ML20205C111

Summary of 990310 Meeting with NEI & Various Util Representatives Re Performance Indicators & Insp Findings Assessment for Emergency Preparedness Programs.Attendance List & Meeting Matls Encl

ML20205C111
Person / Time
Issue date:	03/24/1999
From:	Reggie Sullivan NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Essig T NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
PROJECT-689 NUDOCS 9904010081
Download: ML20205C111 (18)

Text

n kQ CIC yo k '

UNITED STATES

~ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5f WASHINGTON D.C. 20066 4 001

1. March 24, 1999 l

l MEMORANDUM TO: Thomas H. Essig, Acting Chief Emergency Preparedness and Radiation Prctection Branch Division of Inspection Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Randolph L. Sullivan, Emerrpnt/ Preparedness Specialist <

Emergency Preparedness and Radiation Prot 6ction B h Division of Inspection Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUMMARY

OF PUBLIC MEET' 4G WITH NUCLEAR INDUSTRY REPRESENTATIVES REGARDING PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ANO INSPECTION FINDINGS ASSESSMENT FOR EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAMS On March 10,1999, representatives of various utilities and the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) met with representatives of the Nuclear Regulator) Commission (NRC) at NEl offices in Washington, DC. Attachment 1 provides a list of attendees. '

The purpose of the meeting was to provide NRC input and stakeholder comments on the development of the Performance Indicator Reporting Manual, an NEl document. The draft NRC logic diagram for assessing EP inspection findingt was also discussed.

-l NRC and NEl staff discussed the NRC and industry efforts to date and the goals and time schedules for this project. Future meetings were planned, with a goal of meeting with Pilot Plant EP managers in April.

/  ;

The group discussed pilot plant implementation of the Pl system and the inspection program -

during the pilot. The plants who would likely be inspected were identified, although a final 3, decision was not yet made by NRC. These inspections would implement the new baseline ///A 3 inspection program for those plants with EP inspections currently scheduled.  !

j The NEl Pl Reporting Manual was discussed (Attachment 2.) The definition of key ERO ,

members was discussed and a list of key functions identified (Attachment 3.) Other details of  ;

Pi definition were also discussed, including: required drill scope, definition of timely and  :

accurate and counting of notification opportunities. EPPOS 2 will be used to establish acceptable timin3 of classification and notification activities.

NEl proposed a method for counting the success of siren tests to support the ANS PI:

successful tests divided by tests, with at least a monthly test performed. This method was acosptable to NRC.

CONTACT: Randolp L. Sullivan PERB/NRR pcyQC

~

9904010001 990324 PDR REV0P ERONUMRC PDR _

1 The NRC handed out Attachment 4, NRC Draft Oversight Assessment Process for Emergency Preparedness Inspection Findings. The attachment was explained to the inctustry group and a request made for comments. This will be revised and discussed at a later date.

Attachments: As stated cc w/att: See next page 1

1 l

l

~

~

I

' Nuclear Energy Institute Project No. 689 L

cc: Mr. Ralph Beedle Ms. Lynnette Hendricks, Director  !

Senior Vice President Plant Support and Chief Nuclear Officer Nuclear Energy Institute i Nuclear Energy Institute Suite 400 Suite 400 17761 Street, NW 1776 i Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-3708 Washington, DC 20006-3708 Mr. Alex Marion, Director Programs Nuclear Energy institute Suite 400 1776 l Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-3708 Mr. Jim Davis, Director Operations Nuclear Energy Institute '

Suite 400 1776 i Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-3708 l

L

< Distribution: Mtg. Summary w/ Dated March 24, 1999

}iard Copy

" PUBLIC -

PERB R/F OGC ACRS SMagruder RSullivan SRoudier EMail SCollins/FMiraglia BSheron BBoger FGillespe BGallo TEssig l AMadison i DHickman '

RSullivan FKantor SMagruder GTracy, EDO KBarr ANelson, NEl l l

c10002 L

7, l

l The NRC handed out Attachment 4, NRC Draft Oversight Assessment Process for Emergency Preparedness inspection Findings. The attachment was explained to the industry group and a request rnade for comments. This will be revised and discussed at a later date.

