ML20134P438
| ML20134P438 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 07/22/1985 |
| From: | LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20134P436 | List: |
| References | |
| EP-3-020, EP-3-20, NUDOCS 8509060312 | |
| Download: ML20134P438 (83) | |
Text
..
B POWER & LIGHT LOUISIANA U$MsEsYEU PCM VOL12fE 18 EP-3-020 PCM SECTION 3
REVISION 4 EMERGENCY PLAN SUPPORTING PROCEDURE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS DRILLS AND EXERCISE PORC Heeting No.
d Reviewed Mk b(1
/ 7-/ /-dM'~
PORC Chairman DATE Approved'_
fd / [ - -
/
~
Plant Manager-Nuclear DATE Effective Date UNT-1-002 Revision 9 22.3 (1 of 4) 8509060312 050819 PDR ADOCK 05000302 F
L 6. C07Z1 Sm EP-3-020 - Emergency Preparedness Drills and Exercise (Rev. 4)
CT:
]
. CRC R.6.
The PCEC has teviewed this itas and decarm1=ad hat a safety evalca.1:n was perfor_ad i
(as applicabla). that an unreviewed sadas7 question does not exist (as applicabla),
. hat a change to the Tae w -=t Specificacicas is not required and that nuclear sadat7 is/was not adversely affected.
CIDIR ev N ED CF PCEC 1SMEIE FORC MEM3II 701 AFFEC7AL DA'"I l
3ETTE2 SIGNA 1TRE TI5 4 30 i
Matatanance I
'f"/h'
/
j q
Superistandant X]}h wds v
C W tLa**
llkh'-),p,(,%,,,. y l ',,~
Supectstandant
/
Radiatama 7:stestaca.
9 i
Superintendant 7! 'S 06y,,j,d v/
Plant Quality
~ f/rs M.an r w
fe/;//,p
,m/
V
/ /
i Teshnasal Support
/
7 J
Superistandast
< /v ha m/, %_,__-
' '"i i
~
Assistans Plans
-p p p
}%<,
f
- g., -
Wmaggy Qe I
b
$2
'A-// - Y.i
)
PCEC Meestag No. ' 'O /4' Itan Is..
4' Data
6
\\
This itas is r- - dad for approvel?
'Tx:
O==
This itas requires SIC /1EC review prior to implanestation?
OTS so 13 yes, ensure documentation supporting review is at ached.
This itas regtd.res QA review prior to FM-N approval?
YZ3 ' @ NO I
CA RT7*I2 lavtaved h l' /
DATE Corporata QA. Manager i':
7'.JLT" WACIR-vt*C*.ZAR AF".07Al CAETER TO 5.4.12.1)
C maants:
i 1
Approved by DATE Fisat.~.angerwiucisar 4
i UYr-1-004, Revision 6 18 gg
WATERFORD 3 SES
(
PLANT OPERATING MANUAL Check Block Below CHANGE / REVISION / DELETION REQUESTg
$1POM l[lPORC-S/C Procedure No h ] -0 2 6 TitlehrPthit4, /fhbtreSHs.r lhd/sk 6t2#sG Effective Date (if different from app'roval date)
Complete A. B, and C A.
Change No.
l[l Permanent l[l Deviation Expiration Date B.
Revision No.
C.
Deletion l[ LYES $No DESARIPTION OF CE6NGE OR REVISION
$ff9k62.-l A2 ht2?fTsb Shhi-SdZ//Y #sA*d /&Nsk /N&hc=
6 p4 An6+ a Ak c4x.L~d -fem 4 / sdaDn d Asa:%7 eM m/s4,G,da.-:
Mee i66dno & J M reste-dres We REASON FOR CHANGE, REVISION, OR DELETION 5/Afdf&f#k~ fr//?wsWb!st /// e A fer v l h & fi*u, r a )
</ /A[a '32e/Gafuse-A wVo v ~ Essclfa Ant ttus' uh6-!dI he dea U rbs d O!s k le'tsNWI /N b kWdk,*a7 /chsXlt ad Mkre V/
REqutar.u SIGNAn = b /
Ou GINAIG d ' M M M a-N DATE
[/2f/ ['
f/
ff SAFETT REVIEW Does this change, revision, or deletion:
1.
Change the facility as described in the FSAR7 YES NO 2.
Change the procedures as described in the FSAR7 YES NO V 3.
Conduct tests /expe s no't described in the FSAR7 YES NO V 4.
Require a change to th Technical Specifications?
YES NO If the answer to any of above is yes, complete and attach a 10CFR50.59 Safa 'Ev tion SAFETT REVIIW A
djh TECHNICAL REV N 8 / / M o DATE d
F of DATE la --M'5ff' GROUP HEAD REVIEW [/7 [ M [j#dd'b DATE d76Mi-
~
TEMPORARY APPROVAL * (SRO)
DATE TEMPORARY APPROVAL
- DATE
- Temporary approval must be followed by Plant Manager /APM-N - Nuclear approval within 14 days.
(
UNT-1-003 Revision 8 43.7 (1 of 1)
e i
Emergency Plan Supporting Procedure EP-3-020 Emergency Preparedness Drills and Exercises Revision 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PURPOSE
2.0 REFERENCES
3.0 RESPONSIBILITIES 4.0 INITIATING CONDITIONS 5.0 PROCEDURE 5.1 Drill / Exercise Scheduling Requirements 5.2 Drill / Exercise Development 5.3 Drill / Exercise 5.4 Post Drill Activities 5.5 Post Exercise Activities 5.6 Records Retention 6.0 FINAL CONDITIONS 7.0 ATTACHMENTS 7.1 Definitions (1 page) 7.2 Drill / Exercise Scenario Objective Check Sheet (4 pages) 7.3 Drill / Exercise Scenario Format 7.4 W3SES Cue Card 7.5 Drill Monitor / Observer Assignment Sheet 7.6 Drill / Exercise Participant Attendance Report 7.7 Drill / Exercise Critique Sheet 7.8 Observer Evaluation Checklist 7.9 Drill / Exercise Evaluation Report Sheet 7' 10 Milestones for Exercise Obseristion and Critiques i
LIST OF EITECTIVE '.' AGES TITLE Revision 4 1-80 Revision 4 NS30176 1
1
Emergency Plan Supporting Procedure EP-3-020 Emergency Preparedness Drills and Exercises Revision 4 1.0 PURPOSE The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidance for the O
preparation, scheduling, performance, and evaluation of emergency preparedness drills and exercises, j.
2.0 REFERENCES
j 2.1 Waterford 3 SES Emergency Plan 2.2 NUREG 0654/ FEMA-REP-1 1
J.
2.3 Waterford i SES Final Safety Analysis Report 2.4 Waterford 3 !!S Emergency Medical Assistance Program (EMAP) 2.5 UNT-3-002, Training Records and Forms 2.6 EP-3-040, Emergency Equipment Inventory 4
]
2.7 EP-3-070, Emergency Commuu cations Systems Routine Testing 4
2.8 NSP-451, Emergency Planning Action Itee Tracking Systes 3.0 RESPONSIBILITIES 3.1 The Emergency Planning Coordinator (EPC) is responsible for the coordination of all emergency preparedness drill and exercise activities.
3.2 The Plant Manager or his designee approves plant drill scenarios.
3.3 The Senior Vice President-Nuclear Operations or his designee approves joint exercise scenarios.
3.4 Individuals involved in drills / exercises as participants are responsible f
i for the following precautions:
3.4.1 Understanding Attachment 7.1, Definitions.
3.l. 2 Prefacing all communications and announcements that are part of
.l
- the drill /evereine with the voeds "THIS IS A DRII,f.."
