Plan; however, there was sufficient staff available to monitor the required planning basis for this facility within the 12 hour1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> require-ment.
The demonstrated monitoring rate corrects an issue from a previous exercise (ARCA B/F 92-3).
When the two monitoring lanes were in use a poten-tial cross-contamination problem was created with the process demonstrated.
When an individual was monitored and found to be above the trigger level, they were sent straight ahead to the decontamina-tion areas (male or female).
If an individual was clean (below the trigger level) they were in-structed to turn to the right to proceed to the registration area.
With only one monitoring lane, l
the demonstrated process is acceptable; however, with two lanes operating, clean individuals from the left lane would have to cross the potentially contaminated path created by contaminated individu-als from the right lane.
The Plan is not specific with regard to the traffic pattern in the initial monitoring area.
Hand-held possessions carried by either evacuees or Emergency Workers were monitored either as they were held or by placing the posses-sion on the table adjacent to the step-off pad.
I This consistent monitoring of possessions corrects an issue from a previous exercise (ARCA B/F 92-4).
Possessions found to be contaminated were bagged for later decontamination and a receipt was given to the owner.
If an evacuee was found to be clean; i.e.,
below the trigger level, the individual was given a green tag with the word " monitored" and was allowed to enter the clean area of the EWAC.
Individuals found to be contaminated were directed to the decontamination area for a more extensive survey and decontamination.
Clean evacuees were given an information sheet after being allowed to proceed toward the registration area of the EWAC.
This sheet provides an explanation of the monitoring and decontamination process at the EWAC.
Providing this information corrects an issue from a previous exercise (ARCA C-90-9) ; however, issuance after the evacuees had been processed in the vehicle monitor-ing area and in the initial monitoring area is of little value.
18
The Dose Tracker was located in the initial monitoring area as recommended in the Plan.
How-ever, the single Emergency Worker who was processed during the monitoring process was not immediately identified.
The worker did seek out the Dose Tracker af ter having been cleared by the decontami-nation area of the EWAC.
All Emergency Workers assigned to the EWAC were correctly processed through the Dose Tracker during the close out of the EWAC.
It is recommended that Emergency Workers be reminded to check in with the Dose Tracker at the time of initial monitoring.
The Dose Tracker also needs to be more aware of the need to identify Emergency Workers as they are processed through the initial monitoring area.
Decontamination Area:
The decontamination area staff demonstrated the I
ability to perform decontamination of evacuees and Emergency Workers in accordance with their Proce-dures.
The staff consisted of three monitors and two assistant monitors in the female decontamina-tion area and three monitors and one assistant monitor in the male decontamination area.
Separate male and female locker rooms with showers are utilized for the decontamination areas.
Contamination control measures utilized included wearing gloves and booties, covering the instrument probes with thin plastic, and covering the walkways from the initial monitoring area into the decontam-ination area with paper.
Prior to beginning decon-
[
tamination monitoring, the Ludlum Model 12 count l
rate meters with 44-9 GM pancake probes were checked for proper operation and for response to a check source.
The "EWAC Decontamination Monitor l
Checklist" was completed by all monitors which closes planning issue B/F 92-7.
Evacuees and Emergency Workers were monitored upon arrival in the decontamination area by the monitor while the assistant monitor recorded the required information on the " Personnel Contamination Chart-ing Worksheet."
Correct monitoring procedures and f
completion of the chart were adequately demon-l strated thus closing previous issues ARCA B/F 92-8 f'
and ARCA B/F 92-9.
l t
Inconsistencies between Section 9 of the State Plan and IP-12 of the B/F County Plan, regarding the l
l 19 l
l
" Personnel Contamination Charting Worksheets," was noted.
This could cause confusion and failure to record all necessary information if it is not resolved.
Decontaminated personnel were provided with tempo-rary clothing, if necessary, given a green "moni-tored" tag, a copy of the monitoring information, j
and sent to the registration area of the EWAC.
Contaminated possessions were either decontaminated immediately or placed in a plastic bag,'the bag sealed and tagged, and a " claim" slip given to the owner.
Monitors verbalized the correct procedure for referring an individual to a medical facility if the third decontamination effort failed to lower i
contamination levels below the trigger point.
The decontamination areas had clearly defined contami-nated waste receptacles, appropriate cleaning j
agents, showers and sinks.
