ML19081A086

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
M190320: Scheduling Note and Slides - Meeting with the Organization of Agreement States and the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors (Public)
ML19081A086
Person / Time
Issue date: 03/20/2019
From:
NRC/SECY
To:
Shared Package
ML19080A298 List:
References
Download: ML19081A086 (15)
v • d • e


Text

SCHEDULING NOTE

Title:

MEETING WITH THE ORGANIZATION OF AGREEMENT STATES (OAS) AND THE CONFERENCE OF RADIATION CONTROL PROGRAM DIRECTORS (CRCPD) (Public Meeting)

Purpose:

To inform the Commission of radioactive materials policy and regulatory issues of interest to the States.

Scheduled: March 20, 2019 Time: 10:00 a.m.

Duration: Approx. 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> Location: Commissioners' Conference Room, 1st Floor OWFN

Participants:

Presentation OAS and CRCPD Leadership: 60 mins.*

Jennifer Opila, Director, Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (OAS Chair)

Topic:

Topic:

  • OAS Perspectives on Financial Assurance David Turberville, Director, Office of Radiation Control, Alabama Department of Public Health (OAS Past Chair)

Topic:

  • The Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program Jeff Semancik, Director, Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, Radiation Division (CRCPD Chair-Elect)

Topic:

  • CRCPD On-Going Activities
  • CRCPD Vision for the Next Year 1

Commission Q & A 50 mins.

Discussion - Wrap-up 5 mins.

  • For presentation only and does not include time for Commission questions and answers 2

Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors (CRCPD)

Board Brief to NRC Commissioners Jeff Semancik Chair-Elect CRCPD March 20, 2019

Topics

  • Collaboration successes
  • Radiological Operations Support Specialist (ROSS) Program

Collaboration Successes

  • CLIA Letter
  • Training Support

Offsite Emergency Preparedness for Decommissioned and Next

. Generation Reactors

CRCPD supports graded*approach to offsite EP

  • Support integration of Radiological Emergency Plan (REP) organization into an all-hazards Incident Command Structure {ICS)
  • Degree of safety should be commensurate with risk
  • The public helps define acceptable risk
  • Do not expect EP to be supported at same level as with operating light water reactors (LWRs)

Myopic focus on EPZ size should not overly drive all other EP requirements

  • Special and unique hazards require unique response capabilities/preparedness
  • General All-Hazards capabilities are not sufficient to address potential radiological hazards
  • ORO radiological capabilities require licensee support
  • Other funding is challenged
  • Next generation reactors may have unique and unfamiliar hazards (different chemical hazards, source terms, etc.)
  • Due to the loss of experienced Offsite Response Organization (ORO) personnel, additional support will be required to respond to radiological events
  • Homeland security response capabilities are not wholly consistent with those required for nuclear power plant (NPP) response

NPP preparedness is a public confidence issue

  • Despite analytical calculations, the public expects a "trust but verify" approach should any accident occur at a NPP
  • At a minimum, sampling and analysis of any offsite release would be expected
  • History has taught us that physics has a better imagination than designers (Salem ATWS, Browns Ferry, TMI, Fukushima, etc.)
  • Licensees should provide support for offsite preparedness as part of their obligation to local communities

State and Local stakeholders should have mean i ngfu I in put

  • All events are local - Municipalities must deal with impacts
  • CRCPD can provide consensus input and local insights
  • Experience in coordination and outreach from Naval Nuclear Power Program and Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations (ISFSls)
  • ROSS offers opportunity for state/locals to provide mutual aid and support to control costs
  • Meaningful engagement minimizes potential for alternate strategies L

0 0...

D...

~ E V) m C: L 0 b.O 0

L (U 0....

L Q) ~ '

D... (./)

oQ (U

cc u

  • - -1,-J b.O (/")

0 *-

m 0 *-

-0 Q) u (U D...

cc: (./)

ROSS

  • During Radiological Incidents: SME Demand>> SME Resources
  • Radiological Operations Support Specialist {ROSS)
  • State/Local SME {FEMA-typed) asset
  • Translate between local and federal response organizations
  • Technical Interpreter, - Incident Commander's Health Physicist
  • Provide the expertise necessary to clearly explain the implications of modeling, measurement, and analysis methods as well as, health risks and hazards existing during a radiological incident
  • Prepared for diverse radiological events

Building the ROSS Cadre

  • Over 100 trained since 2016
  • Many ROSS are retired or private sector SM Es
  • Qualification requires exercise participation as ROSS
  • Vibrant Response {IND)
  • Silent Thunder {RDD)
  • Southern Exposure Roglon
  • Duane Arnold IV
  • Millstone (including CRCs)
  • Pilgrim

Flexible, Cost-Effective Enhancement to REP

  • Incorporating ROSS volunteers into Rad Emergency planning provides a simple and cost effective enhancement to preparedness.
  • Effective and flexible alternative to leverage additional radiological SM Es
  • State response procedures should incorporate guidance for requesting and activating ROSS
  • Cadre management handled by the FEMA-ROSS steering committee
  • ROSS are being successfully used in graded exercises

Support for ROSS Program

  • Incorporate in Emergency Response Plans
  • Exercise Support for ROSS
  • Credentialing
  • Access to training and tools for non-government ROSS
  • Encourage the opportunity
  • Questions:
  • William.lrwin@vermont.gov
  • Represents the CRCPD on the ROSS Steering Committee
Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19081A086&oldid=2395368"