ML19343C463

Report to Congress on Status of Emergency Response Planning for Nuclear Power Plants

ML19343C463
Person / Time
Issue date:	03/31/1981
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To:
Shared Package
ML19343C464	List: ML19343C463 ML19343C466 ML19343C467 NUREG-0755, Forwards NUREG-0755, Rept to Congress on Status of Emergency Response Planning for Nuclear Power Plants. Satisfies Section 109,Public Law 96-295
References
NUREG-0755, NUREG-755, NUDOCS 8103240278
Download: ML19343C463 (107)

Text

. -_

NUREG-0755 THIS DOCUME,VT CONTAINS l

P00R QUAllTY PAGES Report to Congress on Status o" Emergency Response P anning for l\\ uc ear Power P.lants U.S. Nuclear Regulatory l

Commission Office of Inspection and Enforcement p'%9 l*s.:.:./

I 81032.4 Oj77

~

-,-.3 r--p_

,__r

.,r.,

..._n

,,,,.7 7w-..

,.p-,,-....,~-...%.

-...m_,y

,,,.,..-..y,__w

e NUREG-07 l

Report to Congress on Status of Emergency Resaonse P anning for N uclear Power Plants Manuscript Completed: December 1980 Date Published: March 1981 Division of Emergency Preparedness Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

,** ** %g C

i

ABSTRACT This report responds to Public Law 96-295, Section 109 which calls for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to report to Congress on the status of emergency response planning in support of nuclear power reactors. The i port includes information on the status of this planning as well as on the Commission actions relating to emergency preparedness. These actions

-include a summary of the new regulatory requirements and the preliminary results of two comprehensive evacuation-time estimate studies: one requested by the NRC including 50 nuclear power plant sites and one conducted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the 12 high-population-density sites.

FEMA provided the information in this report on the status of State and local planning, including projected schedules for joint State / county / licensee emergency

. preparedness exercises.

Included as Appendices are the NRC Emergency Planning Final Regulations,10 CFR Part 50 (45 FR 55402), the FEMA Proposed Rule, " Review and Approval of State and Local Radiological Emergency Plans and Preparedness," 44 CFR Part 350 (45 FR 42341), and the NRC/ FEMA Memoranda of Understanding.

iii v

~

CONTENTS Pace ABSTRACT.................................................................

iii

?.BBREVIATIONS............................................................

vi I.

INTRODUCTION.......................................................

1 A.

ScopeofReport................................................

1 B.

Overview of Commis sion Acti vi ti es..............................

1 II.

REGULATORY ACTIONS.....................

5 A.

Final Rule on Emergency Planning...............................

5 B.

Planning Standards and Criteria (NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1)........

6 C.

Licensee Emergency Response Facilities (NUREG-0696)............

9 D.

Pole of the States.............................................

11

-III.

EMERGENCY PLAN STATUS..............................................

13 A.

State Plans...................................................

13 B.

Facility Plans................................................

13 C.

-Joint Exercises................................................

14 IV.

. EVACUATION-ilME ESTIMATES...........................................

15 4

A.. NRC Con trac to r Analys es........................................

15

.B.

-FEMA Study of Evacuation Times.................................

16 C.

Continuing Effort..............................................

21 JV.

NEW LEGISLATION....................................................

22 VI.

. BIBLIOGRAPHY.......................................................

23 APPENDIX A: NRC EMERGENCY PLANNING; FINAL REGULATI0NS'...................

A-1

' APPENDIX B: FEMA PROPOSED RULE,-REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF STATE AND LOCAL RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PLANS AND PREPAREDNESS'...............

B-1

. APPENDIX C: STATUS OF-REVIEW 0F STATE AND LOCAL PLANS...................

C-1

' APPENDIX D: NRC/ FEMA MEMORANDUM OF UNCERSTANDING, JANUARY 11, 1980.....

D-1 APPENDIX E: NRC/ FEMA MEMORANDUM OF-UNDERSTANDING, NOVEMBER 4, 1980......

E-1 V-

ABBREVIATIONS CFR

' Code of Federal Regulations E0F Emergency Operations Facility

. EPPO Emergency Preparedness Program Office EPZ Emergency Planning Zone FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency F

IE Office of Inspection and Enforcement, NRC M00 Memori ndum of Understanding NOAA-National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, USA NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRR Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC OSC Operational Support' Center

'SPDS Safety Parameter Display System TMI Three Mile Island TSC Technical Support Center i

i vi e

e

.--, w

,..--,e.4,...-

n

.n,

,.~,

I.

INTRODUCTION A.

Scope of Report Section 109 of Public Law 96-295 calls for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to report to Congress on the status of emergency response planning in support of utilization facilities. This report responds to that provision of the law.

Additionally, the report includes information on other Commission activities and' actions relating to emergency preparedness. The report includes discussions on: new regulatory requirements and implementing criteria and standards, organizational changes, and related administrative arrangements.

4 The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provided the information in this report en the status of State and local planning.

Included for reference are projected schedules for emergency preparedness exercises.

B.

Overview of Commission Activities

===1.

Background===

Onsite and offsite emergency preparedness as well as proper siting and engineered

- design features are needed to protect the health and safety of the public.

As 1 result of the accident at Three Mile Island (TMI), it became clear that the protection provided by siting and engineered safety design features must be bolstered by the ability to take protective ceasures during the course of an accident. The accident also clearly demonstrated that onsite conditions and actions, even if they do not cause significant offsite radiological conse-quences, can affect the way the various State and local entities react to protect

- the public from any dangers associated with the accident.

In June 1979, NRC began a formal reconsideration and revision of the role of emergency prepared-ness for ensurir.; the continued protection of the public health and safety in areas around nuclear power f acilities. The Commission began this action in recognition of the need for more effective emergency planning and preparedness and in response to the investigations of the accident at TMI.

2.

Efforts To Improve Licensee Emergency Preparedness The NRC efforts to improve licensee emergency preparedness, which had been initiated in the afternath of TMI, continued at a high level of activity in 1980. The initial _ guidance for these efforts was containea in an action plan which the staff presented to the Commissioners in July 1979. The action plan was directed toward promptly improving emergency preparedness at all operating power plants and those plants for which an operating license application is scheduled. The action plan identified the elements required for upgrading licensee emergency preparedness for nuclear power plant accidents, including the integration of onsite and offsite emergency planning and preparedness by 1

i responsible agencies.

Emergency preparedness review teams were formed and a

. schedule of site visits developed giving priority to those sites in areas of relatively high population and those scheduled to receive operating licenses within the next year.

Each review team consisted of a team leader from the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), a member from the Office of

' Inspection and Enforcement (IE) Regional Office, and a consultant from Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories. Regional meetings were held in August 1979 to brief licensees, State and local officiais, and the public on the interim emergency planning and preparedness acceptance criteria, schedule of site.

visits, and schedule of upgraded emergency plans.

The objectives of the review team effort were to promptly improve licensee emergency preparedness, to assure the capability of offsite agencies to take appropriate emergency actions, and to improve working relationships and cocrunications concerning emergency plan development among all parties.

These objectives were accocplished by reviewing existing emergency plans

-and preparing draft questions for the licensee prior to the site visits.

Federal, State, and local response agencies were invited to participate in

,~

the site visits.

Informal individual visits with State and local officials were held by 'the team leader prior to meeting with the licensees.

Each team participated in an onsite tour for the purposes of information gathering and fact finding. These tours included an inspection of the radia-tion monitoring and meteorological instrumentation in the plant control room and visits to the proposed onsite Technical Support Center (TSC) and near-site

, Emergency Operations Facility (E0F). Technical meetings were held with the licensee during each visit to discuss existing' emergency plans, to identify the areas needing improvement, and to connanicate new upgraded criteria.

Local and State authorities as well as the general public were invited to attend these technical meetings as observers. Technical meetings were also held between the NRC review teams and local and State authorities.

L One of the primary functions of the review teams during each site visit was to meet with the public at a location near the nuclear facility to solicit comments and give-the public an opportunity to express its views on emergency planning. The public meetings were generally held in the evening to encourage attendance.

l.

Site visits ~, to.all operating power plants and facilities for which operating.

license applications are expected.during the next year, were initiated by the review teams in September 1979.with a visit to the Three Mile Island site.

The initial phase of site visits was completed in July 1980 with a visit to the Summer Nuclear Power Plant in ~ South Carolina.

In all, during FY 1980, the review. teams visited 72 operating nuclear power facilities and 6 facilities-that were scheduled to receive. operating-licenses within about 1 year. The teacs traveled to 52 geographical locations.

i.

2

..i...

M.-

y

.-e

=,,-,,.,.,,-.,.a s.

.. ~, - -.,. -.... - -

k 3.

Organization On April 28, 1980, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation was reorganized and the responsibility for managing and directing all NRR actions related to emergency preparedness was assigned to the newly formed Emergency Preparedness Program Office (EPPO)..Two branches were created in the new office. The Emergency Preparedness Licensing Branch was given the responsibility for reviewing and evaluating emergency plans associated with the applications for nuclear reactor facilities and reviewing the emergency preparedness evaluations of State and local emergency plans performed by FEMA. The Emergency Preparedness Development Branch was given the responsibility for developing and evaluating policy recommendations and regulatory requireme its for emergency preparedness, developing emergency planning and preparedness guidance and technical publica-tions, and providing technical support for the Emergency Preparedness Program Office. A staff of 29 was authorized for EPP0 in FY 80.

On November 10, 1980, the Emergency Preparedness Program Office and its functions were transferred to the Office of Inspection and Enforcement as the new Division of Emergency Preparedness. A third branch, the Incident Response Branch, was

.added to the Division.. This branch is responsible for planning NRC response to national emergencies and incidents involving NRC licensed f acilities.

4.

NRC/ FEMA Relationship.

On December 7,1979, the President ~ issued a directive assigning FEMA lead respon-

.sibility for offsite emergency preparedness around nuclear facilities. The NRC

.and FEMA initiated negotiations for a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to provide for a smooth transfer of responsibilities. The initial M00 became effective January 14,~1980. See Appendix D.

It was revised on November 11, 1980. See Appendix E.

The MOU identifies the.following FEMA emergency preparedness responsibilities as they relate to NRC.

1.

lTo make findings and determinations as to whether State and local emergency plans are adequate.

.2.

To verify that State and local emergency plans are capable of being implemented (e.g., adequacy and maintenance of procedures, training, resources, staffing levels, and qualification and equipment).

3.

To assume responsibility for emergency preparedness training of State and local

. officials.

4.

To develop and issue an updated series of interagency assignments that delineate respective agency capabilities and respc asibilities and define procedures for coordination and direction for emergen;y planning'and response.

3

-a-

--ws y

=,-g,-,-

-. + -

e,,,

e g

=

.e w

r

NRC responsibilities for emergency preparedness identified in the M00 are:

1.. To assess licensee emergency plans for adequacy.

2.

To verify that licensee emergency plans are adeq.stely implemented (e.g.,

adequacy and maintenance of procedures, training, resources, staffing levels, and qualification and equipment).

3.

To review the FEMA findings and determinations on the adequacy and capability of implementation of State and local plans.

4.

To make decisions with regard to the overall state of emergency preparedness (i.e., integration of the licensee's emergency preparedness as determined by NRC and of the State / local governments as determined by FEMA and reviewed by NRC) and issuance of operating licenses or shutdown of operating reactors.

In addition, FEMA has prepared a proposed rule regarding " Review and Approval of State Radiological Emergency. Plans and Preparedness," (44 FR 42341, dated June 24, 1980). See Appendix B.

According to the proposed FEMA rule, FEMA will approve State and local emergency plans and preparedness, and issue findings and determinations with respect to the adequacy of. State and local plans and capabilities of State and local governments to effectively implement their plans and preparedness measures. These findings and determinations will be provided to NRC for use in its licensing process.