Attachments: As stated l

cc w/att: See next page l

l

?

l l

l l

DISTRIBUTION: See attached page  !

4 i

l DOCUMENT NAME:G:\RLS\0310MTG.wpd OFFICE PERB PERB o NAME RSullivan(kTEssig %

DATE 3/).4 99 3/14/99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY l

2

, bistiibution: Mtg. Summary w/ Dated - March 24, 1999 Hard Qgs.y PUBLIC .

l ' PERB R/F OGC ACRS SMagruder RSullivan SRoudier EMail SCo; lins /FMiraglia BSheron BBoger FGillespe BGallo TEssig AMadison -

DHickman RSullivan l FKantor i SMagruder l- GTracy, EDO i KBarr l ANelson, NEl l

I I

I I

I

.1

Attachment 1 Emergency Preparedness PI Definition and Inspection Finding Significance Meeting 3/10/99 List of Attendees Name Oraanization A. Nelson NEl R.~ Sullivan NRC/NRR D. Hickman NRC/NRR K. Barr NRC/NRR S. McCain CP&L C. Simmons OPPD N. Avrakotos NYPA D. Mil.ler PSE&G M. Munroe TVA R. Kitts TVA M.Agen NSP M.Vonk CECO C. Sunderman NPPD

Attachment 2 Section 3.4, EP Cornerstone of Pl Reporting Manual I

l l

l

9 ' /o 3.4 Emergency preparedness Cornerstone e

Drill / Exercise Performance Puroose:This indicator monitors timely and accurate licensee performance in drills, 4xercises, and actual events when presented with opportunities for classification of_

cmergencies, notification of offsite authorities, and development of protective action recommendations (PARS). It is the ratio,in percent, of successful performance of those actions to total opportunities. _

Definition:The percentage of all drill and exercise opportunities that were performed successfully in the previous 24 months.

• Only activities that the licensee formally assesses for performance of classification, notification, and PAR development are included; simulated emergency events that are identified in advance for performance opportunities will be included (opportunities cannot be removed fr m the indicator due to poor performance).

e

- Opportunities include those that a e during actual emergency declarations as -

well as those that occur during the bienmal exercise, and may include those g" during other drills of appropriate scope, and shift simulator evaluations h1 conducted by the licensee training organization. el .

W*

• A drill is of appropriate scope if it provides a proficiency developmen opportunity for the ERO that involves, or reasonably simulates, the interaction o the control room, the Technical Support Center (TSC), the Operations Support Center, the Emergency Operations Facility (EOF), field monitoring teams, damage control teams, and offsite governmental authorities, as appropriatg (e.g., : f.;'d mcHtedng ic: n m;y en!y He ::h;'th the EOI, Gie waiivi ec,m m:y only irdeeet #th ** TCO. b"t t'.c TOO n=y inieraui with ihe EOF, u.e ccatrc' -~~m, th: 000, er d gov;m. ert 059' )c

~

• Operating shift simulator evaluations may be included only when the scope requires classification, and notifications are performed at least to the point of filling out the appropriate forms and demonstrating sufficient knowledge to perform the actual notification. However, there is no intent to disrupt ongoing operator qualification programs. Appropriate operator training evolutions should be included in the statistics only when emergency preparedness aspects are consistent with training goals.

- Opportunities should include multiple events during a single drill oi Lvolution if supported by the scr.nario, as follows: l l

i

- each expected recognition and classification opportunity  !

should be induded  !

