ML20153C420
| ML20153C420 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 02/12/1986 |
| From: | Jordan E, Partlow J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Martin R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151K612 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-87-866 NUDOCS 8602200581 | |
| Download: ML20153C420 (34) | |
Text
.
y,pv %q[o, UNITED STATES y , r ,/( h NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION
]/ i wasmNotoN. o. c. 20sss
%, % ' /
- f E .,:.
.2 . ,;90 .c 0 -
MEMORANDUM FOR: dwi M'19eftin;4egionah,44mististente@V THRU: James M. Taylor, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcem) M. 'N .
FROM: Edward L. Jordan, Director f Division of Emergency Preparednets and Engineering Response Office of Inspection and Enforcement James G. Partlow, Director Division of Inspection Programs Office of Inspection and Enforcement
SUBJECT:
COMBINED ASSESSMENT FOR REGION IV EMERGENCY RESPONSE / PREPAREDNESS INSPECTION PROGRAM Enclosed please find (as enclosure 1) the assessment report for Region IV's emergency response capability with appropriate attachments.. Enclosure 2 is the assessment report for the emergency preparedness inspection program. This year the Division of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering Response, in conjunction l with the Division of Inspection Programs is attempting to accommodate regional '
requests for combined assessments. This package represents an evaluation of the Region IV prograr. at the Wolf Creek exercise on November 20, 1985.
As in previous years, the assessment program has proven a valuable tool in promoting standardization and consistency in program implementation from region to region. We value this mechanism for assuring that the NRC is adequately protecting the health and safety of the public.
C- _
ard L. ordan, Director l Division f Emergency Preparedness and En neering Response -
Office of spection and Enforcement i .,
I ,
'y .
James G. artlow, Director gh$/ gK Divi t ion of Inspection Programs Office of Inspection and Enforcement x
Enclosures:
As _ stated -
- (s (9 ) FozaJ700 Contacts: E. Weinstein, IRB/IE 492-7836 g/ jg-D. Perrotti, EPB/IE A M. 4 OC C
. o Enclosure 1 Assessment Report on Region IV Emergency Response Capability 1
1 1
1
)
i i
1 i
l l
l 1
l l
l I
l l
. o Enclosure !
ASSESSMENT REPORT (4TH YEAR) ON REGION IV EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPABILITY SECTION I - SCOPE The focus of the emergency response capability assessment for 1985/85 in Region IV is on information flow and response management. Response management in-cludes the Director of Site Operations and Base Team Manager as well as the Coordinator and Manager roles for the Site Team and the Base Team. The review is accomplished through the evaluation of an exercise. Headquarters response teams fully participated in this exercise. The Office of Public Affairs con-tributed to the evaluation of Region IV performance.
SECTION II - ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES (Agenda is Attachment 1.)
Location of Exercise: Wolf Creek, Kansas Date of Entrance Interview: 11/20/85 Date of Exercise: 11/20/85 Assessment Team Composition / Location: Eric Weinstein, Team Leader / EOF William Burton, Evaluator /TSC Joseph Hines, Evaluator / Base Team Clyde Wisner, Public Affairs !
Evaluator / EOF l Ken Perkins, Conducted Exit Interview -
Date of Exit Interview: 11/21/85 SECTION III - ASSESSPENT FINDINGS (Observer guide is Attachment 2)
Base Team Information flow within the new Region IV Incident Response Center (IRC) was very good. However, between the IRC and the Site or Headquarters (HQ) Teams, the information flow was hampered mainly by recurring telephone problems. The distribution and evaluation of incoming information was well-managed, allowing l the Base Team Management to weigh timely options and still have time to specu- l late about possible worst-case prognoses. While planned procedures were '
followed methodically, it is clear that a good deal of effort also was spent in preparing backup plans. Their value was demonstrated at least twice when primary communication procedures failed, i
-2 Site Team Technical Support Center (TSC)
The NRC site team representatives assigned to the TSC functioned in accordance with their procedures. In many instances, the site team representatives provided updated system parameters to their site team counterparts in the Emergency Operations Facility as much as 15 minutes faster than the licensee was able to record data on their status boards in the E0F. Comunications were a problem because the TSC was quite often the only site team link to HQ during those times when the EOF was unable to comunicate with HQ.
Emergency Operations Facility (EOF)
The Region IV response organization varied somewhat from other regions because the Site Team did not have a Safeguards Coordinator or Resource Coordinator.
The resource coordination function was perfomed very effectively from the base tean. The Resident inspector initially briefed the Reactor Safety Coordinator who in turn briefed the Site Team Leader. In addition, the team had a second layer of management similar to the HQ organization. This organization produced an effective team response. Those functions not handled by the Site Team were accomplished by either the Base Team or Headquarters. The team worked very closely with their licensee counterparts which proved very effective in resolv-ing technical and coordination problems. The region recognized the need to avoid an implied NRC approval for licensee actions or recomendations in this if i,
type of close working relationship. 4 The licensee's EOF was very cramped. In addition to the inevitable comunica-tions difficulties, face-to-face discussions were difficult because of the activity level in the EOF, although this did not seem to limit site team functioning. The site tcam did address shift change and requests for support from HQ in an efficient manner. There was good coordination with other organ-izations, particularly the state.
The Site Team Leader was very professional in his approach. He did not allow l the transfer of authority to take place until he was comfortable with his understanding of the situation and that all basic requirements for that trans-fer had been met.
