ML20081G324
| ML20081G324 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 10/18/1983 |
| From: | Mcgowan J ALABAMA POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20081G319 | List: |
| References | |
| PROC-831018-01, NUDOCS 8311040200 | |
| Download: ML20081G324 (23) | |
Text
.
~
GO-EIP-115 ALABAMA POWER COMPANY NUCLEAR GENERATION DEPARTMENT GO-EIP-115 DE-ESCALATION OF ENERGENCY CLASSIFICATION AND RECOVERY INITIATION APPROVED:
Date f )
~
h)
^
Matfage fjuclea r Operations and Administration
/ / ,f
//W// m' Ka'n a g(r- N u c l e a r ne Date f/b/VL 17:9 & Technical Support / /
Ma ager-S f ety Audi
> ^Wa Engineering Review Date9hO'
,7 Date /i/j/ d Vice P resident-Nuclear Generation Date Issued // v !P ?
DOCUMENT CONTROC CONTROLLED CCPY COPY No. ()& '
8311040200 831102 PDR ADOCK 05000348 Rev. 1 F PDR .
1 GO-EIP-116 IlOEX OF EFFECTIVE PAGES REVISION NO.
I Page No. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 '9 10 1 X 2 X 3 X 4 X
. 5 X 6 X 7 X 8 X X i
l I
l Rev. 1
GO-EIP-115 5
k l
DE-ESCALATION OF EMERGENCY CLASSIFICATION AND RECOVERY INITIATION 1.0 Purpose The purpose of this procedure 1: to delineate authorities for de-escalation of FNP emergency classification and for initiation of recovery actions, establish criteria f or such actions and i dent i fy notifications to be made concur.'ent with such action.
2.0 Scope This procedure applies to de-escalation of emergency classi-fication or initiation of the recovery phase f ollowin g ent ry into an Alert, Site Area or General Emergency classification at Farley Nuclear Plant.
3.0 References 3.1 FNP Emergency Plan 3.2 FNP-0-EIP-9 3.3 G0-EIP-101 4.0 Authority
~
4.1 De-escalation from Site Area Emergency or General Emer-gency classifications must be authorized by. the Recov-ery Manager.
4.2 Termination of emergency classification and e n t ry into the Recovery Phase must be authorized by the Recovery Manager.
5.0 De-escalation of Emergency Classification l 5.1 Meteorological and Plant Parameter Review l
l Rev. 0 l
i
. l l
GO-EIP-115 5.1.1 Ine decision to de-escalate emergency classifi-cation will be based on a comprehensive-review
(
~
of plant system parameters, radiological inven-tory / release potential and cu rre nt and projected meteorological conditions.
5.1.2 The Emergency Director is responsible f or initi-ating recommendation of emergency classification de-escalation. Such recommendation shall be based on a review of parameters that include, but are not necessarily limited t o, the following as applicable to the existing emergency condition:
- 1) Stability of the reactor system (mode, shut-down margin, subcooling-margin, pressure, etc.);
- 2) Quantity and integrity of intact barriers preventing or mitigating radioactive releases (e.g., cladding, RCS vessel, piping & valves, containment, HEPA filters and charcoal fil-ters) including any potential tnreats to
- barrier integrity (e.g. cu rrent and projected containment H2 concentraticn);
- 3) Availability and operability of a heat sink;
- 4) Operability, accuracy and -integrity of plant instrumentation, including effluent monitors and radiation monitcring equipment; l
- 5) Availability.and reliability.of offsite and l
i emergency power. sou rces ; y Rev. O
G O'- E l'P - l l 5
- 6) Status of natural phenomena involved in accident initiation or affecting accident mitigation (e.g. seismic events, flood, 4 tornado, etc.)
- 7) Radiological and meteorological parameters listed in 5.1.3.
5.1.3 The Dose Assessment Director is responsiDie f or advising the Emergency Director regarding de-escalation advisability based on a review of radiological and meteorological parameters that include but are not necessarily limited to the following:
- 1) Current and anticipated effluent release rates (both monitored effluent paths and best estimate of unmonitored paths);-
- 2) Radioactive material inventory constituting potential release source;
- 3) Current knowledge regarding isotopic makeup of effluents and radioacti ve materi al .inven-l tories; l 4) Current off site dose rates (calculated and measured);
i
( 5) Meteorological forecasts'and re s ul ta nt pre-
' dictions of changes in atmospheric stability class, deposition rate, 'popul ation af f ected, etc.
5.2- De-escalation Criteria
'Rev. 0
W G01EIP-115 The Recovery Manager will analyze input from his advis-ors in the areas listed above to decide on emergency classification de-escalation. Tne following criteria shall be considered appropriate for initiating a reduc-tion in emergency classification.