~

7. . .. . . .'. .. ." 1.._ 7 7 .~ - N T .-~ ~ ~_T " - - ' .- - -

~

notification opportunities should include notifications made to c V-

• state and/or local govemment authorities for initial emergency classification, upgrade of emergency class, initial PARS and changes in PARS (periodic follow *up notifications and briefirigs when the classification or PARS have not changed are not included)

- PAR opportunities should include the initial PAR and any PAR change Data Elements:The following data are required to calculate this indicator: )

- the number of drill, exercise, and event opportunities in the previous 24 months a the number of drill, exercise, and evant opportunities performed successfully in the previous 24 months averaae values for this indicator are

" Calculation: The site (oppogigigrformed successfully) calculated

, x as fol 100 (number of opportunities)

Reoortina Reautrements: The following data should be reported monthly:

• the number of drill, exercise, and event opportunities in the previous month

- the number of drill, exercise, and event opportunities performed successfully in the previous month a the inaicator value NNd* G,. ~ 'yo *b

+ the operating band for this indicator N.8.1h g<g Y A 20)

Clarifyino Notes:

• There is no requirement to include any drill or training evolution in the statistics other than the biennial exercise, and no minimum number of opportunities has been established. However, the greater the number of opportunities, the more accurately the indicator will represent licensee performance.

- ? Sa %,,,,,,,,g;;;;r,s

" Timely" means that offsite notificatio w\ of Prete:*Ek:8%. l (fERe)is made within 15 minutes.d

• " Accurate" meansps s procedure. >ecified by the approved plan and( implementingC. M 8.e( i l

.-aq. Q... Mo.._.....

= . . . M .E D D

7. ' .....__M.,Q .

,,'^

c.%d.k s~QJ2. wAM ls b '~*

9 y~

e at. GM b @*^ "

Emergency Response Organization Drill Participati O

Purpose:

This indicator monito's opportunities that the tots! ERO as been p ided to gain proficiency as an integreted organization. It measures the percentage of ERO personnel who have participated recently in proficiency-enhancing drill or exercise opportunities or in an actual eveNnt.

{ Definition:The percentage ofhRO and operating shift crew members that have participated in a drill, exercise, or actual event in the prey'ous 24 months. 41M k i

_7 g Qp.

- ERO participation is intended to includF the epe et% P*. crcecc :nd '.hc rninimum pc;itiene -- . .!".;d ;v in in mergenvy F;en (r;;n). TF; would include positions r quired for the fu tioning of the control roo he TSC,the OSC, and the E F during Plan i lementation. Plant work , security personnel, an others who are n chift or may be called i o support the emergency i do no fill pos~ ons on ERO duty rosters are not part of the this Indicator. However, operating ift crews are t required to be included position that are formal on ERO duty rosters bu re not committed to in the d

Plan, d other positio s important to emergen response, may be 3

• Participation may be as a participant, mentor, coach, evaluato , or controller, but not as an observer. Only participation in the dri!!s, exercises, and evolutions thatls 1 are used to provide input to the Drill / Exercise Performance indicator may used for statistics for this indicator. Multiple assignees to a given ERO sition could take credit for the same drillif their participation is a meaningful and thorough opportunity to gain proficiency in the assigned pqsitio .

Q E q.O &, N, *

• Evaluated simulator evolutions that contrib e to the Drill / Exercise Performance indicator statistics could be considered for .pereth; chi't cren vadivip.~n. i However, there is no intent to disrupt ongoing operator qualification programs. l i

. Appropriate operator training evolutions should be included in the statistics ni J6 when emergency preparedness aspects are consistent with training goals.[lf an 7

• ERO member or Ope'et%; cree =cmber has participated in more than oneidrill M during the 24 month evaluation period, the additional participation can not be " a

.Y

) used in the indicator statistics.

~----

Data Elements:The following data are requi(ed,to calculate this indicator:

( ,. ,. h -- P * *

• the numbe@denLC RO end operetN e* crer/ mem" s O EM Qs, %

the number c'ERO and vgmaUnw .= crew inernbsrs that have participated in a drill, exercise, or actual event in the previous 24 months

~ '

Calculation: The site values for th d ego,r gated as follows:

~w ne"cre that have participated)

(number s'of ~itg ge sr - ..

.7 J '. . '_ . ___ . ._ ~ ~; _._ ' .' 1

"~

.__~.I._.,-.T~~~~.~~"~' T' 1Rgoortina Reautrements: The llowing data should be reported monthly: ,

lub s

the numberof E];y. ..d eh*4c- - bre

- the number of I ER06.d ep=Og ; hit ;;;; =d:: that partic! pated in a drill, exercise, or actual event in the previous month a theindicatorvalue - %bM* @

= the performance band for this indicator %"_0 -

y ,,

h-4 g.)

Alert and Notification System Availability (h o.\hh ogM Purcose:This indicator monitors the availability of the offsite Alert and Notification System (ANS), a critical link for alerting and notifying the public of the need to take ',

protective actions. It provides the percentage of the sirens that are capable of performing their safety function.

i Definition:The percentage of ANS sirens that are capable of performing their safety function, as measured by periodic siren testing in the previous 12 months.

- Failure of a slren is indicated by any failure that would prevent the stren from creating its design sound level and pattem.

- The period assumed for the failure would be in accordance with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) direction on gathering statistics.

. Periodic testing is to be accomplished in accordance with FEMA guidance, and actually tests the ability of the siren to perform its intended safety function.

Data Elements:The following data are required to calculate this indicator:

= the number of ANS sirens

= the number of available ANS siren-hours in the previous 12 months Calculation: The site values for this indicator are calculated as follows:

(numgr, ,gitpble siren-hours) x 100 (number of sirens)x(hours in year)

Reoortina Reautrements: The following data should be reported monthly:

the number of available ANS siren-hours in previous 12 months

. n- ..

w.,a ahra: =tran hnurs in the orevious 12 m n5s

~' ~ ' -- -- -

...~, , _

.'- j l

• theindicatorvalue

~

- the performance band for this indicator  !

l Clarifyino Noter. When ANS availability falls below 90%, FEMA is require NRC, who may issue a notice of finding under 50.54(s) that the state of eme preparedness does not provide rer.sonable assurance that adequate measures can and will be takenin the event of a radiological emergency, il '

licensee does not correct the deficiencies within four anonths of that finding Commission will detarmine whether *.he reactor shall be s enforcement actionis appropriate.

ex ise hbAo a. _

a" W

Q  % f t ses (qAWAo digd ht*-3 _

% M1 Q u

d.bkc.~ Mg.Qw N kU' uu l

'k Td cihA Q-c

, i G u cu 4)

• Co# i q,{ h -

a (

ss { v- .

5 q

1 e l l

1 Attachment 3 l

l ERO Key Activity List

(

n

~

Attachment A Emergency Response Readiness Facility / Key Position / Activity

• Control Room

. Shift Manager (Emergency Director) - Supervision of reactor operations  !

. Shift Communicator - provides initial offsite (state / local) l notification and protective action recommendations 4

Technical Support Center

. Senior Manager - Management of plant operations / corporate resources  ;

e Lead Operntions Support

. Lead Radiological Controls - Radiological effluent and environs monitoring, assessment, and dose projections

. Lead TSC Communicator- provides offsite (state / local) notification and protective action recommendations Emergency Operations Facility l

. Senior Manager - Management of corporate resources

. Lead Operations Support  ;

e Lead Protective Measures - Radiological effluent and i environs monitoring, assessment, and dose projections

. Lead EOF Communicator- provides offsite (state / local) l notification and protective action recommendations Operational Support Center

. Lead OSC Operations Manager l l

l

• Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities, NUREG- 0696, February 1980 c  ;

r-I i .

Attachment 4 NRC Oversight Assessment Process 1

l 1

L 1

1 J

4 l

l i

l l

DRAFT e

NRC Ovtraight Assstement Process for pind2gTieMed l Emergency Prreparooness

• inspection Fmdings 4

sheet 1 draft 1 February 24.1999 ves vos Self Result identified E vaiuhte finding Green - No Further Action i  ?

No

,, Ev.,u.t. . ing the,e is no consideration for self identification A

K.4

}^D a

A n?.A F. J 4 c. , -

2

~

ves 4 - v. + m Problem with Pi coneh ; $ f Analyze hndmg and PIDR tellure indviduelty g

,f e adtion '

verifscasoons rease,  % _ .. . s p* * '...