It was noted during this exercise that the ENS comunicator was some distance from the Reactor Safety Tean in the EOF. This was attributed to a temporary ENS installation in the EOF. The region assured the assessment team that in nortnal circumstances this situation would be rectified. -
Public Affairs in general, the public affairs response was adequate to neet site team needs in l the EOF as well as in the Emergency News Center (ENC). However, better coordi-nation between the Site Team, licensee Base Team and HQ is desirable. l Specific comments on the public affairs response are provided as Attachment 3. l
, D Lessons Learned
- 1. Exercise Preliminary Notifications (PNs) should be numbered differently to avoid statistical confusion with real PNs in the future.
- 2. HQ procedures must be modified for HQ to better address phone calls from the Regional Administrator en route to the site in a timely and efficient manner so as not to delay the Site Team response.
l l 3. Current NRC and FEMA regulations require detailed planning for protective I actions within the plume exposure EPZ (about 10 miles). While it is unlikely that public protective actions wesid be necessary beyond the plume exposure EPZ, the detailed plannin', within the 10 miles provides a substantial base for expansion of respe ,se efforts in the event that this proves necessary. NRC and licensee discussions during the event indicate f ag"'-
that further training on these concepts may be appropriate.
SECTION IV - ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS Region IV implementation of the NRC response capability program in year #4 is complete, fully adequate, and consistent with current NRC guidance. Although the Region IV team organization is somewhat different than in the other re-gions, all core functions were adequately performeo at either the site, region, or headquarters. Site and Base Team performance was exercised with HQ counter-parts and licensee and state representatives. Region IV personnel demonstrated competence in carrying out responsibilities cornensurate with required duties.
Information flow was adequate to satisfy team needs.
The degree of consistency among the regions will be evaluated following comple-tion of all five regional assessments.
l l
l l
l
Attachment 1 IRB 4 ASSESSMENT AGENDA YEAR 4 11/19-21/85 Region IV
- Initial Notification Date: 09/03/85 Follow-up Notification Date: 11/13/85 Notification via IE Horning Report: 11/18/85 AGENDA Day 1, 11/19/85 Burton receives HP Training at Wolf Creek. ,
Day 2, 11/20/85 E. Weinstein and W. Burton Conduct entrance interview. Morning J. Himes preposition at Regional Office.
Evaluate regional performance in Wolf Creek exercise. Morning Evaluators: Joe Himes Base Team ,
i Eric Weinstein EOF l William Burton TSC Teleconference between Weinstein, Himes and Burton Following to consolidate results, exercise Prepare preliminary report. Evening Day 3, 11/21/85 Brief Ken Perkins and discuss preliminary report content. 8:00 a.m.
Conduct exit interview with regional management on exercise - 10: 00 a.m.
performance at the regional offices.
l l
i i
I
<i.- at . o . .a ,i 4, ,, .g e. . w r . .m. t r Attachrnent 2
'. s ,l l ;
,. .1 t.'.... Y.........
s t 11 _ . ./.l. . . . _fi L .
. . L r....tI s CITI r, u .t. T' A k .'i r 5 S " C '# T v o'sut E S
... ...................c...................................................
.. , s i a : i rr f. s o.m tro
=======?. ======================================================
i . P t. 1E.r ' . ' r, / 9
=====
,/)/fe ;. M - /w. 7 - o [ r-fe . T', . r' e.,. .N 1 a' what point is the
,,r/ ,/- . cr n .. ,/ d# , . , . . ,( /f['[I'*[< < T 'fecision te1e to go into
....................s a ,
. / .' e . {c . .s.
f o S t a n m*.Y !
- n. . . .d. r............................................
?) . hat is the basis for l svYa .Y (l ..
f-r d s: 'Jesionating the base Itav
. a.
y *
,/, ,, ,, , 7,, ; f '<
- n a 'a e r 't
....... .. ..... f..... n . rl /. . . . .
- 3) APA LUS cuestions held
< ff
. n ~.- '/ e /f r. . . <r/ fn o inimum a n et consistent with NRC role?
r"~ 4) Is it Clear who has the t s .3 .c , i .> M. ..7
/-'
7 ,, [ r/ < A . . 7
~
, , ,, 7 / E',U.S l e n <,, in FMS co.treunications nurino stanony (region),
.<a _fe , a ,, 4 d n- 7,* 7. er e .<y . initial activation (HQ) a9e e nfia m.n eti ectivation r .< h 1, 11.C <. g / sea al (~ te i , l' : ~ ) (site),
- 5) -t r e staff assignments V / ' ' '/ r' ace in a timely fashion?
e e,- s fr - frv .fl y ? / .* - /- .) h) . hat is the t, a s i s for
- . r./ < /, T, ,7 1 / ,</d i /,, ,c , ' . ) the necision to escalate f, s t r.
- response?
.......s . . . . .. . . d. ... . .s... o.. , . r.e.d. ....................................
p.
- 7) 1s the "ase Team c73 " o n va e r eware of his raanonsibilities for leanine the 40 response
- s C in tr
- ode?
I
, ,- ,. ' r. 7 , ,
, Te , / /,, ") 15 the flo. of i n t (.r e a t i o n aienuate fror
~~, . . / .* < r ..t
'La licensee at the site? ,
) 15 co-munication good
~~ wat.cer the 5ese Team and A
'- d t h e. "eacquarters Standby rene.?
