ML19249E850

IE Emergency Planning Action Plan

ML19249E850
Person / Time
Issue date:	08/03/1979
From:	Hegner J, Sniezek J, Thompson D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To:
Shared Package
ML19249E813	List: ML19249E812 ML19249E830 ML19249E840 ML19249E846 ML19249E848 ML19249E849 ML19249E850 ML19249E851 ML19249E853 ML19249E856
References
REF-10CFR9.7 SECY-79-499, NUDOCS 7910020592
Download: ML19249E850 (17)

Text

-

=

=.=:.

\\

IE EiERGEllCY PLW!I!!G ACTION PLAtt Ausust 3,1979-

~,"~.3

5

=..

by D. Thcmpson J. Sniezek J. Hecner I

-. 0\\ $

6<

a 9

D

-) \\ -)

L

,c

~7

)

n

O.

cE:pson J. Sniezek -

J. Hegner

$=..._._..

8/3/79 g..

IE ACTION PLAN FOR EMERGENCY PREFAREONESS P003 BRIBINM

'" " "c " "

Purcose This plan was developed ~to provide IE coordinaiion:with..other NRC office activities identtffed as "prcblem topics" by the.NRC Task Force on Emergency Planning.

Need Because of the fragmentation within NRC of varicus emergency planning activities, such a plan is necessary to identify clearly areas of Office responsibility, and more appropriately, assure that no aspect of the "croblem topics" is excluded.

E =. =

rEEE Scoce This Action Flah. addresses only those "prcblem topics" identified originally by the 'a'orking Group and later =cdified by the Task Force, for which IE is the lead office, II. SL'FMRY AND CONCLUSIONS The Action Plan basically calls for revisions and additions to existing IE pregrams, such as emergency planning inspeccion activities, the NRC Inciden:

~

Res;cnse Pregram, the NRC Operatiens Center, and coordination with cther Federal agencies.

Lcng term success of the plan hinges on the explicit definition of NRC's role in respending to an incident.

Issues such as defining the ti=eliness of cur respense may require =ajor additien of resources and a revisica to the basic way in which we do business in order to meet cre stringent require-ments.

7r0 I

JN

h...a 9

9r g r

f jUh 5~'

5 Most activities cutlined in the plan can proceed to a point without such definition. Suc$1 planning will have to be "open-ended", however, in order T

to handle unexpected or unforeseen roles which the Ccmission or the Congress 7

may deem necessary as part of NRC's role.

III. IE RESPONSIBILITIES RELATIVE TO EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS Inspect 1feensees to verify adecuacy of emergency plan and procedures.

" Lead Office" responsibility for NRC Incident Respense Program.

Provide initial respense to incidents through Regicnal Offices.

~

Operate NRC Operations Center.

Coordinate with other Federal agencies in support of NRC emergency planning activities.

1 s.j=_-

W IV. CURRENT IE PROG?AM AND CAPABILITIES IE emergency planning activities are of two kinds:

progra=atic and reactive.

7 ogra=atic activities include:

inspections related to licensee emergency planning ccordination ef'NRC. planning actiyi, ties for NRC incident Respcase Pr: gram

~

Liaisen with other Federal agencies, particularly through IPA?,

DOE Aerial Measurements Pr: gram.

Reactive activities include:

Regional Office Incident Respense teams / centers Activation of NRC Operations Center Implementatien of NRC Incident Respense Program Orawing upcn Federal suppcrt through IRAF and MCU's 107)

E9

e

&,=

300RBRSIR Current capabilities include the rapid dispatch of IE perscnnel to an incident sita, dedicated cc::r:unications with licensed facilities and a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> Operations Centar containing information and operational rescurces I

to activate and orchestrate an NRC r'espense in the event of an incident.

Y.

OFFICE. REQUIREMENTS AND NEW IE manpower and technical. equipment funding will be a limiting factor as to how well the plan is implemented since all IE resources were dedicated prior to TMI and the enclosed, plan requires additional resource commitment.

Tepending en the resolution nf key issues, such as deter =ination of MRC role, a su5stantial manpower increase may be required that cannet be absor5ed by present staff through reassignment of priorities and still

~

maintain the mainstream of IE activities.

9 YI.

IE ACTION Pl.AN,,

Outline

~

Problem Tcpic Statament of " Problem Tcpic" frca Task Force repcrt Cetails of Prchlem A statement or statements of scecific creblems that are centained

' n the problem topic i

Planning Base fer Cerrecting Problem A corresponding statament cutlining the philosophy that is believed will lead to an adecuate sciutien of the prcblem and thus for. s the basis for taking the corrective action listed below.

Action Plan 1.

Short Range Action - descriptica

=

1071

%.0

-4 h

'LiDQRBRIGHyt gh =---

uu

=

n.

Discussicn _

~

k b.

Schedule c.

Budget /rescurce ic: pact i

2.

Long Range Action - description '

a.

Discussicn

~

b.

Schedule c.

Sudget/rescurce ic: pact PROELO4 A-2 formal Ar angaments are ill-defined for interagency coordinatien, including federal, state & local. Tne process is en a voluntary basis.

.nar

])

A.

Detafis of Pr:blems.,

1.

IRAF is infrequently implemented.

Responsibilities of signatory agencies blur as plan sits on the shelf.

2.

Only a few signatory agencies have roucine intaraction with NRC concerning radiological mattars.

3.

CCE " lead agency" efforts have not been str::ng encugh to keep all signatory agencies invcived.

In turit, some signatory agencies have been apathetic.

4.

Present IRAF dcesn't clearly delineate operational responsibilities; i.e.' fieid coordination leader.

5.

Federal resources were made available that were not part of IRAP.

6.

Can I?.AP in its present forza ser/c the purpcse cf federal agency-radiological resource coordination.

7.

IRAF is volun' arf.

1071 M

,,g

.(

'$r k *,

9J-

'c 4

- [

s

~ '

' J-s,

_ t e

4

't-

-(

r 4

w

.i 4

,4 4--

. '.< j ' : '. ~

-.. '. a *

._.,e.

~

y..

q'-_...

N 6-

,- '4

. s g r,. -

s

• (,

y.

.j.

y e

A 8

.;. N

- es

... ';.s e

_O.

(

6-

.f

'. }R

.~...: ' -

.g

.a

,e*

-J"*h'.

l

{.

=

+

..y i.

.e

.p

.* ~

J R: -

.o y-J.

n.

~

'^

e.**

g 74

%.s u

..x n w

.,w.

f

.,4

..;. \\...~,Y,.. %.$...~...

E l

m$ $3(e, n# J $ w SE M

$ndB*99%,iR$.$,hge WWE i

w u $n n

hc nt4 givw. g. g.. _;

< n giw e wm s

p.,,.ry.

y.

sn... wny.. y.

g

- t

.-.-g.

s I

,y [fD"", d I, ' 'A :f's jh "2

• )

'2M, h7

),pp'.

f I

fik h

u(hWR$3, sic *W 4, %m$9PSMsMM3

@%@ma#BM#a ss s

w a.$

dB vpk%Q;.%VQ g% dQf ' trM %.si a hi k wm&Tdd. a!fdg w!Is w$ $

, i h WW)4 f5 4

99

///

!/

/)4(4

+4+ )

%'4 TEST TARGET (MT-3)

' DH LE s

1.0 y @ lie I.l

[,'" Ee lLE I.25 1.4 1.6 4

6"

1. • 1. 4 4$+4

• 0f k'

%<ye 5,,,//

s%

f 9)+h>?t>,

///h'fo se+

%'*4

-ee TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 ga m S

S a ll!=n ll m

l,l h., IU hN l.25 IA 1.6 P

6"

'#'3:!b(

\\

44[ 4 0

/

6p

5 e

e

- ~

P00RORIBlK.

t=

3.

Fiannina Base for Cornctinc Pmblems 1.

Renew interast in IRAF by NRC taking " forceful" support role in review af current plan.

Establish and maincain liaison wiE5 other signatory agencies.

2.

3.

See 1 4.

Rewrite IRAP to spell cut clear definition of respcnsibilitics.

5.

Review TMI experience and survey federal resources to assum that all possible federal Mdiological assets are ecl7ected in LUP.

SU.

Basic question, 5ased en success in =aking changes to IRAP in 1-5 above, make a detemination whet $er the revised IRAF will meet future NRC needs.

2-5.=.

C.

Draft Actien Plan.

=-

1.

Sher: tem:

signatory agencies and others will mes: in Sep: amber 1979.

NRC (IE) will identify probiens re TMI.

2.

Sher: tem:

II meet with Forest Service in August 1979 concirning support.

3.

Lcng tem:

revise and rewrite IRA?, schedule based en cutccme of meeting in 1. above.

~

4.

Additienal rescurces required:

to caintain liaisen/ coordination with other signatory agencies en a level similar to that currently maintained with DOE will require apprcximately 4 can-months / year.

p-.

.'."2.'.'--

1072.001

fQ 6-U {j i

?O!;)

(

E

.==-

PK03 Lei 04ij'

}. A-5 NRC has nct adequately defined its role in emergency respons%a.

g e

k A.

Details of Preble=

1.

Expli:it defini:1cn of NRC role is crucial. to determination t

af agency s respensib111 ties, functicns, and require =ents.

2. NRC's TMI role =ay not necessarily he the appropriate one for a regulatory agency.

3.

Lack cf clear role definition resulted in confusien during respense to incident and ha=pers planning process.

S.

Plannine Base for Ccenetine Proble=

1.

Staff =ust develep varicus alternatives; centrac:ce supcort necessary.

2.

Early Cc==ission approval necessary 3.

See 1 tz 2 C.

Ortft Action Plan

..,y_._

[N 1.

Short ter=:

cccrdinate with NRR, NMS3, and SP on develc;=ent of work statement to define spect:.'= cf potential NRC roles.

Each role wculd define authoritier, respcnsibilities, functicns, rela:icnships with cther emergency planning efforts ai.d identify resources necessary especially if role requires NRC involve =ent in areas not currently considered NRC respcastbility.

2.

Leng ter:::

assume 1 centh fer work statement develop =ent, 3== nth prccure-

=ent effort, 9.=cnth centract.

Report due June 1980.

Ccmmission Discussica Paper then prepared.

2.

Additional Resources required:

based en Cc::::ission decision of NRC:cle impact on resource varies.

Esti= ate 2 additicnal =an-yea s/ year to i=plemenc chosen role; 3 can-=cnth effer: by IE to coordinate contracter effort.

=

1072 002

l i )

?

~.

B-2 ine NRC Incident Respense Program needs expansion and further development.

A.

Details of Problem

~

e

. 1.

There are delinquent sections required by the existing MC 2.

The MC will have'to be revised based on the determination of NRC role.

3.

Apprcpriate aspects of national level emergency planning need to be incor; crated in MC.

4.

Chysic21 facilities inadequate.

3.

Plannine Base for Correctine Prebiem 1.

II will identify missing sections at MC and ccordinate with identified

~

offices to obtain specified infor=atien.

. =sE

- 4Wi?

2.

A group consis}ing of IE, NRR, NMSS, and SP representatives will be formed to rewr.its the MC ence a determinaticn of NRC roie is made.

5.

The group specified in 52 above will detarmine wnat as;ect of natienal ievel emergency planning shculd be inccrporated in the revised MC.

4.

Upgrade Operatiens Center major deficiencies.

C.'

Draft Action Plan 1.

Short term: canual chaptar revision will be acce=plished by Cctcber 1979 insofar as possible without explicit definition of MRC role.

Deliquent secticns will be evaluated to deter:.:ine whether implementatien still worthwhile.

- 2.

Short term:

apprcpriate naticnal level planning will be incorporated in guidance dependent en congressional activities.

2.

Short term:

upgrade Operaticns Center cc==unications with facilities by August,1979. -

1072 005

0500%2**'

d

' COldfhi

-.. = =

Eiii5iEE

~."IEr:ii

. 4.

Shcrt tem: Upgrade Operations Center support staff by December 1979.

5 =an/ year increase i

5.

Shcrt tem: Upgrade Operaticns Center facilities Icprove HVAC August 1979

' Upgrade furniture December 1979 Upgrade A/V support December 1979 6.

Lcng tem:

Upgrade field ccxunications Increase incident respcase program manpower 2 additional plarning staff

.. c.-

2 additional cperatiens staff Upgrade Operatic ~ns Center to handle data input (per Sandia st::dy)

=

Upgrade recording capabilities, revise. phone system 7.

Long tem:

expand Operatiens Centar to Edequately support inciden:

respense activities en extended basis.

~

3.

Long ter=:

rulecaking te detamine who pays for ccmunica:iens a licensee s'

't.

9.

Additional Rescurces required:

Cc=unications:

Initial upgrade ecs: 51.2 M/ year if NRC fcets bin for phone systam.

Additicnal cost c $200K for upgrading field ccernunications.

Upgrade data trans;::issicn/ display ces: unkncwn.

1072 004

9 Physical Facility:

Expand Operatiens Center: $100K (based en similar cost to build current Center) including cost to hire personnel.

Manpower: Short term:

+5 s$aff /v GS-9 Lcng term:

+4 staff 'V GS-13 Exercise Program: SlCOX/ year contractor support =ay substitute scce additional manpower requirement.

PF.GSLEM E-1 Ir. sufficient NRC attentien has been given to coordinating the Federal respense affecting licensed facilities.

.."~

A.

Details of P-:ble.s

1..

I?a9 is infrequently implemenced.

Responsibilities cf signaccry agencies blur as plan sits en the shelf.

2.

Only a few signatory agencies have reutine interac-icn with NRC cencerning radiclegical ma:ters.

3.

DOE " lead agency" efforts have not been streng ancugh to keep all signaccry agencies involved.

In turn, scme signatory agencies have been apatheti=.

4.

Present IRAP doesn't clearly delineate operational rzspensibilities; i.e. field coordinaticn leader.

5.

Federal resources wera cade asailable that were not ;: art of I?,AP.

6.

Can IRAP in its present for= serte the purpose of fv=ral agency-

'2-radic1cgical resource eccrdinatien.

7.

IFa? is Voluntary.

)()72_-00b

i)lJkjI Qf)

~

-10.

c. :.:.....

p

)1 'b. _,0 B..PTanninc,?,. o. for Cab ~actina Prob 1 ems 1.

Renew interest in IRAF by NRC taking " forceful" supper role fa T

review cf current 71rn.

2.

Establish and maintain _11aison with other signatcry agencies.

3.

See 1 4.

Rewrite IRAF to spell cut clear definition of resper.sibilities.

E.

ReYiew IMI eXparience and survey fedaral resources to assUTe that all possible federal Yadiclogical assets are ecliected in IRAP.

617.

Basic question, Based en success in making changes t: IRAF in I-5 aheve, make a dete::linatien whether the revised IRA? will =eet future NRC nes#s.

5.iee C.

Oraft Acticn Plan'"

~

1.

Shor: ter=:

s.ignatory agencies and c:hers will meet in September 1979.

NRC (II) will identify prcblems re TMI.

2.

Short te:m:

IE meet with Fores: Service in August 1979 cencarning support.

2.

L:ng ter=:

revise and rewrite IRAF, schedule based on cutccme of meeting in 1. abcve.

4.

Addi:icnal resources required:

te maintain 11aiscn/ccordination with other signatory agencies en a level timilar to that cur ently maintained with 00E will require apprcximately 4 mn-conths/ yea:.

,4 f

\\ Q l (! 2 '

_11

.P_ROBLEM '

_q E-2 Licensing and Inspection Resources need Expansion to Better Implement the E=ergency Preparedness Efforts A.

Details of Problem 1.

At the present time only one licensee (pcwer reactors and fuel facilities) drill every two years is cbserved by NRC inspectors.

Tne nueber of inspectors observing is not sufficient to evaluate the perf mnance of all participating organintiens.

Offsite agency preparedness is nn rigorously evaluated.

Improvement in licensee readiness evaluation is needed.

2.

NRC inspecticn of emer,;ency p cparedness at material licensee facilities is essentially non-existent.

3.

Coordination of NRC Inspection / Licensing effort associated with NRC licensed facilities needs improvement.

B.

Plannine Base for Correctina Problem

, 1.

a.

Pcwer reactor and fuel facil;ty drills are to be observed and evaluated by a multi-disc,iplined NRC evaluation team on an annual basis.

b.

Offsite agency preparedness and capabilities will be evaluated rigorously - Licensing o#fice/SP ccordination/participaticn.

Licensee prep'aledness will be evaluated more cc=prehensively

..~

c.

(Preoperational and every 2 years thereafter).

2.

NRC Inspections of emergency preparedness activities at appropriace material licensees will be concucced.

Licensees recuiring emergency preparedness inspections will be identified by a joint IE/NMSS. effort.

3.

a.

IE will participate with NRR and NMSS in upgrade effort pertaining to evaluaticn cf existing emergency plans.

b.

IE will participata with SP in the evaluation of State / Local agency C.

Craft Acticn Plan 1.

Licensee emergency plan drills (pewer reactors) will be cbserved by.a_

team of 'l ir.s;;ccters en an annual basis.

Initial inspections at power reactors in consonance with the joint. NRC a.

action (NRR/SP/IE) for promptly upgrading emergency preparedness activities schedule of inspecticas will be consistcat with drills identified in NRF, Action Plan.

b.

IE Manual Precedures revised - April 1,1980. (Based on input V results fre criteria develcped during a. above).

2.

A.cceptance criteria for evaluating State agency perfor ance wil' be defined by SP.

1072 C07

P00R ORINAL 3.

As part of-its inspection program,-IE--(in conjunction with. SPl.wil]_

evaluate State agency readiness.

.=

=

Procedures developed - (date - 2 mes. after date in C.2.)

.:x.:

a.

b.

Conduct evaluation ~s - as part of routine inspection effort - en an annuni basis.

4.

Emergency preparedness activity requiremencs fqr material Ticensees wtR be developed. -

a.

IE identifies categories of licensees which should be included -

October 1,1979.

, NMSS, in confuction with IE, develops and impreves. requirements -

b.

January 1, 1980.

c.

IE-ccnducts emergency preparedness inspections.

(1) Procedures developed - JuTy 1, T920 (2)

Ccmmence conduct of Inspections - Octcber 1,1980 (a11cws time for licensee to take necessary actions)

Rescurce Recuirements

, Items 1-3 above were addressed in FY'80 supplement.

Resources ne=:essary for implementation of 4.c. above will be defined upon conclusion of hems 4.a and b.

and wili be included in FY'81 budget supplement, if necessary.

_.g f=!sf P.Ost.EM

.~

~~~~

E -.

ine-Inciednt Respense Criteria for Timely Notificacien cf t% NRC need to be tigntened A.

Cetails of Problem 1.

Current licensee requirements for notificatica do net recu.iire notifica:ica as quickly er as explicitly as desired.

2.

Licensee reluctant to notify NRC because of uncertainty of NRC response E.

Plannine Base for Cor ectine Problem

~

1.a.?rovide more explicit criteria to licensees as to when to motify NRC.

Assure that the critaria are implemented and understccd.

b. Simultaneously develcp acceotance c-itaria for notificatic=s t: trigger an emergency response frem NRC.

2.

A battar organized =ethod cf receiving and disseminating sch noti-fications within the MC will be developed and licensees w..11 te informed as to what happens.:c the infomatien once it is

eceived at 1072 TJ8 NRC.

~

) f)

U

[ (

C..

Draft Action Plan 1.

Short tem:

criteria for notification to NRC haveAean <"" *"M T

to licensees.

Criteria will be aujusted based en initial respcase by licensees until appropriate type'and degree of infomation is obtained.

_2., Short ter=:

pre'cedures for' handling, infomation withirr NRC wYH-tu revised _to assure timely disseminatiots.

s..-

3.

Long tem:

d OSD ticcds.to ' evelop standardi:ed criteria based on NRR/NP.SS input for licensee actificatiocs.

4.

Long term:

EhrM1 verify criteria implementatien threuch inspection process.

5.

Long ter=:

HQ Incident Respense Plan rev. j based en 4 criteria.

, Licensees infor=ed of revisions.

In.spectic: prece:s cer=inue:.

fd$

6.

Additional R Ecurces req'uired:

no majt in;a:t en budget ner manpewer

~

excected.

FRC3LW.

E-5 An organi:ed " facility class crient>-d" NRC respence capabiittv has 'not been fully established.

A.

Details of Pmblem 1.

Role must first be defined.

3.

plannine Basis 1.

Changes that can be implemented without definition of role will be undertaken.

\\ 0 l,l.

n ' q 30'

D 9^\\

e. r=

w--

i J[p#

gdis&0Qha, pns.

= = ~.

C.. Draft Action Pian 1.

Shcrt tem: MRITIG'.;;/:p wa.: identify incidan: response organizatica be'th at HQ and site; requirecents will be integrated with IE response to fem NRC incident respense criani:ation recuirements,-e.g., =anpcwer, infomation, legist' cal support.

2.

Long tem:

proficiency gained during I?iI experience wf11 fade.

Exercise program =ust be reinstituted before this occurs.

Exercises begin NLT F. arch 1,1980.

2.

Additienal Rescurces required:

To adequately maintain interoffice Tiaison, awareness of roles /

a.

responsibilities, and rescurces available -c.5 =as~yeare/ year par office.

++-

=

.=

b.

Exercise planning will require at least 1 =an-year / year.

Exercises will also' serve to acquaint personnel with changes in rescurces.

t.

Lo r.g te rn:

revise', based en definitten of role, II MC 1300.

77.05L F.

E-6 inere is a need during an actual emergency for near-tc-ee-site' facility to hous che =ulti-agency ecordinacion and response supper activit).

A.

Ge. ails of Problem 1.

A, NRC respcnse in the future wi11 Tcst Tikely send a Tane contingen to the site of an incident. This requires pre-planned cc=unications, logistical, and ad=inistra ive support.

Plannine Base for Ccenctine P :blem

.2.

1.

Detemine requirerents frca offices as to expected suppert tc ' e sent to site.-

2.

Ccerdinate with ACM in HQ and Regicnal Office A0 tc arrange for necessary supper: equipment agreements and procedures.

10/;?

U:0

~hT+1 P00R Bigg

~

=m=-

~

C.

Oraft Acti " P1*"'

1.

Shcrt ter=: 4;p.2LLE5 identify anticipatad site supper and functi=ns T

hased en current expects icns; IE integrate with Regicnal Office respense. i 2.

Short tem:

Identify operational and support requirements based ces Offica input above; c:ntact ACM and Regicnal Office Adminis~.rative Officers and'have them ciake prearrangements to obtain support in event of incidents; ine:rperate in Incident Response Plans.

3.

Lcng ter=:

based on. definition of role, revise existing support.

capabilities.

PROBLEM E-7 A need exists for Ex:anced NRC Mcnite:ing Capability A.

Cetails of Problem 1.

NRC Independen:Jenitoring. Capability Needs are not fully defined.

a.

Operational. Areas b.

Radiologicar Areas 2.

Cur en: Mcnitoring Equipment fer ::=prehensive ::r===

raciclegical w.luation is nc: sufficient.

3.

Curr-nt Henit= ring Equip:nent fer evaluation o ~ eperationci s ?c tus is ncn-existent.

3.

?hnnine case fr-Cer-ectine Pr:blem 1.

NRC needs for independent monit: ring capability will be assessed.

NRC has a need for independent eenitoring capability but should not duplicate capabiitties which will be pe==ptly supplied by other Feder22 agencies.

2.

NRC menitcring equipment will be upgraced se that a prc=pt (real ti::n) cn-the-spct independent assesscent of radic1cgics1 ha:ards (both inpin=t_ _

and in the envirens) is pcssible.

The =cnitoring equipment will be abIe tz provide the NRC with a firm basis for independent population d::e assesscent.

3.

Equip =ent which will provide the NRC with the capability of =cnitcring "ksy" plant partmeters is necessary and will be cbtained.

1072 Oli

..a/P.

'.l.'.

C.

_CR*?"T Actien plan J.

1.

NRC offices will i'dentify areas where expanded NRC =cnf tertng capattitties are necessary:

a.

Operational parameters e

(1) To be defined by NRR/NP.53 and IE prict to Jan:.:ary 1.1950.

b.

F.adiological =enitcring

\\

(1)

Envir:nmental =enitoring capability Wbe 9finec oy a7 Octcher 1,1973.

(2)

Plant cischarge cenitoring needs to be defined by NRR/h"3

~

by, January 1, 1980' 2.'

IE will procure equip. ant and ikvelop procedures fcr ut531:1ng sa=e -

Equip =ent whic.iis to be prc. ptly supplied by other Federal agencies Note:

will net be duplicatad.

Ti.Os will be placed around cperating pcwer reac:crs by January 1,1..S].

a.

b.

Initial collecticn of NRC's TLDs will be.T.ade by Apr'i.1 1,1950.

Mcattor4ng equip =ent identified by IE in C.I.5.(1) ateve will be c.

~

g g, ordered

- January 1,1980 (ccasisten witi: FY 'EC hodget).

=qi d.

Budget supple =ent for equip: rent not inciuced in C.2.c. wi)) be deYeloped, April 1, 1980.

2.

Ecuitment/Cata links will be precured for placement in.EC Incident Respc::sc Cantar a.

As defined in C. I.a. (1) - Acril'1980 h.

As defined.in C.1.b.(2) - July 1980 10/2 Di2

.