Registration and Referral to Congregate Care Area:
The Red Cross Area and Registration Desk were well marked and comfortable for evacuees to register.
All individuals entering the area were checked for the green
" monitored" labels on their chests.
Evacuees were registered quickly and efficiently on an ARC form in triplicate.
All questions were answered or listed on a sheet of paper for the Shelter Manager to answer.
All messages were listed on a sheet which would then be given to a relative or friend when they came through the registration process.
Consideration was given to l
the frail or elderly who needed assistance getting to the First Aid Area.
An original registration form marked " Shelter Master File" was retained at the Registration Desk in an Alphabetical File.
The
}
form contained the name, address, telephone number, j
and complete documentation of evacuee, family, and medical problem, if any.
Information left by evacuees at the Registration Desk was available for use in locating and reuniting families.
l 1
Issue 1:
Use of Outdated Procedures.
ARCA (J.12.)
i l
(B/ F94-5)
Discussion:
Initially, the RHP in the vehicle monitoring area, was using draft Procedures which were different from the Procedures the vehicle monitors were l
using.
The controller provided a correct version l
of the Procedures to the RHP.
l f
20 1
r Recommendation:
Train staff responsible for maintaining position specific binders to ensure that current Procedures are contained in the binders at all times.
Issue 2:
Use of Out of Specification Instrumentation.
ARCA.
(B/F94-6)
(H.10., J.12.)
Discussion:
During performance
- checks, one instrument was determined to be outside the response range speci-fied on the instrument label.
The monitor cor-rectly made the decision that a particular instru-ment should not be used.
The Dose Tracker over-ruled the monitor and issued an insruction that the instrument was acceptable for use.
Recommendation:
Emphasize in training the importance of using only instruments which are operating within the parame-ters specified during calibration so that incor-rectly operting instruments are not used.
Issue 3:
Provision of Informational Material.
Plan Issue.
(B/F94-7)
(J.10.h., J.12.)
i Discussion:
The informational sheet, which includes general descriptions of the Monitoring and Decontamination Procedures for vehicles and individuals, was pro-vided to evacuees after they had been processed in the vehicle monitoring area and in the initial monitoring area.
The information was of little use at that point.
Recommendation:
Revise the Plan to require the information to be provided in the vehicle monitoring area when evacu-ees first arrive at the EWAC.
Issue 4:
Plan Inconsistency.
Plan Iscue.
(J.12)
(B/F94-8)
Discussion:
The various parts of the Plan (State Section 9 and B/F IP-12) are not consistent.
The State Plan specifies the use of Figure 9.6a, page 9-25, to record data obtained in the decontamination area of the EWAC.
The use of Figure 9.6b, page 9-26, is not referenced.
B/F IP-12, Checklist 15, specifies the use of Attachment X which is identical to Figure 9.6b for the same purpose.
Also, B/F IP-12, Attachment O.
states that survey results are re-corded on a form which is not in the County Plan but which has the same title as Figure 9.6a of the Section 9 of the State Plan.
21
-. - _ - ~ _ _ _ -
Recommendation:
Review forms and determine if both forms are needed or if the two forms can be combined into one.
Modify all portions of the Plan accordingly.
In any event, ensure that the various parts of the response Plan are consistent.
Objective 19:
Demonstrate the adequacy of facilities, equipment, supplies, personnel, and Procedures for congregate care of evacuees.
Evaluation:
Met Narrative 4
Summary:
The EWAC at Connell successfully demonstrated the-adequacy of facilities, equipment, supplies, per-
- sonnel, and Procedures for congregate care of evacuees.
8 The responsible agency for managing the CCC/ Shelter was the ARC.
Other agencies (simulated) who as-sisted the ARC included the Salvation Army (feed-ing) and Carondelet (mental health).
All other services were provided in house by ARC.
The shelter was activated at 0950, and operational I
at 1035, after receiving a request from the Radia-tion Monitors (immediately prior to 1035) to rear-range the tables in order to accommodate Monitored Evacuees and Decontaminated Evacuees.
At 1001, the Shelter Manager received a copy of the first EBS message (Tape A-1 Orange) which recom-mends precautionary evacuation of three schools and certain recreation areas.
At 1024 he received a copy of the second EBS message (Tape E-1 Orange) which recommends evacuation of Section 1.
-He had not received any information regarding the event status.
