ML20245K298
| ML20245K298 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 03/03/1989 |
| From: | Travers W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Greger L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20245K300 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8903130504 | |
| Download: ML20245K298 (1) | |
Text
~ '~~~
...F g tin ;,
.s-
.n.
,t$ i g . 3
%, : UNITED STATES 18- o -
' ' NUCLEAR REGULATORY. COMMISSION y~ E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 -
% ,,,,, # . March ' 3, 1989 j r
-MEMORANDUM FOR: L. Robert-Greger,. Chief.
Emergency Preparedness and- y Radiological Protection Branch Division of~ Radiation Safety and Safeguards.
Region III FROM: William D. Travers, Chief Emergency Preparedness Branch
. Division of Radiation' Protection and Emergency Preparedness l Office of Nuclear Reactor. Regulation
SUBJECT:
FEMA EXERCISE REPORT FOR CALLAWAY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT i
Attached is a copy of the FEMA Exercise Report for the June'6,'1988 partial -
scale exercise at Callaway Nuclear Power Plant. .As a result of the exercise, approval-of the Callaway offsite plans continue to be in effect.
The exercise identified six deficiencies which ha've been adequately corrected -
.five through' plan revisions and one through a-successful remedial exercise.
Nineteen Areas' Requiring Corrective Action (ARCA) were also identified.
Please note that-FEMA:has identified a future exercise and drill schedule in their Exercise Report cover letter. Please feel free to contact us should you -
have any questions.
) 1111am D. Travers, Chief Emergency Preparedness Branch Division of Radiation Protection and Emergency Preparedness Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
FEMA Exercise Rpt.
2/17/89 MAR 6 1989 hNYfX }
.: os ,
.o .. ,
.h
! N
+
fg%$Pir Federal Emergency Management Agency I Washington, D.C. 20472
,v f ! C J 7 Ch MEMORANDUM FOR: Frank J. Congel l Director Division of Radiation Protection and Emergency Preparedness Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear' Regulatory Commission FROM: '/ Richar d Kri N ) '
', Assistant-Associate Director
' '~~ Office of Natural and Technological Hazards Programs
SUBJECT:
Exercise Report for the June 6, 1988, Exercise of Offsite
. Radiological Emergency Response Plans Site-specific to the Callaway Nuclear Power Plant Attached is a copy of the exercise report for the June 6, 1988, partial-scale exercise of the offsite radiological emergency response plans for Callaway Nuclear j Power Plant. The State of Missouri participated partially and the Counties of Callaway, Gasconade, Montgomery, and Osage participated fully in the exercise. The report was prepared August 5, 1988, by Region VII of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Five of the six deficiencies identified during the exercise have been adequately corrected through plan revisions. A remedial exercise was conducted September 20, 1988, to correct the remaining deficiency, failure to successfully demonstrate the evacuation plan for the Missouri School for the Deaf. As the attached callaway Remedial Exercise Report indicates, it has been successfully demonstrated and the deficiency resolved.
There were nineteen Areas Requiring Corrective Action (ARCA) identified during the June 6, 1988, exercise. As indicated in the exercise report, the related objectives are to be demonstrated during the next full-scale 0
exercise. Additional verification of corrective action implementation and re-demonstration of deficiency areas corrected through plan changes will be provided by FEMA after the next joint exercise which is now scheduled for October 11, 1989. In addition, an unannounced drill is scheduled for the week of February 19, 1989.
s
[ b V I VOU 2.jff. l
..a. .,,:
- o!
~
Based'on the' remedial actions.taken by the State of -
Missouri, FEMA considers that offsite radiological-emergency preparedness is adequate to provide reasonable assurance that appropriate measures can be taken offsite to-protect the' health and safety of the.public living in the vicinity of the site, in:the event of a radiological emergency.- Therefore, the approval of the offsite plans for the Callaway Nuclear Power Plant granted under 44 CFR 350 in July 1985, continues to be in effect.
If.you.have any questions, please feel free to call me on. -
646-2871.
Attachment
.As Stated i.
s
+ ,.
, 't! ,
REMEDIAL EXERCISE REPORT CONDUCTED SEPTPMBER 20, 1988 for the CALLAWAY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Fulton/Callaway county Emergency Operations Center and Missouri School for the Deaf September 26, 1988 prepared by Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VII Kansas City, Missouri
~J.D. Overstreet, Regional Director 4
~
) / -
bit'J y t W O If
1 ? u
- i. .
ot ll< I. Introduction At the biennial exercise for the Callaway Nuclear Power Plant, l held =on June.6, 1988, there was a failure to demonstrate the ca-p .pability to evacuate the students of the Missouri School for the
! - Deaf (MSD) located in Fulton, Missouri.
l A. remmlial . exercise was held on September.20, 1988. At this time, the Fulton/Callaway County EOC and staff from MSD par-ticipated and successfully demonstrated the procedures necessary to accomplish an evacuation of the resident students.
Since the original exercise was off hours, the remedial exercise was also scheduled after the school day was terminated and the 35 day students had gone-home.
II. Exercise Evaluation The exercise began at 6:04 p.m. when the Callaway County EOC re-ceived notification from the plant that an Alert had been de-clared. The skeleton crew at the EOC was pre-positioned since no demonstration of activation and staffing was required.
At 6:06 p.m. the plant notified the EOC that the situation had escalated to a Site: Area- Emergency (SAE) . At 6:07 the EOC Direc-tor' called the Missouri School for the Deaf and advised them of the SAE and that no protective actions were currently required.
The same message was also transmitted via the TDD at 6:09 p.m.
At 6:12 p.m. the appropriate EBS message was released to the ra-dio station. The staff then used the sector map to plot wind di-rection and locate the list of special needs persons living in the potentially affected area. Traffic and access control points were also identified should protective actions he called for.
At 6:29 p.m. the plant notified the EOC that a General Emergency had been declared. The PAR was to shelter within a two mile ra-dius and out to five miles in sectors P, Q, and R.
At 6:30 p.m. the County Director notified MSD of the declaration of General Emergency. The PARS, however, did not yet affect them.
However, at 6:49 the PAR was changed to evacuation from 0 to 2 miles, and out to 10 miles in P, Q, and R.
At 6:50 p.m. this message was phoned to the MSD. The Superinten-
, dent of MSD, Pete Ripley, called back to verify that the school should implement its evacuation plan. This was verified by the County Director.
At 6:56 p.m. Ripley called the Ryder Bus Co. and requested five
G. -
u n
s.
buses lumbia.
to evacuate students and staff to the Hearnes Center in Co-Upon completing this call, Ripley immediately began phoning all the dorms and directed that the children be brought to the auditorium for evacuation. These calls were completed at 7:10 p.m. Ripley then called _the Callaway County EOC to confirm that the busses were on the way and the children were being as-sembled in the auditorium.
In interviewing the transportation dispatcher and one bus driver, the following was ascertained.
It took at began the coordinator 4 minutes to contact five drivers. This 6:57 p.m. and ended at 7:01 p.m. The most distant driver would have arrived at the bus barn at 7:15 p.m., and would.
have arrived at the MSD at 8:15 p.m. Phones were used for all notifications.
The driver being interviewed was fully aware of the procedure which required that she pick up her dosimetry kit at the bus headquarters. The kit contained one high and one low range do-simeter and a TLD, as well as a log for recording instrument readings and an instruction sheet. The kit also contained a sup-ply of KI.
While she was aware that she was required to read the dosimeter every-30 minutes, she was not sure of the authorized dose limit.
However, she did know that it was listed on the instruction card.
She also knew the authorization procedures for recommending the use of KI.
She was fully knowledgeable of the location of MSD and the relc-cation center in Columbia.
With the objective of school evacuation being fully demonstrated, the exercise was terminated at 7:24 p.m.
The deficiency arising from the exercise of June 6, 1988 was fully satisfied.
'9 2
L_-__________-________.-__.
c '
@m$YTQ;Qh'm$:?-$&ne?m&
e Wif4D &%lQiR"n%%bE'n$?_$',Q$:l$,
n j,MEM.IXERClSE 3_dM.
- 2.-@g.gg.yg.,LUATIO - . .
M EVA . .
g j g g g%.%.g g g W
- n g ; W..a, m .w. s g.
- . .m. . w . . . og
% v.::m ,. m w i %,
, . . . .. .m .# , u .3.%_ .. ,
^
,5 j.
f{
5, 6. 7.g ;;Q
, 4g:.. .g~ g w. p n je.
1g n* ' <?;,y ,? g- s4::.it.g:,.M L.Q%: : ,
Lu -2, ,, .,
- i, G O_qQ:;a .tQ 1 ~yL
. ~":s:.m Q.:y;,+ .. m .y .,n n
,q& : , ,..v,x .n u. , ;. .m e
4 *
-l.M((.Ni%fdbyg 3*d),7,
[f- l.:'% ,,
A ' ' ' . .c [.{ ,,' j \~' llll g g . . - : .,
a,
+
^:] ' j.yj m y }.m.s.s;. g ,% . g n
9n: .,
g y* ,}.my: gy s
' , ;? "
r y
<p:: P.f.k.x, -}t lf,
, . .r. ,- 1 e
.,vr , s s...
W J[ 1 ' ' *,
.. ; . ., f
+y<
4" .,.e. .e s c 'I tj.*j' I ;. :,ex W,8 O. .
O es
, - i . g.
~'
- s ,
?
e p
,* , s
~ ~7'39,ge a *f #
% ,{g4 4
N := i;k. ; P u j a*y._f,r$. p%,
..cs JA'Wiy A
,t ).4;.. ' g, t .:
~ I *% ; */
..V w . g'j. ,; 5, ~~
'< g a# '. . f <s3 i , 5' 4 8
] J/ . / j ,b -
f y;,M M,$}- - .- ?.x JU N E' 6, .
1988
, - ., x.
0
}
in,f
. ,r.
- =Y'y y
- \ d 5's ,p
+
v
,4
- g- . .
L Exercise of the Radiological Emergency
. Qj..j. ..
Response Plans for the State of Missouri,- c ..yw 3- and the Counties of Callaway, ,
7 x.~
Gasconade, Montgomery, and Osage - "
c for the' Union Electric Compatty's 4
nlQ.
.u. s
.x1 M
CALLAWAY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT m
- 3. , w near Fulton, Callaway County, Missourl .
A u g u s t 5,19 8 8 -
< .s
. >a,
.,..,- n
, 4 FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGEf?CY l
- , - 4
,, , . k N . '
4 Region Vil s,, , 5:r.'.? , .1
.q
. E3 J.D. Overstreet:
- 911 Walnut Street ^ *X.y .
Kansas City, MO 64106 I Regional Director .
8 4 5
{
- ~.h a O O'! .
o j p w ipw.. gn. w w 7 w
/
3
_1
. ~ . ] m( a a:c., . _, _ ,_
L
- h EXERCISE EVALUATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF STATE AND LOCAL RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANS CONDUCTED JUNE 6, 1988 for the CALLAWAY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Fulton, Callaway County, Missouri Union Electric Company, Licensee PARTICIPANTS:
State of Missouri County of Callaway County of Montgomery County of Gasconade County of Osage (All jurisdictions participated)
AUGUST 5, 1978 preparet by Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VII Kansas City, Missouri Jerome D. Overstreet, Regional Director O
s... ... . . . . . . . . .
G ' i, t 4 CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS.................................. iii EXERCISE
SUMMARY
............................................ vi l 1 INTRODUCTION............................................. 1 1.1 Exercise Background................................. 1 1.2 Exercise Evaluators................................. 2 1.3 Evaluation Criteria................................. 3 1.4 Exercise Objectives................................. 3 1.5 Exercise Scenario................................... 4 1.6 State and Local Resources........................... 5 2 EEERCISE EVALUATION...................................... 6 2.1 Missouri Operations................................. 6 2.1.1 State Emergency Operations Center............ 6 2.1.2 Emergency Operations Facility................ 8 2.1.2.1 State Forward Command Post.......... 8-2.1.2.2 Dose Assessment & Field Team Coord.. 10 2.1.3 Radiological Monitoring Teams................ 12 2.1.4 Radiological Laboratory...................... 12 2.1.5 Joint Public Information Center.............. 12 2.2 County Operations................................... 14 2.2.1 Callaway County /Fulton EOC................. . 14 2.2.2- Gasconade County EOC......................... 17 2.2.3 Montgomery County EOC........................ 19 2.2.4 Osage County E0C......................... ... 20 2.2.5 Medical Emergency........................ ... 23 2.2.6 Columbia Reception & Care Center............. 24 2.2.7 Jefferson City Recaption & Care Center....... 27 2.2.8 Gasconade County Roception & Care Center..... 29 2.2.9 Montgomery County Reception & Care Center.... 32 3 SCEMARIO................................................. 34 ]
4
SUMMARY
OF DEFICIENCIES AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS........... 35 0
O
gn
{l _
E.
ABBREVIATIONS AND. ACRONYMS ANL Argonne National Laboratory ARC American Red Cross BRH ' Missouri Division of Health, Bureau of Radiviogical Health Callaway County Emergency Operations Center
~
CCEOC CNPP Callaway Nuclear Power Plant CRCC Columbia Reception and Care Center
~
CVCS Chemical and Volume control System DOC U.S.' Department of Commerce DOE U.S. Department of Energy DOI U.S. Department of Interior DOT U.S. Department of Transportation EBS Emergency Broadcast System ECC Emergency Communications Center ECCS Emergency Core Coolant System EFPD Effective Full Power Days EICC Emergency Information Coordination Center (FEMA.
Headquarters)
EMD' Emergency Management Director EOC Emergency Operations Center
<'- EOF Emergency Operations Facility EPA "U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPD Emergency Preparedness Director lii
/ .,.- _ .,
I
,, lESF' Emergency Safeguard-Facilities l EPZ' . Emergency Planning Zone-FAA1 Federal Aviation Administration
-FCP Forward Command Post FDAD U.S.. Food and Drug Administration FEMA Federal Emergency Management' Agency FHA Fed ral Highway Administration FSA' Forward Staging Area GCEOC Gasconada County Emergency Operations Center GCRCC Gasconada County Reception and Care Center GM Geiger - Mueller GOIC. (Union Electric Company's) General Office Information-Center HHS U.S. . Department of Health and Human Services-JINEL- ' Idaho National Engineering Laboratory JCRCC' Jefferson City Reception and Care Center JPIC -Joint Public Information Center KI Potassium Iodide LOCA Loss-of-Coolant' Accident MCEOC Montgomery County Emergency Operations Center MCRCC Montgomery County Reception and Care Center MERT Medical Emergency Response Team MR Millirem MRC Media Release Center MSIV Main Steam Isolation Valve NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NUREG- Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological iv
e.
i~ 1 0654 Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants (NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1)
OCEOC Osage County Emergency Operations Centers OFN off Normal Procedures PAG Protective Action Guide PAR Protective Action Recommendation PHS U.S. Public Health Service RAC Regional Assistance Committee RADLAB State Radiological Laboratory RCP Reactor Coolant Pump RCS Reactor Coolant System RHR Residual Heat Removal SEMA Missouri State Emergency Managemont Agency j SEOC State Emergency Operations Center F
SOP Standard Operating Procedure TLD Thermoluminescent Dosimeter uCi Microcuries i
UE Union Electric USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture I l
l *
. V
1 EXERCISE'
SUMMARY
The purpose of an exercise is to determine the ability of d appropriate off-site agencies to respond to an emergency ~ covered-by State and Local Radiological Emergency Response Plans.- The evaluation of such an effort will, of necessity, tend'to focus on the negative aspects of the exercise, on inadequacies in plan- '
ning, preparedness and performance. -
l This focus of attention on the negative should not be taken- H to mean that there were not,a graat many positive accomplish-ments, as well. Indeed, there were; however, in the interest of 3 brevity, only inadequacies will herein be summarized.
]
FEMA' classifies exercise inadequacies as deficiencies or ar-eas requiring corrective action. Definitions of these categories
]
follow.
. Deficiencies are demonstrated and observed inadequacies that would cause a finding that off-site emergency preparedness was ,
not adequate to provide reasonable assurance that appropriate '
protective measures can be taken-to protect the health'and safety of the public living in the vicinity of a nuclear power facility-in the event-of a radiological emergency.
Areas reauirina corrective ~ action are demonstrated and ob-served inadequacies of State and local government performance, and~although their correction is required, they are not consid-ered, by themselves, to adversely impact public health and safety.
In addition, FEMA identifies areas recommended for-imorove-mant, which are problem areas observed during an exercise that are not considered to adversely impact public health and safety.
While not required, correction of these would enhance an organization's level of emergency preparedness.
