ML20140F910
| ML20140F910 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Saint Vrain  |
| Issue date: | 03/24/1986 |
| From: | Gagliardo J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Walker R PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF COLORADO |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8604010220 | |
| Download: ML20140F910 (2) | |
Text
1 A~. a
-3 WR 24886 In Reply Refer To:
Docket:
50-267 Public Service Company of Colorado ATTN:
R. F. Walker, President P. O. Box 840 Denver, Colorado 80201-0840 Gentlemen:
Enclosed is a copy of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) report of the prompt alert and notification system (ANS) evaluation for the Fort St.
Vrain Nuclear Generating Station.
The report states that, despite improved ANS effectiveness, the previously identified ANS deficiency was not fully corrected.
Please review the report and be prepared to cooperate with state and FEMA Region VIII officials as necessary to ensure that this deficiency is corrected in a timely manner.
Sincerely, aciatnet stane:1 byn it E,HAl# g,v J. E. Gagliardo, Chief Reactor Projects Branch
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/o report:
Floyd Shoemaker, RAC Chairman FEMA Region VIII Denver Federal Center, Bldg. 710 P. O. Box 25267 Denver, Colorado 80225-0267 cc w/ report:
J. W. Gahm, Manager, Nuclear Production Division Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Station 16805 WCR 1915 Platteville, Colorado 80651 L. Singleton, Manager, Quality Assurance Division f
(same address)
Colorado Radiation Control Program Director c
J b/'
t r
Rb/A C: BF [' AI 86-074
)dt JP(Jeudon JBBaird/jt'p C:EP&SP '/RL RIV:EP&SPS 0:0 LAYand E 3agliardy 3/IS/86' b/ft /86 (
b})p/86
/p/86 QD/86}/;p',k f
g604010220 860324 I (
J7
(
PDR ADOCM O
~3 Public Service Company of Colorado,
bcc to.DMB (A045) bec distrib. by RIV w/ report:
Resident Inspector Section Chief (RPB/A)
J. B. Baird RIV File bcc w/o report:
RPB DRSP R. D. Martin, RA RSB Section Chief (RSB/ES)
R&SPB L. A. Yandell MIS System R. L. Bangart RSTS Operator G. Sanborn
L F
L i.
FORT ST. VRAIN NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION SITE-SPECIFIC OFFSITE RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROMPT ALERT AND NOTIFICATION SYSTEM EVALUATION
(
Prepared for Federal Emergency Management Agency Washington, D.C.
20472 Under Contract No. EMW-83-C-1217 l
December 27, 1985 1
(
-8&o)3ooto r E_
i FORT.ST. VRAIN NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIO'N SITE-SPECIFIC OFFSITE RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROMPT ALERT AND NOTIFICATION SYSTEM EVALUATION
)
l Prepared for Federal Emergency Management Agency-Washington, D.C.
20472 Under Contract No. EMW-83-C-1217 December 27, 1985 sammo mammma im um s ai i
__._.___d
1 1-TABLE OF CONTENTS I.
INTRODUCTION 1
A.
Identification 1
- 1. Site Information 1
- 2. Governments Within The 5-Mile Emergency Planning Zone 2
1 B. Scope Of Review 2
- 1.. Emergency Plans For Offsite Response Organizations 2
]
- 2. Alert And Notification System Design Report 2
- 3. FEMA Evaluation Findings 3
II.
FINDINGS FOR EVALUATION CRITERION E.6 4
A. Administrative Means Of Alerting
( E. 6.1, FEMA-4 3 )
5 B.
Physical Means Of Alerting (E.6.2, FEMA-43) 7
- 1. Tone Alert Radios (E.6.2.3, FEMA-43 )
7
- 2. Special Alerting (E.6.2.4, FEMA-43) 10 III. FINDINGS FOR EVALUATION CRITERION N.1 12 j
A.
Findings For August 15, 1984 Demonstration 12 B.
Findings For June 18, 1985 Demonstration 22 IV.
FINDINGS FOR EVALUATION CRITERIA E. 5, F.1, N. 2, N. 3, AND N. 5 27 REFERENCE LIST 28 APPENDIX A:
Sample Size Determination
]
h I
5 -
Fort bt. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station
[
Site-Specific Offsite Radiological Emergency Preparedness Alert And Notification System Evaluation State Of Colorado Weld County I.
INTRODUCTION A.
Identification 1
- 1. Site Information The Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station is located about three and one-half miles northwest of the town of Platteville, Colorado, and about 37 miles g
t north of Denver in Weld County.
It is owned and operated by the Public Service Company of Colorado (located in Denver, Colorado) and began commercial operation in 1979.
The area within a few miles of the reactor site is characterized by irrigated f arm and pasture land with gently rolling hills.1 In general, the majority of the land within 30 miles of the site is agricultural.
The population density within the ~5-mile emergency planning zone (EPZ)
- surrounding the site is relatively low.
The population within the 5-mile EPZ is approximately 2,077 persons.3
- The Federal Emergency Management Agency / Nuclear Regulatory Commission (FEMA /NRC) Steering Committee concluded that small water-cooled reactors and the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station mag use a 5-mile EPZ rather than the standard 10-mile EPZ.