3.5 Individuals involved in the development of the drill /es.ercise ensure that plant safety is not compromised.
j 2
i
._,,-_---._,,.-7, y,-__, _ - _ _,,,.,
y-,___
m+_. - _
,,--_,--,--,,.,y,_-,,,,
,y---
l l
I Emergency Plan Supporting Procedure EP-3-020 Emergency Preparedness Drills and Exercises Revision 4 4.0 INITIATING CONDITIONS l>
This procedure is used to develop, conduct and document emergency i
preparedness drills / exercises.
5.0 PROCEDURE 5.1 DRILL / EXERCISE SCHEDULING REQUIREMENTS 5.1.1 A major exercise simulating at 1 cast a Site Area Emergency is j
conducted annually. The scenario is varied to ensure that over l:
a 5 year period all major components of Waterford 3 emergency preparedness are exercised. At least once every six (6) years j
there should be one drill initiated between 6 pm and midnight and another between midnight and 6 am. 'This exercise is evaluated by the Federal, State and LP&L drill observers / evaluators.
5.1.2 Communication drills.
5.1.2.1 Monthly, a communication drill involving the state and local governments within the Plume Exposure Pathway / Emergency Planning Zone (10-mile EPZ) is conducted.
5.1.2.2 Quarterly, a communication drill involving the Federal and State Emergency Response Organizations within the Ingestion Exposure Pathway Emergency Planning Zone (50-mile EPZ) is conducted.
5.1.2.3 Annually, a communication drill between Waterford 3 and the State and local Emergency Operations Centers (EOC's) and the Field Assessment Teams is conducted. This drill may be held in conjunction with the annua? exercise.
l 5.1.3 Fire drills acc v..Jucted as described in the Waterford 3 SES I
Training Manual.
5.1.4 Plant environmental and radiological monitoring drills (on-site l
and off-site) are conducted annually. This drill may be held
?
in conjunction with the aru:ual exercise.
.l 3
l 1
L...
i Emergency Plan Supporting Procedure EP-3-020 Emergency Preparedness Drills and Exercises Revision 4 5.1.5 Health Physics drills involving response to, and analysis of,
~
simulated elevated airborne and liquid samples, and direct radiation measurments in the environment, are conducted semi-annually. One of these drills may be held in conjunction with the annual exercise.
5.1.6 Analysis of inplant liquid samples and use of the post-accident sampling system are included in health physics drills annually.
j This drill may be held in conjunction with the annual exercise.
l 5.1.7 Medical emergency drills are performed annually in accordance with section 7.0 of the EMAP and may be held in conjunction with the annual exercise.
5.1.8 A drill is performed semi-annually to assess the capability of Control Room personnel to don air-supplied respiratory equipment within two minutes. This drill may be held in conjunction with other drills or the annual exercise.
5.1.9 Additional drills, table-tops and walk-throughs are scheduled, developed and held as directed by the EPC in order to maintain emergency preparedness at an acceptable level.
5.2 DRILL / EXERCISE DEVELOPMENT r
NOTE
' The Drill / Exercise Package and information related to the package is considered proprietary in nature.
Individuals privy to the information contained within the
, package, or related to the package, are the package preparer (s) and authorized reviewers.
5.2.1 The EPC develops the Scope and Objectives of the drill / exercise..2, Drill / Exercise Objective Check Sheet, is provided to assist in the development of the Scope and Objectives.
4 i
Emergency Plan Supporting Procedure EP-3-020 Emergency Preparedness Drills and Exercises Revision 4 5.2.2 The drill preparer prepares the drill scenario based on the Scope 4ad Objectives developed in 5.2.1 above. Attachment 7.3, Drill / Exercise Scenario Format is provided as guidance for use in the preparation of the scenario.
5.2.3 The EPC reviews and approves the drill / exercise scenario.
The EPC ensures that the appropriate management approvals are obtained. If the exercise is the annual exercise, the submittals for the NRC and FEMA are in accordance with Attachment 7.10, Milestones for Exercise Observation and Critiques, or, other schedules developed in coordination with NRC, FEMA and LP&L.
5.2.4 The EPC, prior to the drill / exercise date, selects and ensures adequate preparation of the drill team.
5.2.5 Prior to any scheduled drill or exercise which involves events and/or evolutions which could be witnessed by the general public, the EPC informs the LP&L Direc' tor of Public Relations of the l
event.
5.2.6 The EPC notifies affected off-site agencies prior to any drill or exercise.
5.2.7 Prior to each major drill / exercise the EPC or his designee performa a walkdown of all Plant Emergency Facilities.
5.3 DRILL / EXERCISE i
5.3.1 The Drill Team Leader ensures that each drill team member understands his duties and responsibilities in the development and conduct of the drill / exercise.
5.3.2 The Drill Team Leader conducts a pre-drill / exercise briefing with the drill team.
J 5.3.3 Those Drill Monitors required to provide information for participants' use shall be issued Cue Cards containing the j
information. See Attachment 7.3, Drill / Exercise Scenario Format.
~~~
5.3.4 The Drill Tese Controller commences the drill / exercise and is responsible for control of the progress of the scenario.
5.3.5 During the drill / exercise, the Drill Monitors and observers record their observations and comments in chronological order.
4 j.
5 i'
O w
- g
1 (
c Emergency Plaa Supporting Procedure EP-3-020 Emergency Preparedness Drills and Exercises Revision 4 9
5.4 POST DRILI, ACTIVITIES
\\
V 5.4.1 Upon Termination of the Drill:
/
l 5.4.1.1 h Drill Team Controllers meet with drill team'eenbers and drill
, {
participanta and critique the drill.
1 5.4.1.2 During this critique; highlights of the drill are discussed.
5.4.1.3 Drill Controllers and Monitors collect all Loss, Records, and Forms generated by the drill participants during the drill.
5.4.1.4 h EPC ensures that the Emergency Response Tacilities are restored to pre-drill conditions.
5.4.2
' Drill Evaluation Report 5.4.2.1 Drill Team Members provide completed Attachments 7.7, 7.8, and 7.9 Drill / Exercise Critique Sheet, Evaluation Checklist, and Drill /Emercise Report, respectively, to the Drill Team Leader.
5.4.2.2 Drill Tese Members provide the documentation collected in 5.4.1.3, above, to the Drill Tese Leader.
5.4.2.3 Using the Logs, Records and documents generated by the participants during the drill, the Drill Tese Leader constructs the Sequence of Response of the drill.
5.4.2.4 h Drill Team Leader debriefs the drill tese identifying any deficiencies which should be corrected prior to the next drill.
Deficiencies noted are forwarded to the EPC.
5.4.2.5 h Drill Tese Leader, using the documentation collected froe l
5.4.2.1 and 5.4.2.2, develops the drill evaluation'.
5.4.2.6 Discrepancies identified are placed on the Emergency Planning
' Action Itse Tracking System in accordance with Reference 2.8.
5.4.2.7 h Drill Team Leader compiles the Evaluation, Sequence of Response, Action Ites System Input Fo M,Nand Drill Attendance Records in the Drill Evaluation Report.
5.4.2.8 h Drill Evaluation Report is approved by the Emergency Planning Manager and forwarded to the Plant Manager-Nuclear and Nuclear Se: vices Manager, A.
Identification of all; drill requirements in Section 5.'l of i
this procedure that were satisfied by the drill is included
~
in the evaluation report cover letter.
6
\\
\\
Emergency Plan Supporting Procedure EP-3-020 Emergency Preparedness Drills and Exercises Revision 4 3.
The EPC notifies the Training Department under separate cover of any items to be included in the training program.
1 5.4.2.9 Table-tops and walk-throughs are documented as determined by the EPC.
5.5 POST EXERCISE ACTIVITIES 5.5.1 Upon Termination of the Exercise:
5.5.1.1 The Drill Team Controllers meet with drill team members and exercise participants and critique the exercise.
5.5.1.2 During the critique, highlights of the exercise are discussed.
5.5.1.3 The Drill Controllers and monitors collect all Logs, Records, and Forms, generated by the exercise participants during the exercise.
