ML19296C456

Advises That Review of Emergency Plan Is Dependent on NRC Establishment of Low Power Licensing Criteria.Requests Action to Expedite Concurrence

ML19296C456
Person / Time
Site:	Sequoyah
Issue date:	02/11/1980
From:	Mcconnell J Federal Emergency Management Agency
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML19296C454	List: ML19296C456
References
NUDOCS 8002260084
Download: ML19296C456 (5)

Text

- ,

I

= : = - A ,1. c.

. \

h '

e N' l t FEDERAL E~vie:yrc ERG 5NCY MANAGEET "O SAG5 17 Err/ ,3

= -

/ n, o.c. 2xn

!..-)

b R. Mcrold R. D nton [-\

Director Office of thiclear Recctor R~Jutation z{gg -[.]  %,pgj ,

Caclecr Rcquiatory Ccrission

'dishington, D.C. 2C5SS D:,2r T~e. Ccntun:

E en urf ting to ycu ccacarfiing tha reco :ndation of the RacTear Rcst-Ictor/ Cc=issica (i;RC) staff that the Cc=issica license lea pezar c oratica of the Sct;ucych r.ucTear reactor, This mcommdatica has be-riataficd in Secticn EEI of cn RRC staff pcpor delivered to the Fedcral Ec2mcacy Ibnnge: ant Aguncy (NF.A) en Friday, Fchruary 8,1980.

As ycu know, tha iknarandua of Uadarstandf ng hafxaca 12C and FEFA, dct:.d Jcauary ll,103, provid:s (in III.0 undar Ecargancy Frepcred-n2ss Caf dence) that:

For tha othar cgancy to revies and cm:22nt en c arscicy prcptredn ss cuidance pr-f or to cd:ptica es forcal ag:ncy guidcnce.

The I;RC staff rocc=cadction rufers, ca pcg2 EII-A-3-lc, to a decur at cc11cd "St. ff ccccptence criteria for You pr.<2r aparatica." FEIG is not cc:re of such a docu;.51t, nar can we find rnferance to it in any oth2r liRC litercture. It is rat clear e>2ther tIw.t decen nt has the status of forrai fmC atency guidance or hcw it cddresses the g.iesticaIn of Stato ard local gcvern= ant radfological c;.orgency preparcdness.

cny cvant, it is a doctraant which is unkncv., to FETM; tharefore, tha buis for liRC staff rmendations is unkncq1. to us.

Tha . iE1' staff rncu=cndation also doas not take into account tha pubit cation by fiRC cnd FU3 of a n:rre docu ant entitied " Criteria for Frpar tion cad Evaluation of Fadialcgical Er:sro:ncy Casponse Picns cnd Presc nass in Support of Ffmd Guciece Fcear FIants (i,~JREG-C59/ FEM-REP /I),

publish:4 by the two agencies in Jcnuary 1530. This docurant mkcs o distinction batt. men rucctors cperating at fuli power cnd thase cpcrat ing at Tou power. It is, in cur vieu, not a d:cu~.nt dich should ba 2nitctarn1Ty set aside or ignored by T2C.

Tne FU3 revicu of CSe Tcnnassee pTan, as it miates to the Scquoych station, was r.2da against previous criteria nca superseded by h11 REG-

-%M/ FBt'r-PEF-1. Es find that7ts cll v:of re thothcq, deficiencies Wiich ea noted cred still ara, listed as in cur January 2, TSED, o i

os:catial clexents of critoria. Ccasidcring tha secpe of tha ncu critt f

- 8002000

- -..~.._ _. _= M. - ._= EY

== -.

'-,."....,r%.,%-

, , . .; , Q c e, 4 -

• g,* .

43.g'. 4.,.;-

. i s

6.

D & @ % fr .

N pM~/Q z

it c _c~; caly prepar tint cny refermeas to FEQ revic 62 t'ith resp;ct t3 criteria neu in effect. FEG uill ba imppy to ake a mku of &3 Sqtaych related fcctures of the Ter.nassee Stato and related Iccal pra-per -62ss picas in short crder, f.e. , uf thin .30 days.

Alturnstivaiy. it of cht be pecsib1e for our to staffs to cFee cn a

' criteria for Stato c5d Iccal curarrant picas cavoring Icw pcrar cpera-tica. This cay be a cre d~sirable alternative- It cay, hc.cavar, tuo sc. 2 tica to davise such a nau crf teria docte :1t.

Plcare cdytse ra of your preferences in this regard as scen as pcssibio so cur FUM staff can verk with CC staff without incurring an umscessar.

d.nlty in the testing progrea sought by HRC for tha Sequoyah reactor.

SincereTy ycurs, 0/

Os ngi, r-  ; ./,y 4ch %.~ ..

itCorseT1

- /Tsssistant Associate Cirector L e r peculatic: W a-M ass t

,,mmo, y,., ,.-.,. m.

e.. r .. m ,c,. m .r ,. n ,,,r,,rz. n, m,.,r . m. ,, , ,m mm. . ..

. u . m.,o,m.mmu xa . ..nu m .._m,- m .- -. - ,aww. -,.w.

,m,menr, .w u . w;;-. . r. _,.m..

,m.4. _.,.c,. - . ~.

. . . .si. um..u,

. . ., . wn,w n. .-- mm c-. . um. w. . e , u,,, .

w,_. .m,m..m.,. .--y.-. . . , w n,.m,m,,m. . . -

,/-..e.. p.. - , .

.. ,% ,-.*^.s__u_.S. c.4 4,

• g., . ,s. ..ap, d. . ~,." e=_er => . . ._.e.e,., e ,= .;,., t > G. "

...v

...m .. .

... A . ~g,,s==.....-m.

,n.p. + ~

.m.s.-m .. .

.~.- c . <

y. . . . g. ,..

~

3.:--s :

7"i **

-- .r ,q./. ,~. ,. pn .c.N ., c6.r4:,,R2;:w,r,jy..!g>.

... ...O . ~ , .

,.' i@m

$-$W ,.t. Q~:.xM:c$w:+$(q.Wq4.;w&p&y.

m$. ;g 3, %.6.R $%i>q,4:%. 1&,e#;&e..Y  %' ~

W .& "."h-MN^hbW5fO?N .

.%,c,.j 2

.< . .-,.4.u".$o%-y

. s:~.,T,.%,,.v? g&a .A p:p..-7.n,. :.g,g.-..s'-b. -.s M

?:.v .,-.,,,v

,... # .: ~ 9s.'. 9 b ._,..,9 . z,: ,. - 6.o.,

cu. .n._ 4z

- %n,._%..s, . .e .i .a'.;i,.:M.v,:

. _1- ., ,,,.g . ,..,.':;.:.~w.v.,.g?._,

r,,'.9 ......y.? . d. p. 2..a &. >> g.

,,<.,,x., .

s. -

.,. , s. ~ , .  : .. s: . s.i .,.

. . ., ,. . s. .T' .< . .;; . .,.., . . .. . . .. .

.+ . ,,. m .- 8 .' :.,,..--c4v, m.m, - -

s .~s.e.e. 1  ;.. .

w.- fe ~,.~~c. .

w,. .~.,.,. x..

.;', , Yk.,#' 7

'h:.-;.v. ~is. f'. s . o.a. '. .,~..-

~

- 8* ?,'.? ' .Q'.r".. M:b'*

<,,.'u'~C 1 "0.s. *

?.:t/S, %,.,v% ,.i. "h> ,t. s'.9 .M.[d~'Y.2.*~~Y:/^' 4.5"Q; h

,.'.> cj.a.,'

,,,,a ~ .x.s'; '3..G ': G*A ,R, y' '. ' C-?>^?&,U.C,; . ,. <.9. , , . - .:',K:f.%

~

.v,. m ,..w . ..-o, ., . , u, . ,,. . ,. , c, . .g .- s .s y,.~,.. c.

.v s... . - . . . . .

. . . A.- ,....s.A. s. :? s< ,.,'.1 k..s,s... v. . .::.%. m,s.,;..,..,...

- .~ . . .

.. ., ^, .

. ..- . _- %.< . . ..c., .. . , . , . ,. .:;,e. .~. . . .s

. , w. . ..--*

,

~.

.; . w.

. " , . - . ,, %w. . . s . . . . . . , .-

..'. ? ' .. * ~ ,y,,;

N .'.: b3e....,-.

. .~. .- - + .

' <,;sb. .,.c

.j-:;r .l'.?:~d '%.<~^.5'.T- 2 &'.e.ci.s.?'-d. ,.,,-~~ . ?s h. ., ; .r. ~r."d .h '~,%.' % . v :~5.*&. .'

' 4,4k. G-A.::#.LC:. . M.u.:.5::

p . e;*A s . . . . . ' . , , > ,_, , "*'*--

,.c

- t-i :.s s - Q , ., , . . , o ,,, '. g i i, , . .g. .

. .._ z- ,.- xr.1 e. . :w . - -

'. ,[s hI* ". .. *. -h *, '. . '[

s WM'j.'#'"~%

1"I,,*).hk* *'h'$b.k, Q.\k'..'i"Shih$%. -MIA 'f5', . ,  ?^# d*Y'*Y#' *MNDWM***

" --~."r..m.u..m.._ , , _ , . , , . . . . . _., . . = - . . - - -- ....----l'-~.' .

^' *

, $. ~. {

A ' f'r .%

e . .

. , . 2

.. .. , r. , ~4, ... , . . . ... . . . . . . .

r, c . .. ) . -

.r.t n .- . s... .~3 ...i.

'r  ; ., * .*

, t s

• . . I

.'s.'.'. . *,

[  %,' . {.2..p n.  %.*),{f c

. ,s *k .jh -

. f

. r.

I. ,

-

• fd- .A . .i.,'e

,. l.. ...

. .; .. . .. !. .' g,r '

t

g. ,,.s,

,->. c.

.. . . . , . , v' r .>

- { v. .r s..n .yj; fs .,.,.,,

s.

. , . . s .. )*?Y 1

'^

s c *

,.e~

s'-

[ ,, [ -

' "'- "* . 'I - I ~ *

• M**2M ' * ' ' ' ~ ~ ~ '##~~' **

.---,"..,,,;r;., - c'4". %* r *-

. . e g _y ," 'h .- .'[ ' . . .

.ty' y',.

4.,'q

. . . . . . ~ .- - . - .ak-g , , , . , *

" ,e ./;y g *fa.=.,,,,,,s

, , , , ..<,-. .,.f..

.< n

c. g . , . - (~J . , y'3r , #- '.* .,

s

. 1 a

ENCLOSURE 2 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

SUMMARY

OF CURRENT STATUS This evaluation is based on staff review of the following documents: docketed revisions of the Radiological Emergency Plan (REP) through August 20, 1979; and docketed letters from Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to the NRC dated September 7, October 18, and October 30, 1979, and January 3, 1980. The letters contain various commitments by TVA to revise the REP by June 1, 1980, to incorporate revisions required by the NRC staff, principally with regard to the requirements set forth in NUREG-0610 and in an October 10, 1979 letter sent by the staff to all operating power reactor licensees and near-term operating license applicants.

In the various letters, TVA makes broad commitments to comp'y with those items in the staff's October 10, 1979 letter which are addressed to licensees. TVA's position with respect to further development of State and local plans is stated as follows in their January 3,1980 letter:

"With respect to the new requirements as they apply to State and local emergency plans, it is our understanding that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has been given the responsibility for review of these plans. Although TVA does not have the authority for offsite emergency planning, TVA is working closely with State and local agencies to ensure timely implementation of revisions neces-sitated by new requirements. We expect to complete this effort in a time frame consistent with the FEMA review."

The import of this position, for this evaluation, is that TVA has not submitted revised plans of local and State agencies as requested by NRR on October 10, 1979, nor do the TVA letters address revised local and State plans in any other way.

Evidence that the applicant and State and local agencies are cooperating during this transient period is contained in OI&E Inspection Report No. 50-327/ 79-69 which summarizes the results of an emergency drill conducted by the applicant, local, State and Federal agencies during the period 10/19/?S through 11/20/79.

As reported by OI&E "this drill was one of the largest exercises, in terms of scope and numbers of drill participants, ever conducted in the Southeast." The report continues: "The NRC recognizes that improvements will inevitably come from such exercises, but that overall the TVA and State of Tennessee response actions were acceptable."

Conflicting evidence with regard to the level of preparedness of State and local governments is contained in three letters: one from the NRC Office of State Programs to FEMA, dated December 18, 1979; the other two in FEMA's replies dated January 2, 1980 and February 11, 1980. In essence, OSP was ready to grant con-currence to the State of Tennessee plan, based on the recommendations of the Federal Interagency Region IV Advisory Committee, but FEMA could not agree.

1

The NRC staff has concluded that the following approach should be used in evaluating current fuel load and low power applications:

1. Currently docketed, combined applicant, State and local emergency plans must meet:

a. Current Regulatory Requirements at 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E.

b. Regulatory Position Statements in Regulatory Guide 1.101 (March 1977).

c. Essential planning elements in NUREG 75/111 and Supplement 1 thereto.

FEMA findings that State and local plans are adequate will satisfy this requirement. Deficiencies identified by FEMA will be evaluated by NRC for significance to low power operation.

d. Further requirements may be established on a case-by-case basis based on NRC review against upgraded criteria presently under consideration.

2. The staff's Safety Evaluation Report will identify those deficiencies to be corrected before a full power license can be issued.

The NRR staff will meet with FEMA in the near future to resolve this matter in an expeditious and mutually satisfactory manner.

e 2

Enclosure 3 Major Residual NTOL Items to be Resolved I.A.l.3 Shif t Manning An applicant commitment is needed for an SR0 and R0 to be in the control room at all times. (Prior to license issuance).

I.G Training During Low Power Testing To conduct the low power test program, documentation is required for the procedures related to the program. Staff

review is also required. (License conditioned requiring resolution prior to initiation of low power test program).

I.B.l.4 Licensee Onsite Operating Exoerience Evaluation An applicant commitment is needed that this capability exists onsite for evaluating operating experience. (Prior to license issuance).

I.C.l.(b) Inadeouate Core Cooling Commitment from applicant to document the procedures for staff review that will be used for inadequate core cooling (License conditioned requiring resolution prior t'o the initiation of the low power test program).

II.D.5 Relief & Safety Valve Position Documentation is required for qualification schedule and calibration methods on acoustic monitors. (Prior to license issuance).

II.E.1.2 Auxiliary Feedwater Initiation and Indication Documenation is required for confirming vital bus power is supplied to the flow indicators. (Prior to license issuance).

III.A.l.2.a Onsite Technical Support Center Applicant commitments are required on several items in this area as a result of the IE/NRR report. (Prior to license issuance).

Control Room Design Review A number of items require correction. (Prior to license issuance).