ML20108D768
| ML20108D768 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 12/07/1984 |
| From: | Krimm R Federal Emergency Management Agency |
| To: | Jordan E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20108D772 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8412130392 | |
| Download: ML20108D768 (12) | |
Text
..
g Federal Emergency Management Agency Washington, D.C. 20472 O
O DEC - 71984 MEMORANDUM FOR: Edward L. Jordan, Director Division of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering Response Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission FROM:
ic ar rimm Assistant Associate Director Natural and Technological Hazards
SUBJECT:
Exercise Report and Schedule of Corrective Actions for the March 21, 1984, Exercise of the Offsite Radiological Emergency Preparedness Plans for the Arkansas Nuclear One Power Station Attached are two copies of the Exercise Report of the March 21,1984, joint exercise of the offsite radiological emergency preparedness plans for the Arkansas Nuclear One Power Station. 1he State of Arkansas and the Counties of Pope, Logan, Johnson, Yell, and Conway participated in the exercise.
The exercise report dated August 3,1984, was prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Region VI staff.
Also attached is a schedule of corrective actions for the deficiencies identified during the exercise. The corrective actions proposed by the State of Arkansas are appropiate and adequate to address the deficiencies.
The State and local plans are adequate to protect the public health and safety and there is reasonable assurance that appropriate protective measures can be taken offsite in the event of a radiological emergency;
)
therefore, the 44 CFR 350 approval will remain in effect.
If you have any questions, please contact Robert S. Wilkerson, Chief, Technological Hazards Division, at 287-0200.
Attachment As Stated 8412130392 841207 PDRADOCK05000g h
F Q
TAllif. 2 1)eficiency Tracking and Schedule for Corrective Artions FEMA Evaluation of State.and 1.ocal Deliciencies and FEMA /RAC Proposed Corrective Actions-Actual Reconusendations for State (S) and Local (L)
Compl et ion and Determination of Completion Corrective Actions Proposed Corrective Actions Date Adequacy or Inadequacy Date CATECORY "A" DEFICIENCIES - NONE CATECORY "B" DEFICIENCIES:
State Emergency Operations Center - Conway 1.
Description The Covernor's 2
State of Emergency proclama-tion was not comenunicat ed from the State EOC to the TOCC through the proper com-j munication channel (NUREC-0654 II, A.3).
to a
decomumendation The State State will see that this is 5/1/85 i
EOC should promptly comununi-done properly at all future j
cate the notice and details exercises.
of the Governor's State of Emergency Proclamation through the prope r comunun i-I cations channel to TOCC.
4
]
Technical Operations Control l
Center (TOCC f
2.
Desc ri pt ion s The State EOC The AR Dept. of Health will 5/1/85 fella will observe again was not intorn.ed of the assign a staff member at the in FY85 exercise.
Cencral Emergency until one TOCC to notify the State EOC l
hour and 45 minutes af ter it at Conway of EAL and PAD occurred (NUREC-0654, II, info by commercial telephone.
{
D.4).
Plans being anended to reflect i
this change.
TAHi E 2 (Cont'd)
FEMA Evaluation of State and Local Deficiencies and FEMA /RAC Proposed Corrective Actions Actual Recommendations for State (S) and Local (L)
Compl et ion and Determination of Completion Corrective Actions Proposed Corrective Actions Date Adequacy or Inadequacy Date Recommendation:
The TOCC should promptly inform the State EOC of all emergency i
status changes.
3.
De sc ri pt ion:
Protective A directive was issued at 1300' Closed Explanation by State Closed Action Recomunenda t i on s were for cattle in certain areas of is satisfactory.
not effectively coordinated Pope County to be placed on based on information re-stored feed. At 1415, A recommendation was issued which RELAXED the recommendation ceived (NUREC-0654, II, E.5 made at 1300, but did not RESCIND it.
The relaxed recommendation reduced the size E.7).
of the affected areas in Pope County, but did not eliminate the need to have cattle Recommendation:. Proteciton in some areas of the county placed on stored feed. Apparently, the observer assumed Action Recommendations that " relaxed" meant " rescind".
That assumption was wrong.
The news briefing held should be improved by TOCC at 1510 at the EOF stating that cattle in parts of Pope County were still on stored $
. Provide for better com-LO feed was, therefore, correct.
munications.
4.
De sc ri pt ion:
At the time See Attachment #1.
3/21/04 lie accept your explanation 4
the TOCC requested evacua-of what and why it happened.
l tion of the London School Also agree that it is a re-they did not call the Pope sponsibilty of TOCC to do, but i
County EOC concerning their feel since there was some dif-actions.