5.5.1.4 i The EPC ensures that the Emergency Response Facilities are restored to Pre-Exercise Conditions.
5.5.2 Exercise Evaluation Report 5.5.2.1 Drill team members provide completed Attachments 7.7, 7.8, 7.9, Drill Exercise Critique Sheet, Evaluation Checklist, and Drill / Exercise Report to the Drill Team Leader.
~
5.5.2.2 Drill Team Members provide the documentation collected in
/
5.5.1.3, above, to the Drill Team Leader.
5.5.2.3 The EPC onets with the members of the drill team to critique the Exercise. This Critique provides the discussion items for the Licensee /NRC Critique.
5.5.2.4' The EPC conducts the Licensee /NRC Critique.
5.5.2.5 Using the Loss, Records and documents generated by the participsnts during the Exercise, the Drill Team Leader constructs the Sequence of Response of the Exercise.
5.5.2.6 The Drill Team Leader debriefs the drill team as necessary to prepare the Exercise Evaluation.
L 5.5.2.7 The Drill Team Leader develops the Exercise Evaluation using the information collected from 5.5.2.1, 5.5.2.2, and 5.5.2.4, above.
5.5.2.8 Discrepancies identified during the development of the Exercise are placed on the Emergency Planning Action Item Tracking System
.in accordance with Reference 2.8.
~
l 7
i e
L-
Emergency Plan Supporting Procedure EP-3-020 Emergency Preparedness Drills and Exercises Revision 4 5.5.2.9 The Drill Team Leader compiles the Exercise Evaluation, Sequence of Response. Action Item Input Forms and Exercise Attendance Records in the Exercise Evaluation Report.
5.5.2.10 The Exercise Evaluation Report is approved by the Emergency Planning Manager and forwarded to the Plant Manager - Nuclear.
Nuclear Services Manager, and the Senior Vice President - Nuclear Operations.
A.
Identification of all drill requirements in Section 5.1 of this procedure that were satisfied by the exercise is included in the evaluation report cover letter.
B.
The EPC notifies the Training Department under separate cover of any items to be included in the training program.
5.6 RECORDS RETENTION l
5.6.1 The original Drill and Exercise Attendance Forms are forwarded with a copy of the Evaluation Report to the Training Manager.
5.6.2 The original of the Drill / Exercise Package, a ' copy of the Drill / Exercise Evaluation Raport and all supporting documents are
^
forwarded to Project Files.
5.6.2.1 Copies of the Maintenance Tracking System Task Cards corresponding to the drill requirements in Section 5.1 that were satisfied by the documented activity are included in the package provided to Project Files.
5.6.3 The Records identified in 5.6.2 above are retained in Project Files for a period of at least 6 years.
6.0 FINAL CONDITIONS 6.1 The Evaluation Report is forwarded to the designated management personnel including Training Department report for items to include in the Training Program, as appropriate.
6.2 All documents and records are completed and filed for retention in Project Files.
6.3 Restoration of the Emergency Response Facilities to Pre-Drill / Exercise conditions has been initiated.
6.4 Action Items are documented and tracked on the Emergency Planning Action Item Tracking System.
8
Emergency Plan Supporting Procedure EP-3-020 Emergency Preparedness Drills and Exercises Revision 4 7.0 ATTAC10ENTS 7.1 Definitions j
7.2 Drill / Exercise Scenario Objective Check Sheet 4
7.3 Drill / Exercise Scenario Format 7.4 W3SES Emergency Preparedness Drill Cue Card
-\\
7.5 Drill Controller / Monitor / Observer Assignments 7.6 Drill / Exercise Participant Attendpace Record 7.7 ' Drill / Exercise Critique Sheet 7.8 Observer Evaluation Checklist 7.9 Drill / Exercise Evaluation Report Sheet 7.10 Milestones for Exercise Observation and Critique i
l a
e e
9
t DEFINITIONS l
1.
Drill - A supervised training instruction period conducted or simulated in a work environment for the purpose of developing and maintaining skills required to cope with abnormal or emergency plant conditions, including an evaluation of performance.
2.
Exercise - A demonstration of the response to Simulated Emergency Conditions, including the demonstration of the ability to effectively evaluate the response.
Lead Controller - The Senior Drill Tead Controller responsible for 3.
coordinating the control of the Drill / Exercise.
4.
Controller - A member of the drill team assigned to Control and Evaluate the Drill / Exercise activities within a component of response through interaction with the monitors and participants.
5.
Monitor - A member of the drill team r sponsible for the Control and Evaluation of a component of response under_ the direction of a Controller.
6.
Observer - A member of the drill team who evaluates a component of response.
7.
Drill Team Leader - The individual assigned the responsibility for the development of the Drill / Exercise Package. This person is usually the Lead Controller, also.
8.
Drill Team - The cadre of personnel assigned to develop, control and evaluate the Drill / Exercise.
9.
Drill Package - The docugent developed by the drill team which contains the administrative and control details of the scenario.
10.
Exercise Package - See Drill Package.
11.
Joint Drill - A Drill involving participation by both Waterford 3 and State or Local Agency Emergency Response Organizations.
12.
Sequence of Response - A reconstruction of the response to the Simulated Emergency.
13.
Table-Top - A supervised training instruction period which involves
" talking through" responses and instructions, but no actual
" activities" related to response. Evaluation of performance is usually not included.
14.
Walk-Through - A supervised training instruction period which involves response activities, assistance from the drill team, but no evaluation of response.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 10.1 (1 of 1)
~
DRILL / EXERCISE SCENARIO OBJECTIVE CHECK SHEET 1.
Time Frame a.
Season (Circle one) winter spring summer fall b.
Period of the week (Circle one) weekday weekend holiday c.
What shift shall the drill begin on-8 am - 5 pm 6 pm - midnight midnight - 6 as d.
Projected Drill / Exercise date
/ /
e.
Cate of last similar drill / exercise
/
/
f.
Real time span of drill
- hours, days g.
Drill / Exercise time frame
- hours, days 2.
Maximum Level of Classification Emergency a.
Classification during the drill / exercise (check one)
Notification of Unusual Event Alert Site Area Emergency General Emergency 3.
Organization / Facility Involvement a.
On-Site Control Room Staff yes/no TSC yes/no EOF yes/no Site Security yes/no Fire Brigade yes/no OSC yes/no B/U OSC yes/no EP-3-020 Revision 4 11.2 (1 of 4) i
DRILL EXERCISE SCENARIO OBJECTIVE CHECK SHEET B/U EOF yes/no PR Staff yes/no Off-Site Assembly Areas yes/no b.
Off-Site EOC St. Charles Parish yes/no EOC St. John yes/no Sheriff's Department yes/no Fire Department yes/no EOC State Baton Rouge yes/no Regional NRC Office yes/no LOEP Office of Emerg yes/no Preparedness LNED Nuclear Emerg Division yes/no CCC yes/no GOIC yes/no Emergency Medical yes/no Ambulance yes/no 4.
Communication Do you desire to exercise the emergency backup phone system?
a.
yes/no b.
Do you desire to use the emergency paging system?
yes/no c.
Should a news bt'lletin be prepared?
yes/no d.
Do you desire to activate the LP&L Public Information Center?
yes/no Do you desire to exercise the Public Notification System?
e.
yes/no i
f.
Is a sedical problem to be involved? yes/no
~
If yes, 1) On-site response? yes/no
- 2) Off-site response?
yes/no EP-3-020 Revision 4 12
' Attachment 7.2 (2 of 4) i
DRILL / EXERCISE SCENARIO OBJECTIVE CHECK SHEET
- 3) Victim (s) injury (ies)
- 4) Is the victim contaminated? yes/no g.
If yes is answered for f.2 above, describe involvement of off-site organization.
h.
Will the exercise involve a fire? yes/no a)
On-site response? yes/no b)
Off-site response? yes/no c)
Describe involvement of responder.
i.
Will the Security Force response be tested? yes/no a)
Sabotage / Bomb? yes/no b)
Intruder? yes/no c)
Other 5.
Radiological Release a.
Meteorological capabilities 1.
Should real-time meteorology be used? yes/no 2.
Should simulated meteorology be used? yes/no 2
3.
Should weather forecasting capability be required? yes/no
)
EP-3-020 Revision 4' 13.2 (3 of 4)
-%_m-
-eg**eg-l w
- h*
"*b'*
'N'
DRILL / EXERCISE SCENARIO OBJECTIVE CHECK SHEET b.
Dose Assessment 1.
Will dose projection be backed up by field monitoring?
yes/no 2.
Will long-tern dos'e projections be calculated?
yes/no 3.
Source of radioactive release c.
Postaccident Sampling 1.
Should postaccident sampling capabilities be exercised?
yes/no 2.
If yes, to what extent?
1 EP-3-020 Revision 4 14.2 (4 of 4) 1
-w.-
~~
~ ~^
iem
DRILL / EXERCISE SCENARIO FORMAT 1.
The following format shall be used by the Drill Preparer to ensure a standardization of the drill and exercise packages.
2.
The first page of the drill / exercise package shall be a Title Page with the following information centered on it.
W3SES Emergency Preparedness Drill / Exercise (Title)
(Da'te) 1 3.
Page number two (2) of the package shs11 be a " Table of Contents" similar in design to the following outline.
Sections:
I Introduction II Objectives III Guidelines A.
General B.
Safety Precautions IV Narrative Summary V
Sequence of Events A.
Initial Conditions 1.
Plant Status 1
2.
Meteorological Conditions j
B.
Scenario Timetable 4
VI Cue Carde Part I Participant Message Part II Monitor Guide EP-3-020 Revision 4 15.3 (1 of 5) e
-m 3
p a
DRILL / EXERCISE SCENARIO FORMAT VII Charts, Graphs and Tables A.
Plant Data B.
HP Plant Data C.
Chemistry Data j
D.
Meteorological Data E.
Offsite Field Data F.
Onsite Data VIII Controller / Monitor / Observer Instructions IX Controller /Honitor/ Observer Assignments X References 4.
Introduction - This section should contain a brief narrative description of goals that the drill or exercise is designed to accomplish.
5.
Objectives - This section clearly states, in detail, the objectives that the drill / exercise package was designed to evaluate.
6.
Guidelines - Includes those items that provide guidance to the participants, Drill Monitors and observers throughout the performance of the drill. This section is broken down into several subsections.
General Guidelines - Those general guidelines that are to be a.
followed by all participants throughout the drill or exercise period.
b.
Safety Precautions - General and detailed precautions necessary to prevent jeopardizing plant and personnel safety.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 16.3 (2 of 5) t
_. ~, - -....
..n
~...
^
DRILL / EXERCISE SCENARIO FORMAT 7.
Narrative Summary - A brief narrative description of the d
drill / exercise sequence of events.
8.
Sequence of Events - An outline of the sequence of drill events.
a.
Initial Conditions - Those parameters and plant conditions necessary to be established to set the stage to commence the drill or exercise.
b.
Meteorological Conditions - Those meteorological parameters necessary to establish the initial conditions for the drill or exercise radiation release.
c.
Detailed Scenario Timetable - A three-column format that provides a sequence of events that includes a drill time, event summary and the cue card number used to initiate the drill or exercise event. Some indication of the anticipated response of the drill / exercise players may be included in this section.
9.
Cue Cards - A two page document used to transmit parameters and plant conditions to the participants of the drill / exercise.
The information on page 1 is given to the participant. The time a.
block is the drill time or condition under which the cue card should be issued. The message contains, in chronological sequence, the events, changes in parameters, indications or actions that the participant will observe, hear, smell, feel or experience.nd then respond to.
b.
Page 2 is retained by the Drill Controller / Monitor to provide him/her with guidance control or to evaluate the participant's response to page 1 of cue cards. Page 2 of the cue card has three subsections:
l 1)
Anticipated Response - is an outline of the order of actions that is expected to be observed as the participant responds to the cue card message. This section includes reference to procedures that are to be used and the expected interpretation of the message parameters.
2)
Comments - This section is a blank section to allow the Drill Monitor to make comments while referring to the Anticipated Response section. These comments should be transferred to the Drill Critique Sheet at a later time.
~ 'l EP-3-020 Revision 4 17.3 (3 of 5)
-o y
W
=&%
DRILL / EXERCISE SCENARIO FORMAT 3)
Instruction - Special instruction that the monitor should be aware of during the response to the cue card message.
10.
Charts, Graphs and Tables - This section includes all supportive charts, graphs and tables referenced by the cue cards or by the Drill / Exercise Package.
11.
Controller / Monitor / Observer Instructions - Those information items that the drill team members need to be aware of in order to perform their functions.
a)
Evaluation Standards 1)
Satisfactory - Personnel and Equipment performed according to expectationn. The area was able to carry out its functions.
2)
Unsatisfactory - Personnel and Equipment generally performed below expectations. The area's ability to carry out its function was diminished.
3)
Not Applicable /Not Observed - Not a part of the drill or exercise.
b.
Categories for Evaluation - See Attachment 7.8.
Drill Team Documentation - Drill controllers / monitors / observers c.
use three (3) documents to generate their evaluation of the participants and equipment performance observed:
a.
Drill / Exercise Critique Sheet (Attachment 7.7) b.
Observer Checklist (Attachment 7.8) c.
Drill / Exercise Evaluation Sheet (Attachment 7.9)
The Drill / Exercise Critique Sheet is a narrative summary of significant observed events. The Observer Checklist is an outline of expected key events that should ha performed by _each segment of the emergency organization. The key events are coupled with an evaluation scale. The Drill Controller / Monitor / Observer, on completion of the evaluation, l
3 shall complete the Drill / Exercise Evaluttion Sheet based on his/her comments made in the Drill / Exercise Critique Sheet and evaluation made in the Observer Checklist.
l EP-3-020 Revision 4 18.3 (4 of 5) a l
-,e.
e
-e
l i
DRILL / EXERCISE SCENARIO FORMAT
.i 9
d NOTE The Observer Checklist is not weighted, nor are items equal in i
value; therefore, a quantitative evaluation of this document is not considered reasonable. An " Unsatisfactory" in one area can l
significantly impact the overall rating of that section.
12.
Controller / Monitor / Observer Assignments - This section lists the positions which require Drill Controllers / Monitors and/or Drill Observers. The Drill Team Leader ensures that each position is filled with an individual that is qualified to evaluate and safely monitor the assigned responsibility.
13.
References - All referenced documents and procedures, including Action Ites Tracking System Drill Items, used to prepare and/or support the design and uses of the Drill / Exercise Paczage.
d l
l I
I EP-3-020 Revision 4 19.3 (5 of 5)
J
.e e
m*
v -
4 h
t W3 SES EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS DRILL CUE CARD DRILL TYPE /NO.
CUE CARD NO.
TO:
TIME:
FROM:
l I
THIS IS A DRILL DO_ NOT initiate actions affecting normal plant operations.
INFORMATION:
i
+
i l
i 1
i THIS IS A DRILL EP-3-020 Revision 4 20.4 (1 of 2) l i
~
i
+
+..,...,
e.+
.-e-
+= ~
er--e
+ + *. *
.A
,,m
.14.--
2.
m4
- .~
m i
W3 SES EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS DRILL CUE CARD 9
DRILL TYPE /NO.
CUE CARD NO.
4 TO:
TIME:
l l
FROM:
I ANTICIPATED RESPONSE s
COMMENTS:
INSTRUCTIONS:
4 p
L' e
1 EP-3-020 Revision 4 21.4 (2 of 2)
. _ _ ~. - _ _ _
. ~....... _ - _
-e
l-il,
DRILL CONTROLLER / MONITOR /0BSERVER ASSIGNMENTS Drill / Exercise Title Page of Date
/
/
. Time l*
Controller / Monitor / Observer Name Area of Responsibility l
1.
2.
3.
+
4.
i i
5.
6.
7.
8.
l 9.
10.
4 11.
12.
13.
l 14.
15.
~
r
+
16.
17.
18.
I 19.
4 20.
21.
4 22.
23.
24.
i B.
26.
26.
27.
28.
29.
4 30.
- EP-3-020 Revision 4 22.5 (1 of 1)
J i
m1
-.w,-
me--
~-
~ * ~ ~ ' " " " * * " ' ' ' ' * ^ ^ = '
~ '
g
.c
- + - -
g m----mm.yyw.-
.w p
-g,*
rtu
-e aw p-re epm
-=
',y-p3+
.'gn.e y
-,.,-e
f EDARG N
)
I N
f Y
o NA N
1 P
(
C\\
N 6
M O
C 7
tnem
,\\
u tca t
t A
T
~
NEM TRA j
P E
D x
R E
W M
B E
T C
A E
A7,- f E
D T
~
R E
A S
T D
N E
M R
A C
A D
S 3
n T
N S /y.
2 a
C S
E D
N 6
E R
g A
E 7
RUTANG o.
I S
~
T /
E S M R A
I J
N F N
4 n
o is iv E.
e I
R T
R I
O T
l b
T T
S 0
C A.
2 G
E U
1 0
S R
M R
T 3
R U
S O
O N
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
P F
C I
'2 3 ' 5 6 7 8 9
'1 1
1 1
1 1
1 E
DRILL / EXERCISE CRITIQUE SHEET
)
a Drill Observer Name:
Date
/
/
Drill / Exercise
Title:
4 Assigned area to monitor 1.
Drill controllers, monitors and observers use this sheet to record importanteventyandcommentsduringthedrill.
2.
The notes on this sheet should be used when completing the Observer Evaluation Checklist (Attachment 7.8).
ji Time Event Comment Page _ of _
t I
l 4
I a
.?
J f
I l
e l
l I
l I'
i!
EP-3-020 Revision 4 24.7 (1 of 2.'
Ii t
n
. ~ -.
DRILL / EXERCISE CRITIQUE SHEET Time Event Comment Page _ of _
i.
4 i.
-1 i
A
.1 i.
i I.
rl l
'i
.,I 3
t i
)'
J 4
1 e
f 4
EP-3-020 Revision 4 25.7 (2 of 2) l
.~,
+ew-ey.---
ri y
- *+-
ew' r v-
.-r-v w--
T
'-f r
--7'T v-
- '-e-t*-t'e'-N-'s'
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED:
CONTROL ROOM DATE DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating Column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comunents column.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS 4
I.
ACTIVATION AND RESPONSE Control Room (CR) personnel j
rapidly and correctly interpreted the probles.
~
CR personnel knew when to refer to the Emergency Operating procedures, Emergency Plan and which Emergency Implementing procedures to use.
Plant process information was available.when required.
.~
EP-3-020 Revision 4 26.8 (1 of 52)
.i
6-CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS CR personnel obtained timely meteorological data.
J CR personnel got timely release information from radiological and effluent monitor systems.
CR personnel responded quickly to personal injury incident.
CR personnel responded properly to simulated operational events.
HP assistance was requested as needed.
I Event classifications were timely accurate and clear.
j The SS took action to determine what other conditions might exist which would verify the ace'Jeacy of the initial indication.
CR personnel took appropriate actions to mitigate the effects of the accident.
~~~
Technical advice was requested l
and/or received from the proper people.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 27.8 (2 of $2) e
-w
- m -
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS The emergency was upgraded or downgraded when appropriate.
The SS made the correct response to implement on-sita and off-site assessment and protective measures.
II. COMMUNICATIONS / DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION Notifications were timely and properly completed.
Communications flow was adequate to ensure that information was timely, effective, and efficient.
Phone listings were available.
complete and up-to-date.
General status announcements were'made and updated periodically throughout the drill.
Proper data flow was maintained l
between TSC and CR.
l l
EP-3-020 Revision 4 28
. Attachment 7.8 (3 of 52)
l CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS 4
Logs were maintained.
The ambient noise level in the CR was not a problem Trans'fer of information within the CR was clearly and completely understood.
II
I. PROCEDURE
S Emergency Operating Procedures and Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures were clearly marked and readily available in the CR.
Procedures used were current and controlled.
IV.
DIRECTION AND CONTROL The SS promptly assumed control and authority.
.e.
Action was taken to initiate activation of the Emergency
?
Response Centers when plant conditions and procedures indicated they should be activated.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 29.8 (4 of 52) mg.g_
d 9M Mw4=e m
-w
+m m
w a se
+y p
1 l
l CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS i
l The proper management chain of command in the CR was followed when making decisions Emergency control and authority was properly transferred to the designated Emergency Coordinator.
The transfer of control and authority was announced and logged.
V. MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT Plant Monitoring system functioned correctly.
Radiation Monitoring System functioned correctly.
CEPADAS functioned correctly Met. Data.available independent of CEPADAS.
Public Address System functioned 4
correctly.
~~~
Paging /Callout System functioned correctly.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 30.8 (5 of 52) s a.
a
-ww me
~
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS i
Message recorders functioned correctly.
PABX and dedicated hotlines functioned correctly.
l Station Alarm / Fire Alarm Systems functioned correctly.
I Radios functioned correctly VI.
PROTECTIVE MEASURES Personnel in the CK were adequately protected from radiological and chemical hazards.
Supplies such as respirators, protective clothing and KI for CR personnel were available.
HP personnel were available as needed.
5 VII. ACCESS CONTROL Access to CR was limited to personnel operating the plant, or participating in the drill / exercise.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 31.8 (6 of 52) r
-, + -
r e
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSER7ER LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED: DOSE ASSESSMENT - CR DATE DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating Column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS The need to perform dose measurements was promptly identified.
The correct procedures were used for making dose calculations The individual (s) assigned to perform dose calculations were familiar with the procedures.
Dose calculations were performed efficiently and accurately.
Some means were available to verify that the dose calculations were correct.
~~~
EP-3-020 Revision 4 32.8 (7 of 52) w
OBSERVER CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED: TECHNICAL SUPPORT CENTER DATE DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
CRITERIA RATING COMME.VIS I.
ACTIVATION AND RESPONSE The TSC was manned in a timely manner at the Alert Action Level.
Command and control authority was transferred from the Control Room (CR) according to procedure.
The transfer of command and control was formal, was announced, and was logged.
Follow-up activities to manage injured persons.
l l
1 EP-3-020 Revision 4 33.8 (8 of 52)
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Follow-up activities to manage fire.
l' Field monitoring teams dispatched if appropriate.
II.
COMMUNICATIONS / DISSEMINATION 0F INFORMATION f
Plant status and/or radiation i
parameters needed to determine the existing conditions were available in the TSC including portable radiological monitoring, chemistry and meteorological data.
Communications with State, parish, and NRC officials were quickly-established.
Initial (if appropriate) and Follow-up Notifications were made in timely (usually 15 min) fashion.
Major changes in plant or radiation release status was made known to all parties quickly.
Off-site protective action recommendations were made quickly and clearly.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 34.8 (9 of 52) m
L
\\,
A CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS i
All responsible persons in the the TSC kept abreast of current conditions.
Communications between TSC and CR, EOF, OSC and CCC were established and used.
Consunications with field monitoring teams were adequate.
' Discussions were held concerning
~
-trends, prognosis, courses of s
action.
.III.
PROCEDURES Current and controlled copies of the Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures were available.
I l
l Personnel
- using procedures were trained and familiar with them.
Camsunications with off-site groups were made in accordance with procedures.
EP-3-020, Revision 4 35.8 (10 of 52) mves+=
.e
,P e
'W wqp g sh w.esee 69 #.
hah w ph.m.
+-Aer w
4@ w$ Mge
-e F
Y M-N
_a
+
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING CO.6S IV.
DIRECTION AND CONTROL f.
Transfer of command from the CR 1<
was clear and understood by all persons in TSC.
Transfer of command from TSC to EOF was clear and understood by l
all persons in TSC.
l Appropriate TSC personnel made prompt recommesdations.
Logs verg kept.
Recommendations were passed on to Emergency Coordinator for decisions.
Proper classification upgrading and downgrading was done.
V.
MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT SPDS was operational.
CEPADAS was operational.
Blueprints as-built drawings maps, etc. were available.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 36.8 (11 of 52)
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST t
P CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS PABX, sound-powered phones and dedicated hotlines functioned correctly.
Public Address System functioned correctly.
Radios functioned correctly.
Fascimile machine functioned correctly.
Status boards in place and used.
VI.
PROTECTIVE MEASURES HP coverage available in TSC (air sampling, dose rate instruments).
Protective equipment and supplies for TSC personnel.
Plant evacuation decisions logical and clear.
Plant evacuation directives included travel routes, special-precautions, etc.
Continuing accountability information given to Security.
I EP-3-020 Revision 4 37.8 (12 of 52)
. ma
..p..
a.
e es a'
- e W
48
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS In-plant radiological monitoring L
reported to TSC.
' t VII. ACCESS CONTROL Only those people with assi'aned responsibilities were in TSC.
Sign-in system was employed i
l s
EP-3-020 Revision 4 38.8 (13 of 52)
L OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER 4
LOCATIONfGROUP OBSERVED:
DOSE ASSESSMENT - TSC DAIE DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating -
column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS v.
Initial and subsequent dose dose calculations were
%.g performed in a timely manner.
Computerized equipment was properly utilized. (CEPADAS)
Plume was defined and tracked Teams were contacted, briefed, and dispatched expeditiously (through OSC).
Communications were maintained with all teams.
g Personnel were efficiently,'
utilized.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 39 (Attachment 7.8 (14 of 52)
L
~
h a m.mgu y.
g.
e-dum,%Ag,
.s.
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS r
t Health Physics Coordinator initiated and provided periodic updates to the Emergency Coordinator.
Status was maintained on team exposure levels.
Comparisons were made between projected and actual field measurements.
Off-site monitoring teams were provided with adequate information to perform their duties.
1 i
1.
EP-2-020 Revision 4 40.8 (15 of 52) l i
)
i OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED: EMERG OPERATIONS FACILITY DATE DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows.
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comment column.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS I. ACTIVATION AND RESPONSE EOF Director maintained open communication link with TSC while enroute.
EOF was activated within two hours af ter request by Emergency-Coordinator.
EOF Director received complete briefing from Emergency Coordinator prior to assuming command and control.
EOF personnel informed of assumption of specific responsibilities.
4 EP-3-020 Revision 4 41.8 (16 of 52)
+
.g
OBSERVER EVAI.UATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COM.ENTS Sign-in system used to assume full staffing.
II.
C0ftfUNICATIONS/ DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION Communications were quickly established with TSC, EOF, CCC and off-site groups.
All parties notified of assumption of command and control by EOF.
Needed data was available from TSC and CR.
EOF received prompt information on radiological status, both on-and off-site.
l EP-3-020 Revision 4 42.8 (17 of 52)
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS 3
Pertinent. information quickly (15 minutes) transmitted to off-site groups.
Up-to-date meteorological data was available.
Plant status information was promptly available.
Communications with off-site monitoring teams were adequate.
l General status announcements and updates were made to EOF personnel throughout exercise.
EOF coordinated the supply of infonnation to news media, or to Corporate Command Center.
Status bo'ards used and kept current.
f EP-3-020 Revision 4 43.8 (18 of 52)
- ~
w n
m,g
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS II
I. PROCEDURE
S Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures were available-in current and controlled copies.
EOF participants were familiar
^
with procedures.
i Correct procedures were used 1
IV.
DIRECTION AND CONTROL The organizational structure and chain of command in EOF was clear.
Appropriate people made prompt
- decisions and recommendations.
' EOF Director took necessary follow-up actions to care for injured personnel, if any.
Status boards kept current.
4 Plume pathway tracked and visible Emergency classifications and action level notifications transmitted to proper authorities as required.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 44.8 (19 of 52) r
+ - -
~
a y
e
--.a
+ +.
p gn ar 7.+.m
,i en
OBSERVER EVAI,UATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING C0retENTS Protective action reccamendations were made clearly and timely.
Continuous accountability performed.
V.
MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT SPDS was available.
CEPADAS was available.
PABX, sound-powered phones, and dedicated hotlines available and working.
Facsimile machine functioned.
Status boards available.
Reference materials, procedures, prints, etc., available.
VI.
PROTECTIVE MEASURES Radiological monitoring performed I
at EOF.
Protective supplies available.
Personal dosimetry available and used.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 45.0 (20 of 52)
Q.
i f
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST 9
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Security control established.
VII. ACCESS CONTROL Only assigned EOF people were
- present, EP-3-020 Revision 4 46.8 (21 of 52) 1 4
A
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED: DOSE ASSESSMENT - EOF DATE DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS
~
Initial and subsequent dcse calculations were performed in a timely manner.
i Computerized equipment was properly utilized.
Plume was defined and tracked Teams were contacted, briefed, and dispatched expeditiously.
Communications were maintained with all teams, i
i Personnel were efficiently utilized.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 47.8 (22 of 52) t
-y-m--
a+-
mae m
r.--
-y y,
-W--
7
+. +,
p
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Radiological Assessment Coordinator initiated and provided periodic updates to the EOF Director.
Status was maintained on team exposure levels.
Off-site monitoring data were coordinated with State.
Comparisons were made between projected and actual field measurements.
Dose assessment off-site teams were provided with adequate information to perform their duties.
I EP-3-020 Revision 4 48.8 (23 of 52) e..
y
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER 1
LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED: OPERATIONAL SUPPORT CEN*tdR DATE Directions:
Indicate the rating for each criteria.in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
a CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS I.
ACTIVATION AND RESPONSE The OSC was activated in a tLeely manner.
All support personnel listed in the Emergency Plan were available in the OSC.
The personnel stationed in the OSC understood their emergency response functions.
There were enough specialists available to fill all demands for HP, Fire Bridgades, Search and Rescue teams, Repair teams, and
~~~
Field Monitoring teams.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 49.8 (24 of 52) e
4 OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS II.
COPMUNICATIONS/ DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION Communications with the CR and TSC were adequate.
Communications with -4 control point were adequate.
Communications with +7 Health Physics area were adequate.
Consunications with specialty teams were adequate.
There was adequate information flow from the TSC concerning plant conditions and hazardous areas.
There was adequate information flow from the OSC to specialty teams.
II
I. PROCEDURE
S The Emergency Plan and implementing Procedures were available and current and controlled copies.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 50.8 (25 of 52) m
-e OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Appropriate procedures were available, as needed, for the specialty teams.
IV.
DIRECTION AND CONTROL The OSC was supervised (coordinated) adequately.
A chain of consand was established.
Team formation and briefing were done quickly and accurately.
Information for continuing accountability was supplied to Security.
V. ~ MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT The office and communications equipment necessary to activate the OSC were-available.
All necessary vehicles were immediately available.
1 i
Specialized tools were obtainable EP-3-020 Revision 4 51.8 (26 of 52)
I r
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS VI.
PROTECTIVE MEASURES Protective equipment, clothing and decontamination facilities were available.
The OSC was monitored for radiation.
VII. ACCESS CONTROL Only OSC assigned personnel were in the prescribed areas.
~
1 l
EP-3-020 Revision 4 52.8 (27 of 52) l 1
E OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED: FIRST AID TEAM DATE.
DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory O - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
CRITERIA RATING
'C0t9ENTS First Aid Team assembly was timely following notification.
First Aid Team assembled with the proper first aid equipment.
Accident / Injury assessment made by the First Aid Team.
First Aid assistance was rendered in a timely manner.
Appropriate decontamination measures were taken.
Maintained communications linkage with Control Room.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 53.8 (28 of 52) 1
1 OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS The HP escort reacted properly to the simulated event.
The request for and notifiction of
~
ambulance was in accordance to procedures.
Patient was made ready for transport by the First Aid Team Dosimeter was left with the patient.
Adequate HP coverage was provided at the hospital.
Patient's radition doses are monitored by MP personnel.
KP performed radiation survey of ambulance at hospital before vehicle was released.
Consideration / measures were taken to prevent spread of contamination.
Periodic status reports are provided to the Shift Supervisor as to the injured undividual's status.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 54.8 (29 of 52) i
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED: FIRE TEAM DATE:
DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory
.U - Unaatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Reaction time between fire alarm and fire team activation is timely Fire fighting personnel response time to the scene of the fire was timely.
Fire team members report to scene of fire with 3ppropriate fire fighting gear and equipment.
Initial assessment of fire situation' is adequately performed.
l Standard fire fighting procedures were followed.
__. 1 i
EP-3-020 Revision 4 55.8 (30 of 52) l i
1 OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS When it is apparent W3 team cannot control the fire, off-site support is requested and obtained in a timely manner.
Communications were maintained between the fire team leader and 3
the OSC.
Adequate information is provided by the fire team to the OSC for their assessment.
Smooth transition and coordination is made between plant fire team, and local fire department.
Arrival of local fire department to fire scene is timely.
l l
EP-3-020 Revision 4 56.8 (31 of 52) l 1
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED: SEARCH AND RESCUE TEAM DATE:
DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS OSC Supervisor selected three or more volunteers to serve as team.
If radiological hazards are involved, one team member is a HP Technician.
Team members briefed in accordance with procedure EP-2-130.
1 At least 6ne team member has required formal access permit to area being entered.
Radio check performed.
r EP-3-020 Revision 4 57.8 (32 of 52)
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST 4
CRITERIA RATING C0tefENTS Safety equipment and first aid assistance available as requested.
Communications maintained with OSC during search and rescue.
Log of activities kept.
2.
Debriefing conducted, records and logs collected.
Personal dosimetry used, if needed.
TSC informed of results of search and rescue.
l' EP-3-020 Revision 4 58.8 (33 of 52)
~~
l l
l' OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST l'
l WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER I
L LOCATION /GROUPOBSERVkD: OFFSITE MONITORING TEAMS DATE:
DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
4 S - Satisfactory l'
U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Initial tese briefings were held Team assembled with field kits, vehicles and communications equipment in a timely manner.
Field Monitoring Kits were checked for contents b= fore leaving site.
Instruments checked for proper operability and current calibration.
Teams received explicit instructions of where to go and what to saeple.
l EP-3-020 Revision 4 59.8 (34 of 52)
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS
(
Procedures for. conducting off-site conftoring were consulted and followed.
Vehicles were readily available Vehicles checked for contamination after mission completed.
Sampling locations were readily located.
Samples were properly packaged, identified and labeled.
Pocket dosimeters were periodically checked.
Pocket dosimeter readings were lossed in upon return to W3.
Communications were maintained with the TSC and/or EOF throughought sampling activity.
8 l
l EP-3-020 Revision 4 60.8 (35 of 52) i
\\
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER LOCATIOJ/ GROUP OBSERVED: CORPORATE COMMAND CENTER DATE:
DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comuments column.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS I.
ACTIVATION AND RESPONSE The Corporate Command Center (CCC) was fully staffed in a timely fashion.
The Emergency Director was clearly in command.
Information was received quickly from EOF.
II.
COMMUNICATIONS / DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION Statements prepared by EOF Off-Site Technical Advisor reviewed by Emergency News Director.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 61.8 (36 of 52)
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Emergency News Director coordinated news releases in a timely manner with Louisiana Nuclear Energy, Division, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and local officials.
Spokespersons were clearly identified.
Emergency News Director acted as moderator at all briefings.
Rumor control methods were used.
II
I. PROCEDURE
S Controlled and current copies j
of the Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures were available.
IV.
DIRECTION AND CONTROL Emergency Director was clearly in control of the CCC.
Major decisions were made by Emergency Director in consultation with his staff.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 62.8 (37 of 52)
(.
)
i l
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST LCRITERIA RATING COMMENTS News releases were reviewed and issued emoothly and quickly.
6 s'-
Off-site power transmission and distribution restoration was handled smoothly and 431ckly.
Security assistance was provided to the plant Security Superintendant as requested.,
3 Liason with off-site law enforcement was provided, as appropriate.
Spokespersons were knowledgeable about technical aspects of plant problems.
V.
MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT Space for staff was adequate.
'i Space for news media representatives was adequate.
1-Adequate telephones to handle traffic wers available.
I l
Fascimile machine operable, i
Enough vehicles available EP-3-020 Revision 4 63.8 (38 of 52) i
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING C0tefENTS VI.
PROTECTIVE MEASURES (Not Applicable)
VII. ACCESS CONTROL Only persons with assigned emergency responsibilities were present.
(News media representatives excepted.)
l EP-3-020 Revision 4 64.8 (39 of 52)
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED: HEALTH PHYSICS DATE:
DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteris in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Adequate trained personnel were available to furnish HP coverage I
to the -4 Control Point, First 1
Aid Teams, Chemistry, Search and Rescue Teams, Fire Teams, Repair Teams, EOF, OSC and evacuees.
On-site monitoring equipment was easily accessible and properly distributed.
Equipment was checked for proper operability prior to its use.
Standard KP practices were employed for entry into actual or potential radiation areas.
SP-3-020 Revision 4 65.8 (40 of 52)
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Proper survey records, dosf aetry,'
stay times, etc. were maintained during entry.
Survey results were reported to the appropriate personnel.
Follow-up actions were taken on survey reports.
Pocket dosimeters were frequently checked and properly logged.
l The TSC and EOF's habitability were frequently monitored.
1 Team members had adequate understanding of proper utilization of equipment (survey instruments, radios, SCBA's, etc.)
l The Radiological Controls Coordinator received adequate information from the OSC to perform his function
_ I Survey results were system-atically collected by the Radiological Controls Coordinator.
~'
EP-3-020 Revision 4 66.8 (41 of 52)
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST i
1.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS The correct procedure was used to establish emergency dose limits, if needed.
r 4
4 EP-3-020 Revision 4 67.8 (42 of 52) g 9e.-
~
y y-
,-w,-
+
y y
l OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED: EMERGENCY CHEMISTRY DATE:
DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Obseved/Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS I. ACTIVATION AND RESPONSE The Chemistry Engineer reported promptly to the Technical Assessment area of the TSC'.
The Chemistry Supervisor reported promptly to the RAB Laboratory.
An adequate number of technicians were available or were called in.
Analytical results were available'within the specified times.
l l
EP-3-020 Revision 4 68.8 (43 of 52) l
.x_
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS II. COMMUNICATIONS / DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION Communications with the Control Room (CR) and/or TSC were adequate.
Directions given to technicians were clear.
Plant status information was available and followed:
CE-3-900, CE-3-901, CE-3-902 CE-3-903, CE-3-904, EP-2-091 and EP-2-031.
IV.
DIRECTION AND CONTROL Samples were collected and analyzed as requested by CR or TSC.
Chemistry Supervisor (or alternate) was clearly in command.
Analytical results were verified Logs of acticas were kept.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 69.8 (44 of 52)
W m -
e M
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST I
i CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS
^
V.
MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT Analytical equipment functioned properly.
Sacple points were accessible and open (valves correctly aligned by CR and/or technicians).
VI.
PROTECTIVE MEASURES Health Physics coverage was requested as needed.
Protective equipment was available to lab personnel.
~
VII. ACCESS CONTROL Only personnel with emergency responsibilities were present during exercise.
Access to PASS, etc., was made according to procedure.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 70.8 (45 of 52)
A
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED: EVACUATION / ASSEMBLY AREA DATE:
DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory 0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS I.
ACTIVATION AND RESPONSE Announcement to evacuate is clearly understandable and is heard by all personnel.
Announcement was preceded by station alarm.
Evacuees quickly assembled in correct area.
1 Person in charge was clearly identifiable.
II.
COMMUNICATION / DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION Adequate instructions were given to evacuees by Emergency Coordinator.
i EP-3-020 Revision 4 71.8 (46 of 52) w 4
e
.x.
-_,,,#~~
3-z.
,,,'..a CM y
gygg EVALygtlog S COMMENTS gAtlNG CRITERIA stablished e
rvisor with Astembly Area Supe ication c.d maintained commun OSC.
notified or ervis Assembly Area Sup were all persons OSC when at off-site for eccounted assembly area.
PROCEDURESugh proper cuees passed thro III.
Eva control points.
were and TLD's badges ccess point.
Personn lthe primary a e
left at co*P *'*
l were Muster *heets requested
- as CONTROL AND was DIRECTION Supervisor IV.
The Assembly Areaidentified and c learly ea ily s
' ~ j charse-ta in was performedner, Evacuationnd controlled man ooth a she ts) sm e
(muster 52) t off-site 7 8 (47 of Accountabilityused corre tly a Attachment c
were assembly area.
72 4
e yision
il OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST e
CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Evacuees followed directions given over PA System and given by Assembly Area Supervisor.
V.
MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT Assembly Area Supervisor was equipped with voice amplifier.
Adequate vehicles were available Adequate radiation instrumen-tation and decontamination equipment was available.
Radios functioned correctly.
VI.
PROTECTIVE MEASURES Portal monitors were effectively used to monitor evacuees.
First aid equipment was available or obtainable.
Decontamination equipment was available or obtainable.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 73 Attachnent 7.8 (48 of 52)
~
.. =.
n
y
]
I 4
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Health Physics coverage was available at off-site assembly area.
VII. ACCESS CONTROL Off-site assembly area was fully accessible.
There were no major problems in moving evacuees through control points or the Principal Access Point.
'EP-3-020 Revision 4 74.8 (49 of 52)
~.
i OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST t
WATERFORD 3 SES OBSERVER LOCATION / GROUP OBSERVED: ACCOUNTABILITY / SECURITY DATE:
=
I' DIRECTIONS:
Indicate the rating for each criteria in the rating column. The rating scale is defined as follows:
S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory l
0 - Not Observed /Not Applicable
- If not observed, so note in Comments column.
CRITERIA RATING CorEENTS I.
ACTIVATION AND RESPONSE Security personnel were in place quickly following evacuation announcement.
Means were established for performing rapid initial accountability for persons
~
leaving protected areas.
Means were established for quickly establishing location of personnel remaining in protected area and performing evacuation verification outside the protected area.
II.
COMMUNI(*.IION/ DISSEMINATION OF INFORMA? ION Initial notifications to Security Supervisor were clear and complete.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 75.8 (50 of 52) 4 I'
=
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST t
9 CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Communications internal to the Security organization were adequate.
Status reports from Security Supervisor to the Emergency Director were tLeely and complete.
{
l
\\
Continuing accountability l
reports were quickly furnished to Security by CR, TSC, and OSC.
II
I. PROCEDURE
S Appropriate Security procedures were readily available.
i i
i Controlled and current copies of the Earegency Plan and i
Implementing Procedures were readily available.
Appropriate procedures were
[
used during exercise.
i i
IV.
DIRECTION AND CONTROL
+
}'
Accountability of all personnel was achieved within 30 minutes.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 76.8 (51 of 52) l 1
)
OBSERVER EVALUATION CHECKLIST CRITERIA RATING COMMENTS Accountability of people entering or leaving assembly areas was accomplished.
Security personnel were trained and familiar with their l
responsibilities.
Security personnel requested or required by procedure were promptly dispatched.
V.
MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT Security computer in place and operable.
Comeur.ications equipment properly functional.
VI.
PROTECTIVE MEASURES Health Physics coverage available as requested.
Security personnel.hept advised of plant status. -
~'
VII. ACCESS CONTROL Facility access controlled during exercise.
Special access controls, if any, put in place as requested.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 77.8 (52 of 52) a e-_.
w..,
s J
DRIII/ EXERCISE EVALUATION REPORT SMEET Drill Observer Name:
Date:
/
/
Drill /Ezercise
Title:
Assigned Area to Monitor:
Catemories Rating
- t 1.
Activation and Response 2.
Communications / Dissemination of Information 3.
Procedures 4.
Direction and Control 5.
Material and Equipment 6.
Protective Measures 7.
Access Control Report i
I a
4 I
w
- e...,. 2;;
i I
- S = Satisfactory, U = Unsatisfactory, N/A = Not Applicable, N/0 = Not Observed EP-3-020 Revision 4 78.9 (1 of 1) 1
.,,me._.
w e
M
^*
i.
i-l
_ MILESTONES FOR EXERCISE OBSERVATION AND CRITIQUES NR - DAYS DESCRIPTION
- 75 days State and licensee jointly submit exercise objectives to FEMA and NRC Regional Offices.
- 60 days FEMA and NRC Regional Offices discuss and meet with licensee / state as necessary and prepare response.
- 45 days State and license scenario developers submit exercise scenario to FEMA and NRC Regions for review.
- 35 days FEMA and NRC Regions notify State and licensee of scenario acceptability.
- 30 days FEMA and NRC Regions develop specific postexercise critique schedule with the State and advise FEMA and NRC Headquarters.
- 15 days RAC Chairman and NRC Region will meet to develop observer action plan (where stationed, how many from each organization, what to look for).
- 1 day Meeting, in the exercise area, of all Federal observers both on-site and off-site to finalize assignments, give instructions.
E day Exercise E day RAC observers caucus to collate observations. NRC observers also caucus to collate observations, E day RAC Chairman and NRC Region meet as soon after their respective caucuses as practical to coordinate Federal participation in critique.
E to + 1 day Joint RAC/NRC critique General Agenda A.
State, locals and licensee present their views.
EP-3-020 Revision 4 79.10 (1 of 2)
~...
. MILESTONES FOR EXERCISE OBSERVATION AND CRITIQUES 9
NR - DAYS DESCRIPTION B.
Critique of off-site actions, by RAC Chairman C.
Critique of on-site action, by NRC D.
Critique of Federal response (if applicable) by RAC Chairman E.
Opportunity for clarification questions or comments by licensee, State and locals (press and public questions will not be e*ntertained during the critique).
I,
+ 15 days Written critiques by FEMA Region to State with copies to FEMA Headquarters and NRC, and by NRC Region to licensee with copies to NRC Headquarters and FEMA.
s l
EP-3-020 Revision 4 80.10 (2 of 2) g
. h y
___..-