It should be noted that there is a distinction between fail-ure to fully demonstrate an objective and the declaration of an inadequacy. Limitations imposed by an exercise scenario, or the
, choice of one response option over another could preclude a full demonstration, yet, not constitute an inadequacy.
l vi
. J
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . . _ . .I
l 'O{
MISSOURI OPERATIONS L fatate amaraenew onerations Center (SEOC) 1:
Seven- objectives were planned, four were not fully. demon-strated. 'The demonstration of Objective Number 13, public alert-ing on the Missouri River, resulted in the declaration of a deficiency, because the time necessary.to complete public alert-
- .ing-on the Missouri River exceeded the mandatory 45 minute alert-
! ing requirement.
The demonstration of Objective Number 14,. distributing .ap-propriate instructions to the public, resulted in a second defi-ciency, when a
! from sheltering., sheltered area.(area'C-7) was mistakenly' released The.first of two inadequacies-cited during the 1986 exercise was demonstrated satisfactorily by the. SEMA PIO' transmitting critical information to the JPIC. The second was. corrected
. through procedure changes, but the procedures for FEMA notifica-tion via the EICC were not demonstrated after the initial' contact and resulted in an area requiring corrective action to be demon-strated atithe 1989 exercise.
State Porvard Command Post (FCP)
^
'Of the signt planned objectives, only objective Number 35,
~
ability to determine and' implement appropriate measures for con-trolled recovery and reentry, was not fully demonstrated when the exercise terminated prior to dissemination of relaxed PARS.
There were no areas which would require corrective actions.
Both inadequacies identified during the 1986 exercise were corrected satisfactorily by plan changes and redefinition of the role of the FCP/PIO.
Dose Assessment and Field Team Coordination There were eight planned objectives, . Objective Number 20, ability to continuously monitor and control emergency worker ex-posure, was not adequately demonstrated because personal dosimetry was not issued or monitored, and is an area requiring
, corrective action to be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
Three other objectives which were not fully demonstrated are ;
as follows: Objective Number-2, ability to fully staff fa- l cilities and maintain staffing around-the-clock, objective Number j 5, ability to communicate with all appropriate locations, organi- 1 zations and field personnel, and objective Number 35, ability to determine and implement appropriate measures for controlled re- .
covery and reentry.
vii
f .
i
., . Radiological Mopitorine Teams Radiological Monitoring Teams were not' deployed to the field this exercise, but they did correct an inadequacy from the last exercise. by dispatching two (2) staff per shift to the EOF and demonstrating the contents of.their' monitoring kits.
Radiological Y=horatory The RADLAB did not exercise, but a Letter of Agreement had-been. presented to FEMA.to correct a previous inadequacy.
Joint Public Information Center (JPIC) of~the seven objectives.to be demonstrated at this facility five were fully demonstrated and two were not fully demonstrated. l Full demonstration of Objective Number 2, ability to fully staff l
- facilities and maintain staffing around-the-clock, was precluded
, by the lack of a formal shift change. Ineffective use of maps.
f1 and displays prevented full demonstration of Objective Number.24, ability to brief the media in a clear, accurate and timely man-ner.
Callaway County /Fulton EOC Thirteen objectives were to be demonstrated at the callaway County .EOC. Objectives Number 17 and 19, were not adequately demonstrated which resulted in deficiencies at the~ Missouri 1 School for the Deaf, and for Access Control. A remedial exercise j has been scheduled for September 20, 1988, at 6:00 P.M. Objec- j tives Number 15 and 20, were not adequately demonstrated account- )
ing for four areas requiring corrective action to be demonstrated j at the 1989 exercise. Objective Number 2, full staffing /24 hour 1 operation,was not' fully demonstrated. Three inadequacies identi- )
fled during.the 1986 exercise were corrected through submission of procedure. changes to account for activation call-up proca- g dures, landmark descriptions in EBS messages, and the clarifica-tion of procedures for the Transportation Coordinator.
Gasconada County EOC 1
Ten objectives were planned for demonstration. Of the ten, Objectives Number 15 and 20 were scenario dependent, and were neither driven nor demonstrated by this exercise. Objective Num-ber 13, ability to alert the public within the 10 mile EPZ, and disseminate an initial instructional message within 15 minutes, was not demonstrated, resulting in a deficiency. Objective Num-bar 2, " ability to fully staff facilities and maintain staffing around-the-clock, wac not adequately demonstrated becauso staff-ing rosters failed to fbily reflect staff identified in the Gas-conade County Plan anil resulted an area requiring corrective viii l I
b..
l - . . .- .
.+
f action to be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise. _
The resulting
- incomplete staffing precluded full demonstration- of objective Number 1,. ability -to mobilize staff and activate facilities promptly. One' inadequacy identified during the 1986 exercise was corrected through submission of procedure changes to clearly re-flect the Sheriff's message handling responsibilities prior to and after activation of the EOC._.
Montoomery County EOC of- the eleven objectives planned for. demonstration at .this facility,_ only one was not fully demonstrated. objective Number 2, ability to fully staff facilities-and maintain staffing around the clock,- was precluded because a shift change was not per-formed.
Osaqq._CRER1Y_EQG Twelve objectives were planned for demonstration at this fa- 1 cility. Two of three scenario dependent objectives were unable
. to be demonstrated. There was a failure to demonstrate timely activation of_the siren system in osage County which resulted in a deficiency for objective Number 13. Adequate telephones and radio equipment were not made available for Eoc staff resulted in
< an area requiring corrective action to be demonstrated at .the-1989 exercise. Four objectives-were not fully demonstrated.
Medical Emergency All four objectives assigned for the Callaway Memorial Hos-pital and Ambulance were fully demonstrated.
Columbia Reception and Care Center
'Seven objectives were to be demonstrated at this facility.
objectives Number 27 and 29, pertaining to monitoring and decon-tamination, were not adequately demonstrated. This resulted in y five areas requiring corrective action to be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
Jefferson City Recention and Care cettqg Six of seven objectives were fully demonstrated at this fa-cility. The Reception and Care Coordinator did not perform a shift change which precluded full demonstration of objective Num-ber 2. There were no areas requiring corrective action.
Gasconada County Recention and Care Center of the seven objectives assigned to this facility, objective Number 1, the ability to mobilize staff and activate facilities was the only objective to be fully demonstrated. The par-ix
_ _ _ _____________________s____m._ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ _
-ticipants; vere enthusiastic, but further. training in the plan and procedures.is necessary. Six. areas requiring corrective action were. identified and must be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
Montgomery county Recention and care center Seven objectives were to be demonstrated at this facility..
Backup communications were provided by Ham operators rather than' by.the Sheriff's Department whien precluded full demonstration of Objective Number 5. However, as the Ham-oparators were utilized effectively and efficiently, it is recommended that they be added officially to the plan, i
t G
l X
, - :e
. 4 4
1 W
1 INTRODUCTION-1.1 EXERCISE BACKGROUND 1 I
On December 7,- 1979, the President directed the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to asuume lead responsibility for all off-site nuclear planning and response.
FEMA's responsibilities in radiological emergency planning
- for fixed nuclear facilities include the following:
- Taking the lead in off-site emergency planning and in the review and evaluation of radiological emergency. response
_ plans developed by State and local governments.
. Determining whether such plans can be implemented on the
, basis of observation and evaluation of exercises of the plans developed by State and local governments.
- Coordinating the activities of the following Federal agen-
.cies with responsibilities in the radiological emergency planning process:
- U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
- U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FCA) ~{
- U.S. Public Health Service (PHS)
--U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)
- U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
- U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI)
Representatives of these agencies serve as members of c
'he Regional' Assistance Committee (RAC), which is chaired by FEMA.
Formal submission of tha radiological emergency response plans for the Callaway Nuclear Power Plant (CNPP) to the RAC by the State of Missouri and affected local jurisdictions was fol-lowed by a critique and evaluation of these plana-m A joint radiological emergency preparedness exercise was conductad for CNPP or. March 21, 1984, to as'4ess the capability of State and local emergency preparedness organizations to: (1) implement their radiological emergency preparedness plans and procedures, and (2) protect the public during a radiological emergency at the Callaway Nuclear Power Plant.
During the March 21, _1984 exercise,-tho State.falled to dem-onstrate the-ability to promptly alert'the public, an.d to effec-tively;; coordinate the development and release of- protective action recommendations. -Also,;Callaway County was unable to dem-- 1 9 >
onstrate the~ capability to adequately and. effectively sound si-rens in the EPZ. These failures necessitated a remedial exercise which was successfully conducted on April 19, 1984.
I A second exercise was. conducted'on June 5, 1985.
The 1986 exercise was conducted on July!30, and was-classi-fled a full scale exercise with all State and local jurisdictions participating.
The 1987 exercise was not evaluated.
The June 6, 1988 exercise was a partial scale' exercise and was' conducted off-hours.
1.2 EXERCISE EVALUATORS Fifteen.(15) Federal agency personnel and six (6) FEMA con-tract staff evaluated the off-site emergency response functions.
These individuals and their exercise assignments are given below: j OBSERVER AGENCY ASSIGMMENT Bob-Bissell FEMA Callaway Co..EOC Tim Burke ARC. Montgomery Co. Reception / Care Columbia Reception / Care Jefferson City Reception / Care Marlee-Carroll FEMA Roving Carol Coleman FEMA Callaway Co. EOC John Coleman FEMA JPIC Bob Dye EPA Montgomery Co. Reception / Care Jefferson City Reception / Care Dave Edwards DOT / FHA State EOC Jon Furst FEMA Callaway Co. EOC Christine Kliaczak ANL Gasconada Co. Reception / Care Bill Knoezer ANL Gasconada Co.'EOC Rich Leonard FEMA Roving (Overview)
Will Marshall PHS Callaway Memorial Hospital and
, Ambulance George Pickler FEMA EOF FCP Pete Podell FEMA Roving Brad Salmonson INEL Columbia Reception / Care Dee Seymour ANL Osage Co. EOC Ron Shaw
- FEMA Montgomery Co. EOC Marty Sinonin ANL Gasconade Co. Reception / Care Lyle Slagle INEL EOF FMC Dick Sumpter FEMA State EOC 2
__ -__ - _ - - - - .f
+
. l s
1 Dianne Wilson FEMA Montgomery Co. EOC Jim Winger FEMA Callaway Co. EOC f j
NELLUATION CRITERIA
~
1.3 i
The evaluation criteria for this exercise were:
I
- 1. NUREG-0654, FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1 (All applicable requirements).
1.a. The thirty-five standardized objectives developed as a I
summary of observable elements contained in NUREG-0654, and submitted by the Missouri State Emergency Manage-ment Agency indicating the locations for demonstra-tion (s). (See matrix, pages 3.1 to 3.20.)
- 2. Missouri Nuclear Accident Plan - Callaway.
- 3. Callaway County /Fulton Radiological Emergency Response Plan.
-Callaway County /Fulton Implementing Procedure Responsi-
, bilities.
- 4. Gasconada County Radiological Emergency Response Plan. i Gasconada County Implementing Procedure Responsibilities. >
- 5. Montgomery County Radiological Emergency Response Plan.
Montgomery County Implementing Procedure Responsibilities.
- 6. Osage County Radiological Emergency Response Plan.
Osage County Implementing Procedure Responsibilities.
1.4 EXERCISE OBJECTIVES On March 22, 1988, the State of Missouri submitted formal objectives for State and local jurisdictions for .this exercise arrayed in the following matrices, showing which objectives ap-plied to which facilities or functions. The objectives are num-bered 1 through 35, and will be referred to by number throughout this evaluation report.
t 3
e
. l STATE OBJECTIVES 1988 IEOC IFCP IDose Assm IFM lJPIC IMedicall ll____I_____I__________l____f______l_______I
! ! I I i
- 1. Demonstrate ability to I ! 1 I I I !
- ' mobilize staff and ! X ! X l X ! ! X ! I activate facilities I i i t i I I promptly.
l____I_____i__________I___,1,_,__,1,__,,,,1 1 I I I l ;
- 2. Demonstrate ability to I i ! ! I I I
- I fully staff facilities I X ! X l X i i X ! I and maintian staffing ! I i ! l ! I around the clock.
i l____l_____l__________!____l l _______I I I I I i
- 3. Demonstrate ability to i I I I I I i
- make decisions and to I X l X l X l 1X l I coordinate emergency i I i i l i i activities. l____I_____!__________f__,,t______1_______1 I I I I i i !
- 4. Demonstrate adequacy i I I I I I t
- of facilities and I X XX ! X ! l X i displays to support i 1 1 1 i i 1 emergency operations.
l____!_____!__________!____I______!_______!
I I I i ! !
- 5. Demonstrate ability to i I I I I I i
- communicate with all I X l X l X 1 1X l X !
appropriate locations, 1 I I ! I lee I organizations, and i I ! ! I I I field personnel.
l____I_____!__________!____I______I_______I I I I I i 1 !
- 6. Demonstrate ability to I ! l I I I i
- mobilize and deploy i i 1 I I I I field monitoring teams I J i i i i i I j in a timely f ashion.
!____I_____l__________I____!______!_______I i i i I i i !
7.
Demonstrate appropri- 1 I i i l I i
- ate equipment and i i l i l l I procedures for deter- 1 I I I i 1 3 mining ambient radt- 1 I I I I ! I ation levels. I ___!_____I__________!____l _____!_______l l l I I I i 1 I l S. Demonstrate appropri- 1 I I I I I I l
- ate equipment and i I I I I I i procedures for measur- 1 I l I l i I
[
ment of airborne 1 I I I l I l radiciodine concentra- 1 I l I l l I tions as lod as I i ! ! ! I I 10-* uC1/CC I I I I I I I presence of noble ! I I I I I i gases. l____!_____l__________I____l______f_______l
- Core Objectives )
- Callaway Ccrmunity Hospital i Callaway Inbulance District '
- _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . i
O TiB5 TEEE- 75532 EisA TEA- 73Ei5- tai 5iEEET 9
!____l.____!_________ !____!______I_______!
Demonstrate appropri_ l i I ! I I !
I ate equipment and i I i ! l l 1 I procedures for collec- ! ! I 1, I ! I l tion, transport and i I I I ! I I
! analysis of samples ! I I i i i l of soil, vegetation, I i i ! I I I l snow, water and milk. l____!_____f__________l ___,l______!_____,,1 1 1 1 1 I I i
- 10. Demonstrate ability i I I i 1 ! l e to project dosage i ! X ! X l 1 ! I to the public via l i I i ! i i plume exposure, based ! I I i ! ! ! ;
on plant and field i I I I I I I data, and to determine ! I ! ! l ! I appropriate protective ! I i l I I i measures, based on ! I I i i I I PAG's, available i I I I I ! I shelter, evacuation i I I l ! ! !
time estimates, and ! I I I I ! I ather appropriate i I I
- I I I I 4 actors. I____f_____!__________!____!______I I I I I I I I I
- 11. Demonstrate ability i I I I i i !
to project dosage i I I I I I I to the public via ! ! I I I I I ingestion pathway I i ! 1 1 I I exposure, based on I l i i i ! l field data, and to 1 I I I I I !
determine appropriate I i l I I i I protective measures ! ,
3 I I I I I based on PAG's and 1 I i 1 1 1 I an other relevant I ! ! I ! ! I factors (NUREG-0654, i I I I I I I I.10, J.11). 3 l_____!__________I____I ___3 ______3 I I I I I ! !
- 12. Demonstrate abilty to i I ( l i I I implement protectiv; I I I i 1 I
action f or ingestion I ! ! I i 1 I pathway hazards i I i i l i !
(NUREG-0654, J.9, I I I I I I I J.11). l____I____ l__________I____I______I_______!
I I i 1 1 I I ,
- 13. Demonstrate,abilty to i I l I i i !
'
- alert the public with- I X ! ! I I I !
in the to-mile EPZ, I I I I I I I disseminate an initial 1 1 I I ! ! !
instructional message ! I i l 1 1 I within 15 minutes !____l_____I__________I____I______l_______I
- Core Objectives 3.2
1 8 IEDC IFCP IDOSE ASSM IFM IJPIC IMEDICALI
!____l_____3 _________!____!______!_______t i I I i ! I i
- 14. Demonstrate ability to I ! ! ! I i t
- formulate and distri- l X l ! ! 1 I I bute apprpriate in- 1 1 1 1 1 1 I structions to One ! i l i ! I i public in a timely I ! l I I I I fashion. !____l_____!__________I____I______!_,,____t i I I I i ! !