% de e. . aper.te mout.

%g.) -

_f 4 h .:.. g Evaluate finding provide results to ??  ? pee v@

E 52.1.

No for next Pl Verification inspection y;j g 3 V

M c ., i

%4- a v.s - - .

W'8fvi d weg ed for rags 7 Everusta fenome and provide

,.caag. io oE gI

." 7 c' .

• d.

i q

,\ s

/;"[;;$ 'A ..-,,s.

g 4 t )

?

No - g  :.i -

'^

, ..<c

.s.'. . . . .tb +

/.a

> . -e f,'. i -

fr failure of ves A PIDR FAILURE vesV

/

FA8 LURE to 10 vos

$ OR MORE v.'

PiDR SetilEvercase Mbiems with m Systemt i Evoluation? '_c R/S PS si biennial cycle ?

" .a?

i k*

., [, h,.. .

U

/;.

fn._ e y, +

flc , . . .

( No

~ "1; r;: , N, J

' tde c. .. i ,(

, GREkN -

M ~"

(. FAstustal .. ves Q '

to teenefy feNure to k meet er peptement s >-

1. y .q; 4f f ' PS or App E?

.T t

.: t.f , i {, -

i

d. g ' e.<

.) ves j

g. ,. No FAILU,RE p, ,3, to ID vos MORE ves (e_ w,in Regui.ior, 9 ORn

'f' Violation viceATagN Requirement 67 beenrual cyclet -

? of . sheet 2 Note 2 1 10t,;F R t

'Q y

V. + No

l. t W b No y,

x ,

3 GREEN l g,,, ,g I OREEN Not. e E..iusie finding .nd fanore ef PiDR .epar.i.iv. Neie ih. piDR spchrti cfl failures as a separate input, at the peut lower level, e.g.,if the finding is white the PIDR failure is green.

Note 2: Regulatory Requirements include 10CFR50.47 and Appendia E.

l I

L_

e DRAFT.

% e ,

LATION IDC *TIFIED NRC Oversight Assessment Process Emergency Preparedness inspection Fmamos sheet 2 1 1

draft 1 March 1.1999 i

.es Fadure to

1. Fadure to No

'*d

..s A 3 "C '

, ,es implement or meet emplement PS or App E7 10 m"'*l PS or App Et )1 fadures'to RED (Actual E vent) E#I

• I'

+y"*88 "#8 ~ P8' l

j  !

ft No No " '

GREEN nn  %"

Yes '

6 or mor -. Yes fadures to meet ; ygggow PS or App Et '- -

~

4 N _;.

,es/,j'n. i;n. ,g NOVEt GREEN

.A q f *+ ..

f, fY j; f'..

grk No [

p'I II* '

p f'" '

, , t, ,ef: /

//. / /

p.u Faflure to

,.s g".

ALER7 > Implement WHIT E

.f %s.-

k '- 1

' + ;, T "

R/S . PS?

N. ' No 1 u& ;. '-'ng un e1,g a:w ;- .,

,..:.' GREEN 4

[ hj Yes y

A-

/ ky. 6AE Fadure to c;. w yr 9 Imp 6ement YELL 0W f; jf; RIS . PS?

f l- l~ nn h,. -

• ""El l "

~

Fadure to GEN implement RED EMERG R/S. PS?

( PS e Plannma Standerd

} RIS = Risk Signif cont i i YELLOW I l eper rL2 cf1

The NRC handed out' Attachment 4, NRC Draft Oversight Assessment Process for Emergency Preparedness Inspection Findings. The attachment was explained to the industry group and a request made for comments. This will be revised and discussed at a later date.

Attachments: As stated cc w/att: See next page l

DISTRIBUTION: See attached page DOCUMENT NAME:G:\RLS\0310MTG.wpd OFFICE PERB PERB i o

NAME RSullivanh 'TEssig %

DATE 3/J499 3/'L4/99 '

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY