ML20134A244

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Informs of Acceptance of plant-specific Licensing Action Re Review of Draft Usgs/Fema Rept on Possible Hazards Posed by Failure of Spirit Lake Dam.Scheduled Target Date Is 830301.Supporting Documentation Encl
ML20134A244
Person / Time
Site: Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date: 02/24/1983
From: Capra R
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Lainas G
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20132B592 List:
References
FOIA-85-353 TAC-49636, NUDOCS 8508150240
Download: ML20134A244 (23)
v • d • e


Text

'

-- . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . ~ . - - - . ....~_.. _ .

- . . - . . ....- - _.- -- .~. - . - . .

g s .

mm REGO

< / o, UNITED STATES

! , g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .

, j WASHINGTON D. C. 20555

'+, February 24, 1983

......o

(.

NOTE T0: Gus Lainas, A/D for Operating Reactors, DL o

FRCM: Robert Capra, Technical Assistant, DSI

SUBJECT:

PLANT-SPECIFIC LICENSING ACTION CHANGE FOR DSI

Reference:

Memorandum, Roger J. Mattson to Darrell G. Eisenhut, dated 10/12/82,

Subject:

DSI's FY-83 Plant-Specific OR Action Schedule Based upon your request in the attached Division of Licensing 'dork Request, DSI has accepted the following plant-specific licensing action:

Plant: Trojan DSI Branch: MET 3 TACS N0: 49636 Scheduled Target Date : 03/01/83*

~

Suojecc: Mt. St. Helens-Soirit Lake Dam

  • m

/ '

4 e

% a Unless otherwise indicated in the space below, DSI has accepted the work by the scheduled target date without impacting other scheduled OR actions.

  • Note: This TAC involves the review of the draft USGS/ FEMA report on possible hazards posed by the fa11hre of Spirit Lake Dam. (To be provided about 02/22/83). The review may involve a site visit and additional review depending upon the Quick Look report (Target date 03/01/83)

This note represents change number 164 to the reference memorancum.

TCw R. Capra, T/A DSI

Enclosure:

As stated cc: R. Mattson -

DSI A/D D. Muller DSI 3C 4 ca mill I

J. 6 hema, CL o f

DSI File lj 8508150240 850715 PDR FOIA BELL 85-353 PDR

. . . . . . . ~ .

~ ~ '

- - '. ~ . . TT ~ L ...--.... : ~ ~:. . .. -..- :- ..L L~~

- ", (c4 j

Eclosure 2  %

( Rottting Slip ,gmk l *

! i g

TRANSMITTAL OF DIVISION OF LICENSING WORK REQUEST SPECIAL HANDLING - PROCESS WITHOUT DELAY TAC #-Plant Name-Title 9 $3d - TR 07AN- MT. ST. HELEV5 -SMfl7 Description of review requested: 1AKE DAN

/ dr aft USG S / FO"A Q,j.u,e Revo, Sp a., { Lohe. dom. (hYbP*'t l2svttu My Inveln .;;*St VsS *h Q'ut o' 9"c'lk h93ab f4MeeW difCl'j Ch-2 Requested target date "Omck Lol'* of M ro cLeomwd ob /* M-Ba' sis for request date: / pank r , a g.

SEOUENCE NAME ,

DATE

1. Originator '
2. OR Branch Chief -

7- - N 7 ES -

3. OR A/D - I N l/53-

/h

[ This action is requested to be added to the review branch's current co=itments This action is requested to be completed in lieu of TAC #

for (PlantName)

4. Review. Branch Chief (Ill*7O\ . O NI Edk E/E+b3
5. A/D _
6. Division Director
  • DN dx M /l) '

'~

@ This action is accepted for completion with a target date of /

[ This action is accepted for completion with a target date of in lieu of completing TAC # in this fiscal year

7. Return to Review Branch Chief for assignment of reviewer and retention of work package

[, & C N T .5 b kReviewer'sName) (RAMS Initialsi'

8. Return routing slip to originator FROM C / (9Mir,1&/f MAIL STOP /-/M PHONE O 7 3 C'f i

. . . . . ...... . . . - s --+ .: . . . . . - . . . ~ - - . - -

i'

.y. n ,

n-

"E JWL-T04-83 COPIES TO:

TELEPHONE CALL B. D. Withers W. S. Orser By J. W. Lentsch of PCE R. L. Steele T. Bushnell Dave Kresch USGS/WRD T. D. Walt To of G. _A. Zimme rman__

TNP:FSAR:2.5 Date February Time Subject St. Helens Mudflows I returned Dave's call to Bill Babcock, wherein he inquired about previous studies by PGE of the impact of St. Helens mudflows on Trojan. Dave said that the USGS/*w"AD has recently initiated a study of the effects of a debris dam f ailure at Spirit Lake on Cowlitz River mudflows and impacts on the Columbia River in the upstream and downstream directions. This is a one year project, aimed at assessing the effects of both flooding and mud accumulation in the Columbia River. Dave was curious as to what studies have been done previously for Trojan. He also requested certain information on the site topography and intake structure design at the Plant.

He said this study will use the same source term f rom the das failure as assumed in the recently completed study of the Cowlit: River.

I told him that we would send him a copy of the applicable sections from our FSAR, together with copies of correspondence to the NRC on the subject. This information will include site and intake structure details and elevations.

JVL/4sl6A24 s 3 ',

\j-1 ,

h .y . f;

~ ,-L

.4 s -

< *L* .

4 s

\/, V' 2 , ),,5 , f ',-* -

" /,%" ,,.-

- 'eg 4 ,'.-' ,, s* C' ,

'.~'

.. .z ,

f* s j _-

'~

,t , ~

r *s L

  • , J e >

. 6 T .,m=* "

.- . 3 .. g ** e

( g>, ' ,'s'* 9 * .N w i L yJ .

-s a

f .~.

a

, .t y .- * ,,

y \u >,.

~

y ',

  • a s. " ,

,,* .* e -

i* , ,*f* ./ ,

y # '

',fg

  • p,

, p s  ; - . t e

( p , r*.,  ?

,.s #

,- .:+ .w

  • y' _ , l
  • / g 'g g 5* [ P * *

/ D f**

,. y's m

'3. ',N y t~' ,

~

' , ,} - %'}

.p' '

p(?'

A- <

vf -

\

. ~ . . - -

t w -~.. 8 -

y- -

7. ~

' *'t'] '..: .

l

.'Wl- .1,'b, W .?.'.1 v .

.e' o 1- ~~' '

, : . .n ,,; , ,. - :

  • 'v
    .

/4 /7w I??)

.1-!.p;3

. :=, w r G.],-- . . . . .. . - . . . . . -.. ...- ..- -- . ..

~~ -

- & =.a) ... .

$Y. . . . . - . - . . . . . . . - - .

(

. . . . .) . . . . . . - . . . - - -

h$ ....-..-.-:..-- .- .

+4 - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

f . .-

g hfrf: FEri

% g_ w %yv./,IfM f/ppiH ^/?ij n b Y 4Gb lb;>w .

labD hu'1LfitDbv 15ulfl fi11b50. Y b Vo dir

//p6a/U'Mfi.]tbblg1796:0?/ 1 0'5 u $!stu ?5h) id%W y;[....hlst)>f)C h5ili5)beiL(hy}/$AN21.N/</

~

~

ulvxnpu)Uwiks76isGunp Kfitjtiun.

^

k /lrkt]) Bljk }!Wih0(. /lA5N5$!o .6hl/s 4 G J./j u JJk) /lb5iSOl> IVi !b .b'fD Lll%Md i -ltti: .<b4.0

)RJfujVy*UllJilTiii'N/EiAh-l-500)2,'VAndbS

'ldyiu y '%' Mil &cis .ljeiliV$ /tt^J Attlt;'.y Jnoo Os bi!!j ML Xho ngsj&d /yusjo ovwAL) x [

-- La 0 [Ifinv/M(jhpj,v n ,

\'

= f .

4,L si, .v

./i. sin u

,~ i. ., .- - , - - . . . ..w. .,U.CM + ~ + .

!*e~-~_-g

..:.....;',,=* m .. w. e.s e.-~ ~s's. .w. y

  • . na . -- = . =. s e ww- , 9 -s p

. .~ s 1, .

J f.

m.

.. -! :.+

- _9 :, 9; .

, ig. .~I;;J :.J.:q -

Federal

!- Region X - Federal Emergency Regional ' Center t

Bothell. Management n'ashington 980!! Agency

~5 - . .

W -

March 7, 1983 Charles Tramell

  • -U.S.-ffUclear Regulatory Comission MS' 428 Wasnington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Tra== ell:

' Enclosed is a revised version of our Findings for the Trojan Site.

f Nomally, my Naticnal Office forwards these to Edward Jordan's office. I do not ~<new wnat happens to them af ter they reach NRC.

I understand that Sill;Srown forwarded you 5 copies of the mudflow

~

assessment study. .

If you have any cuestions on the findings or study, please let T.e know.

' Sincerely, kl dhe-

. Richard W. Donovan RAC Chairman Enclosure E i$Vhm wc (R!d M wti~h bs UWd an ll$ME?tio r0." bhw s l

!/if$UIJV lll6 S ilit.W) I ft'Ce$.

  • l l

. 1 I

t  !

l

l i

ef =3 .l- . .n c '$'.)~4 3 % & ;Cf

, - , . - - . . , ,. , r - . - - - - - - .- - ..,--m -s,-,-r-

g i~,. - - .. .. .. - . - . ~ - .. . . :.: a .~ :w= = . . .

!.......~..- ~. - - - - - - *

, 3- ,

t '

j .

. I

' . ssWr P fs96 Federal Emergency Management Agen~cMn [

Jji Region .T Federal Regionalhenter Bothell. Washington 98011

'D' -

February 23, IW3 4

MEMCRA! CUM FOR DAVE MCLOUGHLIN ACTING ASSOCIATE O! RECTOR STATE AND LCCAL PROGRAMS AND SUPPCRT FROM: Wm. H. Mayer

, _ . . - Regional Director SUSJECT: Findings and Determinations for Portlanc General Electric's Trojan Nuclear Powe'r Plant

, Last' January we forwar'ded to you our findings (44 CFR 350.11) for tne Trojan site (States of Oregon and Washington), with our recommendation that FEMA acproval be granted. On July 6, 1982, your office granted approval in accordance with 44 CFR 350.12.

Although our approval prccess allcws for withdrawal of approval (a4 CFR 350.13), it does dot call for, reaffirmation of adequate offsite preparedness. It has been tne position of cur Chairman of tne Regional Assistance Coc:nittee (RAC) that an annual reaffirmation snould oe made. I su:: port Inis position and tnis letter with attachment serves that purpose.

Following is a brief summary of activities that the Region and the RAC nas either monitored or observed, evaluated, and critiqued since our fincings statement of last' winter.

. 1. Activities related to Mount St. Helens/ Spirit Lake Disaster and Emergency'Deciaration.

2. Training activities of botn States, counties, and.the licensee as they relate to offsite preparedness.
3. Fublic educaticn program for permanent and transient adults.
4. Second annual Trojan Siren Test (Alert and notification System).

S. Health Physics Orill and Exercise of tne Near-Site Emergency Oceraticns Facility - September 16, 1982.

5. Full-scale Trojan Exercise - November 28, 1982.
7. Media Orientation Program.
8. Monthly Communications Orills, t
9. Review of Draft and Promulated Changes to Plans / Procedures. .

The RAC Chairman prepares a monthly list of significant events. The majority '

cf the significant events are corrective action items resulting from reviews of the exercise er.cril1 critiques and plans or procedures. Corresponcence over my signature forwards these schedules to the cesignated heads of eacn State, county, and the licensee eacn month.

..-r-l, , _ . . . _ . . ._a. - - . .

7-,. _

i.

2 f

, ( ,

4

. , Las; montn the RAC upcated the individual review and evaluation cocuments for eacn set of plans and procedures (as called for in Guicance Memoranoum No. 16).

l,'

The RAC u; dated the findings statement. The Region updated that portion of '

tne finoings statement related to the volcanic chenomenon in carts requested j,, by tne Nuclear Regulatory Connission (NRC). The Region has receiveo

. commitments for corrective action as called for in our critiques of the small-sc-ate and full-scale exercise conducted in 1982.

-t

~

It is tne Region's and the RAC's opinion that no major deficiencies exist in eitner the preparecness posture or response posture of tne States and local

, gover.nments for the Trpjan site. We believe that the plans and implementing precedures are adquate on the basis of the criteria documents (REP-1 and -2).

We believe that the response capabilities exist among the designated agencies within both States and local governments, and that these agencies have demonstrateo their ability to implement the plans.

, In view of the continui.ng.ffRC interest in the volcanic and related natural 4

ha:ards assessments, we'siggest that .the revised Par I be forwarded to tnem f since it is significantly different from that'su:mitted by us in January 1982. i In summary, we believe tnat tne plans / procedures, preparedness posture, anc response capacilities of the States of Oregon and Washington, and affected 1ccal governments, are adequate to protect the healtn and safety of the puolic

in the vicinity of the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant. The States anc local governments have demonstrated continued improvement in all areas. It is the RAC's position that'no significant deficiencies exist. In the Region's opinio,n, t.here is reasonacle assurance that appropriate protective measures can and wi'll be taken offsite in the event of a radiological incident at the Trojan' Nuclear Power Plant.

If you or your staff have any questions, please direct them to l Ricnard Ocnovan, RAC Chainnan.

I AttacNeent 0

e 9

W O 1 4

i

- . . - . - - . M-. -

1 i . .

-e u i

l. i, l i.

. , { ,

FEMA 531E/0-22E/1/83 FEMA Fincings and Determinations for Portland General Electric's Trojan Nuclear Plant Date: Initial Finding - January 1982 Revised Finding - January 1983 ,

I. 1 Introduction A. Identification: _ *

1. Facility'. The Trojan Nuclear Power Plant is the only licensed nuclear pcwer plant in the State of Oregon. The Trojan Nuclear Power Plant is cwned and operated by the Portlano General Electric Company (PGE), a private utility licensad to aperate in the State of Oregon. It is located in Columbia County, Oregen, on the bank of the Columbia River at accroximate river mile 72.5, 42 miles north of Portland, Oregon.
2. Governments in the Plumit EPI. There are two counties within the plume emergency planning zone (d?Z): Columbia County, Oregon, anc Cowlitz t County, Washington.

j 3. Governments in the Incestion E?Z. There are 13 counties within the ingestion emergency planning zone (i?ZJ: Oregon counties are Clackamas, Clatsoc, Colum:ia, Multnoman, Tillamook, Washingten, and Yamnill; Washington counties are Clark, Ccwlitz, Lewis, Pacific, Skamania, and Wahkiakum.

i

~

q '4 . Response Orcanizatien. ~ Tiie State of Oregon's leae agency for

' regulation of, anc response to, radiological incidents is the Oregon Department of Energy (000E). It works closely with the Emergency Management Division (EMD) and the Health Division (HD) who have the respective responsibilities for general State emergency planning and coercination of emergency Operations and radiological response. Other departments and Columbia Ccunty, Oregon, are assigned specific support roles based upon their respective responsibilities. The State has responsibilities for both the plume and ingestion emergency planning zones.

The State of Washington's lead agency for response to raciological incidents 'is its Department of Sccial and Health Services (DSHS). It works cicsely with the Department of Emergency Services (CES) whicn has the resocnsibilities for all emergency planning and the coercination of emergency operations. Other departments are assigned specific support roles based upon their respective responsibilities. Overall, the State nas res::cnsibility for the ingestion emergency planning zone, and Cowlitz County, Wasnington, has tne resocnsibility for the plume emergency planning zcne. Within the county, the Sheriff and the Sheriff's Oecartment is the lead agency. The emergency ,

planning and coordination of emargency operations are the Sheriff's res;:ensibility. .

e

~ - --- - ,

~~

. . . . w.

a.  ;

I/ ,, ',

v

5. General Backercund:  !

i v .

1. Plans. The title of Oregon State's plan is "0 regen State Trojan Emergency Respense Plan." It was issued in Novem:er of 1980, implementec in January 1981, and updated September 1981 and August 1982. It was submitted to FEP.A on December 9, 1980. The Plan was develcped by the Department of Energy.

The title of Washington State's plan is "Wasnington State Fixed Nuclear Facility Emergency Response Plan." It was issued in March 1981, and i 1.?plemented in Marcn 1981. It was submitted to FEMA on March 29, 1981. The Plan wes'developec by the Washington Department of Emergency Services.

The title of the Cowlitz County plan is "Cowlitz County Trojan Emergency Response Plan."- It was' issued in December 1980, implemented in April 1981, and updated in September 1981 and August 1982. It was submittec to FEMA in December 1980.

2. Soecial Circumstances.
a. Gecorachical Situation. The Trojan plant site is located in the Oregon Coast Range. ..Ine Coast aange is bordered on the north by tne Olp:cic Range and on the*scuth by t.ge Klamath Mountains.

The Coast Range section is approximately 250 miles icng *

(running along nortn-south axis) and averages 50 miles wide. In the vicinity of the site, altitudes are generally below 2,000 feet. The area is drained by the Columbia River and by numerous small stream tributaries. West of the i'

site, there is an abrupt rise in elevation to approximately 1,500 feet along the north-south axis. Several streams have their headwaters along tnis divide, and tney flow easterly or northeasterly to the Columbia River. Stream gradients are hign until they reach the floodplain of the Columoia River.

Valley profiles are V-shaped.

. The Cascade Range east of the site is marked by a chain of volcanic cones. The closest cone is Mount St. Helens, approximately 36 miles frem the site. It is an active volcano with a variety of activity. Over the last 2 years the nature of the activity spans the range from earthquakes anc ash emission to several major explosive eruptions (May 18, 25, and June 12, 1980), and a series of non-explosive eruptions.

The climate of the plume exposure EPZ around Trojan is typical of the Pacific Northwest coast and is characterized by wet winters and dry' summers with mild temperatures all year long. There is a icw pr:oacility of srcwf all (greater than 1 inch is less than 1 percent) or heavy fcg (visibility less than 1/4 mile is less than 2 percent).

b. Evaluation. The Region has been requested to consider, in its evaluation, tne cegree of planning for and potential effects upon resacnse .f capabilities with respect to volcanic phencmena (ashfall, mucficws, ficcds, I
i. and landslides). The Region approached this evaluation along tnree separate },

routes.

I 2

a . . -

, /g., _. . _ _

(1) Short-term Hazards. The Region hired Thcmas Dunn and

-Luna 3. Lecocid (both nycrologists) to conduct a study o'f the fleed and secimentation ha:ards in :ne Toutle and Cowlit: Rivers. The report was puolisned in January 1981. It reviewed tne' potential for: 1) catastrophic breaching of Coldwater and Castle Creek Lakes; 2) muaflows and flocas generated by pyroclastic flows; 3) rain and snowmelt floods; anc 4) sediment transport, deposit, and channel changes.

This study was made available to PGE, who utilized. V portions of it in revising their evacuation analysis report and the various procedo iis for evacuation.

The U.S. Amy, Corps of Engineers, perfomed emergency work to mitigate the potential fot catastropnic breacning of Coldwater and Castle Creek Lakes. The Corps performed several other projects to enhance tne dike system of the Cowlitz and improve the ability of the hydrologic system to f hcid snow and rain floods. Revisions were made to ficodplain maps and detailed flood evacuation plans / procedures were developed for Cowlit:

County. Other work Aas perfomed to enable the river system to more i effectively nandle the sediment transport deposit and ;otential for channel changes. ,;

(2) Risk Assessment.

(a) Autcmotive. The Region received opinions from tne U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Soecial Pregrams Administration; Ford Motor Ccmcany, Car Service Engineering Department; General Motors, Service Section; and the U.S. Amy, Tan < Automotive Comand.

The general concensus was tnat a nomal vehicic could be driven at least 50.v.iles before f ailure under volcanic ash f allout conditions of amounts up to 1. inch in depth. Amounts of asn in the range of 2 to 4 inches could be

. expected to cause catastrophic failure of passenger vehicles within 10 tc 20 miles of road travel un, der these conditions.

This infomation was made available to PGE for use in tneir revision of the evacuation analysis report.

~

(b) Volcanic eruotion and related hazards. Tne Region received cpinions from the U.S. Geological survey, Reston, Virginia, ano the U.S. Geological Survey, Cascade Volcano Observatory. Major conclusions are hereby su= arized.

The percent of ashfall wnich might affect tne plume EPZ is 2 to S percent. Also, the plume EPZ could be affected by asnfall from eruptions on Mt. Hocd, which .s considered dormant at this time.

Mudflows and floods could eliminate the I-5 bricge across the Toutle River and several other minor roads. PGE's revised evacuation analysis and the county's flood plan recognize the possibility of tnis bridge and 'stner roads ceing eliminated. .

4 N: : q 7;:3.'[Nl[.? II EU.IN' lAb.

3

~ . - . - . . . . - .

- g . ,- -

.y,.,

2 The current levelfof risk as assesseo for $. N 2 cunt St. Helens is u m % er tnan 3t was in 1980. Risk effects of tho'se na: arcs on man are even lower because the USGS precicticIl capacility is.

i.; roving. The mountain is considered to be in a period of episodic do d grow n. This non-explosive dome growth could ce marked oy small ashfalis ano relatively small pyroclastic flows. It is important to realize tnat ther;e is virtually no enance of another eruption like that of May la,1950, occur?ing uitnin the next few years. Since the last explosive eruption (Cctober E980) all volcanic related potentially letnal effects have been confined to th'e crater and immediate vicinity. Since October 1950 the USGS has oeen acre to 1 predict-aH dome-building eruptions 2 to 4 weeks in advance of tneir f occurrence. If another explosive eruption (a very improbable event) were to occur, tne USGS believes that monitoring would cetect tne cuilcup in tide.to make a variety of preparations. It is important to note that dome growth can be a long drawn out pnenomenon. Activity associated with the Goat. Rocks4 dome at Mount St. Helens pcocably continued for more than a decade in the mid-la80's.

(c) Non-volcanic nazards. TheRegionreceivedmE opinion from the Depertment of tne Army, u.5. Corps of Engineers; U.'S..:

Cesartment of Interior, Geological Survey, Water Resources Division; and the U.S. Weatner Service. .The consensus is that floods and risk of serious :flocos  ;

are mucn higher as a resuit of tne May 18, 1980, eruption. Cespite tne" concluded mitigation efforts, the potential will remain very hign :nrogh tne next decade. The evacuation analysis report, prepared oy PGE, was adoptes cy .

Cowlit: County. The evacuation procedures for Cowlit: County,andtner;elatac floodplain, clearly recognize these risks anc have consicereo tne impiir3 tion of the potential damage / destruction to nort'hern egress routes.

(d) Soirit Lake Hazards. t '  :.J .3.:..m,;,.v'JP

. . . , ,~'E.-- . c. ... p; .. . ' -

~. _ .., , .. = $5% %, . ' ^

. - l=='M*Y . m . x. ~.. . ,,. . w

^

3 .c ,

.. . ..fm L'& a u .'y _ ,c-.. L.

q ,43 . - .

Water ,,

~~ Resources Divisicn . .

6" Narrative and map portions of this report clearty saca  %.... .

and minor Cowlit: County transportation routes will be destroyed or otnsrwise blocked snould short-term mitigation measures for the Spirit Lake hazard fail. Disruption would result in short- and long-term impact on the ability ,

to execute a Trojan evacuation as currently planned in botn Washington ind Oregon. An evacuation for a Spirit Lake event would create a short-tera '

conflict with a Trojan evacuation. Long-tern impact would be from tne .1 radically revised transportation routes and traffic load required to cy;iass blocked routes.

The Geological Survey report addresses only t'he mudflow hazard to the Toutle and Cowlit: Rivers. The report states that a Spirit Lake breacn can ce expected to deliver 1.09 million cuoic feet adr 1 second of mudflow at $57, sediment loading by volume to tne Columcia Riv4r. .

,l l h) (, , l4 lll{,, fl lIE*Y ~/ '

  • h;

. i  !!$'

%d ":n an dw m& cal wub.

4 I

l -

l

g.- -- . .

.- -- . - = :. - .,,..c , , ,,, . , . ~. , . , .

. .u o . . ,

4 Tecnnical ca:a supporting :ne repor snows that mucficws will :e maintained at close to peak flows for several hours. Experience of Ccluccia River olecxage resal:ing.from ficod/mudficws generated by the Mcunt St. Helens volcanic eruption of May 18, 1980, infers that the much greater mucfiow possiole from a Spirit Lake event may have disruptive impact to Trojan evacuaticn ruutes in tne vicinity of the Colum ia River and to the Trojan site. The Geological' I Survey, at tne request of the Federal Cooroinating Officer for tne Spiri: Lake Emergency Declaraten, is preparing a tecnnical pecposal to evaluate :ne hydrologic hazarcs of a Spirit Lake event to the Columbia River. 'ht (3) Long-term Mitigation /Warninc. The Region has been active on several fronts in regard to :ne evolving problems associated witn Mount St. Helens:

(a) The Region chairs an interagcncy cc=ittee under the auspices of the Eederal Coordinating Officer for tne Mount St. Helens disaster and the Spirit Lake emergency. This c:cmittee consists of FEMA; USGS, Cascace Volcano Observa:Ory and Water Rescurces Division; U.S. Wea:ner Service (Regional, River-Forecast Center, Washing::n and Oregon State Offices); USDA (Forest Service and Soil Conservation Service); an: U.S. Army, C:rps of Engineers. This cemittee meets several times a year to ensure cocecina:icn nith respect to data collection, risk assessment, mitigation measures, and warning procedures.

(b) The Regicn chairs the nonstructural Hazarc Mitigation Task Force,.as specified under Section 405 of the Puclic Law 93-2SS. This cc=ittee consists of FEMA; USDA; U.S. Army; U.S. Weatner Service; CHUD; USGS; Cascade Volcano Observa*ory and Water Rescurces Division; CCC; 00T; Small Business Administration; State of Washington; and Ccwlit:

' County, Washington. The task force prepared an interagency ficed nazard mitigation report (11/13/81). The report was aimed at mitigating future puolic and private damages frem potential floccing along tne Toutle ar.d Cowlit: Rivers. Funding of many of the recommendations will be dependent upon National level action and will be one of the decisicn items of tne National Hazard Mitigation Task Force.

(c) With Regional assistance and coordination, Ccwlit:

County has imolemented a rec =endation of the Hazard Mitigation Task Force y initiating tne Toutle-C;wlit: Rivers Watershed Management Plan. Tne Plan is to censolidate a numcer of Ccwlit County ce= unity cevelopment issues anc provice policy for future use of :ne basins of :ne Toutle and Ccwlit: Rivers (post Mount St. Helens). The Plan incorporates sucjects related to emergency planning, including nazard assessment, operational capacity, and aler -notification requirements to deal with Mount St. Helens and Spirit Lake related nazards. The Plan represents an interactive process so as to cevelcp emergency preparedness capacity integrated and supportive of preparecness for  ;

preexisting C wlit: County hazards. '

l l

DO [k:5.!iY.yl1lfb(liv.I.!$li5WC$.

5

$ hL $/hb $ t A /

u{/Y$ LNG .

l I

1 l

1

. . . . r. ~ u, - .- . :. . . ~ . - - .

f - -

.. i i /i

. l .

+

. (d) Regional coordination of specific actions taken to

.itigate the Spirit Lake hazard include:

1) The Cepartment of Army, Corps of Engineers, nas
- undertaken a two element program of structural measures for mitigating the Spirit Lake hazard. The first element is the now implementeo snart term i pumping system designed to maintain tne annual average level.of Spirit Lake below an estaolisheo critical level. The second element is to oetermine and implement a solution or program of solutions to acnieve long term mitigation

! of :ne Soirit Lake hazard. The U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, is seneculed to l Y ccmoleter by November of 1983, a report of alternatives and recomendation for a long term solution.

. _ 2) A joint initiative of Federal, State, and local governments has implemented a warning system ;o deal with a Spirit Lake creacn. That portion of the warning system for alert and notification of the resident and transient population of Cowlit: County, within the Spirit Laxe hazard. area, has been integrated with and extends the exisiting Trojan alert notification system..

3. Socio-Economic Factors.

i The Trojan [uclear Po er Plant f s located in the nortnwes ern section of the State of Oregon on the Columoia River which is the border

etween :ne States of Oregon and Washington. In Columois County tne economy is geared to the timber industry. Its population is accroximately 35,000 with i 9,000 located in the plume EPI. In Cowlit: County, the econccy is a mix of heavy and lignt industrial ;r0 cesses, port operations, and tim::er-related harvest and manufacturing industries. Its population is approximately 50,C00 witn 39,000 located in tne plume EPZ.

'4 Volcanic Contincencies.

The State of Oregon's Trojan Response contains a volcanic eruption contingency wherecy tne Oregon Emergency Operations Plan would se implemented. Damage assessment information would ce relayed to Trojan and Colum::ta: County, or if Columsta County's EOC was made inoperative, tne State would assume complete responsicility. If key elements essential for execution of tne Trojan response are maoe inoperative due to a volcanic eruption or its affects, Oregon would restore tnose elements as soon as possible or arrange for otner ccmpensatory measures.

The State of Washingtcn has made a ccmmitment to include similar

. contingencies in their next Fixec Nuclear Facility Plan review.

  • Cowlitz County has developec a contingency plan separate frcm their Trojan Response Plan.

Please note nat PGE nas arranged for representation at tne Federal Volcanic Cccedinatfog Center.

C. Materials AvaC aole for Examination: - '

1 In addition to the State and local plans / procedures, we nave nad access to evaluations by tne Region and tne Regional Assistance Com ittee 6

9 !h G!n!) gwsr i ibt m. be inns!d :8 No h.& 4ih&im ll17

__ , _,c

. . - . - ~ _ - - .- . ..- _. - .- - _

l ' -. . , . _ _

.m ,, g . . _ . ..... . . _ - . . _ _ .. . . _ 2ena __

,[4' *

. . i, l i t;. o. .

l' (RAC) for the States' and locals' plans; and tne critique by Region and RAC of tne joint approval exercise and followup exe,rcise. The Region nas retained i .cocies'of the recoros of public meetings wnich were cond'ucted in Columota Chnty, Cregon, and Cowlitz County, Wasnington. They state that all 1

particulars were addressed in tn.e plans / procedures revision tnat followea taese public meetings.

II. Evaluation 4

l . Following is the integrated evaluation of the Federal Emergency Man' age-i ment Agency, Region X (hereafter referred to as Region), and the Regional i

' Assistance Comittee, Region X (RAC), for the plans / procedures, prepareoness, and capabilities of the States of Oregon ano Wasnington; Columoia County, l

Oregon; Cowlitz County, Washington; and the Portlano General Electric Company j '

(PGE), as it pertains.to the Trojan Nuclear Plant. For more specific

] findings, reference the Review and Evaluation for Oregon, Washington, and

> Ccwlitz County, Washington, and those comments made in the various critiques of the exercises. ,

A. Assicnment of Resconsibility (Planning Standard A):

Thethreegoverthents(Wasnington, Oregon,andCowlit: County,

Washington) have plans tnat identify and assign the lead and suoport agencies

~

with the various responsibilities called for in Planning Standard A of l

NUREG-C554/ FEMA-REP-1. PGE's plan cross references these agencies witn i respect to identification of lead agencies.

Some of,the written agreements referring to ne concept of operation, mergency measures, mutually. acceptaole criteria for tneir "imolementation,"
and' arrangements for excnange of information, have been executec.

i l 'l . PGE has executed a separate Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)  !

with.the State of Washington and Cowlitz County, Wasnington. The State of i j Oregon, because of its MOV with NRC,.and State legislation which gives tnem j certain regulatory authorities over-PGE, does not celieve an MOU is necessary.

t l

2. The States are updating the 1974 Radiological Accident Assistance J Agreement.
3. The RAC's critique of the approval exercise called for the i' execution of an MOU on the coordination of emergency public information. The State of Washington, Cowlitz County, Washington, and the two major Feoeral response agencies have agreed to particpate in the MOU; Oregon has not.

Sumary. With the exception of the MOU on the coordination of emergency puolic information, all basic agreements, planning assignments, and i staffing assignments are in accordance with Planning Standard A. The Region i and the RAC find the absence of the executed MOU is a minor deficiency. See i discussion under Planning Standard G - Public Education and Information.

! 3. Emerpency Resocnse Succort and Resources (Planning Standard C1:

j

l. Radiological Assistance. The States of Oregon ana Wasnington, and PSE, have mace provistens for incorpcrating Federal response casacility- ,

i I 7 e

  • s n .~. . - o

. ,w , ,-, . _ r ,, . ~ , - - - - . - = ---r - - - - - -- m-

_ ~ . _ _ . ..____.._,_._m.. , ., ,

into Oneir ccerations plans. A specific MOU between the U.S. Department of Energy, ne States of Oregon and Washington, anc PGE has Oeen executed. Tne MOU s:ecifies the Feceral radiological resources expected, inclucing times of arrivil, t

2. Emergency Pu:lic Information. Upcn ceclaration of a Site-Area Emergency or Generai dmergency, tne Regional elements of the Feceral Government will activate tneir response plans. As part of tnis response, a Join: Information Center (JIC) will be estaolisned oy FEMA and NRC. The State of Washing:On and Cowlitz County have agreed to enter a MOU with respect to the ccncept of operation and agreements for exchange of in'armation. The State of Oregon has cnosen not to participate in tne MCU. PGE nas offerec tne use of their JIC facility and have agreed to cc=unicate and coordinate with those organizations at the JIC. The State of Oregen has not agreed to c:=unicate or coordinate _ with the organi:ations at the JIC. See cur cements

~

under Planning Standard G.

Su:ntary. With the exception of the MCU on tne coorcination of emergency puclic information, the existing arrangements for requesting and effec tvely using assistance resources are adequate. The Regien and tne RAC find the absence of the executed MOU is a minor deficiency. See ciscussion under Planning Standard ,G - Puolic Education and Information.

C. Emer;ency Classification System (Planning Stancarc 01:

, The States of Oregon and Washington, Cowlitz C:unty, and ?GE nave ac:p;et a consistent anc c mpatible emergency classificatien system witn 2::ropriate emergency acticn levels.

. Su=ary . All parties nave acepted a consisten anc c:mpaticle I emargency ciassificarica system as called for oy Planning Stancarc 0 cf NUREG-0654/FE'4A-REP-1, Rev-1.

D. Notification Measures (Planning Standard E):

l. Emergency Reseense Personnel. The States of Oregen and
. Washington, ano Gowntz Goun;y, nave estaolished procedur2s for the notification and m
Dilization of emergency personnel for all response organizations. These procedures are consistent witn tne exception of Unusual Even notification. Portland General Electric's and the State of Oregen's plans specify a 1-hour notification time for Unusual Event. The State of cn's and Cowlitz Ccunty's plans specify 15-minute notification, unien Wasnin~i;ed is cal for by NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1.

j . 2. Alercine and Nctification Use of Their Procecures.

a. In the approval exercise (3/04/31), ne State of Wasnington, Ccwl1tz County, Washington, and Columtia County, Oregon, demonstrated ne a ility to alert, notify, and mobilize tneir emergency response personnel.
b. The monthly ce=unication drills were implemented in April 1981. -
c. In :ne a::roval exercise, the State of Wasnington, Cowlit:

Csunty, Wasnington, and Columof a County, Oregon, demons:ratec that tney c:ula 3

~

, 1, . .._,.,,,w,...

. , ..n m. m . ,c _-- - - - - -

,,s .

staff tneir Emergency Operations Center (EOC) in a timely fashion. The State cf Oregon did not demonstrate that they could staff their EOC in a timely fasnion. In the following exercise (11/82) tne State of Oregon ceconstratec, to a limited degree, that they could staff eneir E00 in a timely fashion.

d. In tne approval exercise, the State of Washington and Columbia County, Oregon, demonstrated an ability to use their resources (maps, s,tatus Ocaros, message system, technical ~ support, and logistical suppcrt).
e. In tne subsystem exercise (called for by the critique o'f tne approval exercise) the State of Oregon and Cowlit: County, Washington, demonstrated an acility to use their resources (maps, status boaros, message system, tecnnical support, and logistical support),

~

f. In the subsystem exercises, all organizations (States of Washington and Oregon; Columcia County, Oregon; and Cowlit: County, Wasnington) demonstrated that proper decision, based on recom endations from the Trojan E0F, could be made in a timely and coordinated f ashion for tne plume and ingestion EPZ's. In the following exercise (1T/82), all organi:ations demonstrated that proper decisions, based upon recommendations from the Trojan EOF, cou.ld be made in a timely and coordinated f asnion for the plume E?Z.
3. Alert and. Notification System. The Portland General Electric Company has ins:aiiec ido sirens uier: System) tnroughout tne plume E?!. The Region reviewed tne design proposal. The Region witnessec :ne first test of tne system on August 22, 1981. The test indicated a possible deficiency in coverage in one area, and in the operability of scme of tne equipment. The Region aitnessed the second test of the system on Septemoer 25, 1982. The test indicated differences in coverage and tne fact that tne 95% operaoility factor was not met. Actions have been taken by PGE to correct tne operacility of the equipment. The differences in coverage will be revised at tne next

' annual test. Actions have been tak.an by PGE to correct the operability of the equipment. The possible deficiency in coverage will be reviewec at tne next annual test. The physical means of activating the notification system are in place and operational. Its use was observed during the test of the system anc was found to be quite satisfactory with respect to remote activation and broadcast, television cable interrupt, and public awareness. Appropriate administrative means have been established for the activation and operation of tne Alert System.

Sumary. The Region's and the RAC's position is that tne State of Oregon ano PGE plans / procedures snould be enanged to be consistent witn Acpendix 1 of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev-1. This to be a mfhor deficiency.

Only NRC can resolve the issue by ordering PGE to change their procecures.

The Region and the RAC find that the Alert and Notification System is '

adequate and meets the intent of Planning Standard E and Appendix 3 of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev-1.

The Region and the RAC find that the EOC procedures are acequate for '

operation for the States of Washington and Gregon; Coluccia County, Oregon; anc Cowlit: County, Washington.

9

i . .

E. Emergency C =unications (Planning Standard F):

~

1. Systems. Com::atible primary and tackup cc=unica:icn systems exist ce ween anc among PGE's Emergency Operating Facilities (T5C, Near-Site ECF, Control Room, anc Company Support) and the Emergency Operating Centers.of
ne States of Oregon and Washington; and the counties of Columoia, Oregen, and Cowlitz, Washington.
2. Plans /Precedures. The various procedures call for prompt and continued comunicanons among and between the principal response organization.
3. Orills. The comunications' drill program was implemencea in April 1981. , _

Sumary. The Region and the RAC find tnat acequate provisiens and capabilities exist for prompt comunications accng the principal response organizations.

~

F. Public Education and Information (Planning Standard Gl:

1. Education. '.the various plans contain comitments for an annual mailing :o ali resicents witnin the plume E?Z. Tne firs: mailing was in Decem er 1980, the second was maca in January 1982, and tne tnirc in January 1983. Various public meetings have oeen held to enhance :nc public's awareness.
a. The Region reviewed and commented upon the revistc brocnure (cts:ributicn January 1982). The revised brocnure now contains sufficient information en the types of raciation,
b. Ccwlit: County, Washington, and Columbia County, Oregon, nave maintained distribution of the revised public education brochure to tnose locations wnere the transient adult population visits.
2. Information. The Region and the RAC have recc= ended estaclish-ment and execuncn or an MOV among the States of Oregon and Wasning :n; Columota County, Oregon; Cowlit: County, Wasnington; Portland General Electric; NRC; and FEMA with respect to the coordination and excnange of emergency public information and the establisnment of a JIC.
a. In tne approval exercise (March 4,1981), tne RAC founc :na:

PGE; States of Oregon and Wasnington; and Colur. cia and Ccwlit: Counties cid not cemenstrate that they could coordinate :ne release of information :: :ne media. The RAC's critique called for several corrective measures, inclucing a subsystem exercise for emergency puolic informa: ion.

b. In :ne subsystem exercise (Novem:er 19,1981), the RAC fcunc that the State of Oregon; Columoia County, Oregon; and PGE did demonstrate ne ability to coordinate the release of information to the media. Cowlit:

Q unty, Wasnington, and the State of Wasnington cia not acequately meet tne l

exercise objective of public information and sarning. ,

c. In the folicwup exer:ise (11/18/82), the RAC found :na: all organi:ations did cemenstrate na: they coulc cocrcinate One cevelc: men: anc 10

o . . .

release of emergency puolic information. Some specific corrective actions were recommended for the State of Washington. Columcia Anc Cowli:2 Counties ex:erienced difficulties in coordinating the release of emergency warning messages to tne public. See our 1982 Trojan Exercise report, ca:ec Decemoer 10, 1982.

d. The RAC's review of the plans for all organi:a: ions reveals some inconsistencies in approacn to the release of emergency puolic information.

(1) There are three phases of emergency puolic information released during an emergency phase:

(a) Frcm the utility and counties - initial warning and initial release to the media for the initial phase.

(b) From the utility, counties, and States - separate release points for followup warning and followup releases to the media for the intermeciate-phase. .

(c) On cehalf of utility, counties, Sta:es, anc Feceral agencies - a single relehse point for folicwup releases to mecia. Counties retain warning function to the media for :ne final pnase.

(2) Obviously, during all three phases of cperation, .

coorcination, timely exenange of information, and rumor control are requirec.

(3) The plans and procedures are in agreement cnly for :ne firs; pnase. During snase :no, Oregon and PGE will operate fr:m tne Oregen ECC. The plan reads :Sa: the Oregon EOC is the efficial source of contact for the State of Oregon to the media. The operation of Cowlit: County, Washington, and the State of Washington, continues as in ; nase one (also official sources of contact for tne media). During the thirc pnase, establishment of a JIC, the location for releasing puolic information, will be transferred frcm the EOC's to the JIC. However, the Oregen and PGE plans

, place the estaolishment of the news center under operational centrol of :ne Governor of Oregon. The plans for Washington State, Cowlitz County, ano Federal agencies assume automatic activation of the news can:er at tne declaration of a Site-Area Emergency or General Em: gency.

e. The State of Oregon has indicated that they do not want to se a signatory of :ne MOU or revise :nef r current plans witn respect to au cma:ic activation of the JIC. ,
f. The State of Washington and Cowlit: C:unty nave :ecome a signatory to the MOU. Their plans /procecures do not recogni:e :ne Oregon State ECC as the official control for activating the JIC.

Summary. The Region and the RAC find that the revised version of :ne public ecucanica brocnure masically meets the intent of Planning Standarc G.

The Region and the RAC find that tne puolic ecucation program for tne ,

acult permanent ;cculation is adequate.

11

^

-.- - - . - . - . ...- u_u_ _ . _ _ .

l '- ,

. - - ~ . - - - - , . .

+

The Region anc tne RAC find that tne States of Washington anc Gregon, C:16 01a County, Gregon, and Cowlitz County, Washington,-nave demonstrated a:e:.a e caccility to coordinate emergency puolic information. Cowlitz and C:l*. oia Counties have failec to adequately demonstrate tne acility to c::r:inate the exchange of warning. The Region and the RAC find tnat tnis is

- a nicer deficiency anc corrective action has been premised.

The Region and'tne RAC find that the plans /procecures of the orgar.i:ations ao not acequately demonstrate that sufficient arrangements for timely exchange of information and coordinated arrangements for dealing with

. rumors have been made. The Region and tne RAC find that tnis is a minor deficiency. There appears to ce no resolution on tne issues of disagreement; tr.erefore, this deficiency will continue. ,

G. Emergency Facililites and Ecuioment (Planning Standard H):

The various organizations have identified facilities, equipment, anc procecures. They are as follows:

1. Near-Site E'nercency Goerations Facility and State's/ County's Emergency Ooerations Centers t iuC's ).
a. The various physical locaticns nave adequ ne space, security and ;ress arrangements for emergency operations.
b. The co=unications include three dedicated voice circuits and one facsimile circuit with dedicated equipment. Other aopropriate ccm.unica-tien enannels exist to allow for minimum cackup and co=unication neecs to otne: State /lecal government agencies, Feceral agencies, mecia, ano the gene.al public.
2. Field Radiological Teams,.
a. The two Oregon team field kits and the three Washington field team kits contain equipment that meets the requirements of

- NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, with respect to detection (10-7uct/cc)'for ground survey and air sampling activities.

. b. The States and PGE share a common radio frequency. The radies in eacn field team kit anc the base radio station at the Near-Site Emergency Operation Facility are compatible.

.. c. The States have made arrangements for primary and cackup

. aerial radiological monitoring capabilities. Appropriate ground / air co=unications have oeen estaDlished at the Near-Site Emergency Operaticn Facility.

3. Oose Assessment Area.
a. The States and Portland General Electric have establisnec a dose assement area at tne Nea -Site Emergency Operation Facility for tne -

receipt and analysis of all f' eld menitoring data and the coordination of ,l s eple collection.

l 12

i .

4 Joint Information Center.

a. Tne Portland General Electric Ccmpany nas made tne pnysical anc financial arrangements for establishing a Joint Information Center casec en NRC guicance y ovided in the fall of 1979.
b. Arrangements have been made to provide the dedicated voice circuit for public affairs and 24 otner telephone lines at tne Joint Information Center. Current plans call for these pnones to ce operative
  • witnin 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> (tiRC - Fall 1979 Guidance).
c. The plans of the Federal agencies (NRC and FEMA) ano tne State of Wasnington assume tnat tnis center sill ce operational witnin 5 nours of a declared Site-Area Erergency or General Emergency.

Summary. Thi Regicn and the RAC find that tne organizaticns nave made arrangements for adequate facilities and equipment to support the emergency response.

H. AccidentAs$essment(PlannincStandardI):

1. Arrancement9.
a. Radiolooical Assessment. The States of Oregon and Wasnington

- and PGE nave agreec (na M0u) ta incorporate their ractological nealth resources (equipment and personnel) for field monitoring assessment and protective action reconnendations.

The organizations nave adopted a ccmmen protective action guide. Provisions and procecures nave been jointly ceveloped for estimating integrated dose from the projected and actual release rates. They are contained in PGE procedures and referenced in the States' procedures.

. b. Plant Status Assessment. The State of Oregon and tne NRC have a MOU that aliows tne State to regulate various aspects of the operaticn of the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant. As part of their emergency response, tne State is prepared to perform tecnnical assessments of tne plant status ano onsite operations. Based upon this accident assessment function, tne State is in a position to recor=end protective actions. The State of Oregon nas agreec to coordinate their assessment with other organizations and resulting recc=mendations for protective actions before protective decisions are made.

2. Cacability for Accident Assessment.
a. Field Monitorine. The State's radiaticn control staff anc field teams have cemonstrateo neir ability to respond to and provide analysis of a simulated airborne release. These demonstrations have included tne collection of samples (water, vegetation, and air), and tne monitoring of simulated releases. The Region ocserved and evaluated tnese activities in :ne aoproval exercise (Maren 81) and two Health Physics Orills (Octcoer 1950 and -

Novemoer 1981). Corrective actions were implemented. The Region /RAC coserve tnese activities in tne Septemcer 16, 1982, Healtn Physics Orill and folic.,up exercise on Novemoer 18, 1982. See our reports. These reports incicate tnat scme revision of procecures and retraining on monitoring procedures anc collecticn of samples is required in order to ensure adequate environmental sampling. The Region and the RAC find that nese are minor ceficiencies.

13

- - - - .- = - .- . -.w _. ._:.,. . . . . . _ _ . _  ; ,,,,

u -- .

) .-

?

b. Oose Assessment and Protective Action Recommendation. The States' radiation contros starr anc PGd's raciologicai er.ergency starf nave dem:nstrated their acility to translate raciological monitoring data into appropriate protective action recommendations for cecisionmaking at tne State / county EOC's for oath tne plume and ingestion emergency planning zones.
: See our Reports for 1981 Trojan Revisited dated Decemoer 10, 1981, anc 1982 irojan Exercise cated Decemoer 10, 1982.

Summary. The States of Oregon and Washington, and PGE, nave developed acequate methcds, plans, and procedures. They have adequate 4

equipment to assess, monitor, and evaluate the potential offsite consequences

. of a radiological emergency condition.

The Region a0d the RAC find that accident assessment capaoilities and procedures basical,1y meet the intent of Planning Standarc I.

I. Protective Resoonse (Planning Standard J):

1. Protective Action Guides. A range of protective actions have been jointly cevelopec oy :ne staff s of the health agencies of Oregon and Washington, and PGE, for the plume and ingestion EPZ's. These guicelines are consisten with Federal isicance anc are incorporatec in :neir plans and implamenting procecures. .
2. Evacuation Planning. A detailed evacuation plan was ceveloped i by PGE and acopteo oy tne 5 tate of Oregon and Ccwlit: County, Wa:hington (the appropriate decision authorities). The Region has found the evacuation plan to be in compliance with Appencix 4 of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1.

A; pro;riate implementing procedures have been incorpora:ec into tne resoective plans / procedures of Cowlitz County, Washington; Columof a Coun:y, Oregon; anc the States of Oregon and Washington.

i i 3. Procedures for Imolementino Protective Actions. Protective

! action procecure nas oeen cevelopec oy Gregon, wasnington, and PGE for the I

plume and ingestion EFZ's. This procedure will also ce used by PGE's Technical Support Center (TSC) for making early protective action recommendations until the EOF dose assessment area is operational. In accition, the State / county ECC's may use the procedure for making decisions to protect the public.

4. Ingestion Pathway Precaredness. The various' agricultural i enterprises anc f oco procucers w1:ntn tne ingestion E?Z have been identifiec.

- Common procedures for both States have been developed for sampling and for I . imolementing protective measures. The implementing procecures contain appropriate maps and a basic inventory of agricultural enterprises,'focd producers, potable water supplies, and key crop infonnation.

! 5. Cacabilities for Imolementing Protective Action.

a. The States and counties did demonstrate an ability to coordinate protective action decisionmaking for ne plume and ingestion E?Z's.* -

A .

4 e 14

  • *" er e p , y. -q - *- -

w w g - - . , e -,m e

~

, __ . . . _ . = _ - . . . .

_m._ . __~._J. _'_

. ..__.m.. . .._. - _ _ . _ _ _m u 2 ._.

. , __..s,_..)...____..., ,

. , . + .

b. The counties did demonstrate an ability to implement tneir procecures for access controls. v -

See our Reports: 1981 Interim (3/4/81); Revisiteo

(12/10/31); ano Trojan Exerci.se (12/10/82).

Summary. The States and counties nave oeveloped an acequate range of protective actions for tne plume and ingestion EPZ's. The State, counties, ano licensee have demonstrated an adequate protective action cacability to recomend, decide, and coordinate decisions for protective actions and to '

i implement protective measures.

J. Radiological Exoosure Control (Planning Standarc X):

1. The State Health Departments have mace provisions to cetermine the dose of emergency' workers involved in any nuclear accident.

.. 2. The State of Oregon has prepared and distributed emergency worker kits that contain appropriate dosimetry (self-reading and permanent record devices) and KI.

i 3. The State' of Washington has prepared and distributed emergency worxer kits that contain appropriate dosimetry (self-reading and permanent record devices) and KI.

, Sumary. Scth States have established and developed tne capability for contraliing radiation exposure. No deficiency exists.

K. Mecical
Public Health Succort (Planning Standarc L):

The States / local governments have made arrangements for local and backup hospital and medical services. The plans / procedures contain lists of the available hospitals and other medical facilities within the State.

i Sumary. The States, counties, and licensee have made adequate arrangements for medical services for contaminated and injured individuals.

L. Recovery and Reentry (Planning Standard M):

1. The States and Cowlitz County have included in their general 4'

plans specific means for initiating recovery actions, relaxing protective measures, and establishing recovery organization / operation.

2. In the approval exercise the State of Washington and Cowlit:

County followed their plan and met to estaolish procedures for

' reentry / recovery. The State of Oregon failed to develop recovery recommendations, but they did concur with the State of Washington on tne decisions witn respect to reentry and appropriate recovery measures.

3. In the subsystem exercise conducted on November 19, 1981, the

, various participants executed their plans / procedures with respect to tne ~

recovery / reentry process. Despite some confusion in the Wasnington ECC, there .

. was concurrence and coordination with respect to the reco=encations cevelopeo by tne State of Oregon.

15 l

f

. -... - - .. a-. .:- ,.2 -..-- - - - w. ""

3 ..

.L' .

. i ~

4 3

4 In the approval exercise (3/4/81) and tne Healtn Physics Orill a c ECF subsys:em exercise (11/17/51), neither ne State's field teams nor Ose Assessment Area adequately demonstrated an ability to make reentry reco= endations. See our Interim Report (3/4/81) and 1981 Trojan Revisited Report (12/10/81).

5. An appropriate proce::ure for Recovery and Reentry including tne Ingestion Pathways Monitoring / Sampling Plan has been developed and incorporated in PGE's procedures. The State of Oregon has adopted the procecure. The State of Washington, with some minor reservations, will adopt tne procedure by March 31, 1983.

Summary. The States and counties and PGE have developed acequata plans for recovery and reentry. the Region and the RAC find that the implementing procedures are adequate and that insufficient capacilities ere demonstrated by the f1 eld team and Dose Assessment Area. The Region and the RAC find that these deficiencies are minor.

M. Exercise and Orills (Planning Standard N):

l. The States and Cowlitz County have made commitments in tneir i

plans to estaolish and'ah-intain the schedule of various drills and exercises

, wnich are reRuired by the NRC/ FEMA regulations. Their plans contain comitments for evaluation and formal critique, and for implementing corrective actions recor= ended in the critique.

2. Orills and exercises are being conducted in accorcance witn the

, schecule of Planning Standard N.

t Summary. The Region and the RAC find that the States and CcAitz County have implemented a preparedness program which consists of periodic exercises to evaluate major portions of emergency response capabilities; and periodic drills to develop and maintain key skills. Deficiencies identified as a result of drills and exercises have been corrected in a timely fashion.

N. Radiolacical Emer:ency Resconse Trainino (Plannino Standard 01:

1. The plans for States and Cowlitz County contain commitments to provide initial and annual retraining of all indivicuals assigned a role in their emergency response plans.
2. Formal Training.

, a. Memoers of the planning staffs for both States and iccal governments have attended the FEMA-sponscred training course in planning.

b. All the members of the Oregon State Health Division ano over two-thirds of the Wasnington State Department of Social and Health Services, who nave a field team assignment, have attended the FEMA-sponsored emergency response Course. ~
c. States and some PGE staff, having an assigr. ment to tne
  • ac:icent assessment function, attended the FEMA-sponsored accident assessment ccurse.

16

., - . . . . - .. : a w a.w u-.-.- z. - --. . . a ..~ = a :::

_f . .

.q . , . . - - .

~

3. On-tne-Joo Training.
a. Memoers of both States and local governments nave received initial and followup training in their emergency response assignments and

. plans / procedures. .

b. Most of the State of Wasnington's Public Aff airs Officers (23) nave attended a 1-day seminar in emergency puolic information wnicn was arranged and coordinated by the Region.

Sumary. The. States, counties, and licensee have provided' training to those persons who may be called on to assist in an emergency.

J 0. Planning Effort (Planning Standard P):

I'

l. The Statis and Cowlitz Co'unty have assigned responsioility for plan development, annual reviews, revision, and distribution / update to appropriate officials witnin the various departments and agencies.

~

2. The States and Cowlit: County, Washington, have made commitments to frequently update the,various telepnene numbers in their implementing pr0Cecures. .

Summary. The Region and the RAC find that the States, counties, ano licensee nave trained their planners; assigned responsioility for development and revision of plans / procedures; and have provided for the distribution of emergency plans / procedures.

III.' Schedule of Corrections

' ~

There are specific deficiencies noted in Section II (Evaluation). It is the optnion of the Region and the RAC that none of these are major deficien-cies, and that all, with one exception, will be corrected by either the next

, annual exercise (November 1983) or the next update of plans / procedures.

9 9

e l

17

. . . .s... . -. -.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20134A244&oldid=3454725"