5.2.1 Reduction f rom General Emergency to Site Area Emergency
- 1) Potential exposu re to non-evacuated offsite areas (based on exposure to current ti me ,
current release rate and dose rates, projec-ted release rate and dose rates and project-ed release duration) is less than 1 Rem whole body and less than 2.5 Rem Thyroid.
Qualitative judgement of projections should include assessment of dose assessment model accuracy utilizing Radiation Monitoring Team measurements.
- 2) The plant is stable and subcritical witn either no substantial core degradation existing or expected OR, If core damage has occurred, no fu rther de-gradation is expected and eitner no realis-tic potential exists for loss-of containment-integrity or the. ground-level release of radioactive materials available for release from containment would not cause criteria 1)
Rev. O
l G0-EIP-115 to be exceeded under worst casa meteorological conditions. ,
5.2.2 Reduction from Site Area Emergency to Alert
- 1) Current and projected offsite dose rates due to cloud passage are less than 1 mR/hr. Tnis value excludes background due to snine from prior deposition. Qualitative judgement 1
should be applied based on dose assessment model accuracy utilizing Radiation Monitoring Team measurements.
- 2) Current and projected effluent releases do not exceed the limits established by 10CFR20.
- 3) If the emergency condition involved the pri-ma ry pl a n t , the reactor is subcritical and proceeding to a cold shutdown (or equivalent) condition.
- 4) The plant is' stable.
- 5) If the emergency event resulted in core damage or the release of radioactive material to containment, either containment integrity is j established and unthreatened or the dose rate l
l that would result from loss of containment integrity under worst . case meteorological l conditions would De less than I'mR/hr.at the site boundary. ,
l NOTE THAT MEETING THESE CRITERIA DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY INDICATE THAT OFFSITE PROTECTIVE ACTION MEASURES'SHOULD BE RELAXED. THESE.
R2v. 0 l
l G O*- E I'P - 115 l CRITERI A MEASURE THE POTENTI AL FOR ADDITION AL RELEASES AND THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF ADDITIONAL RELEASES ON THE EPZ, NOT THE IMPACT PRIOR RELEASES HAVE HAD. DEPOSITIUN OF EFFLJENTS IN THE EPZ MAY PREVENT RELAXATION OF 0FFSITE PROTECTIVE ACTION UNTIL FURTHER I
i EVALUATION IS COMPLETED. DECISIONS TO RELAX OFFSITE PROTECTIVE
! ACTIONS WILL BE MADE SY OFFSITE AUTHORITIES AND SHOUL] INCLUDE CONSIDERATIONS IN ADDITION TO THOSE DISCUSSED AB0VE.
5.3 Notification of De-escalation The following agencies should be notified of the decision to de-escalate emergency- classification.
i 5.3.1 Nuclea r Regul atory Commi ssi on Initials /Date 5.3.2 Alabama Radiological Health initials /Date .
5.3.3 Georgia Environmental Protection Division initials /Date 5.3.4 Florida Department of Natural Resources initials /Date 6.0 Activation of Recovery Organization and Recovery Phase 6.1 Plant Parameter Review The decision to move from an Alert condition to the Re-covery Phase will be based on a comprehensive review of plant parameters and radiological inventory / release po-i tential. ~ This review shall include but not necessarily be limited to the following:
)
i 1) Stability of the reactor shutdown condition (if' i .
involved in the event) 1.e., successful movement-toward a cold shutdown condition.
Rev. 0
l GJ-EIP-115 )
- 2) Integrity of intact barriers preventing or mitigating radioactive releases. -
- 3) Operability of radioactive waste systems and decon-tamination facilities.
- 4) The availability and operability of a neat sink.
- 5) The integrity of power supplies and electrical equip-ment.
- 6) The operability and integrity of instrumentation including radiation monitoring equipment. In the latter instar e this shall include portable equipment assigned to the emergency.
- 7) Availability of trained personnel and support services.
6.2 Criteria for Entering Recovery Phase The Recovery Manager will analyze the input from his advisors in the areas listed above to determine if plant restoration efforts can begin. Tne f ollowing criteria shall be considered appropriate f or the initiation of recovery measures:
- 1) Plant parameters of operation no longer indicate a potential or actual emergency exists.
- 2) The release of. radioactivity from the plant is con -
trollable and no longer exceeds permissible levels and no danger to the public from this source is credible.- .
l l 3) The plant is capable of sustaining itself in a_long l- term shut-down condition.
l l -Rev. 0 l
GO-EIP-ll5
- 4) Plant entry and cl ean-up is possible without workers receiving in excess of their permissible exposures.