1
1
- 2. Governments Within The 5-Mil e Emergency Plannino ' Zone The Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station EPZ consists of a 5-mile-radius circle with 'the Fort St.
Vrain Nuclear Generating Station as the center point.
This EPZ lies entirely in Weld County and contains only one town, Platteville.
In case of an f
emergency at the Fort St. Vrhin Nuclear Generating Station, the State of Colorado makes the decision to activate the early warning system.
Weld County is then responsible for physically activating the tone / weather alert radios.
B.
Scope Of Review f
- 1. Emergency Plans For Off site Response Organiz ations All appropriate offsite radiological emergency plans and preparedness site-specific to the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station have been reviewed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region VIII and the Regional Assistance Committee.
}
- 2. Alert And Notification System Desian Report The physical means established for alerting the public within the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station EPZ were documented in the following report:
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Letter f rom Alton D.
Cook, Regional Director, to Richard Krimm, Assistant Associate Director.
Subject:
Documents to be supportive of the public alerting and notification system evaluation, dated April 2, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the Design Repo rt).3 2
- 3. FEMA evaluation Findings In a letter to the Honorable Richard D.
- Lamm, Governor of Colcrado, dated January 29, 1982, cigned by Lee M.
Thomas, Associate Director, State and Local Programs and Support, the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station received FEMA approval under Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 350 (44 CFR 350), conditioned upon the verification of the adequacy of the public alert and notification system.4 5
4 3
II.
FINDINGS FOR EVALUATION CRITERION E.6 L
The Design Report describing the alert and notification system for the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station was reviewed against evaluation criterion ~ E.6 and Appendix
}
3 of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Revision 1,
" Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Pl ant s " (hereinaf ter referred to as NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1).
This evaluation criterion states:
Each organization shall establish administrative and physical means, and the time required for notifying and providing prompt instructions to the public within the plume exposure pathway Emergency Planning Zone.
(See Appendix 3.)
It i
shall be the licensee's responsibility to demonstrate that such means exist, regardless of who implements this requirement.
It shall be the responsibility of the State and local I
governments to activate such a system.2 The bases for review against this evaluation criterion were the corresponding acceptance criteria of FEMA-43, " Standard Guide for the Evaluation of Alert and Notification Systems for Nuclear Power Plants" (hereinafter referred to as FEMA-43).5 Based upon this review, International Energy Associates Limited concluded that the design and implementation of the alert and notification system at the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station and its supporting procedures conformed sufficiently to the acceptance criteria, as stated in FEMA-43, for evaluation criterion E.6 of NUREG-0654/PEMA-REP-1, Rev.1, to support I
a finding that the prerequisites for a demonstration of the alert and notification system for the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station had been met.
This demon-stration was conducted on August 15, 1984.
4
N l
Because the August 15, 1984 demonstration and subsequent public survey resulted in an approximate 40% affirmation t
I alerting ratio for the tone alert system, a second demon-stration was conducted on June 18, 1985.
This second demonstration and public survey resulted in an approximate 70% affirmation alerting ratio, which is considered 'to be only marginally acceptable.
The Public Service Company of Colorado has committed, by letter to FEMA,7 to enhancing the existing early warning alert system by installing an audible alarm in the; community of Platteville, Colorado.
s This portion of the evaluation reviews the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station's alert and notificatidn system against FEMA-43 acceptance criteria in the fol}owing areas:
administrative means of alerting, physical means of alerting, and the special alerting methods.
I A.
Administrative Means Of Alerting (E.6.1, FEMA-43)
The information that is specifically cited-in the.Public Service Company of Colorado's Design Report addresses those individuals within that organization who are responsible for recommending alert and notification system activation to the local governments.
The Design Report also specifies those individuals within the local and state governments who are responsible for alert and notification system activation.
After reviewing the aforementioned documentation dealing with emergency procedures for the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station, Weld County, and the State of Colorado, the I
decision logic as shown in Figure 1 was developed.
s As Figure 1 indicates, the procedures satisfy the acceptance criteria of FEMA-43.
These emergency procedures also specify the means by which the request 5
_j
J FIGUR I
FORT ST. VRAIN NUCLEAF ALERT AN3 NOTIFICATION SYSTEM ACTIVA las Colorsio tent.
- gf3l, Of Health !s g,gggio Notified Of The Situation i
I I
Fort St. Vrain l<
Weld Co. Civig deld C u ty E er;ency 00-supervisor Ce-g,f,,,, gg,,c, erations Cen.
termines Level Of Erergency l **
t,e r i s,h t t -
ter (ECC) 15
,,4 g 33, Ac ti vated And Segins The E
$gggggg3, htt f t cation lC Process 2
I O I C lE Weld Co. Sner-iff !$ ?!ott-l fled Of ine Situation g
State Emergency Operations Cen-l ter (ECC) Is Activated Weld Co. Com-Colorado Olvi-sfon of Cisas.
matcations ter Emergency Center (CC) Is Notified Of Services (000ES)
The $1tuation
!s Nutified Cf fort Luoton sd P s t
The $ttuation
~
Police Depart.
fort Lupton ment is Mott-is Activated fled Of The Colorado State Situation Patrol (Greelef Olvision) Is Notified Of The $ttuation l
- - - ^ -..
P
~
- 1
.GEtlERATIriG STATION fl0tl DECISICri/ACTIO!i SEQUENCE DIAGRN4 n on Cov ercial Broad.
sment cast Stations (TV Incleent.
And RaJio) Are
) is plade T Notified To 8egin
) Warn.
The Ham ing Broad-lag cast (B5 Stations Are Weld Co. Civil Notified To Begin Defense Director The Warning Broad.
Is Nottfled cast Through CC Of T>e Cecision Tu im-pienent Warning Weld Co. Sheriff Weld County National Weather is Notified
$beriff Segins Service is Noti.
Tone Alert fled Cf Cecision Ra2ios Are Throu p CC Of The to Dissemir. ate Gecision To Im' Warning To The To Cegin The Activated pleeent Warnt"9 Public Warning Broad-I cast f Civil Def ense
.* Sirens Are t
Sounded in Platte-003E5 is Notified All EBS & Co**
ville If Available Of The Cectston mercial Broadcast For Use
+
To implement Stations Are Nott-fled of The Appro-Warning f
priate Warning Loudspeaker.
.o Be Broadcast (quipped Vehicles (Plane And Patrol Cars) Are Deployed i
School Authorities And Other Densely Populated Bust-nesses Are Nott-fled By Telephone coor.To. Door Notification Begins
to activate the alert and notification system at a specified time is conveyed from the Colorado Department of Health to the Weld County Sheriff (who is responsible
/
for alerting the aff ected population).
I The Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station's early warning system employs Weatheralert tone / weather alert
{
radios to notify all residences and businesses within the 5-mile EPZ.
These radios are activated by the National Weather Service of the National Oceanic and I
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Telephone hookups are in place to relay the message to NOAA f rom the Weld County Sheriff.
The emergency broadcast system (EBS) stations receive up-to-date reports on the power station's status f rom the Weld County Civil Def ense Director via a telephone communication system.
l Additionally, the means are in place for the notification of local school authorities by commercial telephone to inform them of the situation.
B.
Physical Means Of Alerting (E.6.2, FEMA-43)
The physical means of alerting f or the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station consist entirely of tone / weather alert radios, which have been off ered to all residences within the 5-mile EPZ.
- 1. Tone Alert Radios ( E. 6. 2.3, FEMA-4 3 )
The early warning system for the Fort St. Vrain I
Nuclear Generating $tation is a tone alert system utilizing Weatheralert Model TA-45 weather radios that operate on the National Weather Service communications system.
Access to the National Weather Service communications system to broadcast emergency messages concerning the Fort St.. rain 7
I Nuclear Generating Station is described in an agreement between the Division of Disaster Emergency Services and the National Weather Service, both located in the State of Colorado.
FEMA has developed guidelines that should be followed to maintain an effective and continual alert and notification system at the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear
)
Generating Station.
These guidelines are as follows:
. The program should offer the tone / weather alert radios to the public in geographical areas where needed and must make a "best-effort" attempt to place the radios.
This program should include a record system (register) that contains an accurate list of addresses (names are optional) in geographical areas where tone / weather alert radios are needed.
Addresses where radios are off ered to residents and ref used by the I
residents should be noted.
A maintenance program offering operating checks should be available at least annually to all residences in areas where tone / weather alert radios are needed.
The maintenance program and the register program mentioned above may be integrated.
Tests of the tone alerting feature are desired at least monthly.
The final determination of testing f requency will rest with appropriate local government officials.
The results of these tests do not have to be monitored.
The purpose of these tests is to offer the public a means to self-test their receivers.
Written guidance should accompany the radio.
It should address (1) its general I
use, (2) self-testing f requency and method, (3) suggested placement to facilitate efficient monitoring, (4) the maintenance program, and (5) telephone numbers for repair or replacements.
This information should be provided as a reminder to each tone alert radio holder annually.
This public information program may also be integrated with the register and maintenance programs mentioned above.
8
1 Determination should be made that the broadcast medium for initiating the tone alert signal has adequate availability (24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> a day, 7 days a week), 5 signal strength, and signal quality.
t The early warning system developed by the Public Service Company of Colorado for the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station, as described in the i
Design Report, meets FEMA guidelines addressing tone alert radio systems, thus satisfying the criteria of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1.
In early 1982, the Public Service Company of Colorado identified 1,077 residences and businesnes that were located within the 5-mile EPZ.
Eleven tone / weather i
alert radios were not delivered.
Of these 11, eight residences could not be contacted (even after repeated attempts), and three residents refused to accept them.3 The Public Service Company of Colorado is also developing a system for flagging electric meters, gas meters, or both within the EPZ and will use this system to identify residences that may be vacated, sold, or rented to new persons.
This same system will provide information on any new building that is planned for the area.
The Public Service Company of Colorado has turned the system over to the State of Colorado for its use but has agreed to maintain the system..As indicated in i
the utility's informational brochure and on the radio decal, persons within the EPZ have been given instructions to call the Public Service Company of Colorado for any tone alert problems.
Additionally, batteries (the backup power) are mailed to each residence annually or upon request.
9
s The National Weather Service tests the alert system r
every Wednesday morning between 11:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon (Mountain Time).
The tone / weather alert radios were personally delivered by Public Service Company of Colorado representatives.
Operation of the radios was demonstrated and the alert system explained.
Each residence was lef t with a booklet of instructions, as well as a question and answer booklet.
In addition
)
to the instruction booklet, a decal was placed on the radio to ensure ready access to emergency
. instructions.3 The National Weather Service operates two stations, providing adequate coverage for all of the residences involved within the 5-mile EPZ.
- 2. Special Alerting (E.6.2.4, FEMA-43)
The Port St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station's early warning system incorporates special alerting, as defined in FEMA-43.
The Weld County Sheriff is responsible for requesting the National Weather Service to broadcast warning messages, thereby activating the tone / weather alert radios.
He is also responsible for :
Sounding the Civil Def ense warning sirens in the affected area (in coordination with the Weld t
County Civil Defense Coordinator);
Deploying loudspeaker-equipped vehicles (a plane and patrol cars) in the affected area:
10
1
. Notifying school authorities, other densely populated f acilities or institutions, and isolated f arm f amilies via telephone and a citizen band radio system (in conjunction with the Weld County Civil Def ense Coordinator); and f
. Dispatching personnel for door-to-door notification of known handicapped or infirm persons.
}
Finally, all businesses within the 5-mile EPZ have been given tone / weather alert radios.3 6
i 11
1 III. FINDINGS FOR EVALUATION CRITERION N.1 A.
Findings For The August is.1984 Demonstration
/
l On August 15, 1984, the physical means (tone / weather alert radio.' used to alert the population within the EPZ for the put St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station were demonstrated to satisfy the alert and notification aspects of 44 CFR 350.9 (a).
This demonstration was conducted using the methods specified in Section N. l. ( a, b).2 of FEMA-4 3.5 The results indicated that this portion of the alert and notification system evaluation was not acceptable and f ailed to conform to FEMA-43 and NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1.2 The August 15, 1984, demonstration of the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station early warning system consisted of the transmission of an alerting' signal to the tone / weather alert radios within the EPZ, and a subsequent telephone survey to estimate the proportion of EPZ households actually alerted and to identify areas where enhancement of the alerting system might be needed.
The signal was transmitted at 10:00 a.m.
(Mountain Daylight Time).
The telephone survey of EPZ residences was begun at approximately 10:05 a.m.
(Mountain Daylight Time) and was completed within one hour and 10 minutes.
This survey was conducted by approximately 40 telephone interviewers, each with a separate WATS line and computer terminal.
12
The universe of households to be surveyed was determined by establishing a 7.5-mile-radius circle around the L
latitude and longitude of the power station.
A sorted 7
master list (addresses and telephone numbers) was obtained of 2,3 90 households within the 7.5-mile-radius circle.
The address of each household was then checked to determine whether the household was within the 5-mile EPZ.
This review produced 826 households that appeared to.be within the EPZ.
These 826 comprise nearly the entire universe of households within the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station EPZ.
Replicated samples were developed f rom this list of households.
A sufficient number of these subsamples were developed to ensure that the required number of telephone calls could be made, i.e., to estaL11sh the proportion of households alerted to within a 5% precision at a 95% confidence level.
The method for sizing the sample to achieve this result is described in Appendix A of this report.
To ensure that the Spanish-speaking population was accurately surveyed, some interviewers also conducted the survey in Spanish.
The English and Spanish questionnaires used for the telephone survey are included as Figures 2 and 3 of this report.
As part of the telephone survey, 294 households within the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station EPZ were contacted and their responses were collected in an automated data base.
However, before running the final tabulations, each of these addresses was checked (based on collected crossroads information) on a street map to validate its location.
Of these 294 addresses, 33 were outside the EPZ.
Therefore, the data were tabulated on the 261 respondent households located within the EPZ.
Respondents at 36 of these households had been 13
- 2106Q Chilton Research Services FIGURE 2 Study #8521 Radnor, Pennsylvania August, 1984 OMB #3067-0103 (FEMA 9/83)
FEMA NUGLEAR POWER PLANT ALERTING AND NOTIFICAi10N SY5iEf t: PUBLIG iELEPHONE SURVEY FORT ST. VRAIH Time Began AM PM Interview #
(1-5)
Time Ended AM PM Zip Code (6-10)
Sample Type (ii)
RECOP.D BEFORE DIALING -Telephone #
(Area Gooe)
(cxchange)
(Nuceer)
(1 2-21 )
RESPONDENT: Male or Female head of household.
(ASK, DEPENDING OH SEX: Are you the (man of the house / lady of the house)?
INTRODUCTION:
Hello, my name is We're calling households long distance from Chilton Research Services as part of a survey. This survey is sponsored by The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the United States Government.
Your answers are voluntary and will be kept strictly confidential.
1.
First of all, is this (REPEAT # DIALED)?
l Yes 1
TERMINATE AND DIAL AGAIN Ho 2
2.
As you nay or may not know, there was a test of the public warning / alert notification system for THE FORT ST. VRAIN HUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. Did you, or any other member of your nousenoic, near a signal from a weatner alert radio around 10 A.M.
this morning?
22-SKIP TO 0. a Yes 1
SKIP TO 0. 4A Ho 2
nea rn f ron SKIP TO 0. a another 3
source ASK iF ANY ninEP. HOUSEHOLD Don Know 8
i MEMBER IS MORE KHOWLEDGEABLE 14
N FIGURE 2 (CONTINUED)
Sp. (23-36) 3.
THERE IS NO OUESTION #3.
4 (IF " HEARD DtERGENCY SIGNAL" ASr, O. e BELOW; OTHERWISE SKIP TO 0. 4A)
Were you at this location when you heard the signal from the weather alert. radio?
37-Yes 1
SKIP TO 0. 5 Ho 2
AA.
(IF "DID M HEAR D1ERGENCY SIGNAL")
t Were you at this location at around 10:00 A.M. this mornina?
38-Yes 1
Ho 2
ASK 0. 4B i
Don't Know Y
AB.
Has this household ever been issued a Weather Alert P.adio?
39-ASK 0. 4C Yes 1
"O 2
SKIP TO 0. 5 Don't Know Y
7 15
4C.
Was the red light on this housenold's weather alert radio lit today?
40-fes 1
r No Z
Don't Know Y
5.
Has this household ever received instructions which tell you what to do in the event of a "real" emergency at Fort St. Vrain? These brown brochures in both English and Spanish were sent out by the Public Service Company of Colorado and was entitied, "Infomation about the Ft. St. Vrain Radiological Emergency Response Plan." Do you remember receiving this infomation.?
41 -
t Yes 1
No 2
Don't Know Y
6.
Because we need to detemine whether or not this household is within the 5 mile Emergency Planning Zone of Fort St. Vrain, would you please give ne the address for this 1ocation? (PAUSE FOR AHSWER)
ADDRESS:
and the nearest intersection (or cross street) to this location.
i On behalf of Chilton Research Services and the Federal Energency Management Agency, I would like to thank you for your time and for giving us. this valuable infomation.
10
s
- 22700 FIGURE 3 Chilton Research Services Study #8521 Radnor, Pennsylvania August, 1984 OMB #3067-0103 (FEMA 9/93)
FEMA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT ALERTING AND NOTIFICATION SYSTEM: PUBLIC TELEPHONE SURVEY FORT ST. VRAIN - Spanish Version Hora comen= ado AM PM Entrevistator #
Hora Terminado AM PM Zip Code Sample Type
(
ESCRIBA ANTES DE LLAMAR POR TELEFONO - #
j (Area Code)
(Exchange)
(Number)
RESPONDIENTE: El senor o senora cabeza de familia.
(PREGUNTE, DEPENDIENDO DEL SEIO: Es Ud. (la cabeza) de familia?
INTRODUCCION:
Buenas (tardes/ dias), =i nombre es Estamos lla=ando de larga distancia desde Chilton Research Services, como parte de una encuesta, patrocinada por la Agencia Federal del Manejo de Emergencias (FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGDIENT AGENCY) del Gobierno de los Estados Unidos.
Sus respuestas son voluntarias y se mantendran en forma confidencial.
1.
Primera= ente, es este el nu=ero (REPITA EL # DE TELEFONO)?
Si 1
TERMINE Y VUELVA A LLAMAR No 2
2.
Puede que Ud. este enterado que se llevo a cabo una prueba de el alerta del sistema publico de energencias para la planta generadora nuclear Fort St. Vrain. Escuche Ud.,
o algun otro cie= bro de su familia, una senal de alar a en la radio que. avisa las condiciones atmosfericas, a las (HORA) de hoy?
SKIP TO Q. 4 Si 1
SKIP TO Q. 4A No 2
SKIP TO Q. 4 Otro medio 3
ASK IP OTHER HH MEMBER MORE KNOWLEDGEA3LE No Se Y
17
s FIGURE 3 (CONTINUED) 4.
(SI CONTESTAN "ESCUCHE LA SENAL DE EMERGENCIA", PREGUNTE LA P.4 ABAJO, SI NO, PASE A LA P.4A).
I Estaba Ud. en ese local cuando escucho la senal de alar =a en la radio que avisa las condiciones atnosfericas?
Si 1
PASE A P. 5 No 2
4A.
(SI CONTESTA "NO ESCUCHE LA SENAL DE EMERGENCIA"):
Estaba Ud. hoy7 n ese local a las (HORA DE LA SENAL DE ALERTA)?
Si 1
No 2
No se Y
4B.
Le lan entregado and un radio para alertad de eltienpo?
ASE Q. 4C Si 1
S}2P TO Q. 5 No 2
No se Y
4C.
Estaba la lu: roja encendida en el radio de alerta en el dia de hoy?
Si 1
No 2
No se Y
18
FIGURE 3 (CONTINUED) i 5.
Han recibido en su hogar instrucciones que dicen lo que hacer en caso de una "verdadera" emergencia en la planta generadora nuclear Fort St. Vrain? Estos folletos de color cafe en ingles y espanol fueron enviades por la Compania de Servicios Publicos de Colorado y se titula "INFORMACION SOBRE EL PLAN PARA EMERGENCIA RADIOLOGICA DE FORT ST.VRAIN".
Ud. recuerda haber recibido esta infor=acion?
Si 1
No 2
No se Y
6.
Debido a que debemos saber si Ud. vive c no dentro de la cona de 5 millas del Plan de Emergencia de Fort St. Vrain, podria darme su direccion?
DIRECCION:
(
y la calle principal o cruce principal cerca de su hogar es:
En nombre de Chilton Research Services y de la Agencia Federal del Manejo de Emergencias, deseo agradecerle su tiempo y la atencion que mostro al darme esta valiosa informacion.
9 19
away from home at the time of the demonstration of the early. warning system and therefore were not included in the alerting analysis.
Of the remaining 225 households, 41.3% (93) indicated that they had been alerted during the demonstration.
If one uses the estimated number of
)
households within the EPZ (which is 793 according to the analyses of sample addresses) in the confidence interval f
expression in reference 6, it yields an estimated 95%
confidence interval for the proportion of the total EPZ population alerted that ranges f rom 36.0% to 46.9%.
In other words, at a 95% confidence level, between 36.0%
arsd 46.9% of the households within the EPZ were alerted by the early warning system.
{
The sample of 261 households was also used to estimate the proportion of households within the EPZ that stated j
they received inf ormation about what to do in a real emergency at the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station.
Of these 261 households, 80.5% (210) responded that they had received this information, 13.0% (34) responded that they had not received this information, and 6.5% (17) did not know or refused to state whether they had received this information.
Using the approach discussed previously, the following estimates for the entire EPZ population resulted (at the 95% confidence level) :
Between 76.2% and 84.1% of the households would have reported receiving the information; Between 10.0% and 16~7% of the households would have responded that they had not received the information; and Between 4.5% and 9.4% of the households would not have known or refused to state whether they had received the information.
20
A difficulty, related to drawing valid statistical inferences f rom this survey, arose because the Public Service Company of Colorado conducted a similar concurrcnt telephone survey.
As would be expected concerning an EPZ containing such a small number of I
households, many households were contacted by both surveys.
This may have affected the accuracy of the survey in two ways.
First, when our interviewers, unaware of the concurrent survey, contacted a number of households, they were told that the household had already been interviewed.
Once we became aware of the other survey, many households had to be recontacted, i
which added extra time to the interviewing period.
The major reason that a relatively large number of interviewers are employed for these surveys is the concern that the information gathered immediately after the alert and notification system demonstration is more accurate than that gathered later.
Consequently, anything that delays the survey has the potential to adversely aff ect its accuracy.
The concurrent Public Service Company of Colorado survey may also have introduced a subtle bias in our survey.
It is likely that the Public Service Company of Colorado 3
survey sample was developed f rom the Fort St. Vrain tone alert radio register.
A similar survey has been shown to select a larger f raction of the alerted population than surveys drawn at random f rom EPZ households.6 It is reasonable to expect that individuals contacted previously by the Public Service Company of Colorado survey would be more likely to refuse to respond to our survey.
Therefore, it is possible that our survey underestimated the actual proportion of the population that was alerted due to this sampling problem.
- However, since the extent of this possible problem cannot be quantified, it is difficult, if not impossible, to correct for it.
21
As this discussion indicates, the performance of concurrent surveys by utilities or other organizations during an alert and notification system demonstration has the potential to cast doubt upon the overall accuracy of the data gathered and should be avoided in
{
the interest of ensuring a true measure of the alert and notification system performance.
The survey data were revieved to identify areas where the alerting system could be enhanced.
The primary area identified was public instruction on the operation of tone / weather alert radios.
The survey revealed that 33.8% (76) of those individuals contacted, who were at home at the time of the demonstration,' indicated that they were not operating their tone / weather alert radios in a manner that permitted the radio to annunciate upon receipt of an alerting signal.
This leads to the conclusion that, at a 95% confidence level, between 28.7% and 39.2% of the households within the EPZ would have reported that they were not operating their tone / weather alert radios so that the radio would annunciate upon receipt of an alerting signa"..
B.
Pindings For The June 18. 1985 Demonstration On June 18, 1985, the physical means (tone / weather alert radios) used to alert the population within the EPZ for the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station were demonstrated for a second time to satisfy the alert and notification aspects of 44 CFR 350.9(a).
This demonstration was conducted using the methods specified in Section N.l. (a,b,).2 of FEMA-435 and was to determine whether enhancements made to the alert and notification system subsequent to the 7.ogust 18,1984 demonstration were adequate to bring the system into l
22
conformance with the requirements of FEMA-43 and NUREG-06 54/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1. 2 The results of this
(
second demonstration indicated that this portion of the alert and notification system was in marginal conformance with FEMA-43 and NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.
{
l.
The June 18, 1985 demonstration of the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station alert and notification system consisted of the transmission of three separate alerting signals to the tone / weather alert radios within the EPZ and a concurrent telephone survey to estimate the proportion of EPZ households actually. alerted.
The tone alert activation was originally scheduled for 12:15 PM (MDT).
However, the first activation actually occurred a t 10 : 32 AM (MDT).
Upon notification of this activation uy ; """a Region VIII representative, 32 interviewers were quickly assembled and briefed, and the survey began at 11:08 AM (MDT).
The second alerting' signal was transmitted to the tone / weather alert radios while the survey was in progress, at approximately 11:25 AM (MDT).
The third activation of the tone / weather alert radios occurred subsequent to the survey at 3:32 PM (MDT).
The telephone survey of EPZ residences was completed at 12:37 PM (MDT) (1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 29 minutes after the start of interviewing and 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 5 minutes af ter the first tone alert activation).
The universe of households to be surveyed was again determined by establishing a 7.5-mile-radius circle around the latitude and longitude of the power station.
A second sorted master list (addresses and telephone numbers) was obtained of 2,201 households within the 7.5-mile-radius circle.
The address of each household was then checked to determine whether the household was within the 5-mile EPZ.
This review produced 875 house-holds that appeared to be within the EPZ and which 23
comprise nearly the entire universe of households within the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station EPZ.
Replicated samples were developed f rom this list of households.
A sufficient number of these subsamples were developed to ensure that the required number of telephone calls could be made, i. e., to establish the proportion of households alerted to within a 5%
precision at a 95% confidence level.
The method for sizing the sample to achieve this result is described in Appendix A of this report.
To ensure that the Spanish-speaking population was accurately surveyed, some interviewers were prepared to conduct the survey in Spanish.
The English and Spanish questionnaires used for this telephone survey were the same as those used in the August 15, 1984 survey (Figures 2 and 3 of this report).
As part of the telephone survey, 378 households believed to be within the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station EPZ were contacted, and the responses were collected in an automated data base.
However, before running the final tabulations, each of these addresses was checked (based on collected address and crossroads information) on a street map to validate its location.
Of these 378 addresses, 69 were outside the EPZ.
Therefore, data were tabulated on the 309 respondent households that were located within the EPZ.
Respondents at 51 of these households had been away from home at the time of the demonstration of the alert and notification system and, therefore, ware not included in the alerting analysis.
Of the remaining 258 households, 69.8% (180) indicated that they had been alerted during the demonstration.
If one uses the esticated number of households within the EPZ (which is 793 hecording to the analysis of sample addresses) in the confidence ' interval expression in Appendix A, it yields an estimated 95%
24
l confidence interval for the proportion of the total EPZ population alerted that ranges f rom 65.0% to 74.2%.
In other words, at a 95% confidence level, between 65.0%
/
and 74.2% of the households within the EPZ would have 1
stated that they were alerted by the early warning
)
system.
f Respondents at the households that reported that they were not alerted were asked whether their tone / weather alert radios were turned on and set such that an alerting signal could be received.
Respondents at 35 households indicated that their tone / weather alert radios were not being operated in a manner that permitted receipt of an alerting signal.
Thus, 80.7% of the households whose residents were home at the time of the demonstration and that had tone / weather alert radios operating in a manner that permitted receipt of an alerting signal reported that they were alerted.
Using the estimated number of households within the EPZ, and the confidence interval expression in Appendix A, a
95% confidence interval ranging f rom 76.0% to 84.7% is obtained for the proportion of the total EPZ population with operating tone / weather alert radios that would have stated that they were alerted.
The sample of 309 households was also used to estimate the proportion of households within the EPZ that stated they received inf ormation about what to do in a real emergency at the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station.
Of these 309 households, 82.8% (256) responded that they had received this information,12.3% (38) responded that they had not received this information, and 4.9% (15) did not know whether they had received this information.
Using the approach discussed previously, the following estimates for the entire EPZ population resulted (at the 95% confidence level):
25
. Between 79.3% and 85.9% of the households would have reported receiving the information;
/
Between 9.7% and 15.4% of the households would have responded that they had not received the information; and i
Between 3.3% and 7.1% of the households would not have known whether they had received the infor-mation.
Review of the survey data to identify areas where the alerting system could be enhanced indicated a need f or additional public instruction on.the operation.of
- t. ;e/ weather alert radios and the 'importance of operating these radios in a manner that permits receipt-of an alerting signal.
Alternatively, the alerting system could be enhanced by installation of a physical means of alerting (such as an audible alarm) for areas of high population density that would not require operation by members of households within the EPZ to ensure that an alerting signal would be received.
4 26
1 IV.
FINDINGS FOR EVALUATION CRITERIA E.5, F.1, N.2, N. 3, AND N.5 Those aspects of the alert and notification system addressing evaluation criteria. E.5, F.1, N.2,.N.3, and N.5 of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1, have been reviewed by FEMA and found to be adequate to provide reasonable assurance that appropriate protective measures can be taker.
off site in the event of a radiological emergency.
This conclusion is documented in a letter to the Honorable Richard D.
Lamm, Governor of Colorado, dated January 29, 1982, signed by Lee M.
Thomas, Associate Director, State and Local Programs and Support, FEMA.4 In this letter, the Port St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station received FEMA approval under 44 CFR 350, conditioned on an ultimate approval and verification of the public alert and notification system as called for in NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1.
I 1
27 m
s i
I
{
REFERENCE LIST i
1.
Public Service Company of Colorado.
"Public Service Company of Colorado, Fort St. Vrain final saf ety analysis report."
(No date).
2.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Federal Emergency Management Agency.
1980.
" Criteria for preparation and evaluation of radiological emergency response plans and preparedness in support of nuclear power plants."
NUREG-06 54/ FEMA-REP-1.
Revision 1.
November 1980.
3.
Federal Emergency Management Agency.
1984.
Letter from Alton D.
Cook, Regional Director, to Richard Krimm, Assistant Associate Director..
Subject:
Documents to be supportive of the public alerting and notification system evaluation, dated April 2, 1984.
4.
Federal Emergency Management Agency.
1982.
Letters to the Governor of Colorado and to NRC's Executive Director for Operations, from Lee M.
Thomas, Associate Director, State and Local Programs and Support, dated January 29, 1982.
5.
Federal Emergency Management Agency.
1983.
" Standard guide for the evaluation of alert and notification systems f or nuclear power plants. "
FEMA-43.
September 1983.
6.
International Energy Associates Limited.
1983.
" Analysis of tone alert pilot test."
IEAL-321.
September 27, 1983.
7.
Public Service Company of Colorado.
Letter from O.
R.
- Lee, Vice President, to Alton D.
Cook, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Subj ect :
Radiological alarm in Platteville, Colorado, dated August 16, 1985.
U 28 1
s
?
k APPENDIX A Sample Size Determination 4
APPENDIX A SAMPLE SIZE DETERMINATION The number of households that need to be surveyed is determined based upon the need to obtain.a sample size sufficient to obtain a 95% confidence interval with precision (half-width) of 0.05 for the estimate of the porportion alerted.
The exact number of households to be surveyed can be derived from the following statistical considerations.
For relatively large sample sizes (n 2 30), taken without replacement f rom a population (N), the sampling distribution for proportions (e.g., the proportion of the population alerted) is nearly a normal distribution, the mean of which is the proportion (p) of the population alerted and the variance of which is
~
p(1 - 5)/n If P is the observed sample proportion, then for a particular confidence level with confidence coefficient Zes
\\
(P - p) $Z p(1 - p)/n
~
Thus, for this confidence level, the actual proportion of the population alerted satisfies the following inequalities:
f(1-P)
N - n\\
2 2
c N-n P
N-n c
2n N-1
~ 'c n
N-1 2
N-1
$ p ud e
N-n n
N-1 1
2 2
e N-n P(1 - P)
N-n c
N-n p
2n N-1 c
n N-1 2
N-1 PS N-n 1
c,,,
n N-1 Thus, the precision (W) is simply given by 2
P (1 - P)
N-n
. "e N-n\\
N - 1/
g N - 1/
2 n
W-2 [N - n\\
- c (N - 1/
n This equation can be solved to determine the sample size (n) required to yield a given precision (W) with a given observed sample proportion (P) as follows:
2 P(1 - P) - 2W + W l - 4P(1 - P)
+P (1 - P) 2 2W n=
2 fl+
1+
P(1 - P) - 2W
+ W l - 4P(1 - P)
+P (1 - ?)
2W N
\\
- /
Although this expression for n can be used directly, it is customary to make several approximations.
First, since the term in N in the denominator (the finite population term) is positive definite for all reasonable values of W (0 < W < 0.5), omitting this term will result in an approximation to n that is slightly larger than its true value.
This is an acceptable practice in sizing the sample since a larger sample gives greater precision.
~
\\
A second approximation that can be made is to neglect the terms in W2 within the bracket in the numerator.
Analysis demonstrates I
that this underestimates n when P < 1/2-1/4$[2+8W2 or P > 1/2 + 1/4 T[2 + 8W2 and overestimates n for P between those two values.
For the case of interest (a 95% confidence interval with precision of 0.05), this approximation provides an overestimation of n when a sample size greater than 191 is required.
Since the sampling plan calls for a minimum sample size of 250, regardless of the value of P, this approximation is acceptable because it also yie] ds an estimate of n larger than the true value.
Therefore, for the purposes of the pilot test and subsequent surveys, the following approximate equation can be used to determine whether a sample size larger than 250 is required:
z n=
P(1 - P) or using 1.96 for Z and 0.05 for W, e
n = 1536.64 P(1 - P)
Data from the pilot test can be used to illustrate the eff ects of these approximations.
In the pilot test, the population of tone alert households from which the sample was to be drawn (N) was approximately 4500 and the observed proportion alerted (P) was 0.675.
This yields 311 as the exact result for n.
Neglecting the finite population term yields an estimate of 334 for n, and the simplified final approximation estimates n as 338.
Thus, the final simplified approximation overestimates the required sample size by 27 in this case.
SOURCE: International Energy Associates Limited.
" Analysis of Tone Alert Pilot Test."
IEAL-321.
September 27, 1983.
/
-