Therefore, when asked questions regarding the Emergency Classification Level (ECL), he had no answers.
At 1157, still having not received any information regarding the ECL, he sent a written message, via runner, to the EWAC Coordinator asking the ECL status and the number of evacuees to be expected.
At 1105 the Shelter Manager received a
- notice, via runner, stating that the EWAC was activated at 0835 and operational at 1035.
He received a second message, a partial answer to his previous message.
The message stated that at 0855 they were at a General Emergency, a release was in 22
..,.. ~ _ _,
r progress, and the section was being evacuated-(did not state which section).
According to the Shelter Manager the capacity of the shelter was approximately 400 persons.
They were expecting approximately 300 evacuees (this information was received later).
The facility had the capability to accommodate disabled evacuees.
There were other shelters available in the area, in case this facility exceeded its capacity.
Essential services (Shelter; Food; Sanitation l
Services; Family Assistance; Child Care; Medical Care; First Aid) were available for evacuees.
Staff available for these services were simulated, j
except for managerial personnel, nurses, and regis-l tration clerks.
The center had allocated space for essential support services (i. e. emergency medical care, storage of food, etc.).
All services and resources were available for the center according to the ARC planning guidelines (per interview with the Shelter Manager).
Necessary supplies were available including paper products, heaters and fans.
Registration supplies were utilized in the drill.
The shelter was supplied with hand-held radios for communication.
At 1045 the portable radios were removed and replaced with a runner system.
The runner system was not accommodating.
The runners were not consistently present/available when neces-sary.
The Procedures state that the shelter will use ham radios and CB radios.
However, the Extent of Play Agreement allowed this to be simulated.
The Shelter Manager needed'the assistance of other staff to demonstrate that the center had the re-sources to provide the services and accommodations consistent with ARC planning guidelines.
Because of the Shelter Manager's lack of knowledge of i
Procedures and lack of information, ARCA C90-7 l
could not be recommended for closure.
Staff demon-i strated the procedures to ensure that evacuees had l
been monitored for contamination and were decontam-l
).
inated prior to entering the shelter.
They regis-l tered and tracked the evacuees entering the facil-
)
i ity.
All activities described in the demonstration criteria for this objective were carried out in accordance with the Plan, unless deviations were l
provided for in the Extent of Play Agreement.
23
T 4
No new issues identified.
Objective 22:
Demonstrate the adequacy of Procedures, for the monitoring and decontamination of Emergency Work-ers, equipment, and vehicles.
Evaluation:
Met Narrative Summary:
The Evaluation, Narrative
- Summary, and Issues reported on Objective 18 also encompass / pertain to Objective 22.
1 24 l
"7 3.0
SUMMARY
OF DRILL INADEQUACIES Connell EWAC Drill (6/25/94)
Issue Milestone No.
Type Description Recommendation Date C90-7 ARCA No periodic briefing at Train staff to conduct periodic 1996 CCC/ Shelter.
(A.l.d.)
briefings.
B/F92-11 Plan No Alerting Procedures Develop Alerting Procedures, revise May 1995 Issue for monitors.
(E.2.)
the Plan and train the staff.
B/F94-3 Plan Dosimeter range not Revise both portions of the Plan (State-May 1995 Issue specified.
(K.3.a.)
Section 9 and B/F IP-12) to specify what range of self-reading dosimeter (s) are to be issued to the Emergency Workers at EWACs.
B/F94-4 ARCA Improper use of dosimetry.
Provide additional training to the spec-1996
(:K. 3. a. )
ific individual who did not follow appro-priate procedures.
B/F94-5 AFCA Use of outdated proce-Train staff responsible for maintaining 1996 dures. (J.12.)
position specific binders to assure that current Procedures are contained in the i
binders at all times.
25
3.0
SUMMARY
OF DRILL INADEQUACIES Connell EWAC Drill (6/25/94)- Cont.
Issue Milestone No.
Type Description Recommendation Date B/F94-6 ARCA Use of out-of-specification Emphasize'in training the importance 1996 instrumentation.
of using only instruments which are (H.10., J.12.)
operating within the parameters speci-fled during calibration, so that incor-rectly operating instruments are not used.
B/F94-7 Plan Provision of informational Revise the Plan to require the infor-May 1995 Issue material.
(J.10.h.,
J.12.)
mation to be distributed in the vehicle monitoring area when evacuees first arrive at the EWAC.