- 15. Demonstrate the organi-l i I I I i i
- zational ability and ! I I I I I :
resources necessary to I I i i ! l I manage an orderly i I I I I i 1 evacuation of all or 1 i l 1 i i i part of the plume EPZ ! ! 1 I I i i 1
(NUREG-0654, J.9, I I I I I I I J.10.g). l____I_____!__________l ___f______I_______l
- 16. Demonstrate the organt-l i I I I l l zational ability and i I I I i 1 I resources necessary to I ! I i l I i deal with impediments i ! I i l 1 i to evacuation, as ! I I I I I !
inclement weather or I I I I I i i traffic obstructions. I I I I ! I I (NUREG-0654, J.10.k).
I l____l_____I__________I____I______!_______I I I I i ! i
- 17. Demonstate the organi- 1 I I I I I I rational ability and i I I I I I I resources'necessary to I i ! I i i i control access to an i 1 1 I I I i evacuated area (NURES--1 I I I I I i 0654, J.10.J). l____I_____I__________!.___!______l_______!
! I I I I I i
- 18. Demonstrate the organi-l i I I i ! l zational ability and 1 I I I I I I resources neccessary i I I I i 1 1 to ef f ect an orderly i I I i i ! I evacuation of embility-l i I I i i l impaired individuals i I I I I I I within the plume EPZ l i I I I I I (NUREG-0654, J.10.d). I _I_____I__________I____I______I_______t
- Core Obja:tives l
- 3. 3
1 a' t
. l I
lEOC IFCP IDOSE ASSM IFM IJPIC IMEDICALI l____I_____!__________I____!
_____I_______I
! ! I 1 i
- 19. Demonstrate the organi-l ! ! I ! ! I zational ability and I ! I I I I I resources necessary to i ! ! ! I I ;
effect an orderly I I I I I ! g evacuation of schools i 1 1 I I ! I within the plume EPZ l ! I i i i !
(NUREG-0654, J.9, ! ! ! I I I I J.10.g). l____!_____I__________f____1______I______,1 I l 1 i l 1 i i {
- 20. Demonstrate the abilityl I X 1X l l I X i
- to continuously sonitor i l i ! I I I ** I and control emogency I i l i 1 i i worker exposure, l____1_____l__________I____l______l_______t
! I I i
I i i !
- 21. Demonstrate the abilityl ! I I I I !
to make the decision,, I I I I i i based on predetermined I I I I I I I criteria, whether to i I I I I i 1 issue KI to emergency i I I -
l 1 1 I workers and/or the ! I I I I I i general population.
!____!_____l._________I____I______!_______t
! I I I I I i
- 22. Demonstrate the abilityl i I I I i !
to supply.and adeinst'erf i i l I i i KI, once the decision ! I I I I i !
has been made to de so.l____l_____!__________f.___I______f_______I i i ! I i ! !
- 23. Demonstrate the abilityl I i ! ! I I to effect an orderly i I I I I I I evacuation of onsite i I I i I I I personnel (NURES-Od44, I I I I I I I J.2). I _i_____l__________I____l______I_______l i I I I I I I
- 24. Demonstrate ability to I i i i l i I
- brief the media in a i ! I i ! X X !
clear, accurate and I I I i l i I timely eenner. l____I_____I__________f____I______l_______I eCare Objectives
- cm11 _y Comunity Hospital Callaway Antx21ance District 3.4
l: : .
i l
TiBE TFEF- 755ii Eiis TFA- 73FIE- TA7,Jc ii l____I_____I__________!____!______l_______I I i ! ! I I I
- 25. Demonstrate ability to I I l l I I l
+ provide advance co- 1 I ! I i X l I
- ordination of inform- l 1 1 I I ! I ation released. l____I_____!__________I____f_____,1,______l 8 I i i i l I
- 26. Demonstrate ability to i ! I i i i i establish and operate I i i ! I I I i rumor control in a co- I ! ! l l 1 I orinated fashion.
l____i_____I__________1____I______1_______t
! I I ! ! I I
- 27. Demonstrate adequacy I '
i 1 1 I I of procedures for reg- 1 I I i ! ! I intration and radio- 1 I I l l 1 logical monitoring i i ! i i ! !
of evacuees (NURES- 1 I I I I i 1 0654, J.12).
!____l_____!__________I____f______!_______I I ! ! -l i ! 1 ,
- 28. Demonstrate adequacy i I I I I I I !
of facility for mass ! i i ! I '
I care of evacuees ! I i l I i I (NURES-0654, J.10.h) l____I_____!__________!____I______1_______I !
l I I I I I I
- 29. Demonstrate adequate ! I I i_ 1 1 I equipment and pro- l' I ! l X 1 1 1 1 cedures for decon- 1 1 I I I I l l tamination of emer- ! ! I i 1 1 !
gency workers, equip- 1 I i 1 1 I I l ment and vehicles i I I ! I I I (NURES-0654, K.5.a,b) I____l_____l__________1____!______l_______l i I i 1 1 ! l
- 30. Demonstrate adequacy i I I I I I X l of ambulaiace facilitiesi I I I I I ** I and procedures for I I i i i ! I handling contaminated i I I I I i l individuals. I____i_____i__________i____l______i_______!
! 1 ! ! I I i
- 31. Demonstrate adequacy i I I I ! ! X l of hospital facilities I I i i i I ** I and procedures for i I i ! ! I I handling certtaminated i I ! I i l l individuals. I___ i_____l__________l____!______1_______l
.* Core Objectives f*Callaway Cczmunity Hospital 4 Callaway Ambulance District 3.5
_ 3
e
)
IEOC IFCP IDOSE ASSM IFM IJPIC IMEDICALI I....l_____l_________.l____I______I_______!
I I I I i i 1
- 32. Demonstrate ability to i I i i i 1 1 ,
identify need for, 1 I I i 1 I i (
requeet , and obtain I I I I I I i Federal assistance, l____I____ l _________l,__,1,,,,,_l,,,,,,,1 I I i 1 ! l l
- 33. Demonstrate ability to I i i ! i i i relocate to and operatet i i I i i i the alternate EOF /EOC I I I i ! i I (NUREG_0654, H.2, H.3).1___ 1-___.I-_____-__.I____I I i i_______
! I i 1 1
- 34. Demonstrate ability to i I I I I i i estimate total pop- l 1 1 I i ! i ulaton exposure ! I i .I I I I (NUREG-0654, M.4) l____1_____I__________I____1______l _______l 1 1 I I i 1 1
- 35. Demonstrate ability to 1 i i i I i i determine and imple- 1 I X X X 1 I I t ment appropriate ! I I I I I I measures for controlledi i i i i l i recovery and reentry. l____1.____I__________1 ___I______I_______l I
i f
f 3.6 l .i
?
LOCAL OBJECTIVES 1988
! Callaway! Montgomery i Osage I Gasconaw..
I I I I I l
- 1. Demonstrate ability to ! X l X l X 1 X 1 l
- mobilize staff and acti- 1 I i i vate facilities promptly l__________!____________l,_______l,_____,___!.I 1
I I I I i
- 2. Demonstrate ability.to ! X l -X l X ! X X
- fully staff facilities ! I I ! I and maintain staffing i_______-__i____________!
around the clock. I !
I i !
! I I ! l-
- 3. Demonstrate ability to I i i i I
'* make decisions and to ! X X X l- X
! X !
coordinate emergency i I I I :
activities.- l
__________!____________I________f _________l 1 ! I I I ,
- 4. Demonstrate adequacy of f I i !
- facilities and displays I X !
1 ]
, X X X ! X !
to support emergency 1 1 1 I I operations. l__________I____________l ________1__________t
! I I I I
- 5. Demonstrate ability to ! I I I I
- communicate with all ! X l X ! X ! X l appropriate locations, i ! I I '
organizations, and field i I i !
personnel.
l__________!____________I________!__________.
1 I I I !
- 6. Demonstrate ability to I I I i !
- mobilize and deploy field! ! I ! !
monitoring teams in a i ! ! l !
ti mel y f ashion.
l__________I____________!________!__________!
I I I I I
- 7. Demonstrate appropriate I i ! ! I
- equipt.ent and procedures 1 i l i !
f or determining ambient I i ! ! !
radiation levels. l__________I____________l________I__________I I I I i 1
- 8. Demonstrate appropriate i I i i 1
- equipment and procedures i I I ! I for measurement of air- 1 I i l i borne radioindine con- l 1 1 I I centrations as low as ! I I I i 10-7 uCi/CC in i I i i !
- 3. the presense of noble l__________I____________l________I__________l gases.
- Core Objectives l
1 I
l 3.7 !
,--_---_---n------------_- - - - - - - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - _ - - - - - - - - _ _ _
l Callaway 1 Montgomery i Osage i Gasconadet I__________I____________l________I__________!
! I I i 1
- 9. Demonstrate approprate ! ! ! ! ;
equipment and procedues i ! i l :
f or collection, trans- 1 1 1 : ;
port and analysis of 1 I i 1 ;
samples of soil, vege- I ! g ;
tation, snow, water and i I l ; ;
E milk. !
I I r---________i g I i 1 :
- 10. Demonstrate ability to i ! l g g
- project dosage to the ! ! I g g public via plume exposurel ! l based on plant and field i I t t data, and to determine 1 l
- g :
appropriate protective ! i I i g measures, based on PAG's,I i l l :
available shelter, evacu-l i I I I ation time estimates, I i ! I g and all other appropri- 1 i l i 1 ate factors. l__________!____________l ________!__________;
I i ! I i
- 11. Demonstrate ability to ! ! I ! I project dosage to the i i I l I public via ingestion ! I i 1 I pathway exposure, based i I i 1 I on field data, and to i I i 1 !
1 determine appropriate I i l i i protective measures, 1 I i i i based'on PAG's and other i l I i i relevant factors. I i i i I (NUREG-0654, I.10, J.11).l__________!____________I________I__________l 1 1 1 1 1
- 12. Demonstrate ability to I I i i !
implement protective 1 I i l 1 actions f or ingestion i i i i 1 pathway hazards. (NURES- 1 I I I I 0654, J.9, J.11). l__________l____________I________I__________!
! I i i 1
- 13. Demonstrate ability to I i ! i i <
- alert the public within i ! 1 1 I the 10-sile EPZ, and I X l X l X X X l dissocinate and initial ! ! I I I instructional sessage 1 1 1 1 I within 15 minutes. l__________I____________I________I__________!
eCore Objectives 3.8
j I
i 1
_____________________________________________ l I Callaway .I Montgomery i Osage I Gasconadel j l__________!____________!________I________ l
- 14. Demonstrate ability to 1 1 I I . 1
- -formulate and distribute ! ! 1 1 I appropriate instructions I X X X 1 X l X X to the public in a ti mel y ! ! I I I fannion. i__________I____________i________!__________t
! ! ! I i
- 15. Demonstrate the organt- 1 1 1 I
- zational ability and IIf requir-IIf required IIf re- IIf requir-l ,
resources necessary to led by Iby scenario Iquired led by ! ,
manage an orderly evacu- ! scenario ! lby scen-Iscenario I l ation of all or part of 1 I lario 1 I plume"EPZ (NUREG-0654, I i 1 1 1 J.9, J.10.g). l__________I____________I________!__________t i I I I i
- 16. Demonstrate the organi- 1 l l 1 1 zational ability and i I I I I resources necessary to 1 1 I I i deal with impediments to 1 I I i i evacuation, as incle- 1 I I I I ment weather or traffic I i l i l obstructions (NUREG-0654,1 1 I I I i J.1o.w). i__________i____________i________i__________I j l ! ! ! i
- 17. Demonstrate the organi- 1 I I l l l
zational ability and I i 1 I resources necessary to i I I l control access to an i I I l- ;
evacuated area. (NUREG- 1 I i 1 I o654, J.lo.J) l__________l ____________l________I__________I I I i 1 !
- 18. Demonstrate'the organi- 1 1 1 l ! l I
zational ability and re- 1 I X l X i i sources necessary to l I i 1 1 ,
effect an orderly evacu- 1 I l l l 1 ation of mobility-impair-l I I i I J ed individuals within thel ! l 8 ! j plume EPZ (NUREG-0654, 1 I I I !
J.lo.d). !__________!____________i________I__________I
- Core Objectives
]
l l
3.9
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i
.- t.
1 Callaway i Montgomery i Osage i Gasconadel I l____________l- l__________!
- 19. Demonstrate the organi- 1 I I I i zational ability and re- t 1 1 1 i sources necessary to I ! ! I i '
effect an orderly evacu- 1 1 1 I I ation of schools within -l y i I I l-the plume EPZ (NUREG- 1 I 1 l l 0654, J.9, J.10.g). l__________I____________l________!__________I I I I ! l
- 20. Demonstrate the ability ! IIf scenario IIf scen-IIf scen- l
- to continuously monitor i X ! requires lario re-lario re- I and control emergency i I Iquires lquires I worker exposure. l__________I____________I________I__________!
I I i 1 1
- 21. Demonstrate the ability i I ! ! I to make the decision, ! I i ! I based on predetermined i I I I I crieteria whether to I I I i I issus KI to emergency I l l l 1 workers and/or the l I ! I i general populati on. l__________I____________l________!__________I I I ,
I I l
- 22. Demonstrate the ability i I I I I to administer KI, once i I l l 1 the decison has been medel i ! I I to do so. l__________l____________I________!__________!
I i l i l-
- 23. Demonstrate the ability i I I I I
' to ef f ect an orderly i I i i 1 evacuation of onsite per-1 i l i !
sonnell (NURES-0654, J.2)l_,________!____________I________I__________l I l 8 1 1 !
- 24. Demonstrate ability to i ! I l l
- breif the media in a l ! l 1 I I clear, accurate and l l I i 1 timely manner. l__________I____________!________I__________t I i l I i !
- 25. Demonstrate the ability i I I i !
- to provide advance co- 1 X l X l X l X !
ordination of inf orma- 1 I i 1 I tion releases. l__________l ___________I________I__________I eCore Objectives e*
3.10 i
i l _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
- .l >
l Callaway i Montgomery i Osage i Gasconade:
I I I ! :
1 I i !
- 26. Demonstrate ability to ! ! I I establish and operate I l ! I :
rumor control in a co- ! I I I I ordinated fashion. I I____________l ________ __________.. '
I I i 1 :
i
- 27. Demonstrate adequacy of ! ! I l l procedures for regis- l l l 1 ;
traion and radiological i I I I l monitoring of evacuees. 1 I l l l (NUREG-0654, J.12). I I ---___--____I________i.__________..
I I i l l'
- 28. Demonstrate adequacy of I I I l ;
facility mass care of i i :
I 1 evacuees (NUREG-0654, 1 I i 1 1 J.10.h). l__________I____________l________l__________I i
! i ! ! l )
- 29. Demonstrate adequate i I I I I equipment and procedures l I I I I for decontamination of I I I I I emergency workers, equip-l l I I I ment and vehicles. I I I l (NUREG-0654, K.5. a,b). I I I l_______
l i i 1
- 30. Demonstrate adequacy l l l 1 of ambulance facilities ! I I i i and procedures for hand- 1 I l t ling contaminated indi- 1 I i 1 viduals. l__________I____________I________l__________f I i i 1 !
- 31. Demonstrate adequacy i I i 1 !
I I of hospital facilities ! l 1 I I I and procedures f or hand- 1 I I I I !
ling contaminated indi- !
viduals. l__________1____________I________I__________l l ! l ! I I i l
- 32. Demonstrate ability to I I identify need for, I I i i I I I I request, and obtain i I Federal assistance. l__________!____________I________I__________!
1 e
3.11
d i Callaway i Montgomery i Osage i Gasconadel
\_____-____I__-_________I________I__________!
! I I I !
- 33. Demonstrate ability to I ! ! ! I relocate to and operate ! ! I i 1 the alternate EDF/EDC I I I I I (NUREG-0654, H.2, H.3) l I-----_-__-__I________i -_-_______s.
! I I
- 34. Demonstrate ability to i 1 1 1 !
estimate total popula- 1 I i 1 g tion exposure (NUREG- ! I l l !
0654, M.4). I I____--_____ I l __________.
I I I I !
- 35. Demonstrate ability to I ! l ! I determine and implement I X l I X l I appropriate measures for I I i i controlled recovery and i I I i !
reentry.
l__________1____________l________f__________t h
i 3.12
1 l
RECEPTION / CARE OBJECTIVES 1998 IJefferson i Montgomery IColumbial Hermann !
l City-R&C ! City-R&C I R&C 1 R&C l__________!____________!________I
! l I I i
- 1. Demonstrate ability to I I i ! l
- mobilize staff and acti- ! YES YES I YES I ! YES I vate facilities promptly l__________I____________!________1_,__,,___,1 1 I I I I
- 2. Demonstrate ability to l l l l l
- fully staff f acilities ! YES YES I YES I I YES I and maintain staffing !__________!____________I________!__,___,,,_1 around the clock. . I I I I i
! ! ! ! I j
- 3. Demonstrate ability to ! ! ! ! !
- make' decisions and to I i 1 ! I coordinate emergency i I I I I activities. I
!____________!________1__________I I I i ! l
- 4. Demonstrate adequacy of I I i 1 !
- facilities and displays ! I i i !
to support emergency I i ! ! !
operations. !__________!____________!________l __________l I I I I !
- 5. Demonstrate ability to I !
1 I I
- communicate with all ! YES I YES i YES I YES !
appropriate locations, i 1 I l !
organizations, and field I I i ! I personnel. l__________1____________I________!_________,
! ! ! I
- 6. Demonstrate ability to I i i i !
- mobilize and deploy field! ! 1 ! I monitoring teams in a i i l I i timely fashion. l__________!____________!________!__________!
I i 1 ! l
- 7. Demonstrate appropriate ! ! I I I
- equipment and procedures I ! ! I I for determining ambient ! I ! ! I radiation levels. !__________!____________I________!__________!
! I I ! ! !
- 8. Demonstrate appropriate I l I I i
- equipment and procedures I ! ! I I for measurement of air- 1 I I ! I borne radiciodine con- 1 I I I I centrations as low as ! ! I l !
10-7 uCi/CC in ! I i ! !
the presense of noble l__________l ____________l________!__________!
. gases.
- Core Objectives 3.13 l
IJCffCPCon i M ntgerary ICalumbial Hercenn i ICity-R&C ! City-R&C I R&C I R&C I I__________!____________!________!__________t
! I ! ! 1
- 9. Demonstrate approprate i ! I l l equipment and.procedues ! I I I I for collection, trans- ! ! ! ! l l port and analysis of I I I I l i samples of soil, vege- 1 I i l 1 tation, snow, water and i I I I l milk. !__________l____________I________l _,,__,___,1 I i i i !
- 10. Demonstrate ability to I I l i g
- project dosage to the 1 I i i g public via plume exposurel ! I I ;
based on plant and field i I J ! I data, and to determine ! I I I I appropriate protective ! ! ! l t measures, based on PAG's,1 1 1 1 1 available shelter, evacu-l ! ! ! I ation time estimates, 1 1 1 I I and all other appropri- 1 1 1 I I ate factors. l__________!____________I________I__________t
! I I i i
- 11. Demonstrate ability to i I i 1 I project dosage to the i i 1 1 I public via ingestion I I I i I pathway exposure, based i I I ! I on field data, and to i I I I i determine appropriate ! I I I I protective measures, l i I I I based on PAG's and other I i i i !
. relevant factors. I I I I I (NUREG-0654, 1.10, J.11).!__________!____________I________!__________!
! 1 1 I i
- 12. Demonstrate ability to 1 1 i ! I implement protective .I I I ! I actions f or ingestion ! I I ! I pathway hazards. (NUREG- 1 I I I !
- 0654, J.9, J.11). ' l ___ - ____I____________!________!__________!
! I I i i
- 13. Demonstrate ability to I ! ! I l
- alert the public within I i l i i the 10-mile EPZ, and i I I I I disseminate and initial i ! ! I I instructional message i i ! ! I within 15 minutes. 1 ______l____________I________!__________!
- Core Objectives m
3.14 1
1 I
IJefferson i Montgomery IColumbial Hermann l
! City-R&C I City-R&C ! R&C ! R&C i
- 14. Demonstrate ability to l__________I____________I________I__________!
i '
I ! !
- formulate and distribute ! ! I i 1 appropriate instructions ! I I I I to the public in a timelyl ,
1 I I I fashion.
l__________!____________!________!__________t i ! ! I i
- 15. Demonstrate the organi- ! ! I ! l
- zational ability and ! ! ! ! I resources necessary to ! ! ! I g manage an orderly evacu- 1 I ! ! I ation of all or part of I ! I i l plume EPZ (NUREG-0654, I i i 1 !
J.9, J.10.g). !__________1____________I________I_________,1 l
i )
I I I J I
- 16. Demonstrate tae organi- ! ! l I I f rational ability and i I ! l l l resources necessary to I I i ! !
I deal with impediments to ! ! I i 1 evacuation, as incle- 1 1 1 I i ;
ment weather or traffic 1 l l 1 l )
obstructions (NUREG-0654,1 I I I I J.10.k).
l__________I____________!________I__________!
l q i ! I i
- 17. Demonstrate the organi- 1 1 1 1 !
zational ability and i I I I !
resources necessary to 1 i i i control access to an I l I !
evacuated area. (NUREG- 1 I i 1 0654, J.10.J) l__________1____________I________I__________I I i i I i l
- 18. Demonstrate the organi- I l' ! I I rational ability and re- ! ! I i 1 sources necessary to I i 1 1 I ef f ect an orderly evacu- 1 1 1 1 I ation of mobility-impair-1 i ! I i ed individuals within thel l' i 1 I plume EPZ (NURES-0654, I I I I I J.10.d). 1
_________I____________I________I__________I
- Core Objectivee l
l 4
e*
3.15 l
e O
IJefferson i Montgomery IColumbial Hermann !
! City-R&C I City-R&C ! R&C I R&C !
- 19. Demonstrate the organi- !l__________!____________l________f__________I ! ! I i zational ability and re- 1 1 1 ! I sources necessary to I I i i i effect an orderly evacu- 1 1 1 I I ation of schools within i i 1 1 the plume EPZ (NUREG- !
1 ! ! I I 0654, J.9, J.10.g). ! l l s .
! ! 1 1 I
- 20. Demonstrate the ability i I I I I
- to continuously monitor i YES 1 YES I YES I YES I and control emergency I i ! g I
worker exposure.
l__________!____________l ________!_______,__f 1 1 1 I I
- 21. Demonstrate the ability 1 1 1 I g to make the decision, ! ! J l I based on predetermined i I I i !
crieteria whether to I I i i !
issue KI to emergency i i i i I workers and/or the ! I I l I general population.
!__________l____________I________1__________!
I I i i 1
- 22. Demonstrate the ability I ! ! ! I to administer KI, once ! : l l !
tha decison has been madel l I ( l to da so.
I__________1____________!________!__________t I ! I I I l 23. Demonstrate the ability i I I I !
to ef f ect an orderly i I I I !
evacuation of onsite per-l ! ! I !
sonnell (NUREG-0654, J.2)l_ _______!_ ________I________I__________I
! ! I I I
- 24. Demonstrate ability to l I I I i
- breif the media in a !
1 ! I I clear, accurate and i I I i !
timely manner. !. _f.___________l
'. . ____ __I__________!
I I I i 1
- 25. Demonstrate the ability I ! I i !
- to provide advance co- ! ! I I I ordination of inf orma- 1 I I l I tion releases. l__ _____!_________ l________I__________!
eCore Objectives e
3.16
=_______m-m_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _
l l .' .
IJcffercen i Mantenccry IColumbio: H;rmann ______
ICity-H6C I City-R&C ! R&C 1 R&C I 1__________..____________
l i
o . ___.___.__l
- 26. Demonstrate ability to i I I
)
establish and operate ! L I I rumor-control in a co. I I ! I I ordinated fashion, l__________3.___________l________I__________!
I i i 1 1
- 27. Demonstrate adequacy of i i 1 1 !
procedures for regis- ! YES I YES ! YES ! YES I traion and radiological i I i 1 1
-monitoring of evacuees. ! i ! ! !
(NUREG-0654, J.12).
I__________i____________*'._______I__________e
. I l
- 29. Demonstrate adequacy of I I I I i I
facility mass care of f YES YES ! YES '
I I YES !
evacuees (NUREG-0654, I i 1 1 1 i J.10.h).
t l__________i____________l_______
i l__________!
I I I t
- 29. Demonstrate adequate ! 1 1 1 I equipment and procedures 1 YES I YES I YES i YES !
for decontamination of I 1 ! ! I emergency workers, equip-l l 1 1 1 ment and vehicles. I I i 1 1 (NUREG-0654, K.5. a,b).
!__________I____________I________1__________t i I
~
l i I
- 30. Demonstrate adequacy i I i 1 I of ambulance facilities ! I I i !
and procedures for hand- 1 1 1 I I line contaminated indi- 1 I I I viduals.
l__________1.___________!________!__________.
I i ! I i
- 31. Demonstrate adequacy i I I ! I of hospital facilities ! ! 1 I i and procedures for hand- 1 I I I i !
ling contaminated indi- 1 I i ! I viduals. 1
_________I____________!._______!__________t 1 i l i !
- 32. Demonstrate ability to I i ! ! I identify need for, i 1 1 I I l request, and obtain 1 I i i i Federal assi stance. l__________l____________I_____ l__________!
l 1
{
)
l
.. )
3.17 I
l
1 4
- _____________________________________________ i IJcfferson i Montgoeery IColumbioi Hermann : )
! City-R&C 1 City-R&C 1 R&C ! R&C l l__________I____________3._______l__________l
! I I I !
- 33. Demonstrate ability to 1 I I I I relocate to and operate I ! ! ! I the alternate EDF/EOC ! ! I i l (NUREG-0654, H.2, H.3) l__________l____________I________l________,_!
1 1 I i 1 -1
- 34. Demonstrate ability to 1 i ! ! I estimate total popula- 1 I I i i tion exposure (NUREG- 1 I l ! l 0654, M.4).
!l__________!____________!________!__________l
! ! ! I
- 35. Demonstrate ability to 1 I i l i determine and impleeent ! ! I i l appropriate measures for I l i ! ! ;
controlled recovery and l I I I I reentry.
!__________f.___________I________1 _________!
i e 4 3.18 L
l- .
j . .
I L
1988 ANNUAL EXERCISE GUIDELINES AND EXTENT OF PLAY OFF-SITE GUIDELINES AND EXTENT OF PLAY The following list of rules defines the Extent of Play, or the limits of free play,'for the 1988 Callaway Plant Annual Exercise. All off-site (State, I
County, and Reception Center) participants should f amiliarize themselves with this list and be careful to conform to it in the performance of their emergency duties during the drills.
- 1. The 1988 Call.svay Plant Annual Exercise vill be conducted on June 6,1988 l and will involve the Emergency Response Organizations of Union Electric, the State of Missouri (partial participation), the counties of Callaway, Montgomery, Osage and Gasconade, and the City of Tulten. The State and Counties will attempt to demonstrate all of their remaining objectives.
- 2. The ability to mobilize State and County emergency organizations during off-nor=al hours (between 6:00 p.m. and 4:00 a.m.) vill be demonstrated.
Activation of emergency organizations should be accomplished as described in appropriate emergency plans and procedures.
- 3. Persennel from the Missouri Division of Tamily Services, the American Red Cross, and Radiological Monitoring personnel vill be pre-staged at a location atar each Reception and Care Center. They vill be called out from those locations. In the Reception and Care Centers, double staffing vill only be demonstrated fer supervisory personnel.
4 State Emergency Management Agency (SEMA) and Bureau of Radiological Health (3RE) personnel vill be pre-staged at the Plant Emergency Operations Tacility (EOF).
- 5. If the scenario generates conditions which make evacuation of the popula-tien necessary, such evacuat$on will be simulated only. The general public must not be alarmed or impeded in any way.
- 6. School evacuation vill be simulated, as schools will not be in session during an off-hours drill. The simulation vill include an actual notifi-cation call to the Superintendent or Principal of the school at his office. The Superintendent or Principal and one bus driver vill be inter-viewed by the TEMA evaluator.
- 7. Sirens vill not be sounded during the Exercise, because a full cycle test is run each month. l
- 8. Activation of the EBS vill be simulated. The EBS station vill not actual- 1 ly activate EBS or release a message, but they will be contacted.
- 9. Field response to the off-site scenario events vill be simulated. No i units vill actually be dispatched.
3.19
)
03/1u,88 l
- _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ i
((E -
e .
.. t 1988 ANNUAL EXERCISE I GUIDELINES AND EXTENT OF PLAY 4
OFF-SITE CUIDELINES AND EXTENT OF PLAY (Cont'd.)
1
- 10. The Stace EOC will be minimally _ staf f ed. Only those EOC personnel necessary for direct interface with the Counties, Reception and Care Centers, and IBS will participate.
- 11. Missouri Bureau of Radiological Health Field Monitoring Team response vill be simulated. No team vill actually be dispatched.
- 12. Reception and 'tre Centers will be exercised on separate time lines, and under different scenarios than other facilities in order to facilitate scheduling of public facilities and to allow demonstration of all four Centers in.ene exercise.
- 13. The Montgomery and Gasconade County Reception and Care Centers vill be activated at 6:00 p.m. on the day of the Exercise. The Lincoln University and Hearnes Building Reception and Care Centers vill be separately demonstrated. The Hearnes' Building Reception and Care Center vill hold its graded exercise at 9:00 a.m. on May 17, 1988.- The Lincoln University Reception and Care Center vill exercise at 9:00 a.m. on June 7, 1988.
Different personnel vill be exercised at each Reception and Care Center.
14 Prior to the start of the drills, County EOC participants should engage in nermal activities. Do not come to the Emergency Operations Center until you are called.
- 15. Do net violate any ordinances, statutes, er laws during the drills,
- 16. Should a real emergency arise during the drills, participation in the drills v111 cease, and the real emergency will be dealt with.
- 17. No participant should perform any unsafe act in~ order to demonstrate a drill objective. If there is a question regarding safety, check with your centro 11er.
I t'
e 3.20 q 03/10/88 j 1
- - _ _ - - - _ - _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _ - - __ ]
e
.o . .
1.5' EXERCISE SCEMARIO The plant.is operating at'100% power and has been on 'line for112 days.' Total core III EFPD is.152.
While at full-load, a loose 1 parts monitor alarm is received on the Main Control Board. Shortly afterward, RCS activity be-q gins to increase as indicated on the CVCS letdown monitor.
7 . An individualfis injured in the Radwaste Building necessi-tating activation of the.MERT and subsequent transportation of a contaminated injured person by the Callaway County Ambulance Ser-vice to.the callaway. Memorial Hospital.
RCP "B" trips on' overload causing a trip of the reactor and mainLturbine. The Shift Supervisor.should declare an Alert -and j activate the On-Site Emergency Organization.
{:
An RCS, leak develops as indicated by increasing ' containment 1 t atmosphere activity. The leakage increases to approximately 300-gpm and. the Emergency Coordinator should declare a Site Area Emergency .and activate the EOF Emergency Organization. '
evacuation of all nonessential personnel should occur.
Vital bus NBol trips due to a bus failure. This power loss results in a loss of all "A" train ESF equipment. RCS leakage increases to approximately 1000 gpa. Increasing pressure in con-tainment; ruptures.a spara piping penetration in the Aux. Building resulting in a release of radioactivity to the Aux. Building and j atmosphere through the Unit Vent.
1 The Emergency Coordinator should declare a General Emer-gency. Anticipated initial Protective Action' Recommendations to the public include shelter for a two mile radius and five miles downwind. 1 Repairs are completed to bus NBol and containment pressure is reduced to atmospheric. The release is terminated and ad- ,
equate core cooling is established.
Actions are taken to transition to a Recovery Organization.
Planned Actual Time Event Time 1830 Alert 1817 1915 Site Area Emergency 1906 2030 -
Release Occurs 2040 2040 General Emergency 2015
'2130 Release Terminated 2130 4
-.} ' .;
a
)
2200 Time Jump (24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />) 2200 2315- Exercise Terminated 2310 l 1.6 STATE.1MD LOCAL RESOURCES Listed below are organizations which planned to participate:
State of Missouri
- 1. Department of Public Safety, State Emergency Management Agency Division of Health, Bureau of Radiological Health 2.
- 3. Department of Social Services, Division of Family Services
- 4. Department'of Public Safety, Missouri State Highway Patrol
- 5. Department of Public Safety, Missouri National Guard
- 6. Missouri Highway and Transportation Department
- 7. Missouri State Water Patrol.
- 8. . Missouri Department of' Agriculture
- 10. . Department of Conservation 11.- Missouri Public Service Commission Missouri Counties 1, Callaway County /Pulton
,(a) County Court / Mayor
-(b) Emergency Management Director (c) County Sheriff (d)~Pulton Police Chief (e) Pulton PIO (f) Transportation Officer (g) County Health Officer j (h) City Health Officer -
6 (1) county Road & Bridge Superintendent (j) .Callaway Ambulance Service (k) callaway Memorial Hospital
- 2. Gasconade, Montgomery and Osage Counties (a) Presiding Judge (b) Emergency Management Director l- (c) County Sheriff i
(d) Public.Information Officer (e) Transportation Officer (f) County Health Officer (g) County Road & Bridge Superintendent 3.. Reception and Care Centers (other than noted above).
(a) American Red Cross L (b) Local Police / Security L
(c) Han Radio Operators a1 5
b______________-._____-_____----------- - - - -
v*
2 EXERCISE EVALUATION 2.1 MISSOURI OPERATIONS I- 2.1.1 state mueraenev onerations center (smoc)
-The following objectives were to be demonstrated at the SEOC: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 13, and 14. l The call to initiate' activation of the Missouri State. EOC was received at 1835 from the utility.
staff' mobilization procedures were demonstrated. Some SEMA staff The call was verified and were in the vicinity while most~were contacted at home. .Objec-tive Number'1.was fully demonstrated.
Objective Number 2, ability to fully staff facility and maintain staffing around the clock, was not fully demonstrated.
Since the exercise was partial scale, representatives from the following agencies reported to the SEOC, but'did not stay: Agri -
culture, Department of Public Safety, Division of Family Ser-vices, and the State Water Patrol. Presentation of a roster in lieu of a sh'ift change, precluded a full demonstration of 24-hour staffing.
The' ability-to make decisions and to coordinate emergency activities, Objective Number 3, was fully demonstrated. Periodic briefings were held to update and involve the staff. A current copy of the plan, written procedures and checklists were used ef-ficiently. Message handling was improved over past exercises.
State representatives were dispatched to the Forward Command Post (FCP) at the Emergency Operations Facility (EOF). At 1942 the FCP was declared operational. At 2054 the call was placed to ac-tivate the reception and care facilities.
Objective Number 4, adequacy of facilities and displays to support emergency operations, was fully demonstrated. The facil-ity can support extended operations. Status. boards were main-tained and easily visible. All appropriate maps and displays were posted or available. Access was controlled. It is recom-mended, however, that a speaker phone be attached to the blue phone to enable all participants to hear the conferencing an-f,7 nouncements.
The ability to communicate with all appropriate locations, organizations, and field personnel, objective Number 5, was not adequately demonstrated. A dedicated line between the State and local EOCs and the EOF is the primary means of communication.
4 6
L
- b. .
Commercial telephone is the primary communications .between the- I SEOC-and FEMA Region VII.and/or EBS. Backup communications were neither demonstrated nor intended to be demonstrated during this exercise. The ARCA from the 1986 exercise pertaining to telefaxing EBS messages to the JPIC was corrected by demonstra- l tion'of timely.telefax capabilities. The second 1986 ARCA called -
'for procedure changes to ensure timely notification of the FEMA office of escalating and de-escalating conditions. Following.the initial contact with the-EICC, no further updates were provided.
Objective Number 13, ability to alert the public within the 10-mile EPZ, and to disseminate an initial instructional message within 15 minutes (45 minutes for remote areas within 5-10 miles) was not adequately demonstrated. Specifically, the - Missouri State Emergency Management Agency failed to notify in- a timely L manner the State Highway Patrol to initiate aerial alerting along
~
the Missouri River. River alerting was accomplished, but not within 45 minutes, and not as a. result of action taken by the Missouri State Euwrgency Management Agency.
At 1917 the off-site authorities were notified of the SAE via the blue phone. At 1921, the siren activation was simulated, followed at 1923 by the initial notification to the public. The SEOC was instructed by the FCP personnel enroute to the EOF to inform the Highway Patrol, if present, or to contact them di-rectly, .if not present,.to initiate simulation of Missouri River alerting. In the absence of the Highway Patrol, the SEOC did not attempt any alternative contact. The Highway Patrol representa-tive arrived at the SEOC at 1934, reviewed his checklist, noted that it was a SAE and at 1938 contacted the Patrol pilot to per-form river alerting. Later, upon questioning, the pilot esti-mated that it would take 10 minutes to arrive at the airport.
The time recorded from notification of the pilot at the airport, to siren installation in the plane,-plus flight time, during the Callaway remedial exercise of 1986 was 31 minutes. The projected completion time would be 2019 or 62 minutes, exceeding the 45 minute time limit.
Objective Number 14, ability to formulate and distribute ap-propriate instructions to the public in a timely fashion was not adequately demonstrated. Although, tive meesages war. distrib-uted, one message disseminated at 2047 was erroneously changed by the SEOC. Callaway County's shelter message included subareas C1, C5, C6, and C7. Their subsequent evacuation message covered C1, C5, and C6. The EBS coordinator wrongly assumed that C7 was no longer affected, and broadcast that the area in C7 "was no longer in the shelter mode". This action demonstrated an unau-thorized revision of a protective action recommendation which may have resulted in placing individuals at risk.
summary: There were two areas requiring corrective action (ARCAs) identified during the previous exercise that required 7
A -
u, . ..
C 'a p
corrective action'or subsequent reevaluation during this. exer-
.cise. One was demonstrated satisfactorily by-the SEMA PIO trans--
mitting- critical. information to the- JPIC. The second .was corrected.through procedure changes,- but the procedures.for FEMA
-notification via the EICC were not demonstrated after:the initial
" contact and resulted in an area requiring corrective action'to be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise. .. Objective Number.2 was not fully demonstrated. . Objectives Number 13 and 14 were not ad-equately demonstrated.
Deficiencies That Would Lead To A Meantive Findina
- 1. The Missouri State. Emergency Management Agency'(SEMA) failed to. notify the State Highway Patrol to initiate simulation of:
aerial alerting.along the Missouri River alerting. River alerting was accomplished,.but not until the'SHP representa-tive arrived at the Missouri 1 Stats EOC. The projected; completion time of.62 minutes exceeded lthe 45-minutes allow-able for rural alerting within 5-10 miles from the plant.
This action, did not appear on any SEMA checklist. The plan' must.be' amended to assign this. responsibility to a SEMA per-son if the 'SHP is absent. .(NUREG-0654, elements E5 and E6, FEMA-REP-10.)
- 2. The ~ Missouri SEMA changed an. EBS message erroneously eliminating one subarea.from a' sheltering protective ac-
: tion.. Procedures must be developed- to ensure coordination between the-SEOC and the local government if message changes are being considered.
Area Requiring corrective Aetica H
- 1. - The Missouri SEOC did not demonstrene the implementation of their revised' SOPS requiring them 9 contact FEMA during the escalation /de-escalation of- an ex6ccise or actual event.
This muFt be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
Area Recommended For Improvement
- 1. A speaker phone should be attached to the blue phone to en-able all participants to hear conference announcements.
2.1.2 Emergency operations Facility 2.1.2.1 State Forward Command Post (FCP)
The objectives to be demonstrated at the FCP were: .
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 20, and 35.
. The FCP is the main coordinating arm of the response effort, linking the actions and communications of virtually all the State and local resources, with access to the licensee, SEMA's informa-8
- s. ? ?.
p tion authentication function (called PIO), and the Dose._ Assess-ment Field 1 Team Coordination effort of the State Bureau of Radiological Health. By dedicated conference line (the " blue 3 phone") they are in contact with the State EOC and all county j
EOC's.
l The ability to mobilize staff and activate facilities promptly, Objective Number 1, was fully demonstrated. Mobiliza-tion procedures were demonstrated with full staffing completed at 197,0.
3 Objective- Number 2, ability to fully staff facilities and j maintain staffing around-the-clock, was fully demonstrated by a shift change for tha five SEMA FCP personnel. This fulfilled the -
remaining-issues in the undemonstrated element list for this ob-
, jective. l The ability to make decisions and to coordinate emergency activities, Objective Number 3, was fully demonstrated.
Objective-Number 4, the adequacy of facilities and displays to support emergency operations was fully demonstrated.
.The ability to communicate with all appropriate locations, organizations, and field personnel, Objective Number 5, was fully demonstrated. Primary communications was demonstrated between all locations by;the dedicated " blue phone". Backup radio com-s ,
munications was demonstrated between the FCP and the State EOC.
Backup communications between the FCP and the other facilities was provided by commercial telephone.
The FCP is. only responsible for a portion of Objective Number 10, the ability to project dose to the public via plume exposure and to determine appropriate protective measures based on PAG's and all other appropriate factors. They received the PARS from BRH together with evaluated evacuation times and the numbers of people to be evacuated, and informed the SEOC, JPIC and counties. Feedback was also provided to the licensee when PARS were implemented. In this limited way, Objective Number 10 was fully demonstrated.
Objective Number 20, the' ability to continuously monitor and control emergency worker exposure was fully demonstrated by State personnel. (It must be noted, however, that the licensee pro-vided ' poor monitoring for contamination control at the front door of the EOF. The probe on the survey meter was uncovered and
., people were requested to monitor themselves with little instruc-tion and no supervision. This would result in inconsistent monitoring, possible contamination of the probe, and potential passage of contaminated individuals into the EOF /FCP. Therefore, a trained monitor (s) dedicated to this station must be provided at this' ingress point to insure adequate and consistent personnel i
9 m_.mm___m___._.._.m-____m.__.____._m_m.___.__ , _ _ _ . . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _
__ c_. _ .-_ _
- . j monitoring .to protect the' health and safety of Tthe EOF occupants.).
The. ability to determine and implement appropriate -measures for controlled recovery and reentry, Objective Number 35, was not j fully, demonstrated. Field . monitoring data was simulated.
Discussions were conducted between the FCP and the counties' con-carning recovery activities and the'need for coordination for re-entry. An insurance claims number.was established with Union Electric. . The utility,.BRH, and the FCP coordinated discussions
, of the relaxation of PARS. However, the exercise terminated.
prior to. dissemination of relaxed PARS. Instead, they went;from evacuation 2-mile radius, shelter to 5 downwind to " reentry. can begin, no additional PARS required". The.FCP did not address.re-laxation of the shelter recommendation. 1 Summary: Thers were two inadequacies identified during the-previous exercise that required corrective actionfor subsequent.
demonstration for reevaluation during this exercise. The first one corrected by. plan changes. The second resulted in a re-definition of:the role of the FCP/PIO to that of a liaison.
objective not fully demonstrated was 35. There were no ar-eas which would require corrective action.
2.1.2.2 Dose Assessment and Field Team Coordination This function'is performed at the ECF in a room near the FCP by the Missouri Division of Health, Bureau'of Radiological Health
'(BRH). In this exercise, dose assessment was demonstrated, field team monitoring was simulated.
The objectives to be demonstrated were: 1, 2, 3, 4, '5, 10, 20, and 35.
The ability to mobilize staff and activate facilities promptly, Objective Number 1, was fully demonstrated. Mobiliza-tion procedures were demonstrated with full staffing completed at 1930.
Objective Number 2, the ability to fully staff facilities and maintain staffing around-the-clock was demonstrated for both
' dose assessment and field team coordination through double staffing. However, the second shift was there in a training / observation mode and did not operate independently,
,.. therefore, precluding full demonstration of Objective Number 2.
The ability to make decisions and to coordinate emergency activities, Objective Number 3, was fully demonstrated.
Objective Number 4, the. adequacy of facilities and' displays to support emergency operations was fully demonstrated.
10 l
- - - -_ ._ _ _ _ - 1
u .- .
gp . -1
. . =.
6 As field teams were not dispatched, objective. Number 5, the ability to communicate with all appropriate locations, organiza-tions, and field _ personnel, was not fully. demonstrated. All
/ other communication was internal within the EOF.- ,
objective Number.10, the ability to project dose to the pub-lic via plume exposure and to determine appropriate protective measures based on PAG's and all.other appropriate , factors, .was
-fully demonstrated. Dose projections were made by personal com-puter with DOS AS 1 and 2 programs and hand checked by calcula-tor. Doses were projected properly and in a timely manner.' PARS ,
were developed within 5-10 minutes. Consideration was given to '
plant status and population affected.-- PARS.were promptly updated-as. conditions changed. PARA were discussed between the FCP =and BRH and communicated to and. coordinated wi'a tho' counties. The
. initial ~ PARS' were. continually reviewed in light of developing plant conditions. Logic diagrams were used to arrive at .the proper PARS by both the utility.and the State BRH. Coordination of PARS with SEMA and the Recovery Coordinator was excellent.
.The ability to continuously monitor and control emergency workers exposure, objective Number 20, was not adequately demon-h strated. . Individual staff did not have personal ~ dosimetry, TLDs and self-reading dosimeters. Rather, they had 3 pocket dosin-
-eters .that they placed tr .aghout the area occupied by the BRH staff. . They did not read nor record the readings at 30 minute intervals.- This method of group: dosimetry and record keeping is unacceptable and cannot account for demonstration of personal ex-posure control for travel through the EPZ, per NUREG-0654, el-ement K.3.a.
Objective Number 35, the abil'ty to determine'and implement appropriate measures for controlled recovery and reentry was not
-fully demonstrated through simulated field monitoring. The util-ity, BRN, and.the FCP coordinated discussions of the relaxation of PARS. The exercise terminated prior to dissemination of re-laxed PARS.
summary: There were no inadequacies cited'at the last exer-cise for Dose Assessment and Field Team Coordination which re-quired correction at this exercise. Objectives not fully demonstrated: 2, 5, and 35. Objective not adequately demon-strated: 20.
Area Requiring corrective notion l' 2. BRH personnel 'in the EOF did not display individual self l reading and permanent record dosimetry nor read and record '
I readings from availabla dosimetry. This must be demon-strated at the 1989 exercise.
11 N___________.-----__-. . _ - - - _ _
~l l
2.1.3 Radiological Monitoring Teams
. Radiological monitoring teams were not deployed to the field for this exercise, however, they-did dispatch 2 staff per shift-to the= EOF and demonstrated the contents of their monitoring kits to correct an inadequacy from the last-exercise. All contents were in accordance with the plan.
2.1.4 Radiological Lahorntory (man tan)
- The RAD LAB was not evaluated during this exercise. How ' l ever, it should be noted that the area requiring corrective ac-tion cited during the,1986 exercise pertaining _to the ability to perform analyses of samples to determine the presence- of Sr-89 and Sr-90 was rectified by a Letter of-Agreement with EPA. EPA
'{
agreed to perform these analyses and the plan was amended appro-l j
priately. j l
2.1.5 Joint Public Information Center (JPIC)
The objectives to be demonstrated at the JPIC were: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 24, and 25.
.The ability to mobilize staff and activate facilities promptly, Objective Number 1, was fully demonstrated. The call initiating activation was received at 1843 at the Alert stage by {
n, . <
the SEMA. Duty Officer with full staffing completed at 1920. '*a-l 7 resenting SEMA at the JPIC were a State Spokesperson, PIO, mor control aides and a badging official, plus representat..
from Union Electric.
Objective Number 2, ability to fully staff facilities and maintain staffing around-the-clock was not- fully demonstrated.
All organizations were represented at the JPIC, as required by ,
the State and local plans. However, presentation of a roster for all organizations in lieu of a shift change precluded a full dem-onstration.
, The ability to make decisions and to coordinate emergency activities, Objective Number 3, was fully demonstrated. All staff members were involved .in decision-making. Periodic brief-ings were held to update the staff on the status of the emer-gency. The SEMA PIO was effectively in charge. Status boards were updated as required. It is recommended that an alerting mechanism, i.e., bell be provided to the State Senior Public Af-L fairs Officer and lead utility staff to enable them to keep all L staff apprised of fast breaking items.
The adequacy of facilities and displays to support emergency operations, Ob'jective Number 4, was fully demonstrated. Working ,
space is adequate for the number of media present, but at least )
12 i
.. ?
double the space is needed and recommended in anticipation of re-
'sponse to-national / international media.
Objective Number 5, the ability to communicate.with all ap-propriate locations and organizations was fully demonstrated with
'-both primary (telephone).and backup (telefax) communications. It is recommended that the SEMA PIO utilize fixed or laptcp computers to enable faster gathering and transmission of news data.
The ability to brief the media in a clear accurate and
- - ~ timely manner, Objective Number 24, was not fully demonstrated.
Media kits were available, accurate and complete. Technical jar-gon was explained. Handout materials'and hard copy of news re-leases were available.- .However, maps and displays were not effectively used. Landmark identification rather than sector language should be used at all briefings. It is recommended that' a voluntary aggressor media team be trained and further utilized to effectively test the PIO capabilities, in a tough real world atmosphere. This is not the case presently and, in reality, leaves the spokespersons ill prepared.for an actual event.
. Objective Number 25, the ability to provide advance coordi-nation of information released was fully demonstrated. Pios ef-factively exchanged information with the EOF and EOCs-to ensure
'that these locations were aware of what information was presented to the media.
y ..
summary: There were no inadequacies from the last exercise
,' which required demonstration at this exercise nor were there any inadequacies
~
identified during this exercise that would require corrective action. Objectives not fully demonstrated: 2 and 24.
Areas Recommended For Improvement
- 2. An alerting mechanism, i.e., bell, should be provided to the State Senior Public Affairs Officer and lead utility staff to enable them to keep all staff apprised of fast breaking items.
- 3. At least double the working space is needed and recommended in anticipation of response to national / international media.
4.- A fixed or laptop computer is recommended to permit faster ability to gather and transmit news data.
i 5. A. voluntary aggressor media force should be trained and fur-ther utilized to effectively test PIO capabilities in a tough real world atmosphere in order to prepare them for an actual event.
I 13
l 2.2- COUNTY OPERATIONS J.2.1 Callaway Countv/Fulton EOC'fCCEOC)
.The' following objectives were to be- demonstrated at the Callaway. county EOC: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 13, 14,.1., 5 17, 19, 20, 25,
' 3 5.
At 1829'the dispatcher received notification that the plant' was at Alert status. The. call was-verified and staff mobiliza-tion- commenced--at 1831. EOC staffing was completed at -1903,.
, fully. demonstrating Objective Number 1, ability to mobilize staff and activate facilities promptly.
All positions that were.present performed a shift change, however, EOC staffing did;not include representatives from. the City Engineering Department,- ' local American Red' Cross, County Treasurer, the City Director of Utilities or the County / City At-torneys. While none of.these positions is a member of the " Key Emergency, Response Staff" identified in the Callaway County Plan, !
their absence prevented full demonstration of Objective Number 2, '
the- ability to . fully staff facilities and maintain staf f ' - -
around-the-clock..
The'.Cduncy . Director effectively took charge.-and involved County. Commissioners in decision-making. Staff ensured appropri-ate. SOPS. wore'used at the different emergency classification lev-als by utilizing a. flow chart. ' Status boards were updated as messages were read over the blue phone. At 2031, the call was made to activate Reception and Care Centers.
Objective Number'3, ability to make decisions and to coordi-nate emergency activities, was fully demonstrated.
Objective Number 4, adequacy of facilities and displays to support emergency operations, was fully demonstrated.
All primary and backup communication links were impressively o utilized by an excellent staff and supervisors. Objective Number 5, ability to communicate with all appropriate locations, organi-zations, and field personnel, was fully demonstrated.
At 1915 the EOC received notification of Site Area Emergency from the plant. EBS messages were forwarded-to the State by telefax machine at'1918 and sirens were sounded at 1922, fully demonstrating Objective Number 13, ability to alert the public within the 10 mile EPZ and' disseminate an initial instructional message w'ithin 15 minutes.
At 2023 the EOC received notification from the EOF that Gen-eral Emergency status had been declared. The PIO telefaxed the 14
t '
- o ,
"$~r ...-
General Emergency EBS message to the State at 2036. . Evacuation areas were identified by subarea designations which were trans-
- lated into prescripted landmark descriptions by the EBS Coordina-tor at the SEOC. Objective Number 14, ability to formulate and distribute appropriate instructions to the public in a . timely fashion, was fully demonstrated.
-Objective Number 15, organizational ability and resources necessary to manage an orderly evacuation of all or part of' the plume EPZ, was not adequately demonstrated,- in that Callaway County failed to adequately communicate to the Missouri School
, for the Deaf'the need to evacuate their facility _as required by the exercise objectives. No instruction to activate the school's evacuation plan was psssed from the EOC to the school, except_for a test message stating that they were testing the TTY device, a teletypewriter telecommunications device for the deaf.
. Objective Number 17, the organizational ability and. re-sources necessary to control access to an evacuated area, was not adequately demonstrated and resulted in a deficiency. The-access control points established by the Sheriff's Department were not in accordance with areas for which corrective actions were recom-mended by.the. county. The Sheriff's office established access control points based on the PARS provided by the. State which were to shelter in sectors H, J, and K. Access control points were placed around the'affected sectors, instead of subareas C5,- C6, and C7 identified by the County commissioners for in-house shel-ter. .
Subareas"C5'and 06 were included in the Sheriff's Depart--
This would have
~
ment access. control,'but nybarea C7 was omitted.
permitted free access' 4 an area for which protective actions
- were issued.
Objective Number 19, organizational' ability and resources necessary to effect an orderly evacuation of schools within the EPZ, was not adequately demonstrated, and resulted in a defi-ciency. The Missouri School for the Deaf was not evacuated in accordance with the anticipated exercise scenario, nor were school officials on duty at the school for.the prearranged' demon-stration and evaluation. .The only staff person at the school was unable to describe evacuation procedures for students, and was unsuccessful in an attempt to contact school officials for as-sistance.
Objective Nraber 20, the ability to continuously monitor and control ' emergency worker exposure, was not adequately demon-strated. Emergency worker dosimetry kits were not available in g sufficient numbers to satisfy plan requirements, based on an in-ventory by the County Health Department representative at the Eoc during, <and as a function of, the exercise. These shortfalls were not reported to the Emergency Management Director in accor-dance with the plan. An evaluator inspection of dosimetry equip-ment following the exercise revealed that additional dosimetry l
15
i ,.- ,
. .s
'had been delivered to the EOC in preparation for'this. exercise, butTits presence was unknown.to.the County' Health Department Rep-resentative. ..The post. exercise. inspection also frevealed, how-ever, that even with the additional dosimetry, . an additional 48 TLD's would have been needed to assemble the number of dosimetry kits: required by the plan.
Dosimetry for the EOC staff was neither -distributed nor-simulated per NUREG-0654, elemant K.3.a. . As a result, dosimetry (
I distribution motheds'and procedures were not observed, ~ nor was j the evaluator able to observo whether or not staff utilized the
. dosimetry correctly and regularly recorded their readings. ]
..TLD's are not included as part of the dosimetry kits in SOP-
- 2,- Supplement 2 to Procedure 2 of the. County Plans. Some TLD's were.availabit, but were not shown as part of-the. resources, per NUREG-0654, element K.3.a. .i Objective Number 25, ability to provide advance coordination of public information,.was' fully demonstrated at this facility. l At 2245. Recovery and Reentry efforts were initiated and the i EOC.telefaxed-EBS messages to'the State at 2315. Objective Num-ber 35, 1 ability to determine and implement appropriate measures for controlled recovery and reentry, was fully demonstrated.
There were three areas requiring corrective action cited 1 during._the last' exercise for the Callaway County EOC. All three were satisfied by submission of procedure changes to account- for activation call-up procedures, landmark descriptions in F3S mes-sages, and the clarification of procedures for the Transportation Coordinator.
Summary: Objectives not adequately demonstrated: 15, 17, 19,.and 20.
Objective'not fully demonstrated: 2. '
Deficioneias That Would Lead To 1 Necative Findina
- 3. The Missouri School for the Deaf failed to demonstrate the organizational ability and resources necessary to effect the orderly evacuation of a special population facility within the plume EPZ.
A. copy of the school's radiological cmergency response plan and procedures must be submitted for review; staff must be trained; and the plan demonstrated through a remedial drill.
.. l l
- 4. Callaway County failed to demonstrate access control for the entire- plume affected. area. Roadblocks established by the 1
16 L
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ J
v '*
l
~ Callaway County Sheriff failed to include all.of the area designated by the County.
't SOP's must be amended to coordinate access control points L with PARS made to the public. Individuals responsible for access control must be informed of PARS in terms of subareas, in addition to -sectors, and/or nust request subarea translation.
. Areas'Reeuirina Corrective nation I s 3. Callaway County failed to demonstrate adequate notification
.for evacuation of the Missouri School for the Deaf. This
.must be demonstrated during the remedial exercise.
- 4. Dosimetry was neither distributed nor simulated to emergency workers at the EOC. This must be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
- 5. Insufficient permanent record dosimetry exists at the EOC.
- Sufficient dosimetry must be demonstrated at the 1989 exer-cise.
- 6. TLD's are not listed as part of the dosimetry kits in the county SOPS to the plan. The SOP must be modified to re flect this resource pursuant to NUREG-0654, element K.3.a.,
, _ and demonstrated.at the 1989 exercise.
2.2.2 Gasconade County EOC (GCEOC)
Objectives to be demonstrated were: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 13, 14, (15)y (20), and 25. (If required by scenario.)
The Alert declaration was. received at 1829. The County Emergency Management Director.(EMD) alerted facility personnel.
All but one of those who responded arrived by 1910, with the last person arriving at 1925. Staffing, however, was never sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the County Plan (See objective Number 2, below). The ability to mobilize staff and activate fa-cilities promptly, Objective Number 1, was not fully demon-strated.
The ability to fully staff facilities and maintain staffing around-the-clock, objective Number 2, was not adequately demon-strated. Full staffing was not accomplished. Primary staffing rosters presented for the facility failed to account for the .po-sitions specified in the Gasconade County Plan. " Key Emergency Response Organization Staff" positions for County Health Officer, Transportation Officer, and Public Information Officer were not staffed. Additionally, staff positions for County Treasurer, County Attorney and Ambulance District Representative were va-cant. Although a roster was provided to identify second shift 17
. staffing,ithis list-also failed to identify staff.for all the po-sitions noted in the plan.
Objective Number 3,. descnstrating the. ability to make'deci-sions and to coordinate emergency activities, -and Objective Num--
ber 4, adequacy of. facilities.and displays to support emergency operations, were fully demonstrated.
The : ability to communicate with all-appropriate. locations, organizations, and field personnel,, Objective Number 5, was fully demonstrated, and included impressive amateur radio operator response.
Objective Number 13, the' ability to alert the public within the 10-mile EPZ, and disseminate.an initial instructional mes-sage, within 15 minutes, was not demonstrated, resulting in a de-ficiency. During the exercise,- at the time the counties. were instructed to sound the sirens at the SAE and the GE, no simula-tion was performed.
Objective Number 14,> ability to formulate and distribute ap-propriate instructions to the public in a timely fashion, was fully demonstrated, by use of prescripted messages.
The. organizational ability and resources necessary to demon -
, strate an. orderly evacuation of all or part of the plume EPZ, Ob-L . _
jective . Number 15, 'and Objective Number 20, the ability -to
[". continuously monitor and control emergency worker exposure, . were not. demonstrated because the scenario failed to-drive the plume
, toward Gasconada County and the subsequent exercising- of .these objectivasi l
Objective Number 25, the ability to provide advance coordi-nation of information, is not applicable to this facility.
Summary: There was one inadequacy cited'for the Gasconade County EOC during- the last exercise. It was corrected. by submission of procedural changes to clearly reflect the Sheriff's message handling responsibilities prior to and after activation of.the EOC.
Objectives not adequately demonstrated: 2 and 13.
Objective not fully demonstrated: 1.
I objectives not demonstrated: 15 and 20.
4 Deficianov That Would Lead To & Mecative Findina
- 5. There was a lack of demonstration of the procedures for a j timely activation of the siren system in Gasconade County. ;
18
--____ _=_--_______________-_ _ _ - _
<* , ,1 ,
During the exercise, at the time the counties .were' in-structed to sound the sirens at the SME and the GE, .no-
, simulation was' performed. Further training, by August 15,
-1988, is required in already. established procedures.- A training syllabus and list of attendees must be provided
, -prior to the session.- The results of this training must be demonstrated at the next exercise.
Area Reauirine-Corrective Action
- 7. Procedures and staffing rosters'must he amended to account
, , for all GCEOC personnel and demonstrated at the 1989 exer-cise.
2.2.3 Montaomery County EOC The following elements were to be demonstrated at.the MCEOC:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 13, 14, (15), 18, (20), and 25. (If required by scenario.)
. The ability to mobilize staff and activate facilities promptly, ' Objective Number 1, was fully demonstrated. The Mont-gomery County EOC received notification of the Alert at 1829 from l
-the licensee via the blue phone. . Mobilization procedures were demonstrated per the local plans.
, ... ,0bjective , Number 2, ability to fully staff facilities and
. _ _ ., maintain staffing around-the-clock, was not fully demonstrated.
All key positions at the EOC were staffed'by 2115, including the Montgomery county Board of Commissioners, the Energency Manage-ment Director, County' Sheriff's Office, County Health Department and the Public Information Officer. All remaining EOC positions were staffed with the exception of the County Treasurer, and the County Attorney, who were' alerted and on standby. EOC positions were double staffed by 2127, and remained so for the duration of
[ the exercise. A shift change was not performed which precluded full credit for 24-hour capability.
(? The ability to make decisions and to coordinate emergency j activities, objective Number 3, and adequacy of facilities and
- l. displays to support emergency operations, Objective Number 4, were fully demonstrated.
The ability to communicate with all appropriate locations, organizations, and field personnel, Objective Number 5, was in-pressively and fully demonstrated.
Objective Number 13, the ability to alert the public within I. the 10 mile EPZ and disseminate an initial instructional message, within 15. minutes, was fully demonstrated.
[ .
i 19 e
t .
1 The ability to formulate and distribute appropriate instruc-tions: to the'public in an timely-fashion, Objective Number' 14, was adequately' demonstrated.- The time period between when the PAR ~ to shelter was provided to the off-site authorities (State) y and the eventual broadcast of the PARS over the EBS was timely.
This process took ten minutes to -l complete.
]
Objective' Number 15, ' organizational ability and Lresources necessary to manage an orderly evacuation of all or.part of the pluma'EPZ, was. impressively. demonstrated, even though the plume 'q did not impact Montgomery County. . An actual bridge outage. drove 1 officials to. identify alternate evacuation routes, .and ultimately, .tcr identify and locate the equipment and materials necessary to build a temporary crossing where the bridge had been located..
Demonstrating the organizational ability and resources nec-essary to affect an orderly evacuation of mobility impaired indi-viduals, objective Number 18, was also well demonstrated. . Based on a projected wind change, a precautionary evacuation of mobil-ity' impaired ~ residents was simulated. Lists were available- and.
" consulted. A bus with a wheelchair lift was dispatched and re- -j caption and, care centers were notified- of incoming disabled evacuees.
l' - - -
Objective Number 20, the' ability 'ot continuously monitor and control emergency worker exposure, was fully demonstrated.
The ability to provide' advance coordination of information, objective Number 25, is not applicable to this facility..
summary: There were no areas requiring corrective action cited ~ during the.last exercise for the' Montgomery County EOC.
Objective not fully demonstrated: 2.
2.2.4 Osage County EOC (OCEOC)
, The following objectives were to be demonstrated at the L OCEOC: 1, 2 , 3, 4, 5, 13, 14, (15), 18, (20), 25, and 35. (If l required by the scenario.)
The ability to mobilize staff and activate facilities promptly, Objective Number 1, was fully demonstrated. At 1829 the . plant notified the county via the blue phone of the Alert.
L, . Mobilization began, but was not completed until 2031. However, D
the Osage County Plan requires only key staff to be mobilized at the Alert'. .(1829 in this exercise), and for non-key staff to be placed on standby. Non-key staff are then activated if there is a Site Area Emergency declaration (1915 in this exercise). Full staffing of;this facility took two hours and two minutes from the 20 l'
declaration of the Alert and an hour and sixteen minutes from declaration of the SAE.
Objective- Number 2, ability to fully staff facilities and maintain staffing around-the-clock, was-not fully demonstrated.
The positions for County Road and Bridge, County Treasurer, I County, Attorney,' and Fire Coordinator were not staffed. .Although.
these are notl identified as key positions, the absence of. these participants precluded full demonstration of this objective.
Similarly, twenty-four hour staffing was shown by presentation of a second shift roster, which also precluded full demonstration of this objective. )
Objective Number 3, ability to make decisions and to coordi- i nate emergency activities, was not. fully demonstrated.' At 1915
~
the EOC was notified of Site Area Emergency, followed by a prompt Instructions.were not. relayed by from the SEOC to sound sirens. i the Presiding Commissioner to the dispatcher to activate the sys-tem, precluding full demonstration of this objective and result-ing in a deficiency for Objective Number 13.
Adequacy of facilities and displays to support emergency op-erations, Objective Number 4, was not adequately demonstrated.
Space,. furniture- and equipment.for this; facility appeared ad-equate. Except for the blue phone and the PIO's commercial line,.
however, no telephones were connected for staff use, nor was ra-dio equipment made available.
E
< Objective Number 5, the ability to' communicate with all ap-l . propriate locations, organizations, and field personnel, was not fully demonstrated. The blue phone and the PIO's commercial line were utilized. No additional telephones were connected for staff use, nor was radio equipment made available.
Objective Number 13, ability to alert the public within the 10-mile EPZ, and disseminate an initial instructional message, within 15 minutes, was not adequately demonstrated. At 1915 Site Area Emergency was declared and the EOC received a prompt from the SEOC to sound sirens at 1922. The message would be aired at i 1923. Although sirens were not actually to be sounded, no fur-ther actions were taken. There was no simulation of the proca-dures required for an activation of.the siren system at the SAE.
At 2023, a call came over the blue phone from the Forward
( Command Post to sound the sirens at 2030 for the General Emer-gency (GE); and EBS message would be issued at 2031. The dis-patcher erroneously recorded that the sirens were to be sounded at 2031, simultaneously with the EBS message. On the same form she also' informed the Presiding Commissioners that the sirens were sounded at 2031. The procedures call for the Presiding Com-missioner to authorize the activation of the Osage County public alert system. This was not demonstrated.
21 '
1
/
Y- .
I The ability to formulate and distribute. appropriate instruc-
- tions to the public,~ Objective Number-14, was fully-demonstrated by use of prescripted messages.' The interaction demonstrated by the' Osage County PIO with the EOC staff was commendable.
Objective Number 15, organizational ability and . resources ;
necessary to manage an orderly evacuation of all cn part of the plume EPZ,. was scenario dependent, and was not demonstrated in this exercise. )
Organizational ability and resources necessary to effect an orderly evacuation of mobility impaired individuals within the plume EPZ,-Objective Number 18, was not fully demonstrated. Al-though tabletop discussions and messages generated at the EOC were . complete and in compliance with procedures, neither.
simulated nor actual calls were.made to-drivers and Reception and-Care Centers, nor to "special needs" people. The EOC's "special needs" _ list'was dated March 1988,
~
but included individuals who had moved or were deceased.
Objective Number 20, ability.to continuously monitor and ,
control emergency worker exposure, was scenario dependent and was i not demonstrated.
objective Number 25, coordination of pub 1'ic information,: is !
l- not applicable to-this facility. ;
Ability to' determine and implement appropriate measures for controlled recovery and reentry, Objective Number 35, was demon- 1 strated to the extent of scenario play. The.EOC made arrange-ments to transport the special needs people home and coordinated an EBS- message with the State, but because there had been no evacuation or contamination, little else remained to be done.
summary: There were no inadequacies cited for the Osage County EOC during the last exercise. Objectives not adequately demonstrated: 4 and 13.
Objectives not fully demonstrated: 2, 3, 5, 18, and 35.
Deficioney That Would Lead To 1 Mecative Findina
- 6. There was a lack of demonstration of the procedures for a timely activation of the siren system in Osage County.
[ During the exercise, at the time the counties were in-structed to sound the sirens at the SAE and the GE, simula- !
tion was, improperly performed. The dispatcher. erroneously recorded that the sirens were to be sounded at 2031, rather than 2030, and concurrently with the EBS message. On the same message form she also informed the Presiding Commis-
~
i 22
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . l
7 i . '.
F-
~sioner that the sirens were sounded at 2031. The procedures
- call for the Presiding Commissioner to authorize the activa-
~
- -tion of the Osage County public-alert system. This: defi-ciency stands to be corrected by means of further training-in the already established procedures. FEMA'must be in-formed of the content of the training and the scheduled at-
-tendees prior to actual training. The training must .be completed by August 15, 1988, and the-results of such train-ing demonstrated at the next exercise.
Area Requirina Corrective Action
- 8. Basic. telephone equipment was not installed in the facility.
for use by staff,inor was radio backup equipment distributed for their use. The OCEOC must be fully equipped.at the 1989 exercise-to demonstrate adequacy of facilities.
2.2.5 Medical Emergency The following objectives were to be demonstrated: 5, 20, f.
1 30, and 31.
The Callaway Memorial Hospital and Ambulance participated in the exercise.
'There? were no outstanding inadequacies to be demonstrated from the' prior year.
The ability to communicate with all appropriate locations, objective Number 5, was' fully demonstrated. Radio served as the primary mode of communication and commercial telephone service provided the backup.
_ objective Number 20, the ability to continuously monitor.and control exposure, was fully demonstrated. -All equipment specified in the plan was available and proper techniques for its use were demonstrated. Dosimeter readings vers appropriately re-ported by hospital employees to their supervisors and to the dispatcher by the ambulance crew.
The adequacy of ambulance facilities and procedures lor han-dling contaminated individuals, objective Number 30, was fully demonstrated. Injuries were treated and the patient was trans-ported to the appropriate hospital. The crew demonstrated check-ing the patient for radiological contamination, patient i- decontamination, and prevented contamination of the ambulance and crew.
Objective Number 31, adequacy of hospital facilities and procedures for handling contaminated individuals, was fully dem-onstrated. Callaway Memorial Hospital in Fulton, Missouri is a 23 L _- . _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ - _ _
' primary treatment hospital. .Necessary equipment was available j and it was utilized appropriately-by the hospital staff. j one-item was identified as an area recommended for. improve-ment throughout the medical evaluation. The condition of the dry ,
cell batteries provided with the survey equipment should be (
checked prior to use. -
l Summary: There were no-inadequacies' cited during the last )
exercise for the medical facilities. All objectives were fully I demonstrated.
] 1 Area Recommended _Fer Improvement
- 6. The condition of the dry cell battories provided with the ]
survey equipment should be checked prior to use. i 2.2.s col ==hia- Recention and care center - Isarnes Buildina ,
(CRCC) j
^
'The following objectives were to be demonstrated at this fa- f cility: '1, 2, 5, 20, 27, 28, and 29.
]
This exercise was conduct'ed on May 17, 1988, out of b quence, with FEMA permission. ]
Objective. Number 1, the ability-to mobilize staff and acti-vate facilities promptly, was fully demonstrated. Notification j came at 0909 from1the Division of Family' Services representative at the State EOC in accordance with the plan. Mobilization was demonstrated with only personnel at the center for their normal-shift being propositioned.
1 All positions performed a shift change fully demonstrating ;
Objective Number 2, the ability to fully staff facilities.
Staffing was completed by 0925. The second shift was briefed and displayed' adequate training and knowledge.
Objective Number 5, the ability to communicate with all appropriate locations, organizations, and field personnel, was ens fully demonstrated. Primary and backup communications were demonstrated for all requisite facilities.. A second SEMA vehicle ,
was pressed into service when the first experienced radio prob-lems. This second vehicle then demonstrated backup communica-tions with the State EOC.
The ability to= continuously monitor and control emergency worker exposure, Objective Number 20, was fully demonstrated.
Objective Number 27, the adequacy of procedures for regis-tration, radiological monitoring, and decontamination of evacuees, was not adequately demonstrated. Registration proca-24 t _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ - .
J dures were followed in accordance with the plan. Registration and congregate care were located,in the same facilities. There j was an excellent demonstration of activation and facility set up.
Procedures and floor plan layout were site specific. The facil-
'ity was well suited for the intended use.
Monitoring during the initial monitoring stage and following decontamination by monitoring teams often failed to detect spot contamination. Two procedures were followed. Mass. screening (monitoring) was accomplished by means of a portal monitor. Six r monitoring teams performed both backup to the portal monitor and as follow-up monitoring of contaminated evacuees identified by the portal monitor (2' person teams) and monitoring functions at i the decontamination areas (1 person team). . The portal monitor appeared more sensitive than the hand held instruments, espe-cially for detecting localized spot contamination. Hand. held-in-struments used were different from those identified in the plan.
-The Eberline ESP instrument with the and window GM detector was adequate for the intended use in follow-up contamination measure-r 's. The~Eberline PRM-7 micro-R-meter scintillation detector wa, tescribed as being intended for use in thyroid screening maa-surements. There were no written procedures for this intended use. The PRM-7 should be sensitive er.ough to detect radioiodine uptake in the thyroid , but it .is doubtful whether this uncollinated instrument.can differentiate between radiation from thyroid uptake and radiation frca general surface contamination.
If this instrument is to be used for thyroid screening, it should
~
only be used after the evacues has been decontaminated. It
, should not be used at the entrance of the monitoring station.
The portal monitor could handle 4-5 evacuees per minute (240-300 per hour). However, the teams with hand held instru-ments -missed spot contamination and it is recommended that they monitor no faster than 90 seconds per individual. University Health Physicists had recently calibrated instruments. However, Civil Defense instruments did not have calibration stickers to verify calibration.
Procedures call for a contamination exposure rate limit of 0.5 mR/hr. above background. The procedure _does not specify whether this is an open or closed window detector measurement.
Both survey methods were observed to be in use.
Decontamination was followed per the plan. A high level of uniform external contamination over the body surface would indi-cate that the individual had been immersed in the plume and that there.is a definite possibility of inhalation exposure and inter-
! nal intake. If the surface contamination is completely removed I
during th's decontamination process, the individual is assumed to be clean and there is no further follow-up process. Further medical referral is only initiated if fixed surface contamination is present following the decontamination procedure. This may not i
25
t identify those individuals that have the more serious internal contamination problems. Therefore, decontamination procedures must be amended to account for further medical referral for indi-viduals exposed to high levels of uniform external contamination.
Objective Number 28, adequacy of facilities for mass care of evacuees, was fully demonstrated. The facility was capable of housing over 4,000 evacuees. Logistical support for supplemented services (food, telephones, crisis counseling) has been ad-dressed. Division of Family Services provided its reception staff with an excellent question and answer sheet for potential inquiries from the evacuees.
Objective Number 29, the adequacy of equipment and proce-dures for decontamination of evacuees and vehicles, was not ad-equately demonstrated. Portable car wash equipment will be utilized. Staff demonstrated a knowledge of decontamination pro-cedures and the proper use of monitoring equipment. Con-taminated, uncontaminated and unmonitored evacuees were kept separate. There was sufficient parking to segregate contaminated from uncontaminated vehicles. However, no mease/cments were made inside the vehicle. Floorboards and seats should be monitored.
The procedure does not address these measurements. Some- con-taminated area may go unnoticed and not be cleaned during the de-contamination process. Therefore, the procedure must be amended to account for monitoring inside the vehicle, per NUREG-0654, el-ement K.S.a.
summary: There were no areas requiring corrective action from th as ly demonstrated:
Araps Reauirina Corrective Action:
- 9. Hand held instruments used at the CRCC were different from those in the plan. Either the plans must be changed to re-flect what will be used or the teams must use equipment as described in the plan. This must be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
l
- 10. If the PRM-7 micro-R-meter is to be utilized to detect radioiodine uptake at the CRCC, procedures must be amended to utilize this instrument only after evacues decontamina-tion, and not at the entrance of the monitoring station, to avoid the effects of surface contamination, per NUREG-0654,
,- element J.12, and FEMA-REP-2, Rev. 1. This must be demon-strated at the 1989 exercise.
- 11. Existing procedures fail to address whether the measurement to determine evacues contamination should be taken with an open or closed window on the probe. Both methods were ob-served .to o r in use in the exercise at the CRCC. Failure to 26
y _ _ _ - -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
i g.
i ,
- e correct this situation would. allow the. release oft con taminsted individuals into a. clean area or the decontamina--
tion. of an individual'that did not require: it . - It is-
, recommended 'that the open window technique be utilized.
Procedures must be amended' accordingly, per NUREG-0654, el-oment J.12 and K.5.a. This must be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
- 12. ' Decontamination procedures must be amended to address refer- :
ral and follow-up based on high levels of uniform surface
-1 contamination, as the indiv.i. dual may also have an- internal l contamination . problem. Under the current-' procedure, as demonstrated at the CRCC, if. surface contamination is re-moved during the decontamination-process, the individual is assumed to be clean and does not require _further follow-up.
(NUREG-0654, element J.12, and FEMA-REP-2, Rev. 1.) This must be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
- 13. No measurements were made inside the vehicles. Procedures must be amended to address monitoring seats and floorboards
, per NUREG-0654, element K.5.a., and demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
kreas Recommended For Improvemen$
l
- 7. . The monitoring rate demonstrated by team members utilizing hand held meters appairsd to be to fast to' accurately detect 4 -spot contamination. It is recommended that a minimum of 90 seconds be taken to survey each evacues.
'8.- Bob. the hand' held and portal survey monitors lacked either calibration stickers or certificates, as required in NUREG-0654,- element J.12. It is recommended. that the calibration records be maintained and attached to the- in-struments rather than in the boxes, which may become separated from the equipment.
2.2.7 Jafferson city neeention and care center. Lincoln University (JCBCC)
The following objectives.were to be demonstrated at this fa-cility: 1, 2, 5, 20, 27, 28, and 29.
With FEMA permission, this facility was evaluated out of the scenario sequence.
Objective Number 1, the ability to mobilize staff and acti-
.vate facilities promptly was fully demonstrated. No staff mem-bars were'propositioned prior to the exercise.
- l. The abi31ty to fully staff facilities and maintain con-tinuous staffing, objective Number 2, was partially demonstrated.
27
= ______--________-_-_____:
,r A' double shift of registrars was present. 'The workers and 'the monitor coordinator demonstrated a shift change; however, the RCC Coordinator did not. Second . shift personnel 'were properly briefed.- Both shifts displayed. adequate training and knowledge.
It is recommended that the workers be fully trained in the setup j of'the facility.in the. absence-of supervisory personnel. j Objective Number 5, ability to communicate with all appro-priate locations, organizations and field personnel, was fully demonstrated. Commercial telephone provided primary -communica-tions and'the University's radio system provided backup. It is recommended that -the special emergency phone outside of the facility that links with the University Security Dispatch Center 4 be considered as an asset to the facility.. It. could expedite alerting of medical or security personnel.
The ability to continuously monitor and control emergency worker exposure, objective Number 20, was fully demonstrated.
Required . equipment was available according to plan and it was
, utilized correctly.
! Objective Number 27, adequacy of procedures for registra-tion, radiological monitoring, and decontamination of evacuees.
was fully demonstrated.- Calibration of the Victorean Survey Meters CDV-700/715 last occurred on April 18, 1988. It is the
- r preferred practice that calibration stickers be attached directl,
% ei . = to the survey instruments rattar than to the box in which they are stored.
The adequacy of facilities for mass care of evacuees, objec-tive Number 28, was fully demonstrated. The facility could ac-commodate- 450 evacuees. Arrangements have been made .to accommodate any overflow at the'First Christian Church once they
'have been monitored. Food was available.quickly. The facility was equipped to handle disabled evacuees and to provide ' crisis counseling, if necessary. A' nursing station was available~. Pro- .
cedures were in place to keep evacuees informed of what was hap-pening in the affected area.
Objective: Number 29, decontamination of emergency workers, equipment, and vehicles, was fully demonstrated. Provisions have been made to decontaminate both personnel and vehicles. Vehicles are to be decontaminated at a car wash with an appropriate fil-h, taring system. Showers were available for people with an appro-L priate flow path to avoid cross-contamination.
h-L Summary: There were no outstanding inadequacies from the i,
previous exercise that required corrective action, objective not fully demonstrated: 2.
=_-_____-___--_--_-_____ _ _ _ _ .
C .y
. ". 1.
. :j.
.P... <
Areas Recommended For Improvenant
, 9' . . Registration staff should_be oriented to the setup proca-dures for the facility. A 30 minute delay occurred while registration staff awaited the arrival of supervisors. for instruction.
- 10. Use of.the direct telephone line between the facility and the Security Dispatch Center would serve to enhance the transmission of asssages for medical or security personnel,
- 11. Instrument calibration titickers should be placed directly on survey meters rather tbtn on storage boxes. This would al-low for personnel to verify the status of the meter as numerous individuals any utilize the same instruments.
2.2.8- Gasconada county Recention and care center (scacc)
(Earmann Eigh School, Eermann, Missouri)
Objectives to be demonstrated: 1, 2, 5, 20, 27, 28, and 29.
The ability to mobilize staff and activate facilities, Ob-jactive Number 1, was fully demonstrated.
Objective Number 2, ability to fully staff facilities and a maintain staffing around-the-clock, was not fully . demonstrated.
'. _ . . , m First, shift staffing was complete;and included volunteer Han Op-
'Terators for backup communications. Han Operators are not identi-fled as communications backup in the current plan submitted to FEMA,.however, the center was operating under an unofficial plan, dated April 11, 1988. A shift' change was demonstrated by the Di-vision of Family Services, Red Cross, Han Operators and the SEMA
' Radiological staff. With the exception of the SEMA staff, second
' shift personnel were not adequately briefed. The person in charge. could not be determined until the close of the exercise.
It should be noted that staff were very enthusiastic; .however, efforts must be undertaken to establish clear lines of organiza-tion.
The ability to communicate with all appropriate locations, organizations, and field personnel, Objective. Number 5, was not fully demonstrated. Frimary communication with the local EOC, hospitals and ambulances was by telephone. However, appropriate
-r telephone numbers were not readily available for use. Primary and backup communications were not demonstrated except for the
.. Han Operators, who are not identified in the officially submitted plan, demonstrated backup communications between the Reception and Care Center and the local EOC. No message logs were kept.
Training is needed in communications procedures, and if Han Op-erators are to provide backup communications, this must be clearly assigned in the plan.
29
} s 3, -
The ability to continuously monitor and control emergency worker. exposure, objective Number 20, 'was not adequately demon-Dosimetry identified in the plan (CDV-138, CDV-742-or i
strated. <
l CDV-730.plus-one TLD) was not fully distributed. Emergency work- )
ers were not provided with TLDs.
dosimeters were available from the Fifteen sets of direct reading Hermann Fire Department and the workers knew their exposure limits, and recorded their read-ings every 30 minutes.
Objective Number 27, the adequacy of procedures for regis-tration, . radiological monitoring and decontamination of evacuees and vehicles was not adequately demonstrated. Registration pro-cedures were in accordance with the plan. Evacuees were monitored by male;and female teams'at the rate of 10-12 persons per hour. Staff were familiar with equipment, CDV-700 and CDV-715,. but need additional training regarding required levels for decontamination as well as monitoring procedures upon finding a contaminated area. The monitoring area was designed to segre-gate' contaminated from uncontaminated, but in the decontamination facilities the shower had only one entrance and failed =to assure segregation. Bags for bagging and tagging contaminated clothing were-not available per the plan. They were placed in barrels in the shower area rather than in secured storage and could have caused the spread of further contamination. Calibration stickers were not on individual survey equipment. Only a date was noticed on the'inside of the metal case.It is recommended that calibra-a tion stickers be provided on each survey meter..The~ enthusiasm of the emergency workers'and their excellent rapport with a small child'avacuee was~ duly noted.
The adequacy of facilities for mass care of evacuees, Objec-tive Number 28, was not demonstrated. There was no specific con-gregate mass care facility established and staff were not aware that their facility was'to be a mass shelter. Though a Red Cross EMT was present to represent Nursing and First Aid, no nursing station was established.- The DFS person, per the plan, was to provide crisis counseling, but required further training in the types of questions to be anticipated during a nuclear power plant emergency. staff need to be trained in the plan.
Objective Number 29, the adequacy of equipment and proca- .
dures for decontamination of evacuees and vehicles was not ad- i equately demonstrated. Teams were unaware of the level of decontamination necessary for vehicles and thus could have either ;
4- spread contamination or decontaminated vehicles beyond the re-quired levels.
sumanry: There ware no outstanding inadequacies identified during the previous exercise in the area of relocation / reception centers. Objectives not fully demonstrated: 2 and 5. Objec-
W T&. . .
o tives not' adequately demonstrated: 20, 27, and 29. Objective not demonstrated: 2 8. .
t Areas Resuirina corrective notion 1'
- 14. Emergency workers at the GCRCC were not provided dosimetry as prescribed by the plan and'NUREG-0654, element K.3.a., as L they_ were not provided with either real or simulated TLDs.
TLDs must be provided. This-must be demonstrated at tho ' u
-1989 scheduled exercise.
4
- 15. Staff of the GCRCC required additional training regarding I h levels for decontamination as-well as monitoring procedures upon finding a contaminated area ~, per NUREG-0654, elements J.12., and K.5.a. Without such training evacuees may either undergo ' undo decontamination or be allowed to avoid the j decontamination process-and spread contamination. This must- 1 be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
- 16. Shower entrance at the GCRCC needs to be divided to segre-gate contaminated fron' uncontaminated to avoid the spread of unnecessary contamination, per NUREG-0654, element J.12. .A facility survey layout must be provided to demonstrate' how this segregation will be accomplished. This must.be demon-strated at the 1989 exercise.
- 17. Bags for bagging'and tagging contaminated clothing were' not 4 g . . .available per.the plan. They were placed in barrels in the
. ) shower rather than in secured storage and could have caused the spread of further contamination. The propC' use of bags and tags must be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
- 18. The staff at the GCRCC require further training in the plan pertaining to the locations for establishing' congregate care centers per NUREG-0654, element J.12. Furthermore, a nurs-ing station needs to be established according to the plan.
This objective must be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
- 19. Monitors at the decontamination station at the GCRCC were not 'avare of the level of decontamination required for va-hicles per NUREG-0654, element K.5.b. This could result in either decontaminating vehicles which do not require decontamination or allowing contaminated vehicles to pass through and contaminate others. Additional training must be provided and the results of such demonstrated at the 1989
. exercise.
Areas Recommended For Improvement
- 12. Massage logs were not maintained for message traffic to or from the Reception and Care Centers. It is recommended that 31
- -- __-- - --m_ _ . _ . . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_- -_- - -. ~ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
,f,t,1 1
i
'l training be provided in message handling and_ communications i procedures.
1-
=
'13. Ham. Operators performed backup communications effectively 1
- t. between the. Reception and Care Center and the EOCs. It- is 3 recommended that they be added to the plan. j
,14 . Calibration stickers were not on individual survey equip-ment. It-is recommended that official calibration stickers i be provided on each survey meter. !
, .2.2.9 .Montaomery county Recention and care center-(Menec), Mont--
aemerv Rich School. Montaomery city, Missouri i
- .The following objectives were to be demonstrated at this fa- I cility
- . 1, 2, 5, 20, 27, 28,'and 29. l The ability to mobilize staff and' activate. facilities l promptly, Objective Number 1, was' fully demonstrated according to the plan. Staff mobilization procedures were demonstrated with no staff being propositioned.
Objective Number 2,. the ability to fully staff facilities and maintain staffing around-the-clock was fully demonstrated.
All ' supervisors and workers were very knowledgeable, displayed excellent skills, and. performed as-if responding to a real situa-p . . _c. . tion. ,.
The- ability th communicate with all appropriate ' locations, organizations, and field personnel, objective Number 5, was not fully demonstrated. . Backup communication was'provided by Han ra-dio rather than radio through the Sheriff's office as identified in -the official plan. 'As the Han radio backup operated effec-tively' and efficiently, it is recommended that this means of backup be added to the plan.
Objective Number 20, the ability to continuously monitor and control' emergency worker exposure, was fully demonstrated with appropriate dosimetry, including'TLDs, available at the school when the workers arrived. Workers recorded their dosimetry read-ings at appropriate times and knew their exposure limits..
The adequacy of procedures for registration, radiological monitoring and decontamination, objective Number 27, of evacuees was fully demonstrated. Three two-person monitoring teams demon-strated the ability to collectively monitor 24 persons per hour.
Equipment and procedures were demonstrated in accordance with the plan. However, the calibration stickers were on the boxes rather than on the instruments. It is recommended that these stickers be placed on the instruments. This would insure that only l 4 calibrated instruments were used. New monitors, following a '
shift change, would know that instruments were calibrated by the 32 l
'.-c.,
3 satickers, . rather.than.having to retrieve the box in which they were stored.
, objective- Number 28, the adequacy of facilities for mass care of evacuees was fully demonstrated.. This facility.could ac-commodate 185 cvacuees with parking for 1,000 + vehicles. only 98 people are expected per the plan.- DFG personnel were capable iof providing crisis counseling and a' simulated injury was pro .
cessed through their nursing station. Updates were provided- on the exercise by the local EOC.
The adequacy of equipment and procedures for decontamination of~ emergency workers, equipment and evacuees, objective Number 29, was fully demonstrated.
Summary: There were no inadequacies identified in.the pre-vious ' exercise in the area of reception / relocation centers.
obj ective not fully demonstrated at' this facility: 5.
Artas Recommended For Improvement
- 13. Han radios operated effectively and efficiently as backup communications. It is recommended that they be added to the official plan as an additional communications resource.
- 16. Calibration stickers wars on the box rather than on the 'in-
~
~s trument. It is recommended that these stickers be. placed.
+
on- the instruments-to insure.that only calibrated instru-ments are used.
33
.a
. 3.v4
.i l'
l 3 scaanutzo The scenario for this exercise did not provide ' sufficient data for'a comprehensive demonstration of recovery and reentry-decision making at all facilities.
y A ~ a +
1 4
e e 34
w ..
a ?. g, ...
\
-o ~
I
,~ 1
.I 4 SUMMRRY OF DE7ICIENCIES AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS DEFICIENCIES TIAT WOULD LEAD TO & NEGATIVE FINDING i
, State Emercanov Operation Center
- 1. The Missouri State Emergency Management Agency (SEMA) failed to notify the State Highway Patrol to' initiate simulation of 4 aerial alerting along the Missouri River. . River alerting' was accomplished, but not until the SHP representative ar-rived at the Missouri State EOC. The projected completion time of 62 minutes; exceeded the 45 minutes allowable for rural alerting within 5-10 miles from the plant. This. ac-
' tion, did not appear on-any SEMA checklist. The plan must be amended to assign this responsibility.to a SEMA-person if the SHP is absent. (NUREG-0654, elements E.5 and E.6, FEMA-REP-10.)
- 2. The Missouri SEMA changed an EBS message erroneously eliminating one subarea.from a sheltering protective action -
Procedures must be developed.to ensure coordination between the SEOC and the local government if message-changes are be-ing considered.
Callaway County
- 3. The Missouri School for the Deaf failed to demonstrate the organizational ability and resources necessary to effect the orderly evacuation of a special population facility within the plume EPZ.
A copy of the school's radiological emergency response plan and proceoures must be submitted for review;- staff must be
' trained; and the plan demonstrated through a remedial drill.
- 4. Callaway County failed to demonstrate access control for the entire' plume affected area. Roadblocks established by the Callaway County Sheriff failed to include all of the area designated by the County.
l SOP's must be amended to coordinate access control points I with PARS made to the public. Individuals responsible for I access control must be informed of PARS in terms of l subareas, in addition to sectors, and/or must request subarer translation.
L 1
i 35 w____-_________
. ~ . y-=
.S+ v-F Gasconada county'=--eaanov onerations center !
- 5. There was a lack of demonstration of the procedures .for a timely activation of the siren _ system in Gasconada County.
During the exercise, at the time'the counties were. in-structed to sound .the sirens at the SAE and the GE , no
- simulation was-performed. Further training, by August 15, 1988, is . required:in already.' established procedures. A training . syllabus and~ list of scheduled attendees must be
, provided prior to the. session. The results of this training must be demonstratediat the next exercise.
Osage county Rmercanov operations Center
- 6. There was a-lack of demonstration of the procedures for a
' timely activation of the siren system in Osage. county..
During the exercise, at the time the counties were in-structed to sound the sirens at the SAE.and the GE, simula-tion was' improperly performed. The dispatcher erroneously recorded that=the sirens were to-be sounded at 2031, rather than 2030,, and concurrently with the EBS message. On the-same- message. form she also informed the . Presiding Commis-sioner that the sirens were sounded at 2031. The procedures
. call for the . Presiding Commissioner to authorize the g . activation :of the Osage county public alert system. This deficiency stands to be corrected by means of further train-ing' in the already established procedures. FEMA must be informed of the content of the training and the scheduled attendees prior to actual training. .The training must be completed by August 15, 1980, and the results of such train-ing demonstrated at the next exercise.
AREAS REQUIRING CORRECTIVE ACTION state Rmergency operation Center
their revised SOPS requiring them to contact FEMA during the escalation /de-escalation of an exercise or actual event.
This must be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise. I
. Dose Assessment and Field Team coordination 2.- BRH personnel in the EOF did not display indiviuual self reading and permanent record dosimetry, nor read and record readings from available dosimetry. This must be demon-
-strated at the 1989 exercise.
36 F.. .
i
e-l***. f ,:
Callaway County Emeraenov operations Center
- 3. Callaway County fai! to. demonstrate adequate notification for evacuation of.t Missouri School ~for the Deaf. This must be demonstrated Juring.the remedial exercise.
- 4. . Dosimetry was neither distributed nor simulated to emergency
. workers at the EOC. This must be demonstrated at the next exercise.
- 5. Insufficient permanent record dosimetry exists at the EOC.
Sufficient dosimetry must be demonstrated at the 1989 exer- ',
cise. l 6.- 'TLD's are.not listed as part of the dosimetry kits in the county SOPS to the plan.- The SOP must.be modified to re-flect this resource pursuant to NUREG-0654, element K.3.a.,
and be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
M onade County Emeraency Operations Center
- 7. Procedures and staffing rosters must be amended to account for all GCEOC personnel, and demonstrated at the 1989 exer-cise.
Osaae County Emeraency Onoratina Center
~
- 8. jBasictelephoneequipmentwasnotinstalledintheOCEOCfor use by staff, nor was radio backup equipment distributed'for their use. The OCEOC must be fully equipped at the 1989 ex-ercise to demonstrate adequacy of facilities.
Columbia Reception and Care Center .
- 9. Hand held instruments used at the.CRCC were different from those in tho' plan. Either the plans must be changed to re-flect what will be used or the teams must use equipment as described in the plan. This must be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
- 10. If the PRM-7 micro-R-meter is to be utilized to detect radiciodine uptake at the CRCC, procedures must be amended to utilize this instrument only after evacues decontamina-tion, and not at the entrance of the monitoring station, to avoid the effects of surface contamination, per NUREG-0654, element J.12., and FEMA-REP-2, Rev. 1. This must be demon- '
strated at the 1989 exercise.
- 11. Existing procedures fail to address whether the measurement to determine evacues contamination should be taken with an open or closed window on the probm. Both methods were ob-37
m w y ..
. f., ..
w served'to be,in use in the' exercise at the CRCC. Failure to correct this situation would allow the release of con-taminated . individuals- into a ' clean -area or the decontamination- of an individual that did'not require it.
It is; recommended that.the open window' technique be 'uti--
lized. Procedures must be amended accordingly, per NUREG-0654, element J.12. 'and K.5.a. 'This must be demon-strated~at the 1989 exercise.
- 12. -Decontamination procedures must be amended to address refer-ral and follow-up based on'high levels of uniform surface contamination, 'as the individual may also have an. internal contamination problem. Under~the current procedure, as dem-onstrated at the CRCC, if surface contamination is ' removed during the decontamination process, the individuals is as-sumed to be cleaned and does not' require further follow-up.
(NUREG-0654, element J.12., and FEMA-REP-2, Rev. 1.) This
.must be' demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
- 13. No measurements were made .inside the vehicles'at the CRCC.
Procedures must be amended to address monitoring seats and floorboards per NUREG-0654, element K.5.a., and demonstrated
.at'the 1989 exercise.
Gasconada county Recention and care Center i
=14.. Emergency. workers at the GCRCC were not provided dosimetry as prescribed by the plan and NUREG-0654, element K.3.a., as they were not provided with either real or simulated TLDs.
TLDE must be issued. This must be demonstrated at'the 1989 exercise.
- 15. Staff of the GCRCC required additional training regarding.
required ' levels for decontamination as well as monitoring procedures upon finding a contaminated area, per NUREG-0654, .I elements J.12., -and K.5.a. Without such training evacuees may either undergo undue decontamination or be allowed to avoid the decontamination process and spread contamination.
This must be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
- 16. Shower entrance at the GCRCC needs to be divided to segre-gate contaminated from uncontaminated to avoid the unneces-1 sary spread of contamination, per NUREG-0654, alament J.12.
A facility survey layout must be provided to> Demonstrate how this segregation will be accomplished. This aust be demon-strated at the 1989 exercise.
1
- 17. Bags for bagging and tagging contaminated clothing were not available per the plan. They were placed in barrels in the shower rather than in secured storage and could have caused the spread of further contamination. The proper use of bags and tags must be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
L i
38 i
- j% f,-
N
- 18. The staff of the GCRCC require further training in the plan pertaining to the locations for establishing congregate care centers per NUREG-0654, element J.12. Furthermore, a nurs-ing station needs to be established according to the plan.
This objective must be demonstrated at the 1989 exercise.
- 19. Monitors at the decontamination station at the GCRCC were not aware.of the level of decontamination required for va-hicles per NUREG-0654, element K.5.b. This could result in either decontaminating vehicles which do not require decon-tamination or allowing contaminated vehicles to pass through and contaminate _others. Additional training must be pro-vided and the results of such demonstrated at the'1989 exer-cise.
T I
e*
l 39 4
__m_________m. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _