ML19254F104
| ML19254F104 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/18/1979 |
| From: | Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Dalton J VIRGINIA, COMMONWEALTH OF |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19254F105 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7911070038 | |
| Download: ML19254F104 (2) | |
Text
,f
'o UNITED STATES
{
g
! S,,,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
1 WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
{
y, kk October 18, 1979 CHAIRMAN
.ie Honorable John N. Dalton Governor of Virginia Richmond, Virginia 23219
Dear Governor Dalton:
Thank you for your letter of September 17, 1979 requesting the status of concurrence in the Virginia Radiological Emergency Response Plan.
NRC staff received the most recent changes to your plan and had several discussions with your Office of Emergency and Energy Services staff.
In August, the Federal Interagency Regional Advisory Committee, after its review, recom-cended that 12C concur in Virginia's plan.
Recently, the headquarters office of the new Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) identified eleven items which it believed should be amplified to further improve the Virginia plan. A listing of these items is enclosed.
FEMA and NRC agree that only four of the items (4, 5, 6 and 8) require e'tention by the State prior to formal concurrence.
Our Office of State Programs met with FEMA staff on September 21 to discuss the several FEMA items of concern.
NRC and rEMA staffs met with your Office of Emergency and Energy Services on Tuesday, September 25, and your staff agreed to make several additional changes in the Virginia plan.
We ex;act that the NRC will be able to formally concur in the plan of the Commonwealth of Virginia following the receipt of these changes.
I appreciate your personal interest in this very important matter.
If I can be of futher assistance, do not hesitate to call upon me.
Sincerely, k
C eph M. Hendrie
Enclosure:
As stated 1290 123 QV" 7911070
s FEMA Items of Concern in the Virginia Radiological Emergency Response Plan 1.
The interaction of State agencies to counterpart Federal agencies, in an operational situation should be covered in detail.
Interac-tion should address respective State agencies and Federal agencies, communications, logistical support and locations.
2.
The Plan should define Federal support requirements.
3.
The Plan should define two-way information exchange between facility personnel and government decision-making officials during the emergency period.
4.
The Plan should define the population at risk and protective measures including the population to be evacuated and to be hosted.
5.
Define and delineate the use of radiological monitoring and equip-ment capability at both State and local levels.
6.
Plans should address the monitoring capability of the Facility, on-site, and the utilization of their resources in the decision-making proce:s.
7.
The Plan should make provision for the Federal monitoring capability.
8.
The Plan should be expanded to reflect Federal, State, local and plant participation in exercises.
9.
The Plan should define requirements and procedures for obtaining crophylactic iodine compound to achieve thyroid blocking for members of the populace and for emergency workers.
10.
The Plan should address communications systems end capabilities as they actually exist between State and local 9]vernments.
11.
The Plan should be carefully reviewed to assure Emergency Public Information coordination.
I290 124
.