, g,, , c/c e 4 . 7 ',. ., 1- 7.- ( 10) t. t =*at noint is the
? ,- ,,- , , e e c. . # r' Y . .,,.,ficeision mece t o s e n ti a t e a,a to the site?
- 11) -nat",yT I the Criteria u s i. c for determining the necessity of a site team?
...........................................................r.. .+...........
- 12) is the iT4 in control 7.. , e 1" k 4 (I co$4
,'M of dase T e .;- activities;
, [ , .f / / -r;; , ,
,/ is the teem orqanized or c.intuseu.?
- 13) fi ngg' the Site Team 47f 7 L * .n e r and *ne 6Tu coordinate their A c t i v i t i S pefor to i d em a r t u r e for the site? I
- ~~ 14) Does the Gese Team
'; ,<,.<,.,.., Jr. :st: a .I n r ! s , Cc s unmerstann its ro1ex In St.indhr?
. ,.C t r -r.c, M' ^- r I D*I In Initial Activation?
in * , nance 3 1.ctivation?
Me., d -4, [..t, . .
.. T e] c,., - , ( f ., 5.o . 151 -
mbers aware g)y (*y ) -1 nt . . r eion e : 7..
- < , e , ; < ,, / tr... .. .
7,, , 4_,, u ,y,4, l
c/r.. 3, I (s e d -+100 A dis<d t N f unc t i ons ?
.........................................u.i.tf . ..............................
l e. ) ae r aeoronriete Base
- I Te w nositions trannee?
l ...........................................................................
- 17) ere interface f ("T coamunications e estaelished?
A ggif. p b/ .g A& dr ;<.e ?, Y ' [ I '.' ) Wat is int eractin
....e:ju, /(76 g with tne State
/), f,s / A 7'a r.g?<i'*e.g,p434en,,p,737
- . . . . . . . .$. .r .i ..14 . ..s .. f,/.'....................................................
s
_ , . .- - , . _ , , ~ - . - - .
Po) ..co ernear I
, , nntificatinns -eno?
21.) ora adequate nrenarations mane for
, shift c 'i a n n e s for the
'/' ver10us 4ase Teen ereponents?
(,.' ..,,, r
~
a.,;<
.IRM s
- 22) I s, t h e @ C u s e rs
. . .-. ; % / e l-i effretively to supeort the i !* f o-
, , S T ,- in resnonse I
tenane,ent?
, , ,, ..f one, cortanJ of response (f. , '
/
ococetturas enn team meener casnonsibilities?
- 24) is the ECC performina
,: i his functions in a nenner (I. conducive to suoporting v tha .- T r ' ?
===============================================================
l l
l 4
i I
i i $
.c rr .ut 's -
- a t
- ==:-======::= =====
- 1) is th= .n- Team ENS I. , ~, ,, s , ,- <- le vonna , .. .31ified
- p, trstv. .-
P) ir$ ,oastions
./ follewee un in a responsibla fashion?
i
- 1) are FNS cuestions held gs .. - . .. tn n " i n i mri ano censistent with NRC role?
- 4) is it clear who has the lend in ENS communications
. -a -
_:. . , c . / .1 ce .v e.
norin 1 stansny (region),
initial activation (HQ) and expandea activation (sita)?
..........................................................i.................
(,'.. -r o 4, L. .
. j s ,. . --
%) ih a t is the composition of the *S t e a m .,.
- 6) Is interaction with heaanuarters response team t.
i.e., his counterpart a rriority?
, 7) is he aware of other 3ase Team tas<s? PY,SG.,
. . , . 8) Are aroroeriate staff
- j. ., ,
assioneo to tonitor and
/
evaluate licensea actions?
- 9) No reactor operations t fg assessnents concentrate on enre and containment conditions and proj ec t i ons
- 10) Are Rase Team reactor
,,f, '
operations assessments coordinated with HQ and discussed with the licensee?
i l
I i
2
, 11) Is n# absurinQ t t c rie,r '3 i r a t i o n .ith too s . , . **, o / ll e ,s e I,; r .,,
"Y*\*C'$4* '*NSUfGS
,/
'unamer so that olent
.o, ... r**.u - conditions are factored s irto reojections for offsite conseauences?
- 12) In his staff
-nnitorino the licensee p'+. ' eingely by tnlinwing the f g? ninnts c. n ' s and making anneneriata assessments based en licansee actions?
- 13) a re epnropriate shift
' chance r.r epar it i ons m ade?
_ 14) Are team members aware
,( ,
-t Ls ,
I
_. -r , . , t ,
i
.ri of tertinent information
d suen as chances in p o ,,Te d - .l '-~ ^
reroonsa modes ano licansae classification?
151 a re peonor
'- p3 a r r a n c e
- e n t.s i.a c e for
_ interfacinn with the $ite laam upon their arrival?
IC) Are resources oroperly inventnrien te adeaustely sunport Site Team es.uasts?
I f, y< / ll , .- 'i i ~~( 4 'T. '. _4 . 17) Are status ocards e,.- jd , Yt - /r<
coesistentiv neintained?
. . . . . . . . . -. . . . .r.a .r. . . . . . . .i s. . .f.o. . . . . 4 >... ..c..................................
