lessons learned from the hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
DESCRIPTION
National Radiological Emergency Preparedness Conference, Inc. 15th Annual Conference Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 11-14 April 2005. LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE HUNGARIAN NUCLEAR EMERGENCY RESPONSE EXERCISE 2004. Geza Macsuga Hungarian Atomic Energy Authority e-mail: [email protected] - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
LESSONS LEARNEDLESSONS LEARNED FROM THE FROM THE HUNGARIAN NUCLEAR HUNGARIAN NUCLEAR
EMERGENCY RESPONSE EXERCISE EMERGENCY RESPONSE EXERCISE 20042004
Geza MacsugaGeza MacsugaHungarian Atomic Energy AuthorityHungarian Atomic Energy Authority
e-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]: +36 1 4364910phone: +36 1 4364910
fax: +36 1 4364909fax: +36 1 4364909
National Radiological Emergency Preparedness National Radiological Emergency Preparedness Conference, Inc.Conference, Inc.
15th Annual Conference15th Annual Conference
Harrisburg, PennsylvaniaHarrisburg, Pennsylvania11-14 April 200511-14 April 2005
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 22/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
TopicsTopics IntroductionIntroduction
Exercise typeExercise type, , scopescope, , etc.etc.
EvaluationEvaluation
Lessons learntLessons learnt
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 33/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
EuropeEurope
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 44/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
HungaryHungary
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 55/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Basic data on HungaryBasic data on Hungary RepublicRepublic Member country of the Europen UnionMember country of the Europen Union Area: 93.000 kmArea: 93.000 km22
Population: 10 millionPopulation: 10 million Capital: Budapest (1,8 million)Capital: Budapest (1,8 million) Highest point: 1015 mHighest point: 1015 m Largest lake: Balaton (cca. 75 x 3 km)Largest lake: Balaton (cca. 75 x 3 km) Neighbouring countries: Austria, Slovakia, Neighbouring countries: Austria, Slovakia,
Ukraine, Rumania, Yugoslavia, Croatia, Ukraine, Rumania, Yugoslavia, Croatia, SloveniaSlovenia
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 66/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 77/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Hungarian nuclear programHungarian nuclear program (1/3) (1/3)
Paks NPPPaks NPP four VVER-440/213 type reactors of 4four VVER-440/213 type reactors of 47700 MWMWee
commissioned in 1983, 84, 86, 87commissioned in 1983, 84, 86, 87 six-loop, horizontal steam-generatorssix-loop, horizontal steam-generators provides cca. 40% of domestic electric provides cca. 40% of domestic electric
energy productionenergy production PSR of units 1PSR of units 1 to 4 to 4 is over is over
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 88/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 99/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Hungarian nuclear programHungarian nuclear program (2/3) (2/3)
Interim spent fuel storage facilityInterim spent fuel storage facility dry storage for 50 yearsdry storage for 50 years at the premises of the NPPat the premises of the NPP 7 modules in use, 4 more under construction7 modules in use, 4 more under construction
10 MW10 MWtt research reactor research reactor VVER-SMVVER-SM Operated by the KFKI Atomic Energy Operated by the KFKI Atomic Energy
Research InstituteResearch Institute
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 1010/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Hungarian nuclear programHungarian nuclear program (3/3) (3/3)
100 kW training reactor100 kW training reactor operated by the Technical University of operated by the Technical University of
BudapestBudapest used for educationused for education
Preparatory work for final storage site Preparatory work for final storage site selection of low and medium level radwasteselection of low and medium level radwaste
Central Nuclear Financial Fund for interim Central Nuclear Financial Fund for interim and final disposal and decommissioningand final disposal and decommissioning
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 1111/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Role and tasks of the HAEARole and tasks of the HAEA During preparation and planning phaseDuring preparation and planning phase
International Contact Point and Competent AuthorityInternational Contact Point and Competent Authority Regulatory tasks in nuclear safety matterRegulatory tasks in nuclear safety matter Coordination of international cooperation in nuclear safetyCoordination of international cooperation in nuclear safety Maintenance of its own preparednessMaintenance of its own preparedness
In case of an emergencyIn case of an emergency Facility diagnosis and prognosisFacility diagnosis and prognosis Evaluation of the radiological situation and prognosis of Evaluation of the radiological situation and prognosis of
consequencesconsequences International communicationInternational communication Decision support to NDCDecision support to NDC Public informationPublic information
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 1212/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Structure of the Structure of the HHNERSNERS
....
Ministry
GOVERNMENTAL CO-ORDINATIONCOMMITTEE
HAEA
CERTA
DefenceCommittee
Ministry
Ministry
OperativeStaff
Ministry of Interior
Directorate General of the National Disaster
Management
EICNuclear
EmergencyCentre
Expert Panel of the DC
Technical Scientific Council
GOVERNMENT
Secretariate
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 1313/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Exercise type, scope, etc.Exercise type, scope, etc. Two-day long, comprehensive, table-topTwo-day long, comprehensive, table-top
Exercise Day 1 Exercise Day 1 2004.11.09. 7:30-16:002004.11.09. 7:30-16:00 Exercise Day 2 Exercise Day 2 2004.11.10. 7:30-16:002004.11.10. 7:30-16:00
Central organs, ministries, local defense Central organs, ministries, local defense committees and their local organscommittees and their local organs
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 1414/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Objectives of the exerciseObjectives of the exercise Test the new National ERPTest the new National ERP
Exercise the emergency response related activitiesExercise the emergency response related activities
Test the new National Public Information Plan, Test the new National Public Information Plan, exercise the related activitiesexercise the related activities
Exercise the obligations from international conventions Exercise the obligations from international conventions and bilateral agreementsand bilateral agreements
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 1515/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Scenario – initial stateScenario – initial state Hypothetical accident at Paks NPPHypothetical accident at Paks NPP
4 units of VVER-440/213 type4 units of VVER-440/213 type Nominal power 470 MWeNominal power 470 MWe
Unit 3 is at nominal powerUnit 3 is at nominal power Reserve power supply from Unit 4 is not Reserve power supply from Unit 4 is not
available due to maintenanceavailable due to maintenance One of the three diesel-generators is failed, the One of the three diesel-generators is failed, the
other is under maintenanceother is under maintenance
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 1616/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Scenario – Phase 1Scenario – Phase 1 LOCA - break of 10% on loop 2LOCA - break of 10% on loop 2
Protection signals: hermetization, L&HP Protection signals: hermetization, L&HP ECCSECCS
One of the three LP ECCS is outOne of the three LP ECCS is out
Hermetization failureHermetization failure
Release of primary coolant activityRelease of primary coolant activity
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 1717/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Scenario – Phase 2Scenario – Phase 2 After 2 h 15 m: electric fireAfter 2 h 15 m: electric fire
Both normal and external power supply failedBoth normal and external power supply failed
One of two diesel-generators failed during start-One of two diesel-generators failed during start-upup
Release of primary coolant activityRelease of primary coolant activity
Increased core damage probabilityIncreased core damage probability
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 1818/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Scenario – Phase 3Scenario – Phase 3 After 4 h 5 m the last diesel-generator After 4 h 5 m the last diesel-generator
failedfailed
no core cooling no core cooling
Release core temperature increases, after an hour cladding
defects, gap release
release to atmosphere increases
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 1919/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Scenario – Phases 4-5Scenario – Phases 4-5 Phase Phase 44
Core cooling restored (successful start-up of a Core cooling restored (successful start-up of a diesel-generator)diesel-generator)
Release significantly decreasedRelease significantly decreased
Phase 5Phase 5 Hermetization successfulHermetization successful
Release terminatedRelease terminated
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 2020/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Evaluation processEvaluation processSenior Evaluator
Summary Evaluation Report
Head of playing organization
Recommendations for improvement
International Evaluators
International Evaluation Report
Lead Evaluator
Organizational Evaluation Report
Senior and Lead Evaluators
Head of playing organization
Lead evaluator External Evaluator
Minutes of the Plenary Evaluation Meeting
Self Evaluation Report Evaluation Report Evaluation Report
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 2121/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Meeting the objectivesMeeting the objectives (1/2) (1/2)
A. – Applicability of the ERPs The objective was met, the participants implemented all their
tasks, the ERPs were applicable for regulating the related activities
Further clarifications and modifications in the ERPs are necessary
The operating manual at several organs shall be updated
B. – Exercise the response activities The objective was met, the participants
exercised their tasks and duties gained useful experiences and enlarged their knowledge
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 2222/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Meeting the objectivesMeeting the objectives ( (22/2)/2)
C. – Public information The ministries did not really perform public information Simulation of the media/public interest and press conference The objective was not fully met
D. – Communication by international conventions The objective was evaluated in relation to HAEA Several neighboring countries joined the exercise The communication was well documented The international requirements were met The international communication did not created high pressure The objective was met
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 2323/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Evaluation of the main Evaluation of the main processesprocesses (1/1 (1/100))
Preparation for the exercisePreparation for the exercise OrganizationOrganization
shortage of timeshortage of time reduced scope of the exercisereduced scope of the exercise decisions in the final preparatory stage decisions in the final preparatory stage unexpected revision of unexpected revision of
documentsdocuments
ScenarioScenario the general plan was lately finalized the general plan was lately finalized short time for lower level short time for lower level
plansplans
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 2424/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Evaluation of the main Evaluation of the main processesprocesses ( (22/1/100)) Conduct of the exerciseConduct of the exercise
ConductConduct the second day scenario did not challenge the playersthe second day scenario did not challenge the players the role of the Senior Controller was not clear for the playersthe role of the Senior Controller was not clear for the players
Planning and implementationPlanning and implementation the same report arrived several times to the same the same report arrived several times to the same
organizationorganization important information did not arrived or arrived with delayimportant information did not arrived or arrived with delay the directly not effected counties did not have essential the directly not effected counties did not have essential
taskstasks
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 2525/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Evaluation of the main Evaluation of the main processesprocesses ( (33/1/100))
Alert of the HNERSAlert of the HNERS
Central organsCentral organs exhaustive list of primary notification exhaustive list of primary notification delays in alerting by the Paks delays in alerting by the Paks
NPPNPP the leaders NDC and OpS were timely notified, but the members were the leaders NDC and OpS were timely notified, but the members were
notnot
MinistriesMinistries not all ministries were completely notifiednot all ministries were completely notified there was a shortage of available experts, the operation is not there was a shortage of available experts, the operation is not
ensured in case of long lasting emergencyensured in case of long lasting emergency
Local Defense CommitteesLocal Defense Committees the directly not effected counties did not receive notification in timethe directly not effected counties did not receive notification in time
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 2626/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Evaluation of the main Evaluation of the main processesprocesses ( (44/1/100))
Assessment-evaluationAssessment-evaluation
Central organsCentral organs GCC EC distributed assessment results without preliminary GCC EC distributed assessment results without preliminary
harmonization with NDC Expert Panel harmonization with NDC Expert Panel uncertainties in the uncertainties in the HNERSHNERS
results of RODOS, SINAC and BALDOS significantly differedresults of RODOS, SINAC and BALDOS significantly differed
MinistriesMinistries emergency centers received contradictory assessment resultsemergency centers received contradictory assessment results
Local Defense CommitteesLocal Defense Committees no harmonization of input data among the assessment teams, no harmonization of input data among the assessment teams,
lack of coordination was observed lack of coordination was observed different proposals on different proposals on measuresmeasures
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 2727/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Evaluation of the main Evaluation of the main processesprocesses ( (55/1/100)) Decision-makingDecision-making
Central organsCentral organs the NDC did not perform its coordinative and integrative rolethe NDC did not perform its coordinative and integrative role parallel and overlapping operation of NDC and OpS caused parallel and overlapping operation of NDC and OpS caused
confusionconfusion
MinistriesMinistries lack of experts lack of experts were not able to fully perform their tasks were not able to fully perform their tasks
Local Defense CommitteesLocal Defense Committees Paks NPP information was extremely important in the early Paks NPP information was extremely important in the early
phasephase decision competence was not clear: counties defense decision competence was not clear: counties defense
committees made their own decisions or they implemented committees made their own decisions or they implemented central decisionscentral decisions