B/F94-8 Plan Plan inconsistency. (J.}2.)
Review forms and determine if both May 1995 Issue forms are needed or if the two forms can be combined into one.
Modify all portions of the Plan accordingly.
In any event, ensure that the various parts of the response Plan are con-sistent.
26
_.- _-. -, _ _ ~
APPENDIX A PRE-EXERCISE CORRESPONDENCE December 7, 1993 letter from Franklin County Emergency Management to FEMA RX.
u.
OFFICE OFEMERGENCY MANAGEMENT FRANKLIN COUNTY 1016 North Fourth Avenue Pasco, Washington 99301-3776 e
(509) 545-3546 Fax (509) 545-2130 December 7,1993 larry E. Moore, Chief Technological llazards Branch FEMA Region X, Federal Regional Center 130 228th Street,8 W.
Bothe'1, WA 980219796
SUBJECT:
Graded Exerrise for Connell EWAC
Dear Mr. Moore:
Congratulations on your new assignment with FEMA Region X! I look forward to meeting you, as does our entire staff here at the Ofnce of Emergency Management in Frankhn County. We hope your transition will be an easy one for you. We anticipate building a strong working relationship with you and hope to continue the spirit of cooperation and support we have heretofore erdoyed with Mr. Richard Donovan.
In this spirit of cooperation, I would hke to submit to you for your approval the date of June 25,1994 for our graded exercise for the Connell EWAC. This date has been submitted and approved by the school principal and verified with Department of Ilealth. If a conflict exists, please notify me as soon as possible so we may work towards a more acceptable date. We will be conducting a prelmunary walk through exercise on April 23,1994 in order to provide an added opportunity for some hands on training and to smooth out any rough edges.
Once again, congratulations on your appointment and we look forward to working with you in the future.
SINCERELY, Q7 PEGGY BENNETI' REP PLANNER FNF LEAD A-1
f.
February 14, 1994 letter from FEMA RX to Franklin County Emergency Management.
Federal Emergency Mr.nagement Agency s
Region X Federal Regional Center 130 228th Street, S.W.
BothclI, WA 911021-9796 February 14,1994 Ms. Peggy llennett REP Planner-FNF Lead Franklin County OEM Bldg. 57 Airport Industrial Park Pasco, Washington 99301
Dear Ms. Dennett:
Thank you for your letter of December 7,1993, and the kind words expressed. I look forward to working with you and all the Franklin County Emergency Management staff.
We have approved and scheduled the June 25,1994, date for the graded drill at the Connell Emergency Worker / Assistance Center (EWAC).
Please meet the milestones required for our REP Exercise Process so we can complete our assigned pre-drill tasks on schedule.
Feel free to call if you have any questions.
Sincerely, Onginal signed by Larry F Mnom Larry E. Moore j
RAC Chairman 1
cc: Diane Offord, WA EM Itob Mooney, WA D0li Robert J. Pate, NRC llob Martin, Benton County Don Larson, SS Jason Zeller, EFSEC A-2
Objectives and Limitations, submitted March 25, 1994, by Franklin County Emergency Management.
RECEIVED WNP-2 MAR 2 51994 EMERGENCY WORKER AND ASSISTANCE CENTER OBJECTIVES AND LIMITATIONS FEMA REGIONX 1994 Objective 1 Mobilization of Emergency Personnel Demonstrate the capability to alert and fully mobilire personnel for both emergency facilities and field operations. Demonstrate the capability to activate and staff emergency facilities for emergency operations.
Limitation:
EWAC personnel will be prepositioned. Response time will be waived for the purpose of the exercise.
Ooen Plannina issue: B/F92-11 Planning Issue No alerting procedures for monitors.
Objective 4 Communications Demonstrate the capability to communicate with all appropriate emergency personnel at f acilities and in the field.
Ooen ARCAj C90 7 ARCA No periodic briefing at CCC. (A.I.d)
C90 9 ARCA No distribution of information sheets AC (J.12)
Objective 5 Emergency Worker Exposure Control Demonstrate the capability to continuously monitor and control radiation exposure to emergency workers.