Local plans (Sec.
ference in interpretation of the VI, 8.9) call for the Local plans by local officials at Pope EOC to notify schools of
& Johnson County that the local potential evacuation after plans Part VI B.9. should be ex-notification of an etert panded to say this is to act as a (NUREC-0654, II, J.10).
back-up call to the TOCC or some-thing similar.
i i
1 i
. TAltl1H 3 (Cont'd)
FEMA Evaluation of State and 1.ocal Deficiencies and FEMA /RAC Proposed corrective Actions Actual Recomunendations for State (S) and Local (L)
Completion and Determination of Compl et ion Corrective Actions Proposed Corrective Actions Date Adequacy or Inadequacy Date l
Recommendations Coordi-f nation should be established between TOCC and local EOCs regarding notification of schools.
If TOCC is to assume this responsibility, local plans should be 3
revised to reflect that.
l Field Monitoring Activities -
5.
==
Description:==
Surface con-This item does not qualify as 5/31/84 FEl% will accept the tamination smears of soil a category "B" deficiency and possibilty of an over-sample containers were col-we request that it be deleted sight; however, would lected improperlyl the fil-as such.
Ilhile the method used like to observe again at en ter was held with tongs was inappropriate, the sample next exercise.
a which is an ineffective container was wiped and the area method.
A standard area for wiped was at least 100 cm. Further-2 wiping was not used (NUREC-more, personnel do know correct 0654, II, 1.8).
wipe procedures and this incident Recommendations Training represented a single case of over-l
~should be provided in proper sight.
collection of smear sam-4 l
ples.
'the filter should be pressed down firmly on sus-i pected contaminated surface l
and rubbed hard enough, and over a sufficient area, to
{
pick up sufficient radio-
{
activity to measure.
The I
i
(
1
._. ~
4 j
TAlHE 2 (Cont %8)
I FEMA Evaluation of State and Local Deficiencies and FEMA /RAC Proposed Corrective Actions
' Actual Recomunendations for State (81 and Local _ (L)
Completion and Determination of Completion Corrective Actions Proposed Corrective Actions Date Adequacy or. Inadequacy Date i
area wiped should be a
10 cm standard area sgch as
}
m 10 cm*= 100 cm.
l 6.
==
Description:==
When the util-According to our records,page 3/21/84 FEl% will accept the ity failed to provide impor-3 of the EAL was not trans-State's response, how-I tant data on release rates mitted during the early part-ever will observe again and stability class, the ADH of the exercise.
The members in the FY85 exercise.
j did not make efforts to re-of the Arkansas Nuclear Planning t
I quire the utility to trans-and Response Staff called the AP&L Duty Emergency Coordinator at least five (5) times to request EAL page 3 information,which includes stability, etc.
The
}
mit this data which was i
needed for their independent utility response was that the information was not available and declined to dose assessment projections supply it.
It is therefore, completcly untrue that the state did not make l
(NUREC-0654, II, J.10).
an attempt to secure this information.
The State of Arkansas trains all per-l Recommendation Training sonnel who will deal with the EAL transmittal forms, to include local government. m j
should be provided to ADH After activation at the TOCC, in a real emergency or during an exercise, reception
- staff receiving messaaes to of EAL transmittal information is assigned to a message clerk.
This person is ensure that follow up is instructed:to require that all information specified by the class of emergency
}
made in requiring this involved is received.
However, this message clerk is not of supervisory level.
information from the utility It is the clerk's duty to inform a supervisor that full EAL information is not during transmittal.
being received.
This supervisor has the authority to communicate with manage-ment level at the plant to request correction of the problem.
This was done 7.
==
Description:==
Iodine in this case several times.
Training of personnel who deal with EALs will continue.
measurements were not Procedures and associated 5/1/85 i
reported by the field teams for use in supplementing the report forms have been for-samma readings (NuREC-0654, mulated for making fodine measurements in the field by field teams.
The field team gg, g,9),
inembers have been trained in these procedures and the use of the forms. Also, a more sensitive analysis of iodine concentrations on the filters is possible at the.
i TOCC.
In either or both cases, the data will be given to the Dose Assessment Officer for conversion to dose rates and comparison to values calculated from information sup-j plied by the utility.
The data will then be given to the Accident Assessment Officer-j for use in formulating PAD recommendations This will be exercised in the 1985 exercise
~
TAltl2 2 (ContNS)
~
FEMA Evaluation of State and f.ocal i
Deficiencias and FEMA /RAC Proposed Corrective Actions Actual Recommendations for State (S) and Local (L)
Completion and Determination of Completion Corrective Actions Proposed Corrective Actions Date-Adequacy or Inadequacy.