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 2828/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Evaluation of the main Evaluation of the main processesprocesses ( (66/1/100)) Coordination of countermeasuresCoordination of countermeasures
Central organsCentral organs decision competence on countermeasures was not clearly decision competence on countermeasures was not clearly
defineddefined some counties defense committees made their own decisions some counties defense committees made their own decisions
even after the operation of NDCeven after the operation of NDC
MinistriesMinistries received late information on central decisions received late information on central decisions not prepared for not prepared for
prompt implementationprompt implementation
Local Defense CommitteesLocal Defense Committees no detailed methodology of urgent and long term measuresno detailed methodology of urgent and long term measures protective and measuring equipment was incomplete at local protective and measuring equipment was incomplete at local
organsorgans
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 2929/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Evaluation of the main Evaluation of the main processesprocesses ( (77/1/100))
Public informationPublic information
Central organsCentral organs limited scope of planned activitieslimited scope of planned activities
MinistriesMinistries did not perform public information activitiesdid not perform public information activities
Local Defense CommitteesLocal Defense Committees the national ERP did not regulate adequately the interface the national ERP did not regulate adequately the interface
with the mediawith the media
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 3030/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Evaluation of the main Evaluation of the main processesprocesses ( (88/1/100)) CommunicationCommunication
Central organsCentral organs the information and communication paths were not clearly definedthe information and communication paths were not clearly defined no feedback on the reports sent out to other organsno feedback on the reports sent out to other organs the use of cell phones in case of emergency was not regulated the use of cell phones in case of emergency was not regulated
adequatelyadequately
MinistriesMinistries the interface was not properly regulated between the the interface was not properly regulated between the
representatives at the central organs and the ministerial representatives at the central organs and the ministerial emergency centersemergency centers
Local Defense CommitteesLocal Defense Committees the committees received sometimes too much or too less the committees received sometimes too much or too less
information or similar information from several organsinformation or similar information from several organs
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 3131/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Evaluation of the main Evaluation of the main processesprocesses ( (99/1/100))
Quality assuranceQuality assurance the actual date and time were not shown on all documentsthe actual date and time were not shown on all documents
the importance of self-control was not emphasized at all the importance of self-control was not emphasized at all
organizationsorganizations
document format and content requirements were not document format and content requirements were not
harmonizedharmonized
National ERPNational ERP the national ERP shall be updatedthe national ERP shall be updated
the national ERP did not regulate the quality assurance issuesthe national ERP did not regulate the quality assurance issues
the legal status of the national ERP was unclearthe legal status of the national ERP was unclear
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 3232/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Evaluation of the main Evaluation of the main processesprocesses (1 (100/1/100)) Evaluation of the exerciseEvaluation of the exercise
preparation of evaluators was successfulpreparation of evaluators was successful the hierarchical organization of evaluators operated smoothlythe hierarchical organization of evaluators operated smoothly the methodology provided that problems at all levels were the methodology provided that problems at all levels were
detecteddetected subjective statements, misunderstandings in the evaluation subjective statements, misunderstandings in the evaluation
reportsreports the „yes-no” questionnaire:the „yes-no” questionnaire:
did not support the process-based evaluationdid not support the process-based evaluation did not provide enough information for comprehensive evaluationdid not provide enough information for comprehensive evaluation in case of doubts the majority of the evaluators selected „yes”in case of doubts the majority of the evaluators selected „yes”
differently structured evaluation report differently structured evaluation report difficulty in difficulty in assembling the assembling the comprehensive evaluationcomprehensive evaluation
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 3333/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Good practicesGood practices (1/3) (1/3)
Preparation for the exercisePreparation for the exercise the exercise was financed from the participants own budgetthe exercise was financed from the participants own budget preparatory workshops, trainingpreparatory workshops, trainingss and drills contributed to the and drills contributed to the
successsuccess
Control of the exerciseControl of the exercise thanks to the high level commitment the exercise was successfully thanks to the high level commitment the exercise was successfully
conductedconducted shortages in the second day scenario were solved by the controllers shortages in the second day scenario were solved by the controllers
by giving the players preliminary not defined tasksby giving the players preliminary not defined tasks
Start up of the HNERSStart up of the HNERS experts responded efficiently and timely to all messages of Paks NPPexperts responded efficiently and timely to all messages of Paks NPP the duty-officers were experienced and knew well the alerting the duty-officers were experienced and knew well the alerting
systemsystem
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 3434/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Good practices Good practices (2/3)(2/3)
Assessment-evaluationAssessment-evaluation the accessibility of meteorological data was quick and excellentthe accessibility of meteorological data was quick and excellent the Ministry of Education involved to the exercise its own network laboratoriesthe Ministry of Education involved to the exercise its own network laboratories
Decision-makingDecision-making the chairman of OpS prepared a summary report for the Chairman of the GCCthe chairman of OpS prepared a summary report for the Chairman of the GCC
Coordination of countermeasuresCoordination of countermeasures the directly effected three counties were better preparedthe directly effected three counties were better prepared the Somogy County Defense Committee assessed the technical background of the Somogy County Defense Committee assessed the technical background of
implementation of long term protective measures in the LPZimplementation of long term protective measures in the LPZ
Public informationPublic information the organs recognized the importance of authentic and timely informationthe organs recognized the importance of authentic and timely information press release templates were prepared in advance easily adaptable to any press release templates were prepared in advance easily adaptable to any
actual situation to assist public information expertsactual situation to assist public information experts
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 3535/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Good practicesGood practices (3/3) (3/3)
CommunicationCommunication the MARATHON introduced successfullythe MARATHON introduced successfully
Quality assuranceQuality assurance the Paks NPP and the neighboring counties regularly consultedthe Paks NPP and the neighboring counties regularly consulted
National ERPNational ERP the national ERP provided good basis for preparation of lower level ERPsthe national ERP provided good basis for preparation of lower level ERPs
Evaluation of the exerciseEvaluation of the exercise the methodology was successful, the organization functioned wellthe methodology was successful, the organization functioned well
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 3636/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Recommendations for Recommendations for improvementimprovement (1/ (1/55))
Preparation for the exercisePreparation for the exercise elaboration of long term training and exercise planelaboration of long term training and exercise plan elaboration of annual training and exercise programelaboration of annual training and exercise program
Conduct of the exerciseConduct of the exercise the owner of the exercise shall be the leader of the most competent the owner of the exercise shall be the leader of the most competent
authorityauthority
Alert of the HNERSAlert of the HNERS procedure of multi level alerting exercise shall be prepared for the entire procedure of multi level alerting exercise shall be prepared for the entire
HNERS:HNERS: legal backgroundlegal background the national ERPthe national ERP experiences with the IAEA and EU alerting exercise systemexperiences with the IAEA and EU alerting exercise system
alerting exercises for all levels of HNERS shall be incorporated in the alerting exercises for all levels of HNERS shall be incorporated in the annual planannual plan
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 3737/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Recommendations for Recommendations for improvementimprovement (2/5) (2/5)
Assessment-evaluationAssessment-evaluation harmonizationharmonization
exchange of input dataexchange of input data conditions and applicability of analysis toolsconditions and applicability of analysis tools comparison and understanding of resultscomparison and understanding of results elaboration of proposals for the decision makerselaboration of proposals for the decision makers
Decision-makingDecision-making the roles and responsibilities of central and local governments shall be the roles and responsibilities of central and local governments shall be
revisedrevised
structural simplification and relocation of roles and responsibilitiesstructural simplification and relocation of roles and responsibilities
comprehensive survey on the entire staff of HNERScomprehensive survey on the entire staff of HNERS
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 3838/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Recommendations for Recommendations for improvementimprovement (3/5) (3/5)
Coordination of countermeasuresCoordination of countermeasures OpS shall collect and distribute information on the implementation of OpS shall collect and distribute information on the implementation of
protective measuresprotective measures
Public informationPublic information elaborate an easily adaptable plan of a typical public information elaborate an easily adaptable plan of a typical public information
exerciseexercise preparationpreparation conductconduct evaluationevaluation
incorporate public information exercise into the HNERS annual training incorporate public information exercise into the HNERS annual training programprogram
comprehensive evaluation of the national public information comprehensive evaluation of the national public information capabilitiescapabilities
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 3939/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Recommendations for Recommendations for improvementimprovement (4/5) (4/5)
CommunicationCommunication elaborate and implement the concept of a comprehensive informatics elaborate and implement the concept of a comprehensive informatics
systemsystem
Quality assuranceQuality assurance introduce a comprehensive and unified QA system for the introduce a comprehensive and unified QA system for the
HNERSHNERS
National ERPNational ERP ensure the regular maintenance of the national ERPensure the regular maintenance of the national ERP
Evaluation of the exerciseEvaluation of the exercise revise the evaluation methodology to evaluate and compare revise the evaluation methodology to evaluate and compare
different exercises on a unified basisdifferent exercises on a unified basis
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 4040/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
Recommendations for Recommendations for improvementimprovement ( (55//55))
Implementation of the recommendationsImplementation of the recommendations organizations levelorganizations level
head of the organhead of the organ determination of prioritiesdetermination of priorities planning and implementationplanning and implementation
HNERS levelHNERS level GCC coordinatesGCC coordinates the NER TSC is involvedthe NER TSC is involved
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 4141/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
SummarySummary The HNERS is prepared for nuclear The HNERS is prepared for nuclear
emergencyemergency
The exercise was usefulThe exercise was useful
Importance of regular exercisesImportance of regular exercises
Good practices were identifiedGood practices were identified
Further actions for improvementFurther actions for improvement
11-14 April 200511-14 April 200515th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania15th Annual NREP Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 4242/42/42
Lessons learnedLessons learned from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004from the Hungarian nuclear emergency response exercise 2004
AbbreviationsAbbreviationsEROERO – Emergency Response Organization – Emergency Response Organization
ERPERP – Emergency Response Plan – Emergency Response Plan
GCCGCC – Governmental Coordination Committee – Governmental Coordination Committee
GCC ECGCC EC – Governmental Coordination Committee Emergency Center – Governmental Coordination Committee Emergency Center
HAEA EROHAEA ERO – Hungarian Atomic Energy Authority Emergency Response Organization – Hungarian Atomic Energy Authority Emergency Response Organization
HNERSHNERS – Hungarian Nuclear Emergency Response System – Hungarian Nuclear Emergency Response System
IAEAIAEA – International Atomic Energy Agency – International Atomic Energy Agency
L&HP ECCSL&HP ECCS – Low & High Pressure Emergency Core Cooling System– Low & High Pressure Emergency Core Cooling System
LOCALOCA – Loss of Coolant Accident– Loss of Coolant Accident
LPZLPZ – long term protective action zone – long term protective action zone
MARATHONMARATHON – protected electronic mailing system for governmental use – protected electronic mailing system for governmental use
MoIMoI – Ministry of the Interior – Ministry of the Interior
NDCNDC – Nuclear Emergency Defense Committee – Nuclear Emergency Defense Committee
NEICNEIC – Nuclear Emergency Information Center – Nuclear Emergency Information Center
NER TSCNER TSC – Nuclear Emergency Response Technical Scientific Council – Nuclear Emergency Response Technical Scientific Council
OpSOpS – Operative Staff – Operative Staff
Paks NPPPaks NPP – Paks Nuclear Power Plant – Paks Nuclear Power Plant
PIGPIG – Public Information Group – Public Information Group
RODOSRODOS – Real-time On-line Decision Support System– Real-time On-line Decision Support System