Ooen ARCA: B/F92 2 ARCA Proper use of self-reading dosimeters. (K 3.b)
Ooen Plannina issue: B/F921 Insufficient quantity of dosimetry kits, (K.3.a)
Objective 18 Reception Center-Monitoring, Decontamination and Registration Demonstrate the adequacy of procedures, f acilities, equipment, and personnel, and personnel for the radiological monitoring, decontamination, and registration of evacuees.
Ooen ARCA: B/F92 3 ARCA - Inadequate monitoring performance. (J.12)
Ooen ARCA: B/F92-4 ARCA Inadequate monitoring performance. (J.12)
Osn ARCA: B/F92-5 ARCA Inadequate monitoring performance. (J.12)
Ooen Plannino lism; B/F92 6 Inadequate trigger levels. (J.9)
Omn ARCA; B/F92 8 ARCA Inadequate survey women's decontamination area survey techniques. (J.12)
Ooen ARCA: inadequate vehicle molitoring process. (J,12)
Objective 19 Congregate Care Demonstrate the adequacy of f acetities, equipmen', supplies, personnel, and procedures for congregate care of evacuees.
1 A-3
e Otijecnna and UndLadoes WNP-2 BWAC 1994 Objective 22 - Emergency Workers,-Equipment and Vehicles Monitoring ad Decontamination Demonstrate the adequacy of procedures for the monitoring and decontamination of emergency workers, equipment, and vehicles.
Limitation:
Actual decontamination will not be demonstrated procedural knowledge will be simulated by instructions to evacuees and answering evaluation questions.
Open Plannina Istug; B/F92 7 Planning issue Incomplete procedures (J.12) i Qoen ARCA: D/F92 9 ARCA Inadequate documentation survey forms. (J.12)
_Onen Plannina issue: B/F921 Planning issue Insufficient quantity of dosimetry kits.
(K.3.b) t EKIENT OF PLAY:
1.
Traffic control demonstration will be confined to the school property. No traffic control measures will be demonstrated on routes leading to the EWAC.
2.
The EWAC will be set up for full operation. Each designated initial monitor will consecutively monitor six evacuees.
3.
Actual decontamination of evacuees will agi be demonstrated, but the procedural knowledge to do so will be demonstrated by instructions to evacuees and by answering evaluator questions.
4.
Demonstration of registration of evacuees will be limited to 50 porcent of full staffing.
5.
Evacuee's possessions will be monitored for contamination and either decontaminated or retained for further action as outlined in the procedures.
6 6.
Benton-Franklin EOC will not be activated. Communication to EOC will be through i
the Control Cell.
7.
EWAC personnel will be prepositioned. Response time will be waived for the purpose of the exercise.
8.
Individuals with fixed contamination levels above the action levels will not be transported to a medical facility.
9.
Actual decontamination of vehicles will ngi be demonstrated, but the procedural knowledge to do so will be demonstrated by answering evaluators
- Questions.
2 A-3a
(;
April 6, 1994, letter- f rom FENGL RX to Franklin County Emergency Management.
Federal Emergency Management Agency negion x Feeleral llegional Center 130 228th Street, S.W.
Ilothell, WA 98021 9796 April 6,
1994 Mr. Andrew Dixon, Director l
Franklin County Emergency Management Bldg. 57 Airport Industrial Park Pasco, WA 99301 l
Subject:
WNP-2 EWAC Drill, June 25, 1994
Dear Mr. Dixon:
I have reviewed the proposed objectives and limitations for the Connell EWAC drill that Peggy Bennett submitted to us on March 25, 1994.
I agree with the general scope and extent of play as proposed.
I believe the following objectives and points of review to be evaluated at the June drill are consistent with your proposal.
Obiectives Points of Review (Ref: REP-15, 9/91) 5 1-7, 14.1 18 2-11, 15-39 19 1,
2, 4-16, 17.2, 17.3 22 1-6, 8-33 f
In addition to the above points of review, FEMA will evaluate the implementation of corrective actions for the following outstanding r
issues identified in previous drills.
C90-7, ARCA - No periodic briefing at CCC.
C90-9, ARCA - No distribution of information sheets.
B/F92-1, Planning Issue - Insufficient dosimetry kits.
B/F92-2, ARCA - Improper use of self-reading dosimeters.
B/F92-3, ARCA - Inadequate monitoring performance.
B/F92-4, ARCA - Inadequate monitoring performance.
B/F92-5, ARCA - Inadequate monitoring performance.
B/F92-6, Planning Issue - Inadequate trigger levels.