6.3 Notification 6.3.1 The Recovery Manager shall notify the Plant Manager and company management that a decision has been reached to initiate a recovery operati on. He snall then notify offsite agencies' rep re s en-tatives ensuring the NRC, and state and local authorities are provided with the same informa-tion. he shall also inform these agencies if any.
change in tne structure of the recovery organiza-tion is to occu r.
6.3.2 The Administrative Support Director or his designate shall notify all APCo departments initially notified at the onset of the accident, informing them of the current status of the affected unit, changes in the structure of the recovery orga ni zati on, and any information pertinent to that department.
Rev. 1
ALABAMA POWER COMPANY NUCLEAR GENERATION DEPARTMENT GENERAL OFFICE NUCLEAR GENERATION .
PROCEDURES DOCUMENT TRANSMITTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT To: Alabama Power Company 600 North 18th Street P. O. Box 2641 Birmingham, Alabama 35291 Attention: Nuclear Generation Department Document Control B-300 Flintridge Building
//7> 0 ' d / [!- 7/ I-Acknowledge the receipt of procedure / revision .
The superceded procedure was destroyed.
/2 e /. /
Cc=ments:
a 4
J LG'J & Mw [ C.L hL."/7i,Qc ur[v
~
Copy Number: T -T,' ' N Assigned to: --
Date Signature
1 GO-EIP-135 I
ALABAMA POWER COMPANY NUCLEAR GENERATION DEPARTMENf G0-EIP-135 ENERGENCY PLAN REVIEW AND REVISION APPROVED:
C 2-) h Ma rfa g(r uclear Operations & Administration D' ate"
~'
ring & Tecnnical Support
[N/T
' Manl @er-Nucle /raty
& . i 9 $0 M tager-Safe A ti t & Engineering Review D a't e' ,
- W"' ffff12
- V i ce P resi dent-Nucl ea r Generati on Date .
Date Issued -
.i -
i DOCUggNT CONTROC Ef fective Date '-
~'3. -
l COPY NO. ,
o
l GO-EIP-135 INDEX OF EFFECTIVE PAGES REVISION NO.
Page .
(No. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 X X 2 X X f
W f i
Rev. 1 y ,' f i j i , l j
- j G0sEIP-135 EMERGENCY PLAN REVIEW AND REVISION 1.0 Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to delineate responsibili-ties f or FNP Emergency Plan review and re vi s i o n .
2.0 References 2.1 FNP Emergency Plan 3.0 Procedure 3.1 The Superintendent-Regulatory and Procedural Control (SRPC) is responsible for coordinating an annual (not to exceed 15 months) review of the FNP emergency plan.
3.2 The Corporate Communication Department and Medical l Department will be requested to review their portions of the plan and provide changes as necessary.
3.3 Alabama, Georgia and Florida REP's contained in the FNP plan will be verified to be current or updated with the latest REP version (s) as necessary.
3.4 University Hospital and Southeast Alabama Medical Center plans contained in the FNP Plan will be verified current or updated with the latest plan version (s) as n e c e s s a ry .
3.5 The FNP Plant Manager is responsible for having the plan reviewed and providing plant inputs on plan update.
3.6 The SRPC_is responsible for reviewing pla,n sections-describing Nuclear Generation Corporate organization and functions.
I Rev. 1
GO-EIP-135 3.7 The SRPC will review all agreements to verify ihey are current. The SRPC will coordinate revision of. agree-ments requiring such action.
3.8 Plan revisions resulting f rom the above reviews shall
- be consolidated and submitted to the Plant Manager.
The Plant Manager will have PORC review coordinated and provide approval. The SRPC will then coordinate Nuclear Generation Corporate review and Vice. President-Nuclear Generation approval.
3.9 For Emergency Plan agreements which continue until one of the parties to the agreement notifies the other par-ties of an intention to terminate, the SRPC will ve ri fy at least every tnree years that the parties to the agreement are aware of the agreement's existence and its terms and conditions. This action will normally be taken during the period provided by the agreement for notice of withdrawal.
Rev. l~
ALABJLM POWER COMPANY NUCLEAR GENERATION DEPARTMENT GENERAL OFFICE NUCLEAR GENERATION .
PROCEDURES DOCUMENT TRANSMITTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT To: Alabama Power Company 600 North 18th Street P. O. Box 2641 Birmingham, Alabama 35291 Attention: Nuclear Generation Department Document Control B-300 Flintridge Building Acknowledge the receipt of procedure / revision 'f //7 .
The superceded procedure was destroyed.
Lje v. /
Comments:
0: %rt.Av t'h l /
Copy Number: 853 "68h Assigned to: ' 'I ~ c e -s
'/
Date Signature l
1 1
I I
l GO-EIP-137 l
I ALABAMA POWER COMPANY NUCLEAR GENERATION DEPARTMENT GO-EIP-137 PNS SIREN SYSTEM TESTING AND MAINTENANCE APPROVED:
Manag h6 clear Operations & Administration fVa$/ST t# (
~
~
~
$/ IS
_; "Mrfra'g sr-N u c l ae' r t e ing & Tecnnical Support /DaK 9 3!?'3 Y ' L G Audit; c gineering Review lla t e' Magager-Safet Y N~h
Vic resident-Nuclear Generation t/x &
Date
\
M .
Division Date ro-o-n V i cdJ reli dep ou tn e a s t i
Date Issued /C- '; - M l
CCCUMENT CONT)jgt Effeetiye Date A'- // - E5
( CONTROLL*Dliepy~
,y . .
.CO W tao, dM -
Rev. 1
i .
G0-EIP-137 I INDEX OF EFFECTIVE PAGES REVISION NO.
Page N o. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
(
1 X X 2 X Table 1 X X Fig. 1 (Page 1) X g
Fi g.1 (Page 2) X l
f Rev. 1 i
i
\
. i
~
l GO-EIP-137 PNS SIREN SYSTEM TESTING AND MAINTENANCE 1.0 Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to delineate the program to be utilized for ensuring Farley Nuclear Plant (FNP) P rompt Notification System (PNS) sirens are maintained in an operable condition.
2.0 Scope This procedure applies to Southeast Division Telecommunica-tions personnel.
3.0 References
. 3.1 Whelen Model WS-3000 Electronic Siren Warning System Instruction Manual 4.0 General 4.1 Operational Testing of each PNS siren will be conducted quarterly on the dates shown in Table 1 and coordinated with the Houston County Department of Civil Defense.
4.2 Prior to each scheduled test, the APCo Corporate Communication Department will arrange f or appropriate notice to be provided to the public affected by the test.
4.3 Test results will be documented utilizing Figure 1.
5.0 P rocedu res i
5.1 Perform a visual inspection of the speaker cluster, t
l speaker cable, siren case assembly and antenna.
I 5.2 Inspect batteries and verify battery " eyes" are green.
l l
Rev. 1 l
l
GO-EIP-137 NOTE Hearing Protection must be worn for the following steps 5.3 Contact Houston County Civil Defense at 1-794-9720 or 1-793-1114, Ext. 240 and request that the siren system being checked be activated in the "PA" mode followed by the "Hi/Lo" mode.
5.4 While the siren system is activated (operating), verify illumination of the 16 LEDs and the clipping indicator 1
located on the siren amplifier panel.
5.5 Verify that the siren is audible in the "PA" mode and that the correct tones pattern is generated with adequate volume in the "Hi/Lo" mode (NOTE: This is not meant to require that the volume be measured).
5.6 Document any corrective maintenance performed and retest as required.
5.7 Notify Houston County Civil Defense of successful test completion.
Rev. O i
G0-EIP-137 TABLE 1 PNS SIREN TEST SCHEDULE -
l 1983 1st Quarter Thursday J anuary 6 2nd Quarter Thursday April 7 3rd Quarter Thursday J uly 7 4th Quarter Thursday October 6 a
1984 1st Quarter Thursday J anuary 5 2nd Quarter Thursday April 5 3rd Quarter Thursday July 5 i
I 4th Quarter Thursday October 4 1 .
l Rev. 1 I
l l
r I
- 1il l l'I ll1 o?" 7 h D
R O '
F H
S A
T S N E O N T I O T D Y A R L C O R O G E L T
R A
U Q
M E
T S
Y S
N E
R I
S S
N A P I B
M
. U 1 L O
E C R
U G
I F
N y O l I r b T o m C t N r e E a N O e s P c O I t e s S i d
I T
T s l A N C u b I 0 2 4 6 n A E l a e 2 4 6 8 1 1 1 1 I V P C C s s L g I
S a e A & & & & & & & & T N r r C a i N n C e e n r O 1 3 S 7 9 1 3 5 i A I
k k n n e I 1 1 1 p p
o L a a e e t T s E L A e e r t t A D i T A /
U p p t n a R E l O / i S S S S A B E L C M P H I P . E V O H
'C <
1
. E mE.WWN
/
D R
O '
F l
i S
A
/ _
N O
D R
O G
/
A _
I B
M U
L O
C
)
d e S u K e n R t i A a t M D n E /
o R y C / B
( E C d
. N e 1 o A m w N r ET E o R T .
f U e N r Gg I A
e I a P FP M f<*
_