- 16) nevt counterpart links :
fj; ,, e i f ,
, + b, , 7 . . .?1 a llos t reen properly initiated j
, ene maintaine.1? <
- 19) Is interaction with s
licensee constructive for discussion of recoe+ancia t ions and resolution of differences?
============= ============= ==============================_=====
1 1
I l
l l
l l
l
\
l l
l
.i. Te(11;r 13 .t- 8 Agfl
- =================
'~
- 1) is tha HPil link to the
'q, ,, , - -
licensee established I ./ pe aria r l y , canned at the Lase Tes= with a cualified incivicual anJ maintained with resnect to lead / node?
?) are quaStions routeo in
,r3 a fine 1Y A61 9?8ningful q, enner?
g7 , , , ff gre cues,tions held to a 7 n i n i n- un and consistent with tne 94C role?
'l ) Are questions followed j '- ~
un in an organized routine
/ fashior?
- 5) is coordination with
/3 ., < / a 1. rt e
.rf, fee 7i.v,.r.te,
, heacouarters PhT i.e., his
/ ,. ,/
r d r.r 6 r counterpart, effective?
< 6) l> n team ae-bers y>/ >/js2 . t , 7! j/ -
,. d .as unnerstand their chanoina ef, cf... ? ole in the various modes?
.......... 4...............................................................
- 7) is the licensee follo.ino his energency
- r. i n n particularly for nrescrined protective actions? )
l
- 4) are aonropriate shift !
I di chance preparations made j
.......L.*......................... .................y 9 the P ' 8 '* ? v c '/d< <
- 9) 15 interaction with
,/, g' /, , e /ge ; 4 ( State technical groups carried out in a timely and responsib1'e manner?
D
l ', ) are nffsite I etmS#*40ence prnjQCtion0 neseo on coae and e rs n t a i n n e n t assesstents frc* the R3+1
- 11) For severe accidents
. ), , / .- f 7~,. gf ere protective actions I assessed for compatibility with 54 cure 1 of "Flo.
Crort for General F.wercency Offsite Protactive hecisions" of Seetion I of the Wegional Aurplement?
- 12) Is there adeovate coereinetion eith other technical arm liaison base teams e.=cers?
- 13) Are Rase team dose g/ ,. , f h /* r/ 6' qr, /. ge , , .c y T 33,3g,#nts contdinatec
.t, es . u r t> s ,. <. r-J, ii -i witn r '- end Miscussed with "Q -re , -
- s. , a_ -
liransae anc State where v (, - [. e [ /, 'i' e4 . .c .r. .. s e ed ; 5 wi f A gen. apcrorriate?
.....................................e..es.r..* ,;
- 14) Are dose assessments nerformee in a timely and responsible manner?
IS) 15 the team aware of f4 , q , " ) ,. "( I Le C. , the creat uncertainties
._ essociaten with dose j q- J . < [ u r s . r. 5 by <' ' / '/ 2 T 7' (nrnjections and does not J use then as the princinel
, / ci YtW tt ,. vurT e $ t oL f n * ' $ . f' nesis for crotectfye s\ actions; does not question
- 5. I r . r e c[ Ajb
- r ' !-' \, .inor differences in
's results(factor of 10) and
\
g does not allow dose projections to dominate essessments.
- 16) Are team members aware th$ +4c.U5 / of chances in NRC mode and licensee classification?
- 17) Are reoper' arrangements made for
' #5 inferfacinn with the Site Tean unon their arrival?
7
l '- ) Pre resources nropeely inventoried to A "': u a t e l y sucanrt Site Teuw r ectu e s t s ? 0, e/.. I f . , < *Y s'
- s ,* . , , 7 s ., r.. c ( l 't ) t. r t status hostos t . .' -
1', ,, e, f, ( / '. 6. r ~ ;,f d. .[e . e /.! / r.onsistent1y taintained?
- 70) a v e counterpart links
/f., ..- , - -
/< / fr . hean rconerly initiated and raintain.1?
di) is interection with
.ri . . < / ., .*. .
licansee constructive for
- ,'. 7 t. . . , , ,e s , .,
ntscussion of
/;/ 'l / fa 1 t. x ) a. a V( /2 7 / % .
reroarennations and
..~7. .
, ,/ resolution of differences?
=========================.======= =========================================
l 1 i i i
- . _ - - . - _ . ~ , - - . ~_. _ . .
i i l l s * , c, ', 5 v , n ' < . cy M, c . - 1 i y 'tW i i
- - :==: :::::: ======
ll l
- 1) 15 contact made with tha licensee security ;
nffice in timely fashion? l ........................................................................... l e P) Is Safe 7vards/ security 7 M', / "M r . ./' '/ /- M ' . ' ' . C2 asrect of incident 5, y 4 . , 7 ' 1 ~ N o r Sof T4 w w M h M, considered early in the i T -ff - - A .. .........---------.. N ue "N '# - T) 1s nreparation for Site t q, p. < it e <: ir I L'*b " 7# Tent entev onsite made in
! . c, , , '[, e ,,"1 p . 5 an e v r> e d i[n t manner?
- 4) are conmunications aith p[, r p < , de d 5eadouerters enunterparts estanlished and t a i si t a i n e d?
r> ) *.o. is event safeguards sinnific.ince communicated to teat manacement? (1 y / D e n 2.$, m / l> ~7'r 4 p b o j I/. < L h) shen is cowunication
,/ , ~7 , e i, ,,, y egre., s w/,., .ith licensee established r how?
.........J .. ! . . / .,,..r.,.J . . . . . .. . .J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a ..........................
... nc D 7) is enordination with otner Fasa Team response aroups accotolished in a systeratic tanner?
A) Do team me~bers understand the changino role of NWC in relation to resuonse mecas?
- 4) onen is communications estaelishen with other federal response groups (F41)?
- 10) a re notifications made '
in a timelv minner and unnated on a recular nasis? l o
- 11) Ara sdea' late crocou' tons t al an in tho
* > r hant e of 54fe004rda cnd e e classifie*> intnrmation?
ESAchPhs5fl6fwP5854nto rrotectiva action eccom+endations?
- 13) are s9ift chance necoarations mane by the S b '- in an event of an '
a v t e n fle ti '14 t tJ e F 7 >
- ::::::::::::::::::::: --::::::::::::::::::==================333:333 i
l i i ) i k$ 1
,e.._- _,, , , , . ,._,. ,, , n . , , . _ , , . . _ - . . _ _ _ ,
- - -- - - - , - -. - - , . _ ,,,-e,. ,-, - . - . , .
,i ije a c c,1 -s ,
r,s
.- ======== :::: :s::=====
. l
- 1) Is nositinn s t a f t e ri in
' s* .. Y' < V lr *,? /,< jr, t_., 4 t i r\ t 1 y '.anmer?
.... .....................J...... .........................................
P) 4ere cresa releases or
., , /W% f*'fI - 7 '. , c, -/ resor.nses to overies oevelvneo or essessed in a
, o, , r .- .s time 1y ennner!
.........................................a................................. ;
- 3) vow is information for
/f, p.,if / . , r 7. a i 'In /' d. '
' - the nress nannledY 1s it
/'/ .
enerninated with the ;
,. ' 'T.
f , , f . , [ . . , e. . -[r / /j' ' licensee / state /other
.r,..
d es f /gw. 5/gy j Fe"arel ar1*ncies prior to epi,33,7 a) abet s t e t.s were taken to assura that e11 press releasas that affect of' site officiels are fully coordinated witn t h e'* orior to their release?
;) c. a s the information released to the press consistent with status sowaries? Hnw was that assurert? *ere releasas a titi r o v e d by the B T.u ?
Yt'r ,, , /' . . -7 . < r . . , v e/, " ,1 7% f ..< /e<<re 6) es comeonication with r h f',a y h.. t &s al h . .. e < < < eb. . ,$.l,, r e* l e a s e#0 * * * ' ' s coordinated with
- w. d Tf./ s.:se se Er. . . th*"?
- 7) s.as com*unication A!r .
Y- [af / <b //- r
, /, w <.., l' anaquata wit > the licensee, state and other
/< e r.n jf f f ./f / . t r //<t f r .t 1: l ' ' ' / #7 Federal asancie3. *d h a t
, ,. f /,' ,, ) , . , 7[ 8 / <' f ,, t was done to assure that all anerooriate contacts were nane.
*) Dio neabers of the cener61 oublic have an ot'n o r t u n i t y tn'ask questions of the NRC7
*.h a t arraneerents were
- a. a c e for this?
i i l l 1 11 ! i 1
- 4) 'in tnc Punlic Affairs nanaer consider wnct a,fitinnel resources might ,
, a v- no.ned and were tnov avellekle?
- 10) ner. Punlic Affairs officers ven' abreast of wnnt was henpening durine tne eccident inc was there annonh information available to respono eqamletely? What Channels
*ere osed to qet i infor~ation?
- 11) is norta%ubble usen in
/
/e' ,1 /3 <.
a ri efficient ano affective manner?
- 12) ens coordination with the Base T**m adequate to nrnvion and receive information reoarding news vecia ar.tivities?
- 13) =het is the mechanism for monitorino local ano national news coveraoe and is it effective?
- 14) *ere advance neaparations adequate for staffind the event? Were i anequate resources ,
availante to do the job? 1S) 'J 1 th O 'i O conduct l any pr Ss briefinas? has consic tion niven to ttis an et what point in the event? 1 1
==============*::::::::::::::::::::?:::::::::::::::::::====================
a e i I 4 l lh 1 _ _ _ _ ,._ _ _ . , _ . . . , _ _ _ _ - . m. . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ = _ _ .
' o s t e. Ii? I1aj9
. * . .i r; t 4
=============::::::::::::=
- 1) Are notifications made k "'
o in 6 timely fashion?
- s. , , ,
,,j . ,, / , . 7 W 6 e p a t D 'h.1 /) tre headquarters '
j.-
,, 9, ., r )'>c i ,,,, / ,
."7F/,... - 7.yfe7 counteccarts coordinatec
/. with according to the
.$ e r //j
~
. T-
,//1, Sic ,7, . . . rf /
- interface nrocecures?
- 3) .'h e t other orconizations are intaracta1 with and now?
41 are tema me.hers aware
/ of channes in rode and t{t..
. licensee classifications?
- 9) 14 r e Uffsite nerision'nakers(state or Incal) clearly identified and made knnan to the Hase Teen anti Drotective veesures 'anaaers?
[.) 7 c." Wew g74.a ,.-f , tr / [,. 4, ) Is notifieation r ind e r n.a t i n e c9nsistent
*, ,n e s , t a &,. i u, c . . r f ~h D* % b
- A cl .
Stetus Sunmary?
. . . . . . . . . .n . ./. .e. . . .r .. P. .a. d. . .n. .s . ....
, . >. . u.. a. ., .. .. r. . 1.:s. . . . . *. .t t........................
o
- 7) i s 's a s e Team Vanaper j, < neiefod on a reaular i
h a s i s't
- 4) is interaction with
! etter teneral amencies consistent mith the FRF.RP7
- 4) Are orensrations made
.,, for shift enance in the event of an extenced resonhse?
- 19) Is there a close
,,y,d workinq reletionship with 4($ ,
the Pws ann P$k as j I approuriate? '
- 11) is the interaction
( ,s aanno resnonse team i 1 members in the IRC i cortinuing'
)
i i 1% J
I 1,' ) ' hot oeoricect ions cro toine ~ ;. ri o f r> r stoffing tr* federal onsite facilities (FW"AC)7
====-===============--:====- : = r============================
s
.. , s ' . e .. e,s,
. * ============2==-
- 1) is the Resource Manecer w rt of m .4 s
- Team
( " a n n e r
- i, activities ano nlass for nenleyino site tram?
, - ,? ) -. m e r e doe s k'- set up
/C ,. . ,, /, / / i' 'A y r .. . r . . "7 bene of onerations?
g' ' / '/r , t . ~7 / , *, nw </t ; dI/4 w ) "** * ' O.s i s t 1 c a 1
<* / / a ut,vort activities carried r m.t's'13 y i;j e o r e /'ao w /> t a . w * < m77 t .,
y y os . n) tr* Site team traval n - .< r . R/> .s ,. / % w+ ,, , /, ,( .i n " c o n t" olans efficient 1y , de. . r. /ta nan <llee?
- 5) ehet are the other RP activiti*s?
- 6) 15 the We aware of
/ ,, , e n a n c e si in mode and
,- licensee classitication?
f,. ,[ (; i f - . : ~,s7 ve/e[. [<.7 7) voes he heief the GTs se e e #7eX Ass e s, 7T n t e. , n a .. o r s t . . TJ o.< W nn nerionic basis?
.f'.g...s.............g ........................................
**'/' r- ) Is 16'C ewinneo with
......m.....f,..,,.......X.....en,. . . . . . .d. . .Tr; ' I I n e r '1
- o rasoveces?
- 9) Jre shift change nrenarations in the event
($ nf an e r t ence ra incident made? a 10) Are certinent nersonnel information (ies n a d a e , r'e d i c a l history and g techn1 col otsa l i f i ca t i on inferratinn) available to Q#I OT' for use in antah11 shine Site Team? b ^ h '4 11) is contact tr a d e with
'r e . , , I, M (j C k M u ti:: kesnons, cot 61 nation
.d T a ri for b r o k e r'i ng of
@s t r t. eettinnal Site Tean.
nersonnel?
========================================: ================================
i i 1 1t i s
-- w. _ . . _ _
.m_. _ . _ _ _ _ _ , _ .___._,77_ ,m___ __,.y. , - _ _ , _ __c,____,-, - _ - - _ . _ , . _ _ _ . . . . --
e ( l } l 1 s l. %) ?: ?'.
, , as:e:::::::::::::s:s:
"It- ifs- LCA '_ /'.fi rCT e iF ills irt uAfto %
- ====== : =============:::====:=======
hh p/ m ' tau //M g
- 1. At what noint is the decision made to oc into hbt / j Initial Activation
.g g gg & , A man %n ac tivation??
.................er. .....................................
'q 2) shst is the basis for I noterminino the Site Team t.c=ter?
U
..... b...........................................................
- N N " 3) are staff assi9mments made in a timely fashion?
d wd N'M 4) <in a t is the nasis for the cecision to escalate MEN or ceescalate the case.onse? gg M M -
- 4) ls 950 ware of his resonnsibilities for A/[ mum NM N Icasino t h cr 'M response?
Is it clear .hich
// atJ t nor i t i es h Jve eeen transferreo and which have not?
M EO 8. M e.) Is the flow of g gg* g in torn ation adequate froe
'ha licensee?
G y /, ggg g 7) Is ennunication cond between the base Team and
'Q h ht t ii a I on arters and the ,
RJ If it is necessary to D a t:v i s e the licensee, ho. is init decision mace? N O W e r o o OM *
- 1at nd are l they consistent with l F1oure 1 of the Section i I of the Eegional l
. Sunnlerent? l 1 1 2 l tv
, (/ lo) Does the S T I. / o S O
, s va"eestamo that the NWC j he a ir o n t t o r role and not an active one in the quetsionmakino process?
 are t*JS Questions
.fs ; M". Y, fy @ (.C u a rt FU t*6 6 felle.co or in a raSeonsible aia n n e r ,,
g , ,,
'k'.i.J.W,..L*..................................................
Q g/ j M gf)%
- 3) 4. r
- L'JS Que s t i ons he l d te a ' i e i turi e n r1 ,
C (, o s i s t e n t with the NGC cole? fj tt ) is it clear mho has the fv
\
M 4 2 4./.4 E O lend in ENS communications mi.rine stanohr(ease g' 4444 M t am), initial activation f' ( v. ) anc ernanded activation (site team)?
%) . w hat is the Composition of the LS t e a rn ?
.........p....
, of is interaction with MM A I
hae3cuarters response team i.e., his counterpart a orierity? yb M , d' " ^' '.g"..................................... M M8 71 ls he aware of other Site fees tas<s? Pk',5G..
~ .'k. . . .l.t*t hE.\ftipt )/l$/4 6 Q , . f it a) era anneorriate staff 4 asa.ionee to monitor anc L. M esaluete licensee actions? !
In the 15C, EOF,CR7
- 4) are reacter operations
[ { g [fC M assess 9ents concentratino ch Core and PCntainRent (( cowitions? l ii ) Are Site Team reactor j W operations assenseents I ennedineted wi'th HQ and ,
, discussed with the l l lir.ensee?
l l a
? s'
1)) I s %, assuring coredin4 tion eith tho PU o r ntactive 'easures conedinator so that plant
}{' ennoitions are factored into nenjections for nitsite e.ons*19ences?
- 12) is his staff
%6-g ~ bdt.kJL i.'onttoring the licensee closely ny tollowing the 4 '
riant= EoP's ano '.akinq J4' arr.r or>r i a t e awas sme n t s
/ n e r. e ri on licensen actions 7 I '6 ) Are anernariate snift connoe r.racarations made?
1%) are taan temmers amare NRt4W4 - 14 h et metinent information
. sue 1 as channes in response modes and licensee classification?
- 15) *ere oroper 6 -
b' arranca~.ents tade for ' interfacine uoon team
/*bI4
....................... ............ . /. ...............?
arrival I
- 18) Are resources properly '
inventorien to adequately sunnort Site fea* reevests? 4 h
/' .lu M 17) Are ststus Doerds consistently maintained?
- 10) Have counterpart links ;
cren prouerly initiated i and aia i n t a i n e c ? l y & , in s]w s u_ - -
- 19) is interaction with licensee constructive for gM
~
- 'Jiscussion of eeenea,endations and resolution of offferences?
=========================================================================== l
- l l
l l l 4 j i l l
e4 9 6 r 17 ii e 3 :. o t ,,n, % ; ;n t w,
- =rrurer=r=s.:===:rs===== ;
- 1) is toa di"e link to the licensee estanlished v/ (([ r e et, e r 1 y , nnneo oy the Site 1*++ wit <1 a cualified
[ ./. inesvidual an1 Aaintaineo resnect to lead /moce?
.................p.... ............................'e .s
- 7) tre Nuestions routed in a ti9ely and neaningful ;
- 6. inner?
() are ovestions nein to a ainieur ann consistent with the idL role? p( 4) Are <westions follnwen up in n r. oraanizen routine {
.........................................................'t i n s t. i o n
- 5) is conraination with M M. ' headavarters #'T and tiase
_rGYaty.. [M ......... g ,_ 4jg g e a r- P W- effective?
.....f"..
' ~
# ' ' 0* 6) [>o team me+bers understand their chanqino eq k te
. 4 W......f.......... role in the various moces?
. . . . . . . . . . . . f. . . . . . .(.4/m
- 7) are apprcnciate shift channe preparetions made Sv the PrC7 d) are offsite cor.senuence projections besed on core and centainF*nt assessments l frem tne e? actor safety team? l i
- 9) For severa accinents are protective actions
-cuts assessad for compatibility e .itn rigure 1 of "Flow I 3 Thert for General
, , F eroency offsite y O F'rntective Occjnions" in l tectien I of the Regional i Surnlement. I
........................................................................... j i l
, 1 I i l l a a
>p
4 A ti ) 15 thore cdoousto M
. /[ q g[g roordination with othor tecSnte.el and liaison site p gl .............Q
...... 3..... Q....f.......t w ss ".eeners?
U 11) a re tea + mneers aware nf chanvas in WC code and licensee classification?
' 12) Ara croner
- j. - dd' '
arranoanants made for (f interfacinn .ith the
/ # "' 'O b d44 / l i c arnsee ue )n the site tea.a's errival?
........................................ w ................................ 3 g A>L , . p,g p/a u S. 13) Are resnveces gg, . j 4 v available to arMunte1y sucport the Site b Team nee.is? g Jr.. ./ 14) Ara status boards
- e. o n r. i s t e n t l y tonitored?
Have counterpart links N ' W # p)nurnmerly nee initiated and m a i n t e i n e 17
- 14) Is interaction with j -
/b M e d'p u M licensee / state /localsconst rurtive for liscussion of t2 C 3 ,1 4 + reco***ndetions and resolution of differences?
- 17) Are discussions
- consistent with our j conttoring role ard do not Mf '
/
interfere with
, A ,uu e - decisionmaking process?
h *
/ 16) is interaction with State tecnnical oroups 47>l M. M 25 g//
gprdu4 corried out in a timely ann resronsible manner? p gfjQ Q,gg g g la) a re nose assessments ne e f ora eri in a timely and ( f .44 ,42 . ertuinsihle minner? i
i J. - (L M 101 sep 'i s ' . foat d e, s o 3 c a n e s s e e
- a. roorcinatoo 3)2ndh \
- with Wd and discussed with
- licensee and state, where ltVY ccihk f antrorriatet
- 21) 1s the team aware of t th* or*At uncertainties assectatea with dose g ky *.rnjections and do they n ti t use tnam as thp rrincipal ndsis for h' PD orntactive actions) do not
) queTtion minor differences i r, results (factor or 10)
G 4 W &/ / ani no not allow dose l
.arnject4=nn to cominate l
- s e. a s s t e a t s 't !
- ==::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::=
l i l l
#E
1 i t 1 l 3
- F f M i '. + < < f / % l C o '-' l T f L fh.b ; 1 :. i i hh
===============================
- 1) is contact made with 1 the licensee security I j/
office in timely tasnion? l
?) jS safeQuardS/ security )
asneet of incident ennsinared early in the avent? imW 44 T) 15 preoaration for Site i
, T e ., m entry onsite made in a- v en exreciant manner?
..............+ ,& $. .',.g. .............. ...............................
/ 'J ) t. r e communications with Scacquarters counterparts
$ hVdC established and meintainec?
/*f 4- 5) now is event safeauards sionificance communicated to team man 49ement?
- 6)
- hen is communication M
with licans*e established and now?
- 7) Js conedination with other Site Team response genops accomplished in a systematic manner't
- 4) Do tean m e.T h e r s uncerstand the changing role of ad C in relation to response modes and licensee classifications?
- 9) Aben is communications estanlished with other federal response groups (F"l)?
L'
to) tre notifications made
', . in a timely r.'a n n e r and
'J r t o t e (I on a recular ria n i s' 111 Are anenJate precautions taken in the enc 5snaa of safeguards and classified information?
- 12) Are safeouards t
concerns factored into nrotactive action raconmendations?
- 13) Are shift change nrenarat ions nane by SGC ir en event of an extenced nature?
===============================-============= =============================
l
- 1 l
. \
l 1 i . r v i ,. e r1 1.;s10 . r.s...j
.. r . i ._ i
- ===== :::::==
/
, g ,// g,4'4/ (( l) Are notifications taae i ri a timely fashion?
. . . . 4L 2./. L ,t d .
,d0/L-Al j
\
p.
- 2) ara enunternart links ;
o~ t~ '}554m <u t W
& // e s t ..,
- l i s, h e ! and maintained c'
( with n a a riqu a r t e r s [gg4 ,,9 t?tu , i:nva r n nen t liaison teaml u, te M[f[ - 3) ' hat n t *i e r organirations are
]
du , < M /< . . g[f , M nterertad with and how? w ,gf (/s, 4) e ra teen members aware o1 cnenoes in mode and licansee classifications? g [ b [ ,//ktu 4/ a mal ) Is the interaction vnno respons* team
^
- Mroers continuing?
p.,d --
.g g g/ 6) Are Offsite necisionmakers(state ano local) clearly identified Jf( h/c[$ anc rac'e known to the
;TI./DJri?
h ' g g,y gggp M(( 7 ) 1s ra. notification ne status update information f, consistent with Status
/.Ab/ M A St~. nary?
y / .44rt/te[ N ##'l [ $) Is DC0 neiefed on a l YS$4't&l $A Y $.$W.// *1s' '
//A# (Z W .41/4 d (4 /f g p ) 1s interaction with nther f e 'ie r a l aOencies j g' (( consistent with the FRERP?
/ [p g(g gMQk 10) Sea crecerations made ty TLC for snift chance in as [ B~ h the evant nf an extended res-nse2 c
( W[(44 4 g dks4 44W4 y III IS ' h e r ** A close
. .MU C (M .
g's pf
,' o r k i n r: relatinnship with f s. 4+ ] $0/C~ lL nrnronriate?
ant **5C nen .................................... ..e................................... [kkf b hg.h f/ M
- 12) ' hat oreparations are nein, +ade for staffinn
/J4k I (/A[4 d'(u the f c rie r a l and state y
. . . . . . . . . t 2< b . s <t
//
[ facilities? W/d3..................................... [ -g ((ggg %[ 13) is coorrsination
>. tween resonnse
/ /g.ga/ C Q facilities carried out in an errenitious manner?
fori1ities a'1eouately
- staffed to adfress site
[ c
-============ . ==============.= ===== = ================= ======= ======
tram needs? i J 1 e.
.Lo c e, v.- 1 ., r n -
====================
l> ls tha C esource Ccorainator aware of OSU y activities after denleyment to site?
..................... , L k ..v i
b.l.b.. ..................................... 6444
?) ..n e r e does RC set up case of operations?
/
. 3) How are loaistical
[//(() suroort activities cerried out?
................... ....a.. ...........................................
g.1 4) . hat are tne other RC v activities?
- 5) Is the DC aware of I
f g/,(f l chanqes in moae and t licensee classification?
.............a. .... .....
..zygy...........................................
b) Lines he brief the DSO () < nn o ceriodic basis?
- 7) Is NRC snace equippec
/ b, with needed resources? ................... .n.....................................................
x) ti r a shift change oracerations in the event of an extended incident f/({b ' made cv the PC? b
- 9) Are pertinent personnel information (ie:
naque, technical expertise an- medical nistor y information) availaole to S i l. / S S t! for use in selectino additional Site Tean veteers?
- 10) is contact made with 40 Wesnonse Coooination Team for brokering of aceitional Site Team nnesonnel?
S.ESESIEEN .E E N e N. EN. EE NSI EN . - SN . S S SES.S $$$ ESSE S I 31 l l
- . - - , - - - - - - - - -- . - - - - - ,}}