B/F92-7, Planning Issue - Incomplete procedures.
B/F92-8, ARCA - Inadequate survey in women's decon. area.
B/F92-9, ARCA - Inadequate documentation survey forms.
B/F92-10, ARCA - Inadequate vehicle monitoring process.
B/F92-11, Planning Issue - No alerting procedures for monitors.
I am also pleased to inform you that, as requested, your March 25, 1994 draft EWAC procedures will be considered "the plan of record" for the June 25 drill. Our preliminary review of this revision to section IP-12 of the Benton and Franklin Counties Emergency Response Plan indicates a vast improvement over the previous version.
It is obvious that a great deal of time and effort went into this revision.
We will provide our comments on the plan revision as soon as possible following the June drill in an effort to expedite it's approval.
A-4 1
b e,
--.m n
>-.--n m
(
2 Since the Benton-Franklin EOC will not be activated and response teams will not be dispatched during the June EWAC drill, the extent of play for the September WNP-2 full scale exercise should include demonstration of the following objectives and points of review.
Obiective Points of Review (Ref: REP-15, 9/91) 5 8-14 18 1
19 3,
17.1 If you have any questions call me at (206) 487-4743.
I look forward to working with you and your staff at the practices, drills, and exercise this year.
Sincerely, Originaldgoed by:
Larry E. Moore Larry E.
Moore RAC Chairman cc:
Bob Martin, Benton County EM Diane Offord, WA EM Dob Mooney, WA DOH Don Larson, SS A-4a
r i
l April 30, 1994, letter from Franklin County Emergency Management to FEMA RX.
M
}
o OFFICE OFEMERGENCYMANAGEMENT FRANKLIN COUNTY 1016 North Fourth Avenue a
Pasco, Washington 993013776 (509) 545 3546 Fax (509) 545 2130 April 30,1994 Mr. Larry E Moore RAC Chairman FEMA Region X Federal Regional Center 130 228th Street, SW Bothell, WA 98021-9796 Dear Mr. Moore.
Subject:
SCENARIO PACKAGE FOR JUNE 25,1994 EWAC DRILL
Reference:
Letter dated April 6,1994, LE Moore (FEMA) to AS Dixon (Franklin County),
"WNP-2 EWAC Drill, June 25,1994" Attached is the fmal Scenario Package for the WNP-2 EWAC Drill scheduled for June 25,1994.
Per our recent discussion, Objectives 1 and 4 have been removed from the package. Also, enclosed is an updated version ofIP-12 which has been revised to reflect changes made as a result of FEMA recommendations made subsequent to the April 23,1994 practice drill. It is our understanding that the drafi EWAC procedures contained herein will now be considered the " plan of record" Please provide any comments at your earliest convenience.
Should you have any questions or concerns regarding the attached submittal, please contact me at (509) 545 3546. Thank you for all your assistance in our preparation for this drill.
Sincerely, W
Peggy ennett REP Planner, FNF Lead Attachment cc DE Larson, Supply System RC Martin, Benton County EM A-5
(,
~.,
May 25, 1994, letter from FEMA RX to Washington Department of Health, i
May 25, 1994
(;
r Robert Mooney, Supervisor Nuclear Safety Section WA Department of Health 1511 Third Avenue - Suite #700 Seattle, Washington 98101
Dear Mr. Mooney:
This letter acknowledges receipt of your May 18, 1994, transmittal of Section 9, Washington State Response Procedures for Radiation Emergencies.
These revised procedures will be the Plan of Record for the June 25 EWAC Exercise.
We note Section 9 is not marked DRAFT, but is missing signatures in the upper portion of page 9-0.
I assume when it is incorporated into the State Procedures you will have completed the signature portion of page 9.0.
Sincerely, Onginalsigned by:
LarryB Monte Larry E. Moore RAC Chairman cc:
S.
Denbrook, WA CTED/EM B. Martin, Benton County EM A.
Dixon, Franklin County EM Don Larson, SS RX RAC George E.
Bickerton, USDA Judy Tokarz-Hames, DOE-RL l
Dean Kunihiro, NRC RIV-California I
Jerry Leitch, EPA l
I Ken Miles, FDA I
Bennie Walthall, DOT f
Gene Dates, NRC-RIV-Texas 1
l l
A-6
(
May 27, 1994, letter from Franklin County Emergency Management to FEMA RX.
O?
BENTON AND FRANKLIN COUNTIES EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT OFFICES 503-586-1451 509-545-3546 May 27, 1994 Eleanor Castle FEMA Regicn X 130 228th Street SW Bothell, Washington 98021-7996
Dear Eleanor:
The FEMA graded exercise is Saturday, June 25 at 8:00 a.m.
Our ability to set up and make operational the Congregate Care Center and Emergency Worker Assistance Center will be observed and graded.
The purpose of this graded exercise is to determine areas that may have been overlooked in planning, to familiarize each of us with the roles we will take in the unlikely event that we must activate our shelters, to assist with keeping inventories and supplies current and to expose our staffs to people they will work with in emergency situations.
Participation in this exercise by key responso agencies like the North Franklin School District is critical to the success of the exercise, but more importantly, to provide assurance the.t our agencies can adequately respond to the needs of the commun.ty in times of emergency.
The following areas of concern need to be defined: we must identify staff, brief them on their roles, review site maps and reach concurrence on space ' requirements. This agency will need to have a final number of participants by June 10.
If you do not know what the staffing needs are please coordinate with me.
Timely submittal of this will allow us to identif y positions not, covered and determine supply needs for the exercise.
Those participating are asked to meet at Michael Jay's Restaurant at 710 S. Columbia in Connell at 8t45 a.m.
for a player / controller initial briefing. For those who are interested there will be a continental breakfast provided at 8:15 a.m.
If you will be attending the breakfast or need transportation from Franklin County Emergency Management to Connell please call Scott Fisher at 545-3546.
Lunch will also be provided following the exercise.
I look forward to meeting with you and will be contacting you soon to set a time and date.
RECEIvg9 Sincerely, b
i
/
/
I&MA.It[Q:0Mk Pegg Jen ett, REP Planner FtJF-Lead f rank t 6n Count y (M
$ce on ( p ty in 7
1016 N. 4th Am.108 P.O. Dos 6144 E ceww i c a, wA 99336 0144 Pasco, WA 99301
June 3, 1994, memorandum from FEMA RX to Selected Distribution.
Federal Emergency Management Agency Region X Federal Regional Center 130 228th Street, S.W.
{
Bothell. WA 9802197%
June 3, 1994 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Susan May, WA DOH Andrew Dixon, Franklin County EM Larry Aeschliman, SS fLaEIy.C/*Wwr FROM:
E. Moore f
RAC Chairman I
Subject:
Change in Vehicle Monitoring Location for June 25 Connell EWAC Drill This letter is intended to clarify the comments I provided during the subject conference call on May 31, 1994.
I understand why the drill participants are concerned about the forced switch in location for the vehicle monitoring and related parking for the Connell EWAC Drill.
I again wish to assure you that any direct effects this may cause during the June 25 drill will nat result in an adverse finding.
I Following are examples of direct effects I see as possible results j
due to the change in location.
I would anticipate perhaps a slight i
increase in the time required for set-up and staff orientation.
I also recognize that the temporary location may not be satisfactory in size and configuration. We will overlook this at the drill but, the state and county plans should be revised soon after the construction has been completed at the school.
i I would not cbject to additional staff for vehicle or evacuee traffic control.
I would also not object to the Drill Manager supervising the directing of the first vehicle or first evacuees from the parking area to the reception center.
I i
My concern is that everyone clearly understand that most of the l
objectives and ARCAs to be demonstration in the drill, including those in the vehicle monitoring area, should not be affected by this change in location. The vehicle monitors should be able to demonstrate proper monitoring technique, as well as knowledge of their equipment and procedures, regardless of location. The others l
in this area, such as traffic control and decontamination staff, should be able to demonstrate their knowledge of the plans and procedures at any locations as long as the basic functional areas called for in the plan are present and identified to the staff.
Please provide me a copy of your plan for the temporary vehicle monitoring and parking areas you intend to use for the June 25 drill.
I will share this with the evaluators at the pre-drill briefing on June 24.
I will also provide them a copy of this letter and will emphasis the key points.
A-8
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ = _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
f-2 I appreciate the additional time and effort this late development will cause for all of you in preparation for the drill.
I'm confident your hard work will resu?* in a successful drill.
cc; Gene Dates, 11RC RIV Drill Evaluators 1
A-8a
I o
June 21, 1994, letter from Washington Department of Health to FEMA RX.
3 kElsilN( M. (.llilill 0
ke retary STAit Of WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT Of ILEAL 11I I5II Third Asenue - suoite citatl Seattle, Washin) fon 41410i Larry E. Moore RAC Chairperson Federal Emergency Management Agency Federal Regional Center 130 - 228th Street SW Bothell, WA 98021-9796
Dear Mr. Moore,
Attached are the updated drawings for the Connell Emergency Worker Assistance Center, We are now using two diagrams to show EWAC setup. The Personnel Monitoring diagram has only been modified slightly to show the evacuee traffic route. The second diagram shows the new temporary parking setup to be used on June 25. If you have any questions and/or comments, please call (206/464-7639).
Pi
)
1
/ / I !,/
L.
. ' H '8 l
ll: t(llfv Tracey R. Patterson Nuclear Safety Section ec:
Bob Mooney, WA DOH Susan May, WA DOH Larry Aeschilman, WPPSS Andrew Dixon, FCEM Attachments (2)
A-9
e I
t I
i i WOMEN'S M EN'S DECON DECON
[
g g
AREA l 8 AREA j
=
1
' i l
. V l
5 I
i i
hot itne l
19 21 25 f
e,,
unmonitored Clean waiting /
waiting area l
28 Red Cross j
student Edergency' Worker
,q registration area i
f center / !
20 1 Area
- ,,h,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,T.........
c l ] 22 23 24 g
tracking o
station
{
area 8 :"
i G Building x
l
,--_--_--_--_--_--_--_--------_-----_----J i
1 L
3..I.i ' rest j
~
I KEY I
_. _-> evacuee traf fic l
het Ilse I barrier
- - - - - + - contarmlaaled traffic g
Sagn..
3
-=*- clean traffic
.J. _.J e==cs<ow.t =r:c r4 l
0 0
C@NNIEILIL IH[IIGIE[ SClH[O@IL EWAC ENTRANCE VEHtCLE W. CLARK ST.
Emergency Worker ENTRANCE E ni,. nc.
7
,y; vemsnanuwnswr'annwe s
+
if MONITORING n
. i' I STATION N A &
--. EMERGENCY WORKER /
CLEAN PARKING i
y*gh
/N l $$h@f. gw)^?,
d R
'." - M f
\\
I p'
9'*-
- W Ns -y d.h
( S. ' ',
UNMONITORED pd-3 3
4 e
I.i' k
[ ~~ l N }*
PARKING 3
' SLhf.
~
l1ll" l* We
.i l
7,
[--
'M
'^D"O i foot traffic l j
I Coa "b
g e
Red Cross lEmhefefIj
\\
.' i n d.
__;. j l"OLD GYM"]
T2M 1 9':T~~
l ^ ~:
y' mn P
c
' L ',' ;'t h,1 j.
(
L f'
' ?
- r. -
~
N,,.. ; :.
e
,s u.
o h.
kJ.)dib;NN
_hkI!11
-- t a 7r6 '
'** d Not part of EWAC Barriers 1 Traffic Control Cones h information Sign
Foot Traf fic
,a
- a APPENDIX B ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AC Assistance Center ARC American Red Cross ARCA Areas Requiring Corrective Action ARFI Areas Recommended for Improvement B/F Benton/ Franklin CCC Congregate Care Center CFR Code of Federal Regulations cpm Counts Per Minute DOH/DRP Department of Health / Division of Radiation Protection DWI Disaster Welfare Inquiries ECL Emergency Classification Level EEM Exercise Evaluation Methodology EMD Emergency Management Division I
EOC Emergency Operations Center EWAC Emergency Worker and Assistance Center FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FNF Fixed Nuclear Facility GE General Emergency INEL Idaho National Engineering Laboratory KI Potassium Iodide (Thyroid Blocking Agent)
MOU Memorandum of Understanding mR Milliroentgen (s)
MSRV Main Steam Relief Valve l
NRC U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission I
NUREG NRC documents reference PAR Protective Action Recommendation (s)
REM Roentgen Equivalent Man R
Roentgen (s)
RAC Regional Assistance Committee RHP Radiation Health Physicist SAE Site Area Emergency SGT Standby Gas Treatment TLD Thermoluminescent Dosimeter B-1 l
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _