Information Notice 1986-98, Offsite Medical Services
SSINS No.: 6835 IN 86-98 UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 December 2, 1986 IE INFORMATION NOTICE NO. 86-98: OFFSITE MEDICAL SERVICES
Addressees
All nuclear power reactor facilities holding an operating license or a con- struction permit.
Purpose
This information notice is provided to bring to the attention of licensees a
new Commission policy on offsite medical services around nuclear power plants
and a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) guidance memorandum addressing
that policy. It is suggested that recipients review the information for appli- cability to their facilities. No written response is required.
Description of Circumstances
Attached is FEMA Guidance Memorandum MS-1, "Medical Services," that addresses
implementation of the Commission policy on offsite medical services published
on September 17, 1986 in the Federal Register (51 FR 32904).. This Guidance
Memorandum was prepared in coordinatio with the NO staff. As noted in the
referenced policy statement, the Commission has determined that these modifi- cations fall under the backfit rule's exception as necessary to bring facili- ties into compliance with a rule of the Commission.
No written response is required by this information notice. If you have any
questions about this matter, please contact the Regional Administrator of the
appropriate regional office or this office.
IarL. [ordan, Director
Division Emergency Preparedness
and Engineering Response
Office of Inspection and Enforcement
Attachments:
1. FEMA Guidance Memorandum MS-1
2. List of Recently Issued IE Information Notices
Technical Contact:
Edward M. Podolak, IE
(301) 492-7290
8611260006
Attachment 1 IN 86-98 December 2, 1986 Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D.C. 20472 MEMORMNDM FOR: Regional Directors
Acting Pegional Directors t
FI4: ( W Coghlin
f'pute Associate Director
State and Local Programs and SUPport
SUBJECT: Guidance Memorandum (@1) MS-I, Medical Services
The attached GM MS-1, Medical Services, is forwarded for your use in
providing guidance to State and local officials in developing their
radiological emergency response plans and in evaluating the medical
services capabilities of State and local governments.
The origins of this GM and its development and approval have been somewhat
different from other GM's. This GM was developed as a result of a series
of legal decisions involving NRC which determined that the existing
interpretation of the required pre-accident medical arrangements for
contaminated injured individuals was not sufficient. Those decisions led
NRC to issue a policy statement (Attachment B) on September 17, 1986, indicating that the NRC staff (in cotsultation with FEMA) would develop
detailed guidance on the necessary pre-accident arrangements for medical
services by November 17, 1986.
We have worked closely with NRC in recent weeks in the preparation of
this guidance. Unfortunately, the short deadline did not permit our
usual procedure of obtaining Regional and other oamrents before issuing
this final guidance.
If you have any questions about MS-1, you may contact James Thoaws at
646-2808. A list of all current operative Q4's (Attachment C) is also
provided for your information.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. GM MS-I, Medical Services
B. Emergency Planning - Medical Services, September 17, 1986, 51 FR 32904 C. List of Operative GM's
Attachment 1 IN 86-98 December 2, 1986 Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D.C. 20472 NOV 13 1986 GUIDANCE MEMORANDUM MS-1 MEDICAL SERVICES
Purpose
This Guidance Memorandum (GM) provides interpretation and clarification of
requirements contained in the Nuclear Regulatory Cormnission rule, 10 CFR 50.47 (b)(12) and the associated guidance in NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Revision 1, re- lated to the provision of medical services for members of the general public.
Background
The background is contained in a policy statement from the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) titled 'Emergency Planning - Medical Serviceso (51 FR 32904).
In this policy statement, NRC states its belief that 10 CFR 50.47(b)T12)
("arrangements are made for medical services for contaminated injured
individuals") requires pre-accident arrangements for medical services (beyond
the maintenance of a list of treatment facilities) for individuals who might be
severely exposed to dangerous levels of offsite radiation following an accident
at a nuclear power plant. As used in 10 CFR 50.47(b)(12) and planning Standard
"L" of NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-I, Revision 1, the temm contaminated injured' means
1) contaminated and otherwise physically injured; 2) contaminated and exposed to
dangerous levels of radiation; or 3) exposed to dangerous levels of radiation.
Guidance
10 CFR 50.47 (b)(12) requires that "Arrangements are made for contaminated
injured individuals." In its policy statement the NRC determined that this
standard requires pre-accident arrangements for medical services for offsite
individuals who might be exposed to dangerous levels of radiation following an
accident at a nuclear power plant. The following guidance applies to the eval- uation of the medical services aspects of State and local emergency plans under
the criteria in NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-I.
Standards, Evaluations Criteria, Areas of Reviews and Acceptance Criteria
A. Assignment of Responsibility (Organization Control)
Planning Standard
Primary responsibilities for emergency response by the nuclear facility
licensee, and by State and local organizations within the Emergency Planning
Zones have been assigned, the emergency responsibilities of the various sup- porting organizations have been specifically established, and each principal
response organization has staff to respond and to augment its Initial response
on a continuous basis.
Attachment 1 IN 86-98_
December 2, 1986 -2-
A.3. Evaluation Criterion
Each plan shall include written agreements referring to the concept of
operations developed between Federal, State, and local agencies and other
support organizations having an emergency response role within the Emergency
Planning Zones. The agreements shall identify the emergency measures to be
provided and the mutually acceptable criteria for their implementation, and
specify the arrangements for exchange of information. These agreements may be
provided in an appendix to the plan or the plan itself may contain descriptions
of these matters and a signature page in the plan may serve to verify the
agreements. The signature page format is appropriate for organizations where
response functions are covered by laws, regulations or executive orders where
separate written agreements are not necessary.
Areas for Review and Acceptance Criteria
State or local governments should obtain written agreements with the listed
medical facilities (Planning Standard L. Evaluation Criteria 1 and 3) and trans- portation providers (Planning Standard L. Evaluation Criterion 4). The written
agreements should contain simple assurances that the providers have adequate
technical information (e.g. treatment protocols) and treatment capabilities for
handling "contaminated injured" individuals. An indication of Joint Commission
on Accreditation of Hospitals (JCAH) accreditation will suffice for such assurance.
(Note: Veterans Administration (VA), military and other government hospitals
are not usually accredited by JCAH but usually have the desired capabilities.)
If state or local governments do not obtain written agreements, the licensee
should obtain written agreements with the listed medical facilities and trans- portation providers. If good faith efforts are not successful in a particular
case, the licensee shall provide or arrange for adequate compensatory measures, e.g., obtain written agreements with other providers or provide temporary field
medical care.
L. Medical and Public Health Support
Planning Standard
Arrangements are made for medical services for contaminated injured
Individuals.
L.I. Evaluation Criterion
Each organization shall arrange for local and backup hospital and medical
services having the capability for evaluation of radiation exposure and uptake, including assurance that persons providing these services are adequately
prepared to handle contaminated individuals.
Attachment 1 IN 86-98 December 2, 1986 -3-
Areas for Review and Acceptance Criteria
There should be one primary local hospital and one backup hospital for each
site for the evaluation and emergency treatment of *contamination injured'
members of the general public. Hospitals are generally distributed proportional
to the population. Thus, at sites with low population and few hospitals, the
primary local and backup hospitals for members of the general public could be
the same as those for the utility employees and emergency workers.
L.3. Evaluation Criterion
Each State shall develop lists indicating the location of public, private
and military hospitals and other emergency medical services facilities within
the State or contiguous States considered capable of providing medical support
for any contaminated injured individual. The listing shall include the name, location, type of facility and capacity and any special radiological capabili- ties. These emergency medical services should be able to radiologically
monitor contaminated personnel, and have facilities and trained personnel able
to care for contaminated injured persons.
Areas for Review and Acceptance Criteria
The lists should be annotated to indicate the ambulatory/non-ambulatory capaci- ties for providing medical support for 'contaminated injured" members of the
general public and any special radiological capabilities. This will enable state
and local officials to direct members of the general public to those Institutions
capable of handling "contaminated injured" patients. In the event that local
and regional medical resources need to be supplemented, additional medical re- sources would be available through the Federal Radiological Emergency Response
Plan. These resources would include the Radiation Emergency Assistance Center/
Training Site at Oak Ridge, Tennessee and the National Disaster Medical System
with headquarters in Rockville, Maryland.
L.4. Evaluation Criterion
Each organization shall arrange for transporting victims of radiological acci- dents to medical support facilities.
Areas for Review and Acceptance Criteria
Because the early symptoms of persons exposed to dangerous levels of radiation
are usually limited to nausea and vomiting, ambulances may not be required to
transport such persons to medical facilities. Rather, non-specialized public
and private vehicles can be used; supported, if necessary, with agreements In
accordance with A.3. above. For other types of contaminated injured individ- uals, specialized transportation resources (e.g., ambulances) would be necessary
and should be assured by agreements, if necessary, in accordance with A.3. above.
Provisions should be made for the use of contamination control in transporting
contaminated persons to medical facilities.
Attachment 1 IN 86-98 December 2, 1986 -4- Planning Standard
0. Radiological Emergency Response Training
Radiological emergency response training is provided to those who may be
called on to assist in an emergency.
0.4. Evaluation Criterion
Each organization shall establish a training program for instructing and quali- fying personnel who will implement radiological emergency response plans. The
specialized initial training and periodic retraining programs (including the
scope, nature and frequency) shall be provided in the following categories:
h. Medical support personnel
Areas for Review and Acceptance Criteria
Each hospital listed under Evaluation Criteria L.1 and L.3. shall have at least
one physician and one nurse on call within about 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> who can supervise the
evaluation and treatment of radiologically 'contaminated injured' members of
the general public. There are several sources for this training including NRC
licensee sponsored training. Transportation providers should have basic training
in contamination control. Examples include but are not limited to:
1. FEMA handbook, videotape, slides and instruction manual titled 'Hospital
Emergency Department Management of Radiation Accidents," SM 80/1984.
2. Courses from The Radiation Emergency Assistance Center/Training Site
(REAC/TS) at Oak Ridge Associated Universities.
3. Audiocassette and text course, 'Radiation Accident Preparedness: Medical
and Managerial Aspects" by Science-Thru-Media Inc.,'303 Fifth Avenue, Suite
803, New York, NY 10016.
N. Exercises and Drills
Planning Standard
Periodic exercises are (will be) conducted to evaluate major portions of emer- gency response capabilities, periodic drills are (will be) conducted to develop
and maintain key skills, and deficiencies identified as a result of exercises
or drills are (will be) corrected.
Attachment 1 In 86-98 December 2, 1986 -5-
N.2. Evaluation Criterion
A drill is a supervised instruction period aimed at testing, developing and
maintaining skills in a particular operation. A drill is often a component of
an exercise. A drill shall be supervised and evaluated by a qualified drill
instructor. Each organization shall conduct drills, in addition to the biennial
asvad* exercise at the frequencies indicated below:
c. Medical emergency drills
A medical emergency drill involving a simulated contaminated Individual which
contains provisions for participation by the local support services agencies
(i.e., ambulance and offsite medical treatment facility) shall be conducted
annually. The offsite portions of the medical drill may be performed as part
of the required biennial aRnua4'* exercise.
Areas for Review and Acceptance Criteria
State or local governments should provide for the conduct of appropriate drills
and exercises which include 'contaminated injured" individuals. These medical
emergency drills involving the primary local (L.1.) hospital for state and local
governments should be conducted annually. These drills should also test the
capability of relocation centers to direct contaminated injured' members of the
general public to the appropriate hospital. If State or local governments cannot
provide for the conduct of the drills, the licensee shall provide for the con- duct of such drills. If good faith efforts are not successful in a particular
case, the licensee shall provide or arrange for adequate compensatory measures.
Implementation
State and local emergency response plans should reflect the provisions of this
GM at the next annual update following 9 months from the effective date of this
GM.
Plans for plants that do not have a full power operating license should reflect
the provisions of this GM within 9 months of the effective date of this GM. The
first medical drill reflecting the provisions of this GM should be conducted by
the end of the next biennial exercise following 1 year from the effective date
of this GM.
- Changes reflect language incorporated into GM PR-i.
Attachment 1 IN 86-98 December 2, 1986 -6-
NRC Coordination
This Guidance Memorandum has been prepared'in coordination with the NRC staff.
As noted in the referenced NRC Policy Statement, the Cotmmission has determined
that these modifications fall under the backfit rule's exception as necessary
to bring facilities into compliance with a rule of the Commission.
.;
Attachment 1
1N4 b0-Y
Decemaer 2, 1986 Attachment B
K- 42905 Federal Rezister I Vol. 51. No. SO I Wednesday. September 17. 19B8 I Rules and Regulations
such additional arrangements, tbo decislonalt Commission Itself faced
Commission leaves to the Informed for the &St time the question whether
fudmnent of the NRC staff. subject to planning standard (b)(12) applied to
genital guidance from the Commission. members of the public who were
the exact parameters of the minimally exposed to offeite radiation foilowing an
necessary arrangements for medical accident at a nuclear power facility but
services. To fulfill this mandate the staff were not otherwise Injured, and if so to
(and FEMA) will isue appropriate what extenL In considering this
gidance to licensees. applicants,snd question. the Commission sought the
state and local gOVErnmsntsa views of the parties in the SONGS
The United States Court of A ppeal proceeding, reviewed the principal
for the District of Columbia Court) puposes of the planning standard.
vacated and remanded a preious analyzed the likelihood of serious
Commission Interpretation of planning exposures to the public requirin
standard (1b(121 which required only th emergency medical restmaent. and
development and maIntenance of a Ust evaluated the type of emergency
of treatment facilities on which post. treatment likely to be required. Based on
event, adkhoc arrangements for medical this review, the Commission concluded
treatment could be based GUARD v. as a neric matter that (1)PlannIng
AMC 753 F2d 1144 (D.C Cir. 1985). tsnd rd (b)t12) applied to Individuals
Pending final Commission action Xi both onsIts and oaita. (2)
response to the GUARD remand the *contaminated Injured individuals was
Commilsion Issued a statement of Intended to Include seriously irradiated
interim guidance which permitted. members of the public as well us
pursuant to 10 COR S0.47(CcXI the members of the public who an not
isuance of full power licenses when seriously Irradiated but also are
the applicant satisfied the requirements traumatically injured from other causes
of planning standard (b)(12) as and radiologically contaminated. and (3P
Interpreted by the Commission prior to Atdeq'uatn. post-accIdent arrngements
GUARM and where the applicant for necessary medical tretment of
committed to full compliance With the exposed sembers of te public could be
Comnission's final response to th made ona n od~c basisb if aemeenc
GUARD remand. The Commission's plans contained a list ofcal "atmam
prior interim guidance will continue to
Bovern the Issuance of lull power On appeal. the United States Cort of
ficenses until issuance and Appeals for the p.C. Circuit concluded
Implementation of the NRC staff s that the Commission had not reasonably
specific guidance on this matter, at interpreted planning standard (bl2U2)
which point the new policy Wil applyt when It generically found that a p-
£flcTWI DAtJ September171966 accident list of treatment facilities
FOR FURMR WFORMATSON COWTACU constituted "arrangements" for post.
C.Sebastian Aoot. Office of the accident medical treatment CUUARD v.
General Counsel. U.S Nuclear MRC 753 F.2d 1144 (D.C. Cir 19851W For
NUCLEAR REGULATORY Regulatory Commission, Washnton. this reason. the Court vacated and
COMMISSION DC 2=5. Telephone (202) 634-224. remanded that part of the Commission's
SU"UNIMTARY IORAOC SONGS decision that had interpr ted
tO CFR Par s0 planning standard (b)ll) to require only
L Introducion the preparation of a list of loca
Emergency PlabnInn-Medical I the wake of the Tree Mie Island treatment facilities. Hower, In doing
Services accident In 1979. the Nuclear Regulatory so. the Court made clear that the
aocmr. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC" or -Commission") Commission had on remand. In its sound
Commission. promulgated regulations requiring Its dlscretlon. flexibility in fashioning a
imfnow. Statement of Policy on licensees and applicants for licenses to reasonable interpretation of plann
Emergency Planning Standard 10 CR operate commercial nuclear power standard (b)(12)
50.47(b)(12) reactors to develop plans for emergency
responses to acciTents at their facilities. IL Anangemants Beyond AkUst Of
Among those requirements was 10 CFR Tnatment Fadlities Requird
S1UMAR rThe Nuclear Regulatory
Commission CNR'or "Commission) 50.47(b)(12) ("'pannln standard Whe originally aeed with the
believes that 10 CR S47(b)(12) (bX12R which proves: question whether the phrase
rplanning standard (bl(12)') requires (b1 The onsits end effaite meqlcy "contaminated injard individuals" was
rtea ccident arrangements for medical nsponse plan bor auctear power mtorr Intended to encompass, Interalic.
.. *ervices (beyond the maintenance of a must meet the lowing stndArd:- members of the public who, as a result
list of treatment facilities) for 1:21 Arrangements ame made for medical of an accident. were exposed to
individuals who might be severely erucses bor contaminated Iniured indidualus.L dangerous levels of radiation. the
exposed to dangerous levels of offilte In SouLhtern Colifornio Wison Commission found no explicit and
radiation following an accident at a Compony, o ol (San Onofre Nuclear conclusive definition of the phrase In the
nuclear power plant. While concluding Generating Station. Units 2 and 3). CIJ- regulation Itself or its underlyint
that planning standard (b)(12) requires 53-10.17 NRC 528 (lu3) (-SONGS) documents. Nonetheless, the
IN 86-98 Federal Register I Vol. St. No. 160 l Wednesday. September 17, i988 / Rules and Regulations 32905 Commission concluded that the prudent Tbe minimaly necessary The Commission has determined that
risk reduction purpose of the arrangements for the person that may be the arrangements contemplated under
Commissions regulations required exposed need not be elaborate. As this Statement of Policy are the
interpreting planning standard (b)(12) to previously stated by the Commissio minimum required by a reasonable
apply to such offllie exposed "it was never the intent of the reading of planning standard (bflt.2)
Individuals. given the underlying reulsltions to require directly or ccordingly. although Implementtlion of
assumption of the NRCS emergency Indirectly that state and local tbisrewading of the standard will entail
planning regulations that a serious governments adopt extraordinary some addibions to. and some
accident could ovur and the measures. Such as construction of modifications of. the emergency
Commission presumption that sudc an additional hospitals or reruitment of procedures and organizations for which
accident could result In offadte substantial additional medical lcens ees ar ultimately responsible. the
individuals being expsed lo dangerous personnel. just to deal with nudesr requirements of the backlit rule. 0 CFR
levels of radiation (apresumption plant accidents.' 17 NRC at 133. Rather. 0.109 1986). for a cost-benefil analysis
concurred Inby the Federal Emergency the Commission believts that and a finding that the costs of the
Mfana;emenl Agency). After satisfactoty arrangements shoudd modifications are justified by a
reconsideration of this matter following include (13 a list of local orneglonal substantial Ineresse in safety are not
the GUARD decision, the Commission medical treatment facilities and applicable, since these modification. fall
has decided to neaffirm this por transportation providers appropriately under the backfil rule's exception for
interpretation of planning standard annotated to show their capacities, modifications necessary to bring
(b)12). special capabilities or other uiue facilities into compliance with a rule of
However, the Commission has come characteristics. (23 a good faith the Commission. See 10 CiR 50109 to a different result with rpect to the reasonable effort by licensees or local cr (al2) and (*X4) (1986). The analysis
minimum arrangements necessary for state governments to facilitate or obtain which the backht rule requires be done
Individuals who might be seriously written agreements with the listed to justify the application of any of Its
txposed. but not othervbse injured. in a medical facilities and transportatin exception provisions constitutes the
radiologic emergency. hIn otiginally providers. (33 provision for naking core or tis Statement of Policy. Sem
resolving the scope of arsnnemercita available necessary training for m. inerim Guiam
IssUe, the Commission focused on the emergency response personnel to
particular needs of offjite exposed identity. transport and provide In Its prior stalement of policy the
Individuals for emerency medical emergency frst aid to severely exposed Comm-ssion ldentified thee factors
treatment of their radiation injury. In Individuals, and (4)a good fith which Justified an Interim policy of
this fashion, the Commission made a reasonable effort by licensees or state or gr nting applicants for ull-power
distinction between the need for ' local governments to see that ctnse an equitable exception to the
Immediate or nearterm medical care. appropriait drills and exercises am requi reent of planning standard
which was in Its view the goal of conducted which Include simulated (b)(12) unter 10 Clh 5047(c)(l) where
planning standard (b)121. and Ohe need severely-exposed individuals. If good the applicant satisfied the requiremnats
for long -term medical care. As to faith efforts are not successful In a of planning standard (b)(12) as
exposed individuals. the Commission particular case. the licensee shall Interpreted by the Commission prior to
found that. provide or arrange for adequate the GUARD decision and committed
the special hazard Isposed by the radistion compensatory measures. consistent with Itself to ful compliance With any
expOSURe to te Patient The natuef d the Commissiona intent to limit t e additional requirements Imposed by the
radition Injurytr that. wile medical need for extraordinary measures noted Commission in response to the GUARD
eatment ay e eventually reqirdIn above. The compensatory measures remand. Statement of Policy on
uses O~e~bf ft exposure, the pate are must be approved by NRC. This levelof Emergency Planning Standard 10 CFR
unliliely to aued emewrgncy m cat cOrS planning would help (2)provide 50.471b(1l2). So TR 2CaM (May ZL 2DM)
(footnoe omitted) The sonoa aCy of lb additional assurance of the cooperation The three factors wara: (13the
tratment requind for uudiatioomxpwd of medical facilities. (23 ensure proper possibility that the scope of planning
Indivd&als provides ensita ad oU its training. (3)ensure the availability of standard (b)(12) would be limited. (2)
authiiiu with an add tional "ar oft de transportation, and (4)demonstrate a the possibility that delay in complia
to aivangi for the required medica Ivic. capability to provide necessary services with the post-GUARD requirements
(17 NRC LU-.) through drills and exercis . could be found to be Insignificant due to
From thfs the Cominiuton reasoned TAe Commission has directed the staff the low probability of accidents during
that the long-term treatment needs of to develop, consistent with this the interim period and (3)the possibility
exposed Individuals could be Interpretation of the planning standU d of 'other compeling reasons JuStifyin
adequately met on odhoc basis. detailed and specific guidance on the a briefexception whe applicants had
After reconsideration In light of the aslure of the medical services to be relied In good faith upon prnor
GUARD dedslon. the Commlislon bu available to exposed Individuals and on Commiss~ion Interpretation ofplaning
concluded that snme additional planned the application of plaruning standud standard ](b12).
rrangements beyond the development rb)(21) to NRC licensees and applicants In this Stateent ofPolicy Interpretint
of a list of treatment facilities are or licenses to operate commercial planning standard (b)112) the
Necessary to provide additional nuclear power reactors The Commission directs the NRC stall to
assurance of effective management of Commission has also directed the staff develop tin Consultation with JEhA)
emergency medical services In the bow-s to consider whether and under what and issue by 12/17/68 appropriate
or days following a severe accident. criteria it is necessary or approprIate for detailed guidance on the exact contours
However, the Commisalon continues to the stat to verity the approprilatenss of of the necessary arrangements
believe that the long-term treatment training, and drills or exercises consistent with the CocrmissIon'r
needs of exposed individuals can be associatet with the handling of severely determination that planning standard
adequately met on adhoc basis. exposed persons. (b)(22) require arrangements for medical
Attacnment i.
IN 86-98 December 2, 1986 32908 Federal Regstuer I Vol. 51. No. 10 / Wednesday, September 17, 1986 J Rules end Regulation s
services (beyond the maintenance ot
list of pre-ixlsting tnatment facilties)
for oWfite exposed individual. The
Commission believes that the last two
factors. discussed In detail iA its May 21
1gs5 Statement of Policy. continue to
justify reliance on the Interim guidance
for the period necessary for the NRC
staff to issue and licensees. applicant, and state and local governments to
Implement the detailed uldance.
Therrr^Ore. until appropnoatc det ited
guldance consistent with thi policy
statement Is issued and implemented.
the Ucensin g Boards may continua to
reasonably tund that any hearing
regarding compliance with 10 CFR
So.47(b)(121 shall be limited to Issues
which could have been heard before the
Court's decision in CUAAD v. NBC.
Dated at Washlnon. DC. tis Uth day of
Septembet. 1916.
For the Nudest Reguator Commission.
Samuel 1.COiL.
SectarfryOfhe Commiueion
rFi DoMe 56258 Filed 6-2166 1:43 aml
SW. cm n1411
Attachment 1 IN 86-98 December 2, 1986 Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D.C. 20472 Attachment C
November 13, 1986 OPERATIVE GUIDANCE MEMORANDA
Number Date Title
4 4/1/80 Radio Transmission Frequencies and Coverage
5 4/1/80 Agreements Among Governmental Agencies and Private
(Revised- Parties
10/19/83)
8 4/2/80 Regional Advisory Cammittee Coordination with Utilities
(Revised-
10/19/83)
16 8/7/80 Standard Regional Reviewing and Reporting Procedures for
State and Local Radiological Emergency Response Plans
17 1/8/81 Joint Exercise Procedures
18 5/21/81 FEMA Action to Qualify Alert and Notification Systems
(Revised- Against NURE3-0654/F!MA-REP-1, Rev. 1
10/19/83)
20 10/19/83 Foreiqn Language Translation of Public Education Brochures
and Safety Messages
21 2/27/84 Acceptance Criteria for Evacuation Plans
22 10/19/83 Recordkeeping Requirements for Public Meetings
24 4/5/84 Radiological Emergency Preparedness for Handicapped Persons
EX-1 7/15/85 Remedial Exercises
EX-2 7/15/85 Staff Support in Evaluating REP Exercises
PR-1 10/1./85 Policy on NUREM-0654/FEMA-REP-1 and 44 CFR 350 Periodic
Requirements
Attachment 1 IN 86-98 December 2, 1986 2 IT-i 1041/85 A Guide to Dcurments Related to the REP Program
PI1- 10/2/85 FEMA Action to Pilot Test Guidance on Public Information
Materials and Provide Technical Assistance on Its Use
FR-1 12/3/85 Federal Response Center
MS-1 11/13/86 Medical Services
EV-2 * 11,43/86 Protective Actions for School Children
- GM-21 will be retitled as GM EY-1 when it is revised.
S I' '- . ;. 'W
Attachment 2 IN 86-98 December 2, 1986 LIST OF RECENTLY ISSUED
IE INFORMATION NOTICES
Information Date of
Notice No. Subject Issue Issued to
86-97 Emergency Communications 11/28/86 All power reactor
System facilities holding
facilities
86-96 Heat Exchanger Fouling Can 11/20/86 All power reactor
Cause Inadequate Operability facilities holding
Of Service Water Systems an OL or CP
86-95 Leak Testing Iodine-125 11/14/86 All NRC licensees
Sealed Sources In Lixi, Inc. authorized to use
Imaging Devices and Bone Lixi, Inc. imaging
Mineral Analyzers devices
86-94 Hilti Contrete Expansion 11/6/86 All power reactor
Anchor Bolts facilities holding
86-93 IEB 85-03 Evaluation Of 11/3/86 All power reactor
Motor-Operators Identifies facilities holding
Improper Torque Switch an OL or CP
Settings
86-82 Failures Of Scram Discharge 11/4/86 All power reactor
Rev. 1 Volume Vent And Drain Valves facilities holding
86-92 Pressurizer Safety Valve 11/4/86 All PWR facilities
Reliability holding an OL or CP
86-91 Limiting Access 11/3/86 All power reactor
Authorizations facilities holding
fabrication and
processing facilities
86-90 Requests To Dispose Of Very 11/3/86 All power reactor
Low-Level Radioactive Waste facilities holding
Pursuant to 10 CFR 20.302 an OL or CP
OL = Operating License
CP = Construction Permit