ML19247A687

Submits to Congress Proposed NRC Comments Re Gao Rept on Radiological Emergencies

ML19247A687
Person / Time
Issue date:	05/18/1979
From:	Ryan R NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP)
To:
Shared Package
ML19247A686	List: ML19247A685 ML19247A687 ML19247A688 ML19247A694 ML19247A696 ML19247A697 ML19247A698
References
REF-10CFR9.7 SECY-79-343, NUDOCS 7908010661
Download: ML19247A687 (11)

Text

_

d N SECY-79-313 "av 15, 1979 COMMISSIONER ACTION rcr:

ine Cecnissicners Frem:

Robert G. Ryan, Director Office af Sta e Programs

./

Thru:

Executive Director for Operaticns

Subject:

RESPONSE TO GA0 REPORT CN RADIOLCGICAL EMERGE"CIES Pur:cs e:

To obtain Ccnrission approval of NRC c:mments to Congress Discussien:

The Legislative Reorgani:ation Act of 1970 requires the Chainnan to submit a written statement en action taken en GA0 recomendations to the House and Senate Cecnittees on Goverrcent Ocerations not later than (0 days after the date of the repert.

The GA0 report, " Areas Arcund Nuclear Facilities Shculd Se Setter Prepared For Radiolcgical Exercencies,

recuires a rescense to Ccngress by May 29, 1979.

The enciesed let:er is the proposed respense.

This GAC report discusses the emergency response planning and capabilities a: the nuclear f acilities of the Nuclear Reguia:Ory Cecrissicn, Ce:ar= ent cf Cefense, and Cepar=ent of Energy and the surrounding

mmuni ti es.

I: akes two rec:mendations to ne Chairman, Nuclear Regulatory C:cnissicn, and a third recenrendatien jointly t: the Chair an and the

.n adciticn, ne i

Secretaries cf Defense and Energy.

recer: makes join and se: ara:e rec:menca-icns :: :he Secre: aries of :efense anc Erergy anc One

-he

irec::c, Feceral Emergency uanagemen

'gency.

he r:::csec 1RC rescense agrees na, "

ne 'icn: :#

=e hree 'li e :: anc (TM:, ac:icen:, "

vcu'd :e

esi 2:le #:r ne 1RC staf# anc ne :: missi:n ::

n 2: 3:

0,

3. OJ/an,.(-23170 at:EC: !..e 3AO rec = enca!i n.na. 9tclear CCWer M. E. Sancers, 4-27ElC lancs :e allCheC !O :e9 i'i Cera:icn CCI!.vnere 3!a~e an:

d iccal emercenc / res:cnse : ans ree-1 C '. s :: anni nc :O :C EittZb mg s

~

~

4hgg;M;'

,up "es :nse

2:es =2: ::Esice"3 icr wi

<ewise, 9

.g g

p es

e ;w en : =e rec:=enca-1:n za: :icensees :e k!!ENk%

4 g!,

0:0 29o8o10

,/

9

. required to make agreements aita 5:2:e and local agencies assuring tne full participaticn of tnese agencies in annual 3:ersency drills with State and local governments.

Concerning the establishment of 10-mile emergency planning

nes arcund all nuclear pcwer plants, the res;cnse states that the Ccemission will give careful considera icn to this reccmmendation and other rec:mmendations of the NRC/E?A Task Force in its rescrt "NUREG/ EPA-520/1-73-015 of December 1978. The NRC/ EPA Task Force will analyse all public ccmments, internal NRC staff comments, and comments of other Federal agencies before the matter is put before the Ccamission and E?A in July 1979.

The response indicates that the GA0 reccmmendation that pecple living near nuclear facilities be given mere information abcut the potential ha:ard, emergency acticns planned and what to do in the event of any accident is similar in part to a Public Interes: Research Group (PIRG) petition for rulemaking that was denied by the Ccmmis: ion in July 1977.

Mcwever, the respense states that seme information may be desirable and the NRC will take apprcpriate action to carry cut this reccmmendation.

The propcsed respense expresses support for the GAO recommendations t: the Secretaries of Cefense and Taergy which call for more effer: in radiolcgical emergency preparedness with the State and local gcvernments wnere CCO and CCE nuclear facilities are located.

The NRC respense also sup;cr s the GA0 rec:mmendaticn f:r the Director, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to be responsible for making policy and for c:orcina:ing radiological emergency res;cnse planning ar:unc nucisar facilities so icng as the technical Federal agencies, Nuclear Regulatory C:mmission, Envir:nmental ?retec-icn Agency, anc Cesartment of Health, Education, anc delfare, are permitted to continue providing assistance to State anc iccal goverrments uncer 1RC ecnnical leacersai:.

Su jec

Ccmmissi:n a:Cr: val, an identical ie::er :c

ne encicsure will be sen

ncer ne Chairman's signature ne

hairman, Senate Ccemi::ee :n icvernmentai aff ai s,

Chai-man, Senate Succ:mmi::ee :n Nuclear Reguia-i:n; "hairman, Hcuse Succ mmittee :n Energy inc the Envi-crment; ll Q'n C"

-3 Chairman, Hcuse Subc:mmittee On Energy and : wer, Cemetroller General of the U.S., and Director, Ci S.

The most important of GAO's rec mmendaticns :o :ne Chairman, NRC, and the only c:n:reversial ene, is the proposal that nuclear pcwer plants begin Operation only where State and lccal scverr. ment emergency response plans centain all the C:mmissien's essential planning elements (Supplement No. I to NUREG-75/lli, dated March 15, 1977).

The proposed response would have the Ccmmission accept this rec mmendation.

There are several arguments in favor of Commissicn su; port of this GA0 rec mmendation:

e Reccgnizes the im;cr: ant linkage between licensee and offsite organi:atien emergency plans and preparedness for respense to radio-logical emergencies.

e A bold step in fulfillment of the NRC mission of protection of health and safety of the public in relation to its licensing activities.

Will give public more assurance that the C mmissicn 4

takes seriously this central aspect of its mission.

There is a gr wing sentiment in the Congress e

to legislate this requirement.

The C:mmissien, going on rec:rd new, might disarm er favcrably influence the penponents in Congress.

A positive stance r.cw c:uld put the C:mmissi:n in a position :: ac::mciish the objective scught by the GA0 rec:nmendation and similar legislative prc:csals in a manner mes at:eo:-

able and feasibla to the NRC.

e creas Ccenissicn to acdress an ;m;crian:

clicy issue, in :neir terms, before i-is likely :: te cic:2:ec :: -hem, ;erna:s 'n

arms tha are less agreeab:S Or ;erna:s undC eC aOle.

0 rec gnizes ;r.e 'Tdcriance C Offsi*a nseCuences Of aC:icents a: nuclear CCwer :Iants, as :crne Ou: by "d!, anc :ne : mm": men: Of :ne 1EC '.:

Cay Cre a*.;en:1:n *: emergency "es:Cnse 1:~.ivi!y

'n nesa areas anc ;17'9g '

1 ccre :a:ancac : lace Wi:n licensee CIanni".g 'n tre 1EC 'i ensi~g r :SsI.

404 0:2

4 inere are also arguments Or r.c: scing alcng w1:n :ne GA0 rec:mmendaticn:

State and local authcrities could thwar:

e licensing prccess by refusing to 6:"alop emergency plan.

e C:mmissien and staff has no sufficiently evaluated the pr:posal :: knew encugn of the implications and ramifica:icns that are r.ecessary for a kncwledgeable decisicn.

More time is required to properly staff this s

impcrtant policy. atter.

m l.

.ne present voluntary procedure of dea.ing witn e

the States is working reasonably well and is producing acceptacle results.

States have shcwn increased and renewed interest in plan prepara-tion and NRC concurrence since TMI.

Staff requirements will increase due to need e

for formal regulatory procedures to implement

proposal, n

rurtr.er.eiays in licensing of plants couls.

~

a c

result.

Greater strain will be placed en State anc iccal e

governments :o meet more formal, and perna:s more stringent, requirements that would resuit if the recuiremen: nas made a par cf :ne licensing pr. ass.

Cn talance, State :rcgrams believes the C:mmission shculd accept this GAC rec:mmenca:icn.

a dit concurs.

The Cf# ice C:crdination:

The Office of Inspection anc u

of :ne E.<ecucive Legal Cir2c :r has c legal bjections.

. n C., r s <.....,. a.o..

,--,<.s.a../,.......,...

i.e

a..=.

o

.o 4

-..q.a.-.

n

-r,.

-. c-

. o.s C,..s s.e.

. L,.. p 'i

2../ 2.,.

...3..

a.

.2io

. ~...

- s e e..w.'.y =. e a. <.. c. e. e. s. e.

844.-

. re. e.

1a ee

= a r.-

.s '. %.

2 s

ti.

..44

.5 ep-s I e.yi.C.

e

. * * ~..C s *. ~ ', ~. '. ' '..~.2 r. *.

.4g u,.g y a.

2....:e.....a.s.

. a-

.e a

n....

• '.g.

... :.

• i, *. g g p S t y..g p i g

• J

• li ps

.t O./* V p g r..m. 4. i... 9 e.d yp

• O mp s..

.t.

.ca #. *. ~.' '/.2 ". 4 ". #. a #. 2. #. '.' '. ". '. " ~ ". * <. ". C ". ^^**"* ""

~..~3

'S.'.'.~.~.4."..~.2-J..

6

' s...

..2.2 2.%

c. 2 :.....a r. c r. <r. j.,

.3.<..... e.

e

.a. n

.y

.a. r s

aOM CF7 IrJi UJJ

pcwer plant licensing pr: cess because of :ne inclications in the licensing of other nuclear activities.

The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regula icn preposed alternative language en the rescense dealing wita State and lccal emergency plans which essentially rejects the GA0 rec:mmendation en the grounds that its cojectives can be me

nrcugn :he present c: ordination of licensee - state - iccal emergency planning and preparedness ca; abilities as set forth in 10 CFR 50, Appendix E and Regulatocy Guide 1.101 The Office of Inspection and Enforcemen; believes that the respense to the GA0 rec:mmendation on : tate and local government emergency plans sr.ould state that more time is neeced to evaluate it.

The c:mments of SC, NMSS, NRR and IE are enclosed.

CCA concurs in addressees...,

-~. ~,ai,.l.,/.

~

l',, l : lJ..,.

Rotert G. Ryan, Director Office of 5:ste pregrams Encicsures:

1.

Draft letter to Congress 2.

NRC Actions en GAO recemmendaticns

^

3.

Other office views Ccmmissioners' c:mments shculd be provided directly to the Office Of the Secretary by c.c.b. Friday. Yay 25, 1979.

C:mmissicn Staff Of# ice c:mments, if any, sr.cuid be submitted the C:mmissicners NLT May 23, 1979, with an in#.rmation c:;y to :ne Of ice of

ne Secretary.

• f :ne :a:er is of sucn a 4:ure :na: it requires acciti:nal time for analytical review and c:mmen, :ne Occmissioners and the Secretaria-shculd be a:Crised of unen ::mments may be ex:ec:ec.

,.-,-.-,,_.,,l:

.:u

mmiss :ners C:mmission Staf# Of# ices Exec ]i" # r C erati:ns Eegi;nal

~.f# ices

• Ys Se C re *.a ri a".

r "_ l4 n!

[i e 4 U.,

0 RA F T The Hencrable Jack itoks, Chai rman Comittae en Nyern. rent Cceraticns U.S. Hcuse of Representatives Wa;..ingt:n, D.C.

20515 Cear Mr. Chai rman:

Cn March 30, 1979, the Ccmotroller General of the United States submitted a re: ort to the Congress entitled " Areas Arcund Nuclear Facilities Shculd Se Better Prepared for Radiological Emergencies."

The report made two rec:mmendaticns to the Chairman of ne Nuclear Regulat:ry Commissi:n and ne rec:mrencation 2 :licable to the Secretaries of Defense and Energy, as well as, the Chai rman.

In addition, the re: ort made a rec:mrendation to the Director, Federa Emergency Management Agency that has direct imclica:icns for an interagency cregram for which the Nuclear Regula cry Commissicn staff crevides leacershio.

I am cleased ::

revide you with :ne enciesed statement of acti ns ths Nuclear Regula:Ory Ccmmission plans :: take in addressing :ne re::m-mencati:ns irec:ad 3: this agency.

als: incluces a rea::f:n :: :.". e re c mmenca ti c, ma de :: the Director, receral E.'ergency Yanagemen agency.

Sincerely,

.'e s e:r u - -en:ria Chai" man 5.*

$ :s u r* :

Ees ense :: "AC Ed:Or:

p n.1

['r-

.v t

' J

ur : anx c r.;.

,,n.

-n 6*

WWW W

NRC ACTICNS CN GA0 RECCtPENCATICNS TO CHAI:"AN. NRC 1.

"The Chairman, Nuc'. ear Regulatory Ccanission shculd alicw nuclear ecwer plants to begin operation only wnere State and 1ccai energency respcnse plans centain all the Ccenissien's essential planning el emen ts.

In addition, the Ccmmission shculd require license applicants to make agreements with State and local agencies assuring their full participation in annual amergency drills over the life of the facility."

NRC ACTION To date, NRC has not censidered it necessary to require tr.at State and local radialegical emergency rer crse plans centain ali the :cemissions' essential planning elements as a c ndition precedent to issuing a nuclear pcwer plan: cperating 1 cense.

Sucn plans are desirable, hcwever, since they prcvide an added assurance to the State and lccal officials and the general public where nuclear pcwer plants are located that a; rceriate y

protective measures could be taken in the event of an acciden; witn effsite ccnsequerces The NRC, witn 'ne cccperation of seven other Feceral agencies, has had scme success in assisting State and local gcvernmente in the : reparation anc evaluaticn of :neir radiclegical emergency res:cnse : ans and in

ner activi:ies to imprcve Sta e and Iccal preparecness ;cs ure in this area.

This activity dces not rest cn any s:eci#ic sta u ory authcrity and is done en a c:c:erative ar.d...untary : asis.

Over

.9e

as wc years, State anc Iccal ;cver ment ca:abild:ies

"es: cec :

.ne Of# i 8 e#feC:s Of a quC5 ear CCWer :lan "acic'.gi aI acci en. Save een Ocnsicerec i.1 a T.Cre f:rmal way in :ne licer.si*g OrcCe:s.

~10 1: 0 *c a l."

..,i '... e. ; -.

.r.

u r

,e s-

_2-has been through the evaluation of the licensee emergency plans and the requirements in NRC regulatiens that certain emergency readiness arrangments be made by the licensee with offsite State and local government crganizations.

The Three Mile Island accident response by S:ste and Iccal organizatiens and the utility has raised a number of questions about legal requirements for and adequacy of emergency radiolcgical response plans. We believe new that the emergency plans of licensees and of State and local

.vernments have bec me so interdependent thct NRC regulations shculd give them similar legal status in the licensing prccess.

We have, accordingly, instructed the staff to develop appropriate changes to the Cerraission's regulations which will require NRC concurrence in the adequacy of State and lccal radiological emergency respense plans related to licensed nuclear facilities as a candition for granting an cperating license.

Regarding emergency drills by State and local gcvernments with the licensee of a nuclear pcwer plant, this participation has been encouraged by the NRC in twc ways: On the licensee side thr: ugh the ncn-specific language in 10 CFR EO A::endix S, paragra:h Pl.I; anc n the State side by taking a tes: Of a State plan a precenditien to NRC c:ncurrence and

hereafter making an annual tes: the c:ncitica cf c:ntinued c:ncurrence.

.u king joint drills or exercises between the nuclear facilities and the a

States and lccai scvernments a 5:ecific ecuirement in 1RC regulati:ns is alsc a ra::er wer:hy :f serious ::nsicera:icn.

Tnis suggesti:n will

e ::nsidered, aieng wi.h ne ac:icn :: " taker :n S a:e anc 1: cal gCVer" ment : an ::ncur ence bef0re issuance an ::Grati99 'icense.

t, n !1

(,f 7 m

_ 2.

"The Chaiman, 'luclear Regula: cry Ccmissicn shculd establish an emergency planning :ene of abcuc 10 miles arcund all nuclear pcwer plants as reccmended by the Envircnmental ?rctection Agency / Nuclear Regulatory Ccamission task force, and require licensees tc mocity their emergency plans accordingly."

NRC ACTION The epa /NRC Task Force report er.titied " Planning Basis for the Cevelopment of State and Lccal Government Radiciegical emergency Respense plans in Supcort of Light Water Nuclear Pcwer Plants", NUREG-0396/ epa-520/1-78-015, reccmends the establishment of abcut a 10-mile emergency planning rene for the plume ex;:osure pathway and another :ene of about 50 miles for the ingestien exposure pathway.

This matter will not ccme before the Ccanission until abcut mid July.

The public ccmment period was extended frca March 30 to May 15,1979 in censideratien of the accident at the Three liile Island nuclear station.

The recccmendations of the Task Force, the public ccmenters, the NRC staff, other Federal agencies, and the GAO cn the matter of establishing emergency planning

cces arcund nuclear pcwer plants will be given careful consideration by the Ccemission within the next 90 days.

e( n!

0C8 v i

_a.

3.

"The Chair an, Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission, and ne Secretaries of Cefense and Energy shculd, to the extent :na: national security is not jeccardi:ed, recuire that people living near facilities be periccically provided wi-h information accut the pctential hacard, emergency actions plannec, and what to de in :ne event of an accidental radioicgical release."

NRC ACTION A similar proposal was made to the NRC by a puoiic Interes: Research group petitien for rule-making in August 1975.

The petiticn f:r rule-making was denied (see 42 FR 36326, July la,1977).

The grounds for denial of that part of the petition dealing with providing infor ation to the public were tnat informatien explaining the emergency plan wculd, of necessity, be so general as to be subject to misinterpretation; or if written to cover the wide range of possibilities, :ne information would be too ccmplex for the public to understand, or to folicw in an emergency.

The Ccmmissicn did state, hewever, that information en emergency plans shculd be made available to those who requested it.

Based ucen the response to TMI, hcwever, the Cxmission believes that scme type of very general information to the public would be beneficial.

The infomation would no necessarily explain the specific types of protective measures that they wcuic take, but could simply give instructicns as to wno will be providing inf:r ation during the emergency.

(For examole, ex: lain

na: the governce will previce sucn infor a:icn Over the lccal radic station or TV staticns. )

The infor aticn c uid also briefly ex: lain the

-bree basic types cf :r0:ective actions wni:n wculc be censicered a: :ne time of the emergency ( ake shelter, evacuate, acminister thyrcic :Iccking agent).

NRC will ake a:Cr :riate acticn : im lemen: this rec:mmenca:icn.

/nM p r r) i d 'f d.J '/

_ 4 The reper: rec: mends that :ne Director, Feceral Emergency."anacemen:

Agency (FEMA) assume the rescensi'oility for making policy and c:crdinating radiological emergency respense planning around Nuclear facilities.

The NRC supports the notien that the new FD% play an active policy role in this area of perparedness.

We believe, that FEMA's c crdinating role shculd also be direc:ed at policy considerations and that it shculd rely en the technical agencies such as the Nuclear Regulatory C: mission, Envircnmental Protection Agency, and Department of Health, Educatien, and Welfare, new invcived, to continue providing assistance to State and local goverr.ments in this emergency planning activity.

In this regard the NRC is prepared to continue its lead technical agency role.

5.

The Commissien supports the GA0 recomendations to the Secretaries of Defense and Energy, calling for the development of closer relations between CCO and COE nuclear facility operations and State and local government agencies in radiclegical emergency response matters including joint crill and exercises.

404 000