ML19289F945
| ML19289F945 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 05/18/1979 |
| From: | Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Hart G SENATE, ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC WORKS |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19289F946 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7906210197 | |
| Download: ML19289F945 (4) | |
Text
.
o j.[ S'%
UMTED STATES
~f.,
_ ?s.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISS10N
[/->'
[g wAsMincioN, c. c. 2csss hl[
May 18, ' 79 CH AIR MAN
?
The Honorable Gary Hart, Chairman h
Subecmittee on Nuclear Regulation R
Ccanittee on Environment and Public Works E
United States Senate E
Washing'.on, D. C.
20510
=
1
Dear Mr. Chaiman:
=.
I appreciate the consideration you have shown in limiting tha request for infomation in your letter of April 3,1979 in connection with the Three Mile Island accident to those aatters of imediate her.lth and
+
safety concern.
Heavy demands' have been placed on this age 1cy as a result of the Three Mile Island Plant accident, and we are lard-pressed 3
to reply promptly to the many requests made of us.
In response to the first area of concern in your letter, one of our very early acticas regarding this incident was to carry out a preliminary n
evaluation of possible generic problems and to take innediate actions to
=
strongly reduce the chances for similar serious incidents at other
~
Bab ock and Wilcox operating reactors.
l Based upon our early recc'struction of the sequence of events of the
[
Three Mile Island ~ Plant accident and the additional procedural precautions taken by licensees in response to IE Bulletins 79-05 and 79-05A, action to require shutdown of the other Babcock and Wilcox operating plants did not appear necessary. Although the NRC staff had not conducted a detailed analysis of the benefits of power reduction, they were of the opinion T.
that no significant reduction in risk would be gained through down rating of the Babcock and Wilcox plants to 50% of their power capacity.
Initially the NRC staff considered that the procedural changes identified in I&E Bulletins issued to B&W reactor operators were sufficient to allow continued operation of the B&W reactors.
However, after additional issues were raised by continued staff review of the B&W reactor design, two senior NRC staff members indicated, at an open Commission meeting i
neld April 23, 1979, that the Comission should consider shutting down the operating B&W reactors until a more detailed analysis of the B&W facilities could be conducted.
Subsequently, following a series of meetings with the NRC staff licensees of B&W reactor facilities proposed
~
3 the voluntary shutcown of those reactors that were currently operating and the continued shutdown of those that were not then operating, until certain additional safety measures which had been identified by the NRC 7 9 0 6 21bW7 g
242KrL so w 1M8
.. n/ a
Honorable Gary Hart -
staff could be implemented.
The Comission was publicly briefed on the i
voluntary shutdown proposals on April 27 and a majority of the Comission e
voted to confim the voluntary shutdown proposals by Comission Order.
f To date, such Orders have been published for the Oconee and Rancho Seco Z
reactors (Enclosure 1). Orders implementing the voluntary shutdown proposals will be forwarded to you as they are signed.
~~
With respect to your concern about the capability of State and local authorities to respond effectively to a civilian nuclear accident, let me say that the NRC has exerted substantial effort to improve this y2 capability over the past few years. At present, NRC has no statutory
^
uuthority to require State and local governments to cevise and test i_.
radiological emergency response plans.
The Comission's regulations
~
recognize the States' authority and responsibility to respond to emer-gencies within their jurisdictions.
Our efforts so far have been essentially cooperative rather than mandatory.
NRC conducts training courses.for State and local personnel engaged in emergency response activities and evaluates State emergency plans against a checklist of 70 essential elements.
Through a Federal as-sistance program NRC and other. Federal agencies make reco:miendations for improvement.
NRC also exercises a lead agency role in a Federal inter-agency prograc which provides guidance and assistance to State and local
- 1..
governments in developing and testing their radiological emergency i
msponse capabilities.
In the last two years NRC has concurred in the plans of 12 States.
These States are Alabama, Arkansas, Califomia.
Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, New Jersey, New York.
South Carolina, and Washington.
Facility operators view emergency actions to protect public health and safety outside a facility's boundaries as the responsibility of State and local governments. Under NRC regulations (10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E) licensees are required to have procedures in place for notifying local, State and Federal officials in the event of an emergency.
The NRC, as part of its pmcedures for granting an operating license, does review the adequacy of the license applicant's emergency response plan.
This review includes the verification that there are appropriate agreements between the applicant and local emergency response units such as hospitals, police and firefighters. Also, NRC's Office of Inspection and Enforcement (0IE) observes an emergency response exercise carried out by the applicant.
Local emergency response units are invited te participate in these exercises, but their participation is not mandatory.
The OIE observation focuses primarily on the adequicy of the applicant's performance.
A copy of the OIE report on the Three Mile Island exercise, wnich was conducted on November 8,1978 is enclosed (Enclosure 2).
=
f-Honorable Gary Hart 1:
p_..
The incident at the Three Mile Island station has already caused many States to look seriously at their radiological emergency planning posture.
3:
As we discussed during the April 10 hearing before your subconmittee. I 5::
have written to the governors of each of the States in which commercial s#
pDwer reactors are located or contiguous, but whose plans have not yet Es.
achieved an NRC concurrence.
My letters urge those States to take Es innediate actions to improve and update their radiological response
[?
plans and offer whatever assistance might be necessary to bring about an F
early concurrence by NRC.
Copies of these letters are enclosed (Enclosure
[f 3).
Similar letters will be sent in the near future to Governors of E.
those States in which a reactor is being constructed and for which an il NRC-approved emergency plan does not yet exist.
The NRC Office of State E.
Programs has also been in touch with the responsible State agencies to gr connunicate verbally our desire to work closely with them on an expedited h'
basis.
{.
W;.
Although the State of Pennsylvania has developed and tested a radiological emergency plan of its own, the State has not formally transmitted its ccst recent radiological plan' to NRC for review and concurrence. A copy of the Three Mile Island Annex to the Pennsylvania Plan for implementation r:
of Protective Action Guides was provided to NRC on April 3,197o.
=.
Pennsylvania h'as participated in a limited fashion in our training programs which are offered free of charge to State and local officials.
?~
We also understand that all of the four counties near the Three Mile L
Island station currently have formal plans for dealing with general s-emergency situaticns.
NRC has not reviewed these local plans.
7 Your letter emphasizes the unique statutory obligation imposed on the i-NRC to keep the Congress fully and currently informed.
In the case of the accident at Three Mile Island, the intensity of interest on the par of the Congress, press and public, the large volume of infonnation which has been and continues to be developed, and the limited resources available k
to the Commission have made it particularly difficult to provide all k
relevant infonnation in a timely fashion.
Besides responding to specific requests for information, we have attempted c
to keep our Congressional osersight subcommittees, as well as those
~
rerbers of the Pennsylvania delegation most directly affected, currently inforred primarily by reans of prompt delivery of the updated preliminary notifications received by the Commission and of other related materials, c
such as press releases, meeting transcripts and so forth.
In the case of your own Subccmadttee on Nuclear Regulation, this written material E
has been supplerented by frecuent calls to staff from our Office of Congressional Affairs, periodic briefings in person and by teler. hone for Subcommittee members and by the Commission's own appearance and testimony cf April 10.
24230l[
l
Honorable Gary Hart -
Ycu have already received copies of the transcripts of Ccanission closed meetings en TMI-2 through April 23.
Additional transcripts and traterials related to TMI-2 will be made available to the Congress and the public on an expedited basis.
The file en Three Mils Island prior to the accident is estimated to fill approxicately 30 feet of shelf space.
Arrangements are underway to reproduce this file for use by the Presidential Coranission on the Accident at Three Mile Island, the Congrest, the press and the public.
A microfiche copy will be provided to the Library of Congress for the convenience of Me:bers of Congress.
In addition, we are currently investigating ways in which we might best fulfill the request of Senator Sin:pson and yourself fer a special reading rocm containing TMI-related materials for subconmittee use.
We recmt an" inconvenience or e-barrassment which might have been caused you by failure to receive a particular document in a timely fashion.
We are working to tvoid such recurrences in the future by responding to specific requests for information as quickly as posssible and by providing pertinent up' dating information on the TfG-2 situation as socn as it is available.
- incerely,
\\
o_2_ %
M. Hendrie
Enclosures:
As stated 242306I