Date Recommendation:
Iodine measurements should be re-
}
ported so that thyroid dose j
projections can be made.
8.
==
Description:==
The decision Protective Action Recom-5/1/85 for reentry was not based on mendations regarding re' entry evaluation of field sample will be formulated as a result of field data analyses, which support the decision results (NUREC-0654, II, to re-enter.
This will be exercised in the 1985 exercise.
N.1).
j Recommendation:
Protective action recommendations of
{
reentry should be based on i
field data which supports o,
that decision.
I
{
l'u pe Count y s
i j
Nedical Suppo rt Pope County Members of the Pope County 5/1/85 FEMA disagrees and believes i
Ambulance Service Ambulance Service are fully the ambulance company should i
trained in monitoring and de-show dccontamination procedures j
9.
==
Description:==
The ambulance contamination procedures.
at future exercise. This item i
was not monitored for decon-Training is provided by Arkansas will be observed again at next exercise.
]
tamination measures used Nuclear Planning and Response 1
after removal of the patient and Arkansas Nuclear One.
(NUREC-0654, II, K.5.b).
1 Mecommendation:
Nonitoring In this case a uti.lity Health Physicist accompanied the Ambulance crew whose job l
and decontamination proce-is to inform the crew on contamination matters.
It is evident in this case there dures for vehicles should be was no need to monitor the vehicles for contamination since the ambulance was not i
included as necessary contaminated.
However, should there be a need for monitoring the subsequent decon-requirements.
tamination the ambulance crew was fully qualified to accomplish this task.
i 5
TA448.E 2 (Coat'd)
. FEMA Evaluation of State and Local Deficiencias and FEMA /RAC Proposed Corrective Actions Actual Recoaumendations for State (S) and Local (L)
Completion and Determination of Completion corrective Actions Proposed Corrective Actions Date Adequacy or Inadequacy Date.
4 Johnson County Emergency Operations Center 10.
==
Description:==
Staf f mobil-1.ocal government disagrees 5/1/85 ization and call up were with the Federal observer not demonstrated..
All that this was not done, however, i
staff used were on hand will demonstrate again in the prior to beginning of exer-1985 exercise.
cise.
No simulation of call up was made after re-ceiving notice by AP&L of an alert (NUREG-0654, II, E.2).
Recommendation:
Demon-m 5
strate capabili ty to call up staff for mobilization and activation of EOC at proper time in a real emer-1 gency.
i
.I 11.
Description The Reception Local Director advises 3/21/84 FEMA will accept the 3/21/84
}
Center and Knoxville Reception Center managers fact the Care Center l
Schools were not contacted were at his E0C and he managers were at E0C (or simulated) by the John-advised them verbally to and received notification j
son County EOC at the Alert activate the Center.
to activate center, however.
j stage as called for in the if this is the way it will be i
plan.
Coordinatiori of done in future we suggest you school evacuation between update your plans to state this.
1
- ADH, TOCC, and Johnson l
County was not demonatrated l
1 l
l
TAlli.E 2 (Cont'al) '
1 FEMA Evaluation of State and Local
^
Deficiencies and FEMA /MAC Proposed Corrective Actions Actual Recosunendations for State (S) and Local (L)
Ccaplet ion and Determination of Completion Corrective Actions Proposed. Corrective Actions Date Adequacy or Inadequacy
'Date 1
or simulated.
After noti-fication by TOCC that sec-Lors 14 and 15 were being evacuated, the County did simulate sending four buses from Lamar to transport i
students.
(NUREC-0654, II, H.4).
i Recominendat ion:
Follow j
procedures established in plan for placing school on l
standby and for contacting Care Center at Alert stage.
cn co I
Johnson County Hospital 4
l 12.
==
Description:==
Johnson A decision will be made as 5/1/85 County Hospital which had to what level of participation l
an objective for this exer-Johnson County Hospital will be I
cise to test capability to used.
If decide to continue to receive and process contam-use them they will participate insted
- persons, did not in next-exerise.
participate in the exercis::
)
(NUREG-0654, II, L.1).
Rec - ndaLion Involve
}
the Johnson County Hospital in a
full participation role with scenario activi-ties to test their capabil-ities.
1 i
i t
TAH82 2 (Coal %I)
FEMA Evaluation of Ptate and Local Deficiencies and FEMA /RAC Proposed Corrective Actions Actual Recommendations for State (S) and Local (L)
Complet ion and Determination of Completion
~
Corrective Actions Proposed Corrective Actions Data Adequacy or Inadequacy Date' i
teaan County Emersency Operations Center 1
I 13.
==
Description:==
Nobilization Logan County Director dis-5/1/85 of the Logan County EOC was agrees, stated he had notified i
not demonstrated or sinu-on standby the fire department, lated.
Only two' i s.d i vi-care center managers and three j
duals manned the EOC.
No sheriff deputies. Also, said call up of staff was demon-the scenario only called for strated or simulated limited participation.
Will I
(NUREC-0654, 11, E.2).
do again in next exercise.
Recommendation:
Future
]
exercise should require the full activation (by demon-m stration or simulation) of j
the Logan Cconty EOC.
i j
14.
==
Description:==
Naps were not Logan County Director and 3/21/84 FEHA will observe again 3/21/84 available showing evacua-State officials advised all in future exercises.
tion
- routes, relocation of the maps were in plain
- centers, shelter
- areas, site hanging on the walls.
}
population distribution or Doesn't understand how ob-i preselected radiological server missed them.
i i
sampling and monitoring i
points (NUREC-0654, II,
}
J.10.a,b).
j Recommendation:
Appro-priate maps should be I
prepared and either placed
)
on walls or made available j
on tables at the EOC.
l 1
]
9 TAtti.E 2 (CoatW)
I FEMA Evaluation of State and Local Deficiencies and FEMA /RAC Proposed Corrective Actions Actual Recommendations for State (S) and Local (L)
Compl et ion and Determination of Compl et ion Corrective Actions Proposed Corrective Actions Date Adequacy or Inadequacy Date 15.
==
Description:==
It was an Due to problems that sur-5/1/85 objective to test the Yell faced after this objective County a llos p, t a l capa-was formulated and sent for-t bility to receive and pro-ward, the hospital was unable cess contaminated pe r-to participate in the REX-84.
sons.
This was not demonstrated (NUREC-0654, 11, L.1).
Recommendation Provi de The Danville Hospital will be for participation of.the exercised in the 1985 exercise.
hosp,tal in a full exercise i
Completion date for this item "I
their response is May 1, 1985.
capabil.: Lies.
"o
3 NMMs.7 s
q
%%(:
b I 5
3 g*>
4Y NUCLEAR PLANNING & RESPONSE PROGRAM P.O. Box 1749 Russellville, Arkansas 72801 (501) 968-7171 TABLE 2, ITEM 4 ATTACHMENT #1 According to the REX '84 scenario, the utility was to have de-clared a general emergency at 10:10 a.m.
However, this did not The actual declaration was made at 11:30 a.m. - 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> occur.
and 20 minutes late.
Arrangements had been made ahead of time to allow for evacuation of the London School on the follcwing basis.
Principal, Tom Doan was informed by scenario committee members that a general emergency would occur at 10:10.
This would result in an ENS message being sent to him no later than 10:30 requesting the evacuation of his school to Hector.
He was told he should arrive no later than 11:15 to allow for monitoring and registration of This would allow them to meet the normal lunch sched-the children.
The prearranged timetable could not be ule at the Hector school.
deviated from and still have the children returned to London in time to be taken home on their normal bus route.
Due to the 80 minute slip in the scenario, the London Principal phoned the TOCC and asked why he had not received the ENS message Since the students from the London school were essen-to evacuate.
tial to the successful exercising of the Hector Care Center - a
'84 objective - the decision was made to move the stu-major REX-dents at this time regardless of the status of the scenario.
In in order to preserve the integrity of the scenario for
- addition, and to allov Pope County to carry out their part local government, in the scenario, the decision was made not to violate plans and procedures by informing Pope County of the premature departure of students at Hector.
By keeping with this decision, the Arkansas Department of Health carried on as if the students had not been In the proper sequence, notification of London School and moved.
Pope County occured as shown in the attached radio logs.
A pro-tective Action Directive was made to evacuate the area including the London School, the Arkansas Department of Health notified Pope The state-County of this PAD.as evidenced in the attached logs.
ment that Pope County was not notified is false, according to the radio log, at 12:25 hours the Pope County EOC notified the TOCC that evacuation of the 2-mile radius around Arkansas Nuclear had been completed.
. -2 :..
Attrchment 2 Paga 2 We refer to the suggestion in Table 2, item 4, that the local plans be ammended so that the Arkansas Department of Health and
- not local schools of EAL and PAD information.
We refer to page B-2 of the Pope County Radiological Emergency Plan.
This communi-cation flow chart details the redundant system used to notify schools directly through the Early Notification System and for local govern-ment to verify this notification by use of commercial telephone.
This item is CLOSED as of 3-21-84.
e b