Continued cooperation between NRC and FEMA and continued diligent efforts by both agencies are essential to establich upgraded emergency preparedness plans around and at all nuclear power plants. NRC is prepared to review new and upgraded plans and to review FEMA findings in order to meet its regulatory commitments.

In Appendix C, FEMA has furnished the status of its review of State and local.

plans. We are concerned about the amount of work that remains to be done by FEMA and the State-and local governments as shown in the Appendix and, in some cases, the lack of detailed scheduling.

4 O

II. REGULATORY ACTIONS A.

Final Rule on Emergency plafining In June 1979, NRC began a forma; raconsideration of the rof a of emergency planning for ensuring the continued protection of the public health and safety in areas around nuclear pcwer plant f acilities. On December 19, 1979, the NRC published in the Federal Register proposed amendnents to its regulations on this subject for public coment. During the coment period, in January 1980, NRC conducted four regional workshops with State and local officials, utility representatives, and the public to discuss the feasibility of the proposed amendments, their igact, and the procedures proposed for co@ lying with their provisions. NRC used the information from these workshops, from more than 200 public coment letters,~ and f rom two petitions for rulemaking, to develop the final rule.

In addition, the Comission was briefed on June 25, 1980, by three panels of public comenters, cogrised of representatives from the nuclear power industry, State and local governments, and public interest groups.

The final rule, effective November 3,1980, was published in the Federal Register on August 19, 1980 (45 FR 55402). See Appendix A. It provides that no new uperating license will be granted unicss NRC can make a favorable finding that the integration of onsite and offsite emergency planning provides reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be take, in the event of a radiological emergency. NRC will base its finding on a review of FEMA findings and deter-minations as to whether State anc local emergency plans are adequate and capable of being iglemented, and on the NRC assessment as to whether the applicant's onsite emergency plans are adequate and capable of being iglecented.

In the case of an operating reactor, if after April 1,1981, it is determined that there are such deficiencies that a f avorable NRC finding is not warranted and if the deficiencies are not corrected within 4 months of that determination, the Comission will determine expeditiously whether the reactor should be shut dcwn or whether some other enforcement action is appropriate.

In any case, where the Comission believes that the public health, safety, or-interest so requires, the plant will be required to shut down immediately. Licensees, however. will have an opportunity to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Comissior, for exagb, that deficiencies in emergency plans are not significant for the plant in question, that adequate interim cogensating actions have been or will be taken progtly, or that there are ccgelling reasons to permit plant operation.

Emergency. planning considerations must be extended to Emergency Planning Zones, and these shall consist of an area of about 10 miles -in radius for exposure to the radioactive plume that might result from an accident in a nuclear power reactor and an area of about 50 miles in radius for food that might become contaminated.

Additionally, the final rule sets forth 16 emergency planning standards which must be met by onsite State and local emergency plans within the Emergency Planning Zones. Assessments by NRC and FEMA of the onsite and offsite emergency l

5 e

plans will be made with respect to these planning standards. The Emergency Planning Zone concept and the criteria used by NRC and FEMA to determine whether emergency plans satisfy the planning standards set forth in the final rule are discussed in the following section.

B.

Planning Standards and Criteria (NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1)

The NRC, in conjunction with FEMA, published Revision 1 of the document " Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants" (NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1) in November 1980. The interim version of this document was published in January 1980, at which time interested members of the public were invited tc cornent upon it.

FEMA, NRC, and other involved Federal agencies will use the criteria contained it. the document in their individual and joint reviews of State and local government radiological emergency response plans, and of the plans and preparedness of NRC nuclear power plant licensees.

The criteria in the document intended for use by NRC licensees and operators of nuclear power reactors are based upon several documents. These documents are: NRC Regulatory Guide 1.101 (withdrawn); NRC letters of October 10, 1979, and November 29, 1979, to its power reactor licensees; NRC final rule; and " Draft Emergency Action Level Guideli s for Nuclear Power Plants" (NUREG-0610) Septerber 1979. A revised version of thh latter document is Appendix 1 of NUREG-0654/

FEMA-REP-1; it will not be published as a separate NUREG.

The criteria intended for use by State and local governments were drawn in large part from existing documents already familiar to State and local planners:

The NRC Guide and Checklist for the Development and Evaluation of State and Local Government Radiological Emergency Response Plans in Support of F.xed Nuclear Facilities (NUREG-75/111); Supplement 1 to NUREG-75/111 (March 1977);

and Planning Basis for the Development of State and Local Government Radiological Emergency Response Plans in Support of Light ' dater Nuclear Power Plants (N'JREG-0396/ EPA-520/1-78-016). The Guide and Checklist, including Supplement 1 and the Planning Basis i eport <ere subjected to broad State and local government reviews prior to publistion.

Criteria in NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1 includes that developed from many lessens learned during and after the accident at Three Mile Island. The nes criteria put added em hasis on: notification methods and procedures, emergency cor.Tauni-cations, public education and information, emergency facilities and equipment, accident assessment, and exercises and drills.

The ' document is divided into three major sections:

Introduction, Planning Standards and Evaluation Criteria, and Appendices.

6 6'

q n

-~

_ _ =

j_

i m

I In the Introduction, one of the more important discussions is on the planning basis and its relationship to emergency planning and Emergency Planning Zones.

This section,- which is a synopsis of the NRC/ EPA planning basis document referred to earlier (NUREG-0396), describes the concept of Emergency Planning Zones which has been adopted as a regulatory requirement in the new NRC rule. The two zones around each reactor are the plume exposure pathway zone of about 10 miles and the ingestion pathway zone of about 50 miles. Figure 1 illustrates the concept of Emergency Planning Zones. Emergency plans must contain provisions for pro-tective actions for the public within those zones. The principal exposure

)

sources.from the plume pathway are:

(a) body external exposure to gamma radiation from the plume (cloud) and from deposited material; and (b) inhalation exposure from the passing radioactive plume. Shelter and/or evacuation would likely be the principal immediate protective actions to be recommended for the general public.

1 The principal exposure from the ingestion pathway would be from ingestion of contaminated water or foods such as milk,- fresh vegetables, or aquatic food-stuffs. This exposure pathway is generally a longer term pathway. Emergency plans must contain provisions for. interrupting this pathway, if necessary.

i f

The Planning Standard. and Evaluation Criteria section contains 16 standards

~

which must be included in all emergency plans. These standards are the same standards 'specified in the new NRC rule on emergency planning.

In the appendices of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, several important aspects of the criteria for emergency planning and preparedness are discussed. Appendix 1 describes a' series of four classes of emergencies of increasing severity.

Each class has associated with it exanples of initiating conditions and certain prescribed responses for both licensees and State and local government I

. agencies. The classes of-emergencies are:

(a). Notification of Unusual Event;

-(b) Alert; (c) Site Area Emergency; and (d) General Emergency. Emergency response would be initiated at an appropriate level, and escalate as

~

necessary, if conditions worsen.

The purpose of the prescribed initial responses is to make certain that responses will be started based upon a potential release rather-than waiting for the actual release. This procedure would provide an extra margin of l

time for taking protective actions.

Appendix 2 describes the criteria for meteorological measurements which will be used to make dose projections in the environment. A capability for making the measurements (including a backup system) and for rapidly predictf ag the 3

dilution of the radioactivity in the atmosphere are needed to comply with the

. meteorological requirements.-

l Appendix 3 is one of. the more ~important parts of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1 because it sets forth the criteria to be used in evaluating whether the prompt alert and notification requirements of.Section-IV.D.C. of Appendix E have been met.

That section provides that "The design objective (of early warning system)-

i 7

m

i L

EMERGi. '.Y PLANNING ZONE

1. -(EPZ-INGESTION)

N 4

50 Mt.

(80KM)

\\

\\

PLUME TRAVEL URBAN

' DIRECTION EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE p

/p 10 MI.

1

\\

(EPZ-PLUME)

N j7

....l EXAMPLE RESPONSE

\\

AREA FOR THE I

(16KM)

\\

PLUME EXPOSURE

,C w_f.4.

\\

PATHWAY.

f THE RESPONSE AREA FOR THE 0'

INGESTION EXPOSURE PATHWAY WOULD HAVE THE SAME RELATIVE SHAPE I

BUT WOULD BE

(

LARGER.

' /

('

TRANSPORT OF 4

/

f Innn MILK TO DAIRY i

'/

/

f PROCESSING CENTER.

REACTOR SITE

/

INDICATES VARIABLE

/

/

RESPONSE BOUNDARY.

/

/

I l

Figure 1: Concept of Emergency Planning Zones i

shall be to have the capability to essentially complete the inital notification of the public within the plume exposure pathway EPZ within about 15 minutes."

To be acceptable, this warning system must provide for an alerting signal f(llowed by notification by comercial broadcast plus special systems such as the NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) radio network.

A warning system which would require a recipient to turn on a radio without lirst being alerted by an acoustic signal or some other manner is not acceptable.

The minimum design objectives for an acceptable system are:

1.

Capability for providing both an alert signal and an informational or instructional message to the population on an area wide basis throughout the 10-mile EPZ, within 15 minutes.

2. -The initial notification system will assure direct coverage of essentially 100% of the population within 5 miles of the site.

3.

Special arrangements will be made to assure, within 45 minutes,100%

coverage of the population who may not have received the initial notifi-cation within the entire exposure EPZ.

In conjunction with the annual exercise of the facilities' emergency plans, FEMA, in cooperation with the utility operator and State / local governments, will take a. statistical sample of the residents of all areas within about 10 miles to assess the effectiveness of the alert and notification system. This analysis will also check the awareness of the public of the meaning of the prompt notification message as well as their knowledge on what to do in an emergency.

Appendix 4 describes the criteria for evacuation-time estimates within the 10-mile EPZ. The objective for the licensee (applicant) is to provide an estimate of the time it would take to evacuate people from various segments of the EPZ including permanent residents, transients, and special facilities such as hospitals or schools, and to update these estimates as local conditions change.

-In summary, NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1 was published as interim guidance in January 1980, for use by nuclear power plant operators and State / local governments in developing radiological emergency response plans in support of nuclear power plants and for use by Federal reviews in evaluation of these plans.

Following a public coment period, the document was revised and published in November i

1980. The planning standards and criteria of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Revision 1, will be used by the NRC staff in its evaluation of whether the emergency planning requirements of the NRC final rule have been met.

C.

Licensee Emergency Response Facilities (NUREG-0696)

The investigations of the accident at TMI Unit 2 identified the need for extensive improvements in emergency response facilities at nuclear power plants to aid in the mitigation of accidents. Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50 9

~

was amended to include the requirement for the licensee to provide such emergency response facilities. Other areas identified as needing improvement included establishing organizations to manage and control onsite and offsite activities during emergencies; facilities for these organizations; availa-bility of information needed to assess and manage the situation; and provi-sions for disseminating accurate and timely information, warnings, and instructions to local and State agencies, affected population, and the public in general. Guidelines for the design and construction of the required and related emergency response facilities were developed by tne NRC staff, revised as a result of public coment, and will be issued as NUREG-0696, " Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities." These facilities are:

Technical Support Center -- The TSC is an emergency response facility located in closa proximity to the control room with the displays and data available for senior plant management personnel and technical personnel to support the control room operations personnel during emergency situations. The facility will meet the same habitability stan ards as the control room and have the d

capability to analyze plant conditioni..

In addition, the TSC will perform the functions of the E0F for providing radiological and environmental information to the State and local governments and to NRC.

Emergency Operations Facility -- The Emergency Operations Facility is a f acility.near the plant for the management of overall emergency response, the coordination of radiological assessments, and for management of recovery operations. While the TSC function is centered on management of the plant in the mitigation of accidents, the function of E0F is to provide assistance in the decisionmaking process to protect the public health and safety and to control radiological monitoring teams and facilities onsite and offsite.

The E0F personnel will evaluate potential or actual radioactivity releases from the plant and any environmental consequences and therefore have adequate radiological, meteorological, and plant systems information to perform these functions. The EOF will be used by the licensees to coordinate their emergency response activities.

Guidance to licensees for their establishia a near site E0F soon,till be

- provided in NUREG-0696, " Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facili-ties." The guidance will include information on E0F function, location, size, structure, habitability, staffing, radiological monitoring, comuni-cations, instrumentation, data system equipment, power supplies, technical data, data system, records availability, and management.. The guidance on location of.the near site EOF will allow exceptions only if approved by the Comissioners.

Operational Support Center -- An operational support center (OSC) is a

.f acility separate from the control room and other emergency response facilities as a place where operations support personnel can assemble t.nd report in an emergency situation to receive instructions from the operating staff. Cocenications shall be provided between the OSC, TSC, E0F, and control room.

10

Safety Parameter Display System -- The Safety Parameter Display System (SPDS) provides a display of plant parameters from which the safety status of operation gay be assessed in the control room, TSC, and E0F. The primary function of the SPDS is to help operating personnel in the control room make quick assessments of plant safety status. Duplication of the SPDS displays in the TSC and E0F will improve the exchange of information between these facilities and the control room, and assist nanagement in making decisions.

The SPDS will be operated during normal operations and during all classes of emergencies.

D.

Role of the States (Provided by FEMA for this report)

Section 109 of the NRC FY 1980 Authorization Bill (PL 96-295) required that NRC consult with the Director of FEMA on the status of State Radiological Emergency Response Plans with respect to the issuance of an operating license for a utilization facility. NRC had alreach formalized this consultation in the MOU discussed earlier in this report, and in the NRC final rule on emergency preparedness whereby licensees (applicants) must submit applicable State and local plans along with the facility plan to NRC.

FEMA has proposed a new rule concerning review and approval of State radio-logical emergency plans and preparedness. See Appendix B.

This rule proposes to establish policy and procedures for review and approval by FEMA of State emergency plans and preparedness for coping with the offsite effects of radiological emergencies which may occur at nuclear power facilities. The rule does not cover other NRC licensed facilities. The rule sets out criteria which will be used by FEMA in reviewing, assessing, and evaluating thc plans and preparedness; it specifies how and where a State may submit plans; it describes :ertain of the processes by which FEMA makes findings and deter-minations as to the adequacy of State plans and the capability of State and

. local governments to implement these plans and preparedness measures. Such l

findings and determinations are to be submitted to the Governors of affected l

States and to NRC for use in its licensing proceedings.

l l

The proposed rule codifies the joint FEMA /NRC planning objectives found in l

NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1 as the basis for judging the adequacy of State and local l

planning.

It'is consistent with the language in the NRC final rule.

According to the FEMA-proposed rule, State and local plans will be submitted l

by the Governor of the State to the appropriate FEMA Regional Office for review.

The Regional Director will make appropriate public notification and complete a review on an expedited basis. The State, in coordination with the appropriate local governments and the nuclear facility to which the plan applies, will conduct an exercise of the plan. This exercise will be reviewed and critiqued by the FEMA Regional Director using the assistance of appropriate regional i

personnel from FEMA and other involved Federal agencies. The results of this l

. review and critique will be made known to the State, the nuclear facility l

management, and NRC.

11-e c.-

Either State officials or the FEMA Regional Director will conduct a public meeting at a location near the nuclear facility which the plan supports.

Adequate notification of the meeting will be given to the public. At the meeting, representatives of State and local governments will discuss their plan and describe the concept of operations for their emergency response.

FEMA personnel will describe the Federal agencies' role in the review process and make known any judgments they have made regarding the adequacy of the plan.

The public will have oppcrtunity to present comments.

These meetings are designed to accomplish two main objectives. First, the public will be afforded an opportunity to identify any weakness that they perceive in the plan and be able to discuss any concerns they have. Second, by being involved at this phase, the public will be better informed about the preparedness of the State and local governments and should better understand what actions will be taken in the event of an accident at the facility.

When the FEMA Regional Director has completed the review of the State plan, an exercise has been conducted at the facility to which the plan applies, and a public meeting has been held, then the Regional Director shall forward the State plan, together with the results of the review, the exercise, and the public meeting, to the FEMA Associate Director for Plans and Preparedness.

If, in the judgment of the FEMA Associate Director, the plan with the supporting documentation, is adequate to protect the public health and safety and provides the capability for adequate implementation, the Associate Director shall approve the plan and inform the Governor, the NRC, the public, and other appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies.

If the FEMA Associate Director finds that the plan does not adequately meet the planning objectives of the joint FEMA /NRC emergency planning criteria document, the Associate Director will notify the Governor of the deficiencies.

FEMA and State officials will discuss the deficiencies and mutually agree on a schedule for correcting them so that the plan can be approved.

The proposed rule provides procedures for amending an approved plan, appeals, maintaining approval status, and adding new facilities.

It also includes a stipulation on the frequency for conducting exercises.

l I

12

~

L__

III. EMERGENCY PLAN STATUS A.

State Plans (Provided by FEMA for this report)

As of December 1,1980, approximately 280 response plans, including site-specific applications of State plans, have been received for initial review by the FEMA Regions. Reviews have been completed on 130 of these plans.

About 40 of these plans impacting on 15 facilities have been upgraded to the point that forral submission has been made to the FEMA Regions, under the FEMA Rule. A joint exercise involving the licensee and State and local governments has been completed involving 13 facilities and 49 Ltate and local plans. Public meetings involving 11 facilities have been held.

FEMA has approved the State of Tennessee and two local goverr.sent response plans impacting on the Sequoyah facility in Tennessee and notified NRC of the approval.

B.

Facility Plans All nuclear power reactor licensees must submit emergency plans on January 2, 1981, to meet the requirements of the NRC final rule. Also required are emergency plans for those States and counties which are located within the 10-mile plume-exposure pathway and emergency plans for those States within the 50-mile ingestion pathway EPZ. Licensees are also required to submit copies of their emergency plan implementing procedures by March 1,1981.

All licensee emergency plans must be implemented by April 1,1981.

Applicants for an operating license must also submit emergency plans according to the new rule along with the appropriate State and local plans. These submittals are due with the filing of the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Over the past year the staff has been working with licensees in reviewing draft emergency plan submittals in a concerted effort to improve plant site emergency preparedness and also to assist the licensees in upgrading their planning effort so that their required January 2,1981 submittal could be acceptable.to the staff with minimal review and reiteration. During 1980, all operating plants and those within about one year of receiving an operating license submitted at least one draft. plan for staff review and most submitted a second revision after staff comments / questions were received.

Emergency Preparedness Evaluation Reports (as ap !atachment to the NRC Safety Evaluation Report) required for licensing actions have been issued for: North Anna 2, Sequoyah 1. Salem 2, Diablo Canyon 1 and 2, Farley 2, San Onofre 2 and 3, McGuire 2, and Summer 1.

One of the measures of an acceptable state of emergency preparedness at a nuclear power plant site is the satisfactory completion of a joint emergency preparedness exercise involving the State, the counties within the 10-mile EPZ and the licensee. This exercise is conducted to ensure that the emergency planning is complete, that training is sufficient and that. resources are available to take protective measures onsite and in 13 y

w-A-w 4

m

the environs of the site in the unlikely event of an accident. Several of these exercises have been co@leted and as a result, i@rovements in emergency preparedness are being made.

NRC teams have been formed to perform emergency preparedness appraisals beginning April 1,1981. Each team will consist of a leader, usually from IE headquarters, a consultant from Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, and two members from an NRC Regional Office. The teams will be assigned specific nuclear power plant sites, and will first review the new emergency plans and procedures for those sites. An onsite evaluation and inspection will be conducted of the licensee's state of preparedness and of the inter-faces with State and local governments. Where significant d(ficiencies are found, a 4-month period will be started within which cor'ections must be made.

C.

Joint Exercises Prior to determining the initial adequacy of an upgraded emergency plan and the overall emergency preparedness at a nuclear power facility, the licensee (applicant) must conduct an exercise that invol%s all major response organizations. This full-scale exercise must test as much of the licensee, State, and local emergency plans as is reasonably achievable without mandatory public participation. An exercise cust be conducted annually thereafter. These exercises are to be observed and critiqued by Federal officials.- Exercises were held at seven sites durir.g 1980. All were successful but revealed areas where i@rovements could be made.

These exercises were based on emergency plans which had been upgraded to meet the interim criteria of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1. These exercises will be repeated during 1981 as required by NRC regulations.

Licensees have been instructed to conduct an exercise within one year from l

April 1,1981. In the case of applicants for new operating licenses, the l

exercise must be conducted and found to be adequate before the operating license can be issued. NRC has requested each licensee to submit a schedule of drills and exercises as soon as possible. Licensees have also been requested to provide NRC with copies of the scenario to be used 2 weeks prior to the exercise.

14

IV. EVACUATION-TIME ESTIMATES A.

NRC Contractor Analyser.

An evaluation was done of the techniques used by licensees in their evacuation-time estimates at 50 nuclear power plant sites.

Items considered in the evaluation included population (permanent, transient, and those in special facilities), weather conditions, warning time, response time, and confirmation time. The standard used for analysis of the evacuation time estimates was a report entitled " Analysis of Techniques for Estimating Evacuation Times for Emergency Planning Zones" (NUREG/CR-1745).

1.

Qualitative Analysis An analysis of each of the 50 evacuation time estimate studies was performed to determine the quality of the studies and is reported in a document entitled "An Analysis of Evacuation Time Estimates Around 52 Nuclear Power Plants" (NUREG/CR-1856, to be published in January 1981). The contractor ranked the quality of the licensee studies based on a comparison with a model plan developed by the centractor.

2.

Quantitative Analysis Forty of the nuclear power plants studies were quantitatively analyzed.

Because some extremely high estimates were submitted for a few sites, and because the modal values were less representative of the data, the median values were used _for cocparisons throughout the analysis.

Tables 1, Range of Evacuation Times for the General Population from EPZs, and 2, Evacuation Time Estimates by Licensees / Applicants, on pages 17 and 18, show sites and evacuation time estimates. Estimates for other sites also have been furnished to NRC by licensees / applicants. Of the evacuation time estimates submitted by licensees / applicants, comparisons have not been attempted since identical estimating techniques and standard assumptions have not been used for the calculations. Likewise, comparisons between those furnished by the licensees / applicants and those by FEMA contractors have little validity although they were done for identical nuclear reactor sites.

3.

Median Times for 10-Mile Radius The 40 power plants reported results for 138 sectors. For various reasons, such as geography, not all sites have the same number of sectors. The median population for a sector was 5000; the range for a sector was 0 to 151,000.

Separate estimates were made for adverse weather conditions. Adverte weather conditions usually increased the response time; however, at some sites the response time was lower because transient populations decreased in the winter.

15

i Total. notification time estimates varied from 0.3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> to 6.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />. The median response time for permanent residents was 1.8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> under normal con-ditions and 2.8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> for adverse conditions.

The upper limits were 8.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> during normal conditions and 16.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> under adverse conditions. The median transient population response time

[

was-3.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> and 1.7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> for normal and adverse conditions, respectively.

Maximum values were 3.7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> for normal conditions and 4.2 under adverse conditions. Median special population respense time were 2.7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> for nornal conditions and 3.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> for adverse conditions.

(-

l.

Notification and response tine estimates were added to the estimated time required to clear the sector after warnings were issued. The median general population evacuation time was 5.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> for normal conditions and 5.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> for adverse conditions. Maximum ti $s were 21.0 f.ours for normal conditions and 27.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> for adverse conditions. Confirmatory times ranged from 0.6 hour6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> to 24.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />; the median was 2.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />.

Sector populations were broken into six groups for analysis.

It was noted that permanent population response time (normal and adverse) appear greater in sectors where the population is greater than 25,000. Special population response time appears to increase with increasing sector populations.

The median evacuation time for the 2, 5, and 10-mile radii from the plants increases with increasing distance.

The results of the analysis of the evacuation-time estimates provided by the various licensees' define the range of times that can reasonably be

[

expected to occur during evacuations of tLe Emergency Planning Zones.-

B.

FEMA Study of Evacation Times (Provided by FEMA for.this report)

As part of the MOU executed by NRC and FEMA on January 14, 1980, FEMA agreed to independently evaluate the evacuation times for the transient and permanent population within the 10-mile Emergency Planning Zones at 12 sites that were l

mutually agreed upon. These sites are:

l

(

Nuclear Power b6ation State 1.

Indian Point *

. New York l

2.

Zion

• Illinois 3.

Limeri ck.

Pennsylvania t

l 4.

Bailly Indiana 5.

Three-Mile Island

• Pennsylvania-L 6.

Fermi Michigan 7.

Beaver Valley

• Pennsylvania 8.

Shoreham New York

[

9.-

Seabrook New Hampshire

10. Midland Michigan

11. -Millstone

• Connecticut

12. Maine Yankee

• Maine

• Licensed to operate

~

16 1

i

d f

The FEMA independent assessment consisted of contractor assessments, the l

contractors' major conclusions, commentary from State and local government officials, and a FEMA critique of the contractors' methodologies.

1.

Independence i.

Within the ' constraints of time, manpower, and funds, FEMA produced assessinents that are as independent as possible from thei-licensees and State and local government and should be useful to support licensing reviews. The assessments included tt e expertise and experience of the three contractors used by FEMA; 1.

l contractor reports; assistance by State and local government officials, and the utilities and their consultants; commentary by State and local officials; and the critique of methodologies. Because each contractor used different approaches, assumptions,.and data, each assessment differs on a site-by-site basis.. There is no effective way to easily compare the results of the three

. contractors.

2.. Evacuation Times

- All three contractors. defined evacuation time as the time from the beginning of the first alert to the public for evacuation to the time-that the last vehicle crossed the plume-exposure pathway /EPZ. boundary. Two contractors defined the EPZ. boundary by applying radiological emergency planning guide-lines to the nominal 10-mile redhs which resulted in an irregularly shaped

' boundary that was:in general. greater than-a circle of 10-mile radius. - The other centractor defined the EPZ boundary as a circle' of 10-mile radius for

~

the purposes of!the estimate of evacuation times.

Evacuation. times were estimated for. three population groups:

(a) the general

. population, namely those who own their automobiles or equivalent; (b) the

public-transport-dependent populations, such 'as school chiluen and non-auto-owning p'ersons; and (c) the populations in institutions, sua as hospitals, who require-special vehicles. The populations of the lau two groups-consti-t"ted about 30% or less of the entire pooulation in need of evacuation and I

j

' ried on a site-by-site basis.

- Some indication of the range of evacuation times under a wide variety of conditions and assu@tions is given in Table 1..

The time estimates are -

based on~1001, evacuation of the general. population from the entire EPZ and rounded to the. nearest hour.-

lFor the 12 EPZs ' analyzed by the contractors and reviewed in this report, evacuation times range from ? hours for 4 EPZs (Fermi, Shoreham, Midland,

= and Maine Yankee).to as lont a time 'as 15. hours for 1 EPZ (Seabrock). The

-short times. reflect-nightim:, winter, and good weather; for relatively -

. low-population EDZs assuming 15-minute alert and notification, available

-. emergency manpower and. resources, education of the public, and effective-

- behavioral response of-the drivers. The longest time of 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br /> reflects L

's

.l7 L

L o

a

l summer peak populati on the beach, current alert and notification, the lack of of adequate.:xrgency manpower and resources, and the ineffective behavioral response of the drivers.

(able 1: Range of Evacuation Times for the General Population from EPZs Nuclear Power Station EPZ Evacuation Time in Hours 1.

Indian Point 7-9 2.

Zion 5-6 3.

Limerick 3

4.

Bailly 3-5 5.

Three Mile Island 3

6.

Fermi 2

7.

Beaver Valley 4

8.

Shoreham 2-3 9.

Seabrook 4-15

10. Midland 2-3

11. Millstone 3-5

12. Maine Yankee 2-6 Time-dependent' analyses of evacuation of the general population show that a few people take longer to evacuate because they are relatively late in being notified, mobilized, and have to drive the longest distances.

Consequently, it nay take an additional hour or so for the last 10% of the population to be evacuated.

Therefore, the analyses more accurately describe the evacuation times at the 90% level of evacuation. The observation suggests that a single criterion for evacuation-time estimates is the time when 90%

of the general population is evacuated across the EPZ boundary. A time-l dependent analysis provides the most accurate and complete information for the emergency planner and is supplied for Indian Point, Zion, and Seabrook.

L The evacuation times for the public-transport-dependent populations and those persons in institutions are, for the most part, within the range of evacuation times for the general population shown in Table 1.

However, these estimates are based on the assumption t3at the large number of buses.

l ambulances, and other special vehicles which are required can be mobilized in a timely fashion.

3.

Impact of Phased Ver:us Sinultaneous Evacuation l

A comparison of an inmediate evacuation as a result of a prompt alert and notification versus a phased alert and notification, which more closely reflects the systems currently in place, was made at Indian Point, Zion, and Seabrook EPZs. Under certain conditions for high population densities, 18 v

-e

a phased or gradual loading to the road network resulted in somewhat shorter evacuation times. However, in some cases gradual loading of road networks increased total evacuation times because more time was taken to prepare and depart, thus underutilizing roadway capacity.

In some cases, prompt notification to stay inside as opposed to immediate evacuation would also provide a reduction in exposure to radiation.

4.

Achievement of Evacuation Times The contractors' reports illustrate that substantial emergency manpower and resources are necessary to achieve the estimated evacuation times.

Therefore, ce:?bility for rapid evacuation requires dedicated people and money. The cos.=.ractor reports on Zion and Seabrook are especially illumi-nating in this regard.

5.

Sheltering as an Alternative Protective Measure The contractors' reports suggest a number of instances where sheltering could be considered as an alternative protective measure, such as at hospitals and correctional institutions.

6.

Comparison With Licensee / Applicant Estimates of Evacuation Times Eleven out of the twelve licensees / applicants submitted estima*es of evacuation times based on NRC requests in 1979. The remaining licensee should submit an estimate within the next few months. Seven estimates were coapleted in time to be used in limited ways by the contractors as they saw fit in view of their charge to perform independent estimates. Because of the differences between the NRC request and the FEMA statements of work, many of the assumptions and bases are different for the two sets of estimates and, therefore, are not comparable. For example, the licensee / applicant estimates do not necessarily include the assumption of the 15-minute alert and notification of the public as evaluated by the FEMA contrc ctars. The licensees / applicants are required to report two time estimatet a best estimate and an adverse weather estimate. The conditions for best estimates are undefined by the NRC request. For information purposes, the estimates for~ the general population are suni.ertzed i Table 2 where the evacuation j

times are rounded to the neare*t hour. New York State and Suffolk County, New York, are the only govern ~ ital estimates of evacuation times and are identified by parentheses.

l 19

Table 2: Evacuation-Time Estimates by Licensees / Applicants Evacuation Times in Hours Nuclear Power Station EPZ Best Weather Adverse Weather 1.

Indian Point 5

7 s ))

2.

Zion 21 Not available 3.

Limerick 9

11 4.

Bailly 3

8 5.

Three Mile Island Not available 6.

Fermi 4

5 7.

Beaver Valley 5

7 8.

Shoreham (11)

(12) 9.

Seabrook 3

4

10. Midland 3

4

11. Millstone 8

11

12. Maine Yankee 4

7 7.

Appropriate Protective Action FEMA officials and State and local governnent officials are concerned with how to best protect the population from radioactive material which may be released from accidents at nuclear reactors and the times in which to implement protective actions. NUREG-0396/ EPA-520/1-28-106 and NUREG-0654/

FEMA-REP-l give information on the time factors associated with these releases. The table below summarizes the range of time frames associated with the spectrum of accidents considered in these studies.

Table 3: Guidance on Initiation and Duration of Release (1) Time from the initiating eve nt 0.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> to one day to start of atmospheric relesse (2) Time period over which radio-0.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> to several active material nay be contin-days uously released

(~) Time at which major portion 0.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> to 1 day of release nay occur after start of release (4) Travel time for release to 5 miles--0.5 to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> exposure point (tine after 10 milet--I to 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> release)

Source: Table 2, page 17, NUREG ^654/ FEMA-RF.P-1, Revision 1, November 1980.

20

~

This guidance on the initiation and duration of release suggests, when compared with the estimates of evacuation times, that there is adequate time to complete an evacuation for a slowly developing release. However, if there is an accident with a relatively fast release, the guidance suggests that the time from the initiating event through travel time to the 10-mile EPZ boundary may be as short as 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />. Within this 2-hour time frame, the 12 EPZs can only be partially evacuated.

For an accident under these conditions, sh.eltering could be a viable protective action. Accordingly, sheltering and evacuation are so significantly interrelated that they should be considered jointly when judging the appropriateness of protective action.

e C.

Continuinc Effort Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories is under contract to provide technical assistance to NRC in the review of evacuation-time estimates. This assistance consists of analysis of evacuation-time estimates which have been prepared by operators of nuclear power facilities and applicants for power licenses, development of a computer program to provide the NRC staff with an independent method of performing evacuation-time estimates, and special analysis of problers for individual reactor sites.

Presantly, Battelle has completed an analysis of the evacuation-time estimates that were submitted by licensees.

Its report, to be published in January 1981, will contain maps of the evacuation planning zones and brief summaries of the evacuation-time estimates. Further efforts will include analysis of estimates submitted by applicants for operating licenses. Additionally, Battelle will update its recent review of submittals by power reactor licensees to reflect revised estimates of evacuation times. These revisions resulted from the more-detailed criteria published in NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1 and because some operators have undertaken a more thorough and more accurate estimate of

. evacuation times.

21

V.

NEW LEGISLATION Congress, in Section 109 (b) (5) of PL 96-295, asked NRC for "... its recormiendations respecting any additional Federal statutory authority which the Comission deems necessary to provide that adequate plans and preparations for such radiological emergencies are in effect...."

- NRC and FEMA have considered whether specific radiological emergency preparedness legislation is necessary at this time. The agencies believe that it is prudent to allow some time to gain operational experience with the working arrangements spelled out in their Memorandum of Understanding fcr radiological emergency planning and prepareoness. Based upon the experience gained over the next year, it may then be appropriate to reconinend legislation.

22

VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY Battelle Human Affairs Research Centers, " Analysis of Techriques for Estimating Evacuation Times for Emergency Planning Zones,' NUREG/CR-1745, Ncvember 1980.*

Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, "An Analysis or Evacuation Time Estimates Around 52 Nuclear Power Plant Sites," Report NUREG/CR-1856, Volumes I onc II, in preparation.**

Federal Energency Management Agency, " Review and Approval of State and Local Radiological Emergency Plans and Preparedness," Proposed rule, Federal imergency Management Agency, Federal Register, Vol. 45, No.123, June 24,1980, 42341-42347. - (Appendix B of this report)

Letter from D. G. Eisenhut, NRC, to All Power Reactor Licensees,

Subject:

Emergency Planning, dated October 10, 1979.+

Letter from B. K. Grimes, NRC, to All Power Reactor Licensees,

Subject:

Request for Information Regarding Estimates for Evacuation of Various Areas Around Nuclear Power Reactors, dated November 29, 1979.+

U.S. Congress, 96th, " Nuclear Regulatory Commission Appropriation Authorization," Public Law 96-295, Section 109, 94 Stat 783-785, June 30,1980.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants," NUREG-0654 (FEMA-REP-1),

Revision 1, November 1980.*

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Emergency Planning," Proposed rule, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Fei ral Register, Vol. 44, No. 245, December 19, 1979, 75167-75174.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Emergency Planning," Final rule, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register, Vol. 45, No.162, August 19, 1980, 55402-55418.

(Appendix A of this report)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Functional Criteria for Emergency

- Response Facilities," NUREG-0696, in preparation.**

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Guidance and Checklist for the Development and Evaluation of State and Local Government Radiological Emergency Response Plans in Support of Fixed Nuclear Facilities,"

NUREG-75/111 -(Reprint of WASH-1293, Rev. No.1,12/01/74),

October 1975.*+

23 I

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission, "NRC Office of State Programs Standards and Procedures for Concurrence in State and Local Government Radiological Emergency Response Plans," Supplement No. I to NUREG-75/lli, Mai ch 15, 1977.+

(Bound with reprint of NUREG-75/lli. )*

.U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission / Federal Emergency Management Agency, Memoraldum of Understanding Between NRC and FEMA To Accomplish a Prompt Improvement in Radiological Emergency Planning and Preparedness, Janu a ry - ll, 1980.

(Appendix D of this report)

U.S.-' Nuclear Regulatory Comission/ Federal Emergency Management Agency, Memorandum of Understanding Between NRC and FEMA Relating to Radiological Emergency Planning and Preparedness, November 4,1930.

(Appendix E of this report)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission /U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

" Planning Basis for the Development of State and Local Government Radio-logical Emergency Response Plar.s in Support of Light Water Nuclear Power Plants," NUREG-0396/(EPA 520/1-78-016), December 1978.*

l

'F-~livailable for. purchase from National Technical. Information Service, i.

Springfield, Virginia -22161.-

Single ~ copies are available from USNRC Division of Technical Information and Document Control, Washington, D. C.-

20555. :

Available in the NRC Public Document Room for. inspection, and copying

+

for a fee.

' 24.

e

APPENDIX A NRC EMERGENCY PLANNING; FINAL REGULATIONS l

l A-1 l-

l I

Tuesday August 19,1980 EiA

_;= A

=

h nE]

W m_

g g- -

km M=BT

=4 h3 m

1 t= -

e E

Part Vill u

a Nuclear Regulatory z

Commission d

Emergency Planning; Final Regulations w

n h=N3 N%

,2->

=

5 W

A-3

'mm-m+

sf

?-erw'*

9--e-M wm -

- a

55402 Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday. August 19.1980 / Rules and Regulations The final regulation contains the comments / suggestions in connection NUCl. EAR REGULATORY following elements:

with the proposed amendments within COMMISSION

1. In order to continue operations or to 60 days after pub!ication in the Federal 10 CFR Parts 50 F9d 70 receive an operating license an Register.During this comment period (in applicant / licensee will be required to january 1980) the Cornmission submit its emergency plans. as well as conducted four regional workshops with Emergency Planning State and local governmental emergency State and local officials utility response plans to NRC. The NRC will representatives, and the public to ActNcy:U S. Nuclear Regulatory then make a finding as to whether the discuss the feasibility or the various Comissim state of onsite and offsite emergency portions of the proposed amendments.

ACTION:Fina' ru,e.

preparedness provides reasonable their impact. and the procedures assurance that adequate protective proposed for complying with their suuuAny:%e Muclear Regulatory measures can and wdl be taken in the provisions. The NRC used the Commission is upgrading its emergency event of a radiological emeyncy.The information from these workshops along plannir.g regulations in order to assure NRC will base its finding on a review of with the public comment letters to that adequate protective measures can the Federal Emergency Management develop the final rule (more than 200 and will be taken in the event of a Agency (FEMA) findings and comment letters and the points made in radiological emergency. Nuclear power determinations as to whetner State and two petiticns for rulemaking were also plants and certain other licensed local emergency plans are adequate and considered).

f;cilities are required to submit their capable of being implemented and on in addition to the above, oa June 25.

emergency plans. together with the the NRC assess =ent as to whether the 1980. the Commission was briefed by cmergency response plans of State and licensee's/ applicant's emergency plans three panels of pubbe commenters on local governments, to the Commission.

are adequate and capable of being the rule, one each comprised of The Commission and the Federal Energy implemented.These issues may be representatives from the mdustry. State Management Agency willreview the raised in NRC operating license andlocalgovernments and pubhc plans for adequacy. The amendment hearings, but a FEMA fmding will interest groups. Each panel raised clso F.eds emergency planning cmsmte a MunaMe pmumpum on immant cucuns madng de Gnal rule. On July 3.1980, the Commission cons. tera ions to" Emergency Planning the question of adequacy.

Zor.rs'. and makes additional

2. Emergency planning considerations was briefed by its staff in response to darincadas' will be extended to " Emergency these panels. (ncluding several modifications U the proposed final aFFECTtyt caTE: November 3.1980.

Planning Zones."

rules. Finally, on July 23.1980 at the Note-The Nuclear Regulatory

3. Detailed emergency plan Commission has subcutted this rule to the implementing p'roceudres of licensees /

final Commission consideration of these Comptroller General for review of the applicants wdl be required to be rules the Commission was briefed by reportmg requirements in the ru!e. pursuant submitted to NRC for review. and the General Counsel on the substance of

4. Requirements in 10 CFR Part 50.

conversations with Congressiona,1 staff t$S 35 :h. e e on wScYthe re.g Appendix E are clarified and upgraded.

members who were involved v, _.

requirements of the rule become e rective panage of de NRC Au6omadon Act r

Includes a 45. day period. which the statute

Background

for fiscal year 1980, Pub. I. No.96-295 allows for Comptrouer General review (44 In June 1979, the Nuclear Regulatory The General Counsel advised the U.S.C. 351:(cl(2]).

Poet FustTHEA INFOftsf ATION CONTACT'*

recesMe n

er e m m ency m consistent we dat Act.&

Comminion has rey a au cW Mr. Michael T.Jamgochian. Office of

%e g

umg ecm Standards Development. U.S. Nuclear protection of the public health and above information m its consideration of Regulatory Com:mssion. Washington.

safety in areas around nuclear power these final rules. In addition, the D.C. 20535 (telephone: 301-443-5966).

facuities. The Commission began this Commission directs that the transcripts i

l suppm8ENTANORt4AT10*c On reconsideration in recogmtion of the of these meetings shall be part of the September 19.1979 and on December 19.

need for more effective emergency administrative record in this rulemaking.

19'9. the Commission published for planning and n response to the TMI However, the transcnpts have not been public comment (44 FR 54308 and 44 FR accident and to reports isse-d by reviewed for accuracy and. therefore.

75167) proposed amendments to Es responsible offices of government and are only an informal record of the emergency planning regulations for the NRC's Congressional oversight matters discussed.

After evaluating all public comment production and utihr.ation facilities.

committees.

Extensive comments were received. a13 On December 19.19~9. the Nuclear letters received and all the information cf which were evaluated and considered Regulatory Commission published in the obtained dunng the workshops as well in deseloping the final rule. The Federal Register (44 FR 75167) proposed as additional reports such as the comments received and the staffs amendments to 10 CI:R Part 50 and Presidential Commission and the NRC evaluation is contained in NUREG-0684 Appendix E to Part 50 of its regulations.

SpecialInquiry Group Reports, the In addition. the NRC conducted four Publication of these naal rule changes in Commission has decided to publish the Regional Workshops to so.icit the Federal Register is not only related final rule changes desenbed below, comments: these comments are to the December 19.19~9 proposed rule Description of Final Rule Changes available in NUREC/CP-00n (April changes but also incorporates the The Commission has decided to adopt 1980).'

proposed changes to to CFR Parts 50 a version of the proposed rules similar and 70 (44 FR 54308] published on to alternative A desenbed in Sections

' Copes of NUREG documents m avadable at September 19,19*9. Interested persons 50 47 and 50.54 in the Federal Register etw Commission e Pubhc Document Roon IM7 H were invited to submit written Notice dated December 19,1979 [44 FR Street NW, wasturg.on. D C :csis Comes may be purchased from sne Gasernment Pnrung Offee.

75167), as modified in light of comments.

Laformanon on cwent p *ces may be obtamed by Wasturfort D C 23sss. Attencon. Pubbcanona These rules are consistent with the wnnr,g the L;S Lclear Regdatory Comrmssaan.

Sales Af4aager.

A-4

Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday. August 19, 1980 / Rules and Regulations 55403 approach outlined by FEMA and NRC in applicant / licensee will be required to

6. Requirement for speciahzed training a Memorandum of Understanding (45 FR submit its emergency plans. as well as (Section W.F) 5847. January 24,1980). No new State and local governmental emergency

7. Provisions for up to-date plan operating license will be granted unfess response plans, to NRC. The NRC will maintenance (Section IV.G) the NRC can make a favorable finding then make a finding as to whether the Applicants for a constructica permit that the integration of onsite and offsite state of onsite and offsite cmergency would be required to submit more emergency planning provides preparedness provides rea.,nable information as required in the new reasonable assurance that adequate assurance that adequate procctive Section II of Appendix E.

protective measures can and will be measures can and willbe taket in the Rationale foe the Final Rules taken in the event of a radiological event of a radiological emergene.'.

emergency.In the case of an operating The NRC will base its finding. n a The Commis,sion's final rules are reactor. if it is determined that there are review of the FEMA findings ud based on the sigmficance of adequate such deficiencies that a favorable NRC determinations as to whethe; State and em ncy a ing a d a

ess finding is not warranted and if the local emergency plans are.dequate and p

ie hea and safe tis d deficiencies are not corrected within 4 capable of being impleme nted and on d

months of that determination.the the NRC assessment as c whether the Commission will determine applicant s/hcensee,s e.nargency p!Ans descnbed in the proposed rules (44 FR expeditiously whether the reactor are adequate and capable of being 75169) and the public record compiled in should be shut down or whether some implemented. In any NRC licensing this rulemaking, that onsite and offsite g'",8s w g3 other enforcement action is appropriate. proceeding a FEMA finding will

'* * 'I E

,, ds pursuant to procedures provided for in consitute a rebuttable presumption on p

features are needed to protect the health 10 CFR 2200.-2206. In any case where the question of adequacy.Specifically:

and safety of the pubhc. As the the Commission believes that the public

a. An operating license will not be Commission reacted to the accident at health, safety, or interest so requires. the issued unless a favorable NRC overall Three Mile Island. It became clear that plant w 11 be required to shut down finding can be made.

the protection provided by siting and immediately (10 CFR * ".f). see 5

b. After Aprill.1981. an operating.

engineered design features must be U.S C. 558(c)).

plant may be required to shut down ifit bolstered by the ability to take The standarh that the NRC will use is determined that there are deficiencies protective measures during the course of in making its determinations under these such that a favorable NRC finding an accident.ne accident also showed rules are set forth in the final regulation. cannot be made or is no longer clearly that onsite conditions and Wherever possible. these standards may warranted and the deSciencies are not actions. even if they do not cause blend with other emergency planning corrected within 4 months of that significant o!Tsite radiological procedures for nonnuclear emergenczes determination.

consequences, will affect the way the presently in existence. The standards

2. Emergency planning considerations various State and local entities react to are a restatement of basic NRC and now must be extended to " Emergency protect the public from any dangers joint NRC-FEMA guidance to licensees Planning Zones." and associated with the accident. In order to and to State and local g:vernments. See

3. Detailed emergency planning discharge effectively its statutory NUREG-0654; FEMA-REP-1. " Criteria implementing procedures of both responsibilities, the Commission must for Preparation and Evaluation of licensees and applicants for operatin8 know that proper means and procedures Radiological Emergency Response Plans licenses must be submitted to NRC for will be in place to assess the course of and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear review.

an accident and its potential severity.

Power Plants for Interim Use and in addition. the Commission is that NRC and other appropriate Comment." (January 1980). In deciding revising ;0 CFR Part 50. Appendix E.

authorities and the public will be whether to permit reactor operation in

" Emergency Plans for Production and notified promptly, and that adequate the face of some deficiencies, the Utilization Facilities." in order to clanfy. protective actions in response to actual Commission wdi examine among other expand. and upgrade the Commission's or anticipated conditions can and will factors whether the deficiencies, are emergency planning regulations.

be taken, significact for the reactor in question.

Sections of Appendix E that are ne Commission's organic statutes whether adequate intenm compensatory expanded include:

provide it with a unique degree of actions have been or will be taken

1. Specification of" Emergency Action discretion in the execution of agency promptly, or whether other compelling Levels"(Sections N.B and C) functions. Siegel v. AEC 400 Fad 778.

reasons cust for reactor operation. In

2. Dissemination to the public of basic 783 (D.C. Cir.1968). see Westinghome determining the sufficiency of " adequate emergency planning information Electric Corp. v. NRC 598 Fad 759. 7 1 intenm cogensatory act2ons" under (Section N.D)

& n.47 (3d Cir.1979). "Both the Atomic this rule. the Commission wul examine

3. Provisions for the State and local Energy Act of1954 and the Energy State plans. local plans, and licensee governmental authorities to have a Reorganization Act of19/4 confer broad plans to determine whether features of capability for rapid notification of the regulatory functions on the Commission one plan can compensate for public during a serious reactor and spec 2fically authorize it to deficiencies in another plan so that the emergency, with a design objective of promulgate rules and regulatiocs it level of protection for the public health completing the initial notification within deems necessary to fulfillits and safety is adequate.This 15 minutes after notification by the responsibilities under the Acts. 42 U.S.C.

interpretation is consistent with the licensee (Section IV.D) i 2201(p)." Public Service Co. ofNew provtsions of the NRC Authorization Act

4. A licensee onsite technical support Nctrpshim v. NRC. 582 F2d 77. 82 (1st for fiscal year 1980. Pub. L 96-295.

center and a licensee z.aar site Cir.). cert denied. 439 U.S.1Mo (1978).

The regulation contains the following emergency operations facility (Section See 42 U.S.C 2133(a). As the Supreme three major changes from past practices:

N.E)

Court stated almost 20 years a.r) the

1. In order to continue operations or to

5. Provisions for redundant Atomic Energy Act " clearly recieve an operatmg license, an communications systems (Section N.E]

contemplates that the Commission shall A-5

55404 Federal Register / Vol. 45, No.1C2 / Tuesday. August 19, 1980 / Rules and Regulations by regulation set forth what the public proposed rule changes.The following Commission's disposition to grant such safety requirements are as a prerequisite major issues have been raised in the exemptions.

to the issuance of any license or permit comments rectived.

5. The Commission. in developing this under the Act."PowerReactor aspect of the proposed rule. must Deve!cpment Co. v. laternatwnal Union i.ssue A:NRCReview and Concurrence considet its own history. There was time in tate and E.ocalRadiologicalPlans

,y,, 7, guy,7;,,,,, ey,,,,,,75,,3 y, ofElectricalRadioMachine Workers.

367 U.S. 396. 404 (1961). Finally, it is also

1. FEMA is best suited to assess the the leaders of the atency by simple and clear that " Congress, when it enacted adequacy of State and local radiological very appropriate expressions. The

[42 U.S.C. 2236].. must have emergency planning and preparedness process was to be " effective and envisioned that licensing standards, and report any adverse findings to NRC efficient." he application of regulatory especially in the areas of health and for assessment of the licensing authority was to be " firm. but fair."

safety regulation would vary over time consequences of those fmdings.

Regardless of the outcome of the as more was learned about the hazards

2. The proposed rule fails to provide

" concurrence" issue, the Commission of generating nuclear energy. Insofar as objective standards for NRC must appreciate that alternative B is not those standards became more concurrence. reconcurrence, and faa. It is not effective regulation.

demanding. Congress surely would have withdrawal of concurrence.

Issued PublicEducation wanted the new standards,if the 3.In the absence of additional Commission deemed it appropriate, to statutory authority, the proposed rule Only information reouired to inform apply to those nuclear facilities already frusaates Congressionalintent to the public about what tu do in the event licensed." Et. Pierce Utilities Authority preempt State and local government of a radiological emergency need be

v. United States. 608 F.2d 988. 996 (D.C.

Veto power over nuclear power plant disseminated.There shculd be Cir.19"9).

operation.

flexibility, in any particular case. as to In response to and guided by the

4. Procedures and standards for who will be ultimately msponsible for various reports and public comments. as adjudication of emergency planning disseminating such mformation.

well as its own determination on the disputes are not adequately specified in f,,y,7 f,,g,f 3y,3,,,7 scuficance of emergency preparedness, the proposed rule.

the Commission has therefore concluded L A few commentm feh &at NRC f,,,,g;y,,,,,,,,p,,,,,,,y,,,,

had no authority to promulgate a rule as that adequate emergency preparedness Ol the one proposed.

is an essential aspect in the protection of the public health and safety.The

1. Regulatory basis for imposition of

2. Other comments were the nature Commissio1 recognizes there is a the Emergency Planning Zone concept that NRC has statutory authority only possibility that the operation of some should be expressly stated in the inside the limits of the plant site.

reactors may be affected by this rule regulation.

3. Some commenters suggested that through inaction of State and local

2. Provisions regarding the plume NRC and FEMA should seek additional governments or an inability to comply exposure pathway EPZ should provide a legislation to compel State and local with these rules."Ite Commission maximum planning distance of 10 miles.

governments to have emergency plans. if believes that the potential restriction of

3. References to NUREG-0396 should that is what is necessary.

1,lant operation by State and local be deleted to avoid disputes over its Issue F; Schedule for Implementation officials is not significantly different m, meaning in bcensm, g proceedings.

The schedule for implementing th kind or effect from the means already A #"d # N" proposed rule was considered to be available under existing law to prohibit 8"

l unrealistic and in some cases in confhtt reactor operation such as zoning and land-use laws, certification of public

1. Neither alternative is necessary with various State schedules already in convenience and necessity. State because th,e Commission has sufficient existence. A sampling of the comments financial and rate considerations (10 authority to order a plant shut down for on the implementation schedule follows:

l CFR 50.33(f)). and Federal safety reasons and should be prepared

1. The 180 days in the schedule is an environmental!aws.The Commission to exercise that authonty only on a insufficient amount of time to notes. however, that such considerations case-by. case basis and when a accomplish tasks of this magnitude: the generally relate to a one-time decision particular situation warrants such Federal government does not work with on siting. whereas this rule requires a action.

such speed. States are bureaucracies periodic renewal of State and local

2. No case has been made by the also: there is no reason to assume they commitments to emergency Commissior for the need for automatic can work faster. It took years of workmg preparedness. Relative to applying this shutdown, as would be required in with States to get the plans that are rule in actual practice. however, the alternative B. and certainly no other presently concurred in. It is just Commission need not shut down a NRC regulations exist that would insufficient time for new concurrences l

facility until all factors have been require such action based on a concept and review. Also, to get a job done thoroughly examined. The Commission as amorphous as " concurrence in State within that time frame means a hurried believes. based on the record created by and local emergency plans."

job. rather than an acceptable and l

the public workshops, that State and

3. The idea that the Commission might meaningful plan.

local officials as partners in this grant an exemption to the rules that

2. The time provided is inadequate for undertaking will endeavor to provide would permit continued operation States to acquire the hardware needed.

l fully for public protection.

(under alternative B) has little States must go out for competitive bids hignificance. primanly because to CFR lust as the Federal government does.

Summary of Commenta on Major Issues Part 50.12(a) already permits the Between processing and accapting a bid The Commission appreciates the granting of exemptions.

and actual delivery of equipment,it may extensive public comments on this 4.The process and procedures for take a year to get the hardware. The important rule. In addition to the record obtaining such exemptions are not State budgets years ahead: therefore,if of the workshops. the NRC has received defined, nor is there any policy a State or local government needs more over 200 comment letters o.: the indication that would indicate the money. it may have to go to the A-6

Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday. August 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations 55405 legislature. This is a time-consuming 6fficulties asso Sted with such a

5. The basis for effective offsite pubbc process that may not fit the reqt ire:aent, response capabilities is a sound Federal schedule.

emergency preparedness program.

3. NRC nd FEMA could not review 70

1. 1. 1. "' O'#8'"CM#C I#

Federal support (fundmg and technical or more plans and provide concurrence Applicants,in cooperation Wth State assistance) for the develop =ent of State by January 1.1981.De Federal and local governmental authonties.

and local offsite capabilities should be govemment moves slowly Commenters should be permitted the necessary incorporated into FEMA's preparedness did not think that NRC and FENIA can flexibility to develop emergency action program for a!! emergencies.

review all the plans within the time level criteria appropriate for the facihty Issue Menal frame scheduled.If the Federal in question subject to NRC approval.

government cannot meet its schedule.

Inilexible NRC emergency action level The States support Federal oversight why or how should the States?

standards are not necessary.

and guidance in the development of

4. Funding could not be apptcpriated offsite response capabihties. However, by State and local governments before 183"' E h l###8 many States feel the confusion and the deadline.It was suggested that the

1. Mandatory provision for training uncertainty in planning requirements Commission use H. Rept.96-413.

local service personnel and local news following Three Mile Island is not a

" Emergency Planning U.S. Nuclear media persons is outside of NRC's proper environment in which to develop Power Plants: Nuclear Regulatory jurisaction and is not necessary to effective capabilities nor does it serve Commission Oversight." for the time protect the public health and safety.

the best interests of their citizens. The frame rather than that in the proposed

2. Pubhc participation in drills or development of effective nuclear facihty rule or use a sliding. scale time frame entiques thereof should not be required.

incident response capabilities wMl since States are at vanous stages of

3. De provision regarding formal require close coordination and completing their emergency plar.s.

critiques should be clanfled to mean the cooperation among responsible Federal licensee is responsible for developing agencies. State government. and the Issue C:Impccf ofPicposedRule and conducting such cntiques, nuclear industry. An orderly and 1.The proposed regulations were

4. Definitive performance criteria for comprehensive approach to this effort considered by some conimenters as evaluation of dnlis should be developed makes it necessary that onsite unfair to utihties because it was felt by the licensee, subject to NRC responsibihties be clearly assocf sted they place the utihties in the pohtical approval with NRC and the nuclear industry and financial role that FBtA should be while deferring offsite responsibihties to assuming. NRC is seen as in effect Issue K; Implementing Procedures State govemment with appropriate giving State and local govemments veto NRC review ofimplementing FEhtA oversight and assistance.

over the operation of nuclear plants,it procedures is only necessary to appr.se In adation to these comments, two was questioned whether this was an the NRC staff of the details of the p;ans petitions for rulemaking were filed in intent of the rule. In adation,it was felt for use by the NRC during the cause of reference to the proposed rule.nese that utilities, their customers. and their an actual emergency.

were treated as public comments rather shareholders should not be penalized by a shutdown (with a resulting financial 7,,g. f.g#8 than petitions and were considered in developing the final rule.

burden) because of alleged deficiencies

1. Nuclear facilities, althrugh located ne Commission has placed the orlack of cooperation by State and local in one govemmental tax jurisdiction and planning objectives from NUREG-0654.

officials.

taxed by that jurisdiction, affect other FDtA-REP-1. "Cnteria for Preparation

2. It was suggested that NRC's Office junsdictions that must bear immediate and Evaluation of Radiological of Inspection and Enforcement conduct and long-term planning costs without Emergency Response Plans and the reviews of the State and local having access to taxes from the facility.

Preparedness in Support of Nuclear govemmental emergency response plans

2. As the radius of planning Power Plants for Interim Use and in order to ensure prompt effective, and requirements becomes greater. few Comment." january 1980. into the final consistent implementation of the facthties are the concern cf a single regulations. Comments received proposed regulations.

county.The planning radius often concerning NUREG-0654 were available

3. Cne commenter noted that the encc= passes county lines. State lines, in developing the final regulation.ne public should be made aware of the and in some instances. miemational Commission notes that the planning issue of intermediate and long-term boundaries.

objectives in NUREG-0654 were largely impacts of plant shutdowns.

3. As new regulations are generated to drawn from NUREG-75/111. " Guide and Specifically, people should be informed oversee the nuclearindustry and old Checklist for Development and of the possibihty of" brownouts." cost ones expanded there is an immediate Evaluation of State and Local increases to the consumer due to need to address fixed nuclear facility Government Ediological Emergency secunng attemative energy sources. and planning at alllevels of gover =ent.

Response P!ans in Support of Fixed the health and safety factors associated beginning at the lowest and going to the Nuclear Facihties." tDecember 1.1974) with those alternative sources, highest. Alllevels of government need and Supplement I thereto dated htarch access to immediate additional funds to 15.1977, which have been in use for Issue N PublicNotification upgrade their response capability.

some time.

1. Ultimate responsibility for public

4. It is well understood that the The approximately 60 public comment notification of a radiological emergency consumer ultimately must pay the price letters received on NUREG-M54 were must be placed on State and local for planning. regardDss of the levelin not entical of the proposed planning govemment.

government at which.osts are incurred.

objectives. The Commission also notes

2. The " fifteen minute" public It becomes a matter #how the that at the hf ay 1.1980 ACRS meeting.

notification rule is without scientific consumer will be tand. who will the Atomic !adustrial Forum justification. fails to differentiate admimster the tax re:eipts, and what is representative encouraged the use of the between areas close in and further away the most effective manner in which to planning objectives from NUREG-454 from the site, and ignores the technical address the problem.

in the final regulations in order to

".- 7

55406 Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday. August 19. 1980 / Rules and Reg Jations reduce ambiguity and provide specificity capability of implementation of State and longer times t a release significant to the final regulation.

and local plans.

amounts of activi y in many scenarios).

Based on the above. the Commission

4. To make decisions with regard to Guidance regarding the ra6onuclides to has decided to modify the proposed rule the overall state of emergency be considered in planning is set forth in changes in the areas discussed in preparedness (i.e., integration of the NUREG-0396. EPA 520/1-78-C16.

paragraphs I through X below, hcensee's emergency preparedness as

" Planning Basis for the Development of determined by the NRC and of the State and local Govemment

1. FEMA /NRC Relationship State / local govemments as determined Radiological Emergency Response P!ans in issuing this rule. NRC recognizes by FEMA and reviewed by NRC) and in Support ofIj ht. Water Nuclear g

the significant responsibdities assigned issuance of operstmg licenses or Power Plants." December 19*8.

to FEMA. by Executive Order 12148 on shutdown of opereting reactors.

IV. Rationals foe Altanatives Chosen July 15.19 9. to coordinate the In addition. FEMA has prepared a emergency planning functions of proposed rule regarding " Review and In a few areas of the proposed rule, executive agencies. In view of FEMA's Approval of State Ra6ological the Commission ident2fied two new role. NRC agreed on September 11.

Emergency Plans and Preparedness"(44 alternatives that it was considering.

19*9. that FEMA should henceforth chair FR 42342. dated June 24.1980).

Mar.y public comments were received the FederalInteragency Central Accordmg to the propose

• FEMA rule.

on these allematives; based on due Coordinating Committee for FEMA wdl approve State and n. al consideration of all comments received Radiological Emergency Res'ponse emergency plans and preparedness, as well as the discussions cresented Planning and Preparedness (FICCC). On where appropriate, based upon its durmg the workshops, the Commission December 7,1979, the President issued a fin 6ngs and determinations with has determmed which of each pair of

&recove assigning FAIA lead respect to the adequacy of State and alternatives to retain in the final rule.

responsibility for o;fsite emergency local plans and the capabilities of State In Sections 50.47 and 50.54 (s) and (t).

preparedness around nuclear facilities.

and local govemments to effectively the alternatives dealth with con &tionmg The NRC and FEMA immediately implement these plans and the issuance of an operating license or initiated negotiations for a preparedness measures. These findings contmued operanon of a nuclear power Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and determinations will be provided to plant on the existence of State and local that lays out the agencies' roles and the NRC for use in its licensmg process.

government emergency response plans provides for a smooth transfer of II. Emersency Planning Zone Concept diffennee betwun attematives A and B responsibihties. It is recognized that the The Commission notes that the in these sections was that, under MOU. which became effective January 14.1980, supersedes some aspects of regulatory basis for adoption of the alternative A. the proposed rule would previous agteements. Specifically, the Emergency Manning Zone (W cencept require a determination by NRC on is the Commission s decision to nave a issuing a heense or permitting continued MOU identifies FEMA responsibilities conservative emerSency plannmg policy operation of plants in those cases where with respect to emergency preparedness m addition to the conservatism inherent relevant State and local emergency as they relate to NRC as the followmg.

in the defense-in. depth philosophy.This response plans had not received NRC policy was endorsed by the Commission concurrence. Denial of a license or de r at2on a whether State and in a pohey statement published on shutdown of a reactor would not foJow local emergency plans are adequate.

October 23.1979 (44 FR 61123). At that automatically in every case. Under To eenfy that State and local time the Cocunission stated that two altemative B. shutdown of the reactor emergency plans are capable of bem.g Emergency Planning Zones (EPZs) would be required automatically if the implemented (e g., adequacy and should be established around each light-appropriate State and local emergency maintenance of procedures training, water nuclear power plant. The EPZ for response plans had not receiveo NRC resources. staffing levels and airborne exposure has a radius of about concurrence within the presenbed time qualificat on. and equipment).

10 miles: the EPZ for contaminated food periods unless an exemption is granted.

3. To assume responsibihty for*

and water has a radius of about 50 After consideration of the public emergency preparedness trainmg of miles. Predetemuned protective action record and on the recommendation ofits State and local officials.

plans are needed for the EPZs.The staff, the Commission has chosan a text

4. To develop and issue an updated exact size and shape of each EPZ will be for Sections 50.47 and 50.54 (s) and (t) series ofinteragency assignments that decided by emergency planning officials that is similar to, but less restnctive delineate respective agency capabilities after they consider the specific than. alternative A in the proposed rule.

and responsibihties and define conditions at each site. These distances Rather than providmg for the shutdown l

procedures for coordination and are considered larFe enough to provide a of the reactor as the only enforcement

&rection for ecaergency planning and response base that would support action and presenbing spec:fic response.

activity outside the planning zone preconditions for the shutdown remedy.

Specifically, the NRC responsibilities should this ever be needd.

the final rule makes clear that for for em e prepartiness identified emergency planning rules, hke all other III. P tion on P! ming Bade for Small reactor shutdown udi ed in

1. To assess licensee emergency plans IJght.Watse Reactors and Ft. SL Vrain i

far adequacy.

The Commission has concluded that possible enforcement actions and many

2. To venfy that licensee emergency the operators of smalllight. water. cooled factors should be considered in plans are adequately implemented (e.g, power reactors (less than 250 MWt) and determining whether it is an appropriate adequacy snd r2aintenance of the Ft. St. Vrain gas-cooled reactor may action in a given case. This Commission procedures. training. resources. staffing establish smaller planning zones which choice is consistent with most of the levels and quahfications, and will be evaluated on a case-by-case comments received from State and local equipment).

basis.This conclusion is based on the

3. To review the FEMA findings and lower potential hazard from these s,e secuan v for e di cu on concemma determinations on the adequs cy and facilities (lower radionuclide inven:ory conewmace.-

A-8

Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.182 / Tuesday. Aug.ast 19, 1980 / Rules and Regulations

$5407 governments and is consistent with the the licensee emergency response plans.

basis for choice of notification provisions of Section 109 of the NRC After these two determinatiens have capability requirements for offsite fiscalyear1980 Authorization Act.

been made. NRC will make a finding in authorities and for the public.

Ahernative B was seen by some of the the licensing process as to the overall Emergency plans must be developed commenters as potentially causing and integrated state of preparedness.

that will have the flexibility to ensure unnecessanly harsh economic and It was pointed out to the Commission response to a wide spectrum of social consequences to State and local at the workshops and in public comment accidents.This wide spectrum of governments. utilities, and the public.

letters that the term ** concurrence" was potential accidents also reflects on the State and local governments that are confusing and ambiguous. Also, there appropriate use of the offsite directly involved in implementing was a great deal of misunderstanding notification capability.The use of this planning objectives of the rule strongly with the use of the term because,in the favor alternative A since it provides for past, the obtaining of NRC notifiestion capability will range from a cooperative effort with State and local "concurrenn"in State emergency immediate notification of the public governments to reflect their concerns response plans was voluntary on behalf (within 15 minutes) to listen to and desires in these rules.This choice is of the States and not a regulatory predesignated radio and television responsne to that effort. In addition, the requirement in the b,eensing process.

stations, to the more likely events where industry strongly supported alternative Previously too. " concurrence ' was ene is nbsetial 6 avail & for A as being the more workable of the too stateMde rather than site. specific.

fh (e an jh ca go g

d w

Ap en ix E. Sections II.C and III.

VI. Fifteen 4Gnute Notification not to activate the public notification alternative A would require an The requirement for the capability for system.

applicant / licensee to outline "...

notification of the public within 15 Any accident involving severe fuel corrective measures to prevent damage minutes after the State / local authorities degradation or core melt that results in to onsite and offsite property." as well have been notified by the licensee has significant inventories of fission as protective measures for the public.

been expanded and clarified. It also has products in the containment would Alternative B addresses only protective been removed as a footnote and placed warrant immediate public notification measures for the public health and in the body of Appendix E.The and consideration, based on the safety. The Commission has chosen implementation schedule for this particular circumstances, of appropriate alternative B because public health and requirement has been extended to July 1.

protective action because of the safety should take clear prece fence 1981.This extension of time has been potential for leakage of the containment over acticas to protect property.

adopted because most State and local building. In addition, the warning time Measures to protect property can be governments identdied to the available for the public to take action taken on an ad hoc basis as resources Commission the difficulty in procurina become available after an accident.

hardware, contracting for installation-may be substantially less than the total In Appendix E under Training.

and developing procedures for operating time between the originalimtiating alternative A would provide for a joint the systems used to implement this event and the time at which significant licensee. Federal. State, and local requirement.

radioactive releases take place.

government exercise every 3 years.

The Commission is aware that various Specification of particular times as whereas alternative B would provide for commenters. largely from the industry, design objectives for notification of these exercises to be performed every 5 b1ve objected to the nature of the 15-offsite authorities and the public are a years at each site.The Commission has minute notificat2on requirement, means of ensuring that a system will be ac gt pa t o o fy the chosen alternative B because the indicating that it may be both arbitrary Commission is satisfied that the and unworkable.

7 provision that these exercises be Among the possible alternatives to listening to predesignated radio or performed every 5 years for each site this requirement are a longer television stations. The Commission will allow for an adequate level of notification time, a notification time that recognizes that not every mdividual preparedness among Federal emergency varies with distance from the facility, or would necessarily be reached by the i

response agencies. In addition, under no specified time. In determining what actual operation of such a system under these regulations, each licensee is that criterion should be. a line must be all cond2tions of system use. However.

I required to exercise annually with local drawn somewhere, and the Commission the Commission believes that provision governmental authorities. Furthermore, believes that providing as much time as of a general alerting system will Federal emergency response agencies practicable for the taking of protective significantly improve the capability for may have difficulty supporting exercises action is in the interest of public health taking protective actions in the event of every 3 years for all of the nuclear and safety.The Commission recognizes an emergency. The reduction of facilities that would be required to that this requirement may present a notification times from the several hours comply with these rule changes.

significant financialimpact and that the required for street-by-street notification V. Definition of Plan Approval Procesa technical basis for this requirement is to minutes will significantly increase the t

not without dispute. Moreover, there options available as protective actions The term " concurrence" has been may never be an accident requiring under severe accident conditions. These deleted from the proposed regulations using the 15-minute notification actions could include staying indoors in and replaced with reference to the capability. However, the essential the case of a release that has alrady actual procedure and standards that rationale behind emergency planning is occurred or a precautionary e-

.aa tion NRC and FutA have agreed upon and to provide additional assurance for the in the case of a potential releoe thought are implementing. According to the public protection even during such an to be a few hours away. Accidents that agreed upon procedure. FEMA will unexpected event.The 15-minute do not result in core melt may also make a finding and determination as to notification capability requirement is cause relatively quick releases for which l

the adequacy of State and local wholly consistent with that rationale, protective actions. at least for the public government emergency response plans.

The Commission recognizes that no in the immediate plant vicinity, are The NRC will determine the adequacy of single accident scenario should form the desirable.

I A-9

55408 Feder:1 Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tussdsy. August 19. 1980 / Rules cnd Rm11ations Some comments received on the reasons exist for reactor eperation.

seeking an operstmg license from NRC proposed ruls advocated the use of a Fmally, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(f). the that have not had an exercise insolving staged notification system with quick Commission may. in appropnate the State plan at that facihty site.

notification required only near the plant. circumstances. make the order The Commission has determmed The Commission believes that the immediately effectis e. which could under the entena in 10 CFR Part 51 that capability for quick notification within result in immediate plant shutdown an environmental impact statement for the entae plume exposure emergency subject to a later beanng.

the amendments to 10 CFR Part 50 and Appendix E thereofis not required. This planning zone should be provided but 1FW determination is based on recognizes that some planners may wish to hase the option of selectively In view of the requirements in these

" Environmental Assessment for Final actuatmg part of the system durmg an rule changes regardmg the actions to be Changes to 10 CFR Part 50 and actual response. P! armers should taken in the event State and local Appendix E of to CFR Part 50.

carefully consider the impact of the government planning and preparedness Emergency Plannmg Requirements fcr added decisions that offsite authonties are or become inadequate, a utility may Nuclear Power Plants" (NUREG-0685.

would need to make and the desirabihty have an incentive based on its own self June 1960). Comments on the " Draft of establishmg an official interest as weu as its re consibihty to Negative Declaratiom Finding of No communication link to au residents in provide power. to assist m providmg Sigraficant Impact" (45 FR 3913. january the plume exposure emergency planning manpower. items of equipment, or other 21.1980) were considered in the zone when determining whether to plan resources that the State and local preparation of NUREG-Ooas.

for a staged notification capabihty.

governments may need but are Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of themselves unable to provide. The 1954. as amended, the Energy Vll. Effective Date of Rules and Other Commission believes that in view of the Reorgaruzation Act of19"4. as amended.

Guidanca President's Statement of December 7 and Sections $52 and 553 of Title 5 of the Prior tc the publication of these 1979. giving FBIA the lead role in United States Code. notice is her%

amendments. two guidance documents offsite planning and preparedness, the given that the following amendme.w to were published for pubhc ecmment and question of whether the NRC should or Title 10. Chap'er L Code of Federal intenm use. These are NUREG-0610.

could require a utilit-to contribute to Regulations. Parts 30 and 70. are

" Draft Emergency Action Level the expenses incurred by State and local published as a document subject to Guidelines for Nuclear Power Plants."

governmenta in upgrading and codification.

(September 19"9) and NUREG-0654/

maintaining their emergency planning FEMA-REP-1. "Critena for Preparation and preparedness (and if it is to be Part 50-Oomestic Ucenalog of and Evaluation of Radiological required. the mechanics for doing so)is Production and Utilization Fastles Emergency Response Plans and beyond the scope of the present rule

1. Paragraph (g) of Section 50.33 is Preparedness in Support of Nuclear change. It should be noted. nowever.

revised to read as fo!!ows:

Power P! ants for Intenm Use and that any direct fundmg of State or local Comment." (January 1980). It is expected governments solely for emergency I 50.33 Contorn of app 4cetions; general that versions of these documents, preparedness purposes by the Federal information.

revised on the basis of public comments governmnt would come through FEMA.

received, will be issued to assist in (g)If the applicatloa is fet an L Exerdses defining acceptable levels cf operating license for a nuclear power preparedness to meet this final On an annual basis, all commercial reactor. the applicant shall submit regulation. In the interim. these nuclear power facilities will be required radiological emergency response plans documents should contmue to be used by NRC to exercise their plans: these of State and local govstnmental ennties as guidance.

exercises should involve exercising the in the United States that are wholly or appt priate local government plans in partially within the plume exposure VIII. HW Pmcedures Used in e pport of these facihties.The State.

pathway Emergency Planning Zone Implementation of These Regulations may choose to hmit its participatien in (EPZ)8. as well as the plans of State Should the NRC believe that the exercses at facthties other than the governments wholly or partially within overall state of emergency preparedness facility (site) chosen for the annual the ingestion pathway EPZ.8 Generally.

at and around a licensed facihty is such exerose(s) of the State plan.

the plume exposure pathway EPZ for that there is some question whether a Each State and appropnate local nuclear power reactors shall consist of facility should be permitted * :entmue government shall annually conduct an an area about to miles (16 km)in radius to operate, the Commission may issue exercise jointly with a commercial and the ingestion pathway EPZ sha!!

an order to the licensee to show cause, nucle ar power faality. However. States consist of an area about 50 miles (80 km) pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202. why the plant with more than one facihty (site) shall in radius.The exact size and l

should not be shut down. This issue may schedule exerciaes such that each configuration of the EPZs surrounding a arise, for example,if NRC finds a ir dividual facthty (site) is exercised in particular nuclear power reactor shall significant deficiency in a licensee plan conjunction with the State and be determined in relation to the local or in the overall state of emergency appropriate local government plans not emergency response needs and preparedness.

less than pace every 3 years for sites 11 the NRC decides to issue an order to with the plume exposure pathway EPZ in w,,,,pt.nnin, n e,,(gra,j,n 6 c...,3 show cause,it wdl provide the licensee partially or whouy withm the State, and in Nutrc.4m EPA sWi-rs-c:E "Planung Bas s the opportunity to demonstrate to the not less than e ce every 5 years for sites f

'lgS,,gs;,eadgc7 f'

Comcussion's satisfaction, for example, with the ings m exposure pathway o n,,g.w,,,,u,e,,,p.,,,,.. 1,y p,c.m3,,

that the alleged deficencies are not EPZ partially or wholly withm the State.

tra.

• nificant for the reactor in question.

The State shall choose. on a rotational

'If the sme end locat ewsenn. moon plans nether adequate interim co=pensating basis. the site (s) at which the reautred hy,t. pm gt)p u

d

.pp tneed actions have been or will be taken annual exere: sets)is to be conc ~cted:

4,%.3,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,%,,,,,%

promptly, or whether other compe!Iing prionty shall be given to new facdities r.qmrenwnt A-10 k

Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Teeday. August 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations 55409 capabilities as they are affected by such (3) Arrangements for requestmg and estabhshed for emergency workers. The cor 6tions as demography, topography.

effectively usmg assistance resources means for controllms radaological laid charactenstics. access routes, and have been mace, arrangements to exposures shallinclude exposure jurisictional boundanes.The size of the accomsnodate State and local staff at guidelines consistent with EPA EPZs also may be determined on a case-the beensee's near. site Emergency Emergency Worker and lifesavmg by-case % sis for gas-cooled reactors Operatiens Facthty have been made.

Actmty Protective Acton Guides.

tnd for reactors with an authonzed and other organizations capable of (12) Arrangments are made for power levelless than 250 MW thermal.

augmenting the planned response have medical semces for cutaminated The plans for the ingestion pathway been identified.

injured indmduals.

shall focus on such actiona as are (4) A standard emergency (13) General plana for recovery and cppropriate to protect the food ingestion classtficabon and action level scheme.

reentry are developed.

pathway.

the bases of which include facthey (14] Penodic exererses are (wd1 be)

2. A new i 50.47 is added.

system and euluent parameters, is in conducted to evaluate maior pornons of use by the nuclear facdity licensee, and enegency response capabihties, j 50.47 Ernargency piana.

State and local response plans call fox' penodic dnlls are (will be) conducted to (a)(1) No ope +atmg license for a reliance on information provided by develop and mamtain key skd!s. and nuclear power reactor wiu be issued facdity licensees for determinanons of deficiences identified as a result of unless a findmg is made by NRC that the mimmum initial offsite response exercises or dnlla are (wtD be) state of onsite and offsite eme gency

'"reasuns.

corrected.

preparedness provides reasonable (5) Procedures have been established (15] Radiological emergency response cssurance that adequate protective for notification. by the licensee, of State training is peovided to those who may measures can and wd! be taken in the and local response orgamzations and for be called on to assist in an emergency.

esent of a radiological emergency.

notdication of emergency personnel by (IS) Responsibtlities for plan (2) The NRC wdl base its finding on a all organizanou the cammt ofinidal development and review and for review of the Federal Emergency and foUowup messages to response distnbution of emergency plans are Management Agency (FEMA) findings organizr ions and the public has been established. and planners are proper!y and deteninations as to whether State established; and means to provide early trained.

notification and clear instruenon to the end local emergency plans are adequate (c)(1) Failure to meet the standanis set end capable of being implemented. and populace within the plume exposun forth in paragraph (b) of this subacetion wa

.e ucy Planmng Zee have on the NRC assessment as to whether may result in the Commission declining the applicant s onsite emergency plans tre adequate and capable of being W Pmnsas exist fu prept to issue an Operstmg Ucense: however, implemented. In any NRC licensing commumcadas among pnncpal the applicarrt will have an opportuMty to demonstrate to the satisfaction af the 8

a mergency proceeding, a FBtA finding wdl d

Commission tMt deficwncies in the constitute a rebuttable presumption on a p (7)Information is made available to plans are not significant for the plant in question of adequacy.

the public on a penodic basis on how question, that adequate inunm (b) The onsite and offsite emergency they wdl be not: fled and what their C"P.ensatmg actions have been or will response plans for nuclear power initial actions should be in as be taun promptly, a that then an reactors must meet the following emergency (e.g. listening to a local other compelling rensons to permit plant standards.

broadcast stanon and remainmg operation.

(1) Primary responsibilities fcr ndoors), the prmeipal points of contract (2) GeneraDy. the pine exposun emergency response by the nuclear with the news med a for dissemmation pathway EPZ for nuclear power plants facdity licensee and by State and local of information dunng an emergency shall consist of an aree about 10 miles organizations within the E=ergency

( neladmg the physicallocation or (16 km) in rsdrus a nd the ingestion Planning Zones have been assigned, the locations) are established in advance.

pathway EPZ shaf. :ensist of an area emergency responsibilities of the and procedures for coordinated about 50 miles (80' m)in radius. The various supporting organizations have dissemination of information to the exact size and confurcation of the EPZs bsen specifically established, and each public are established.

surrounding a particular nuclear power principal response organization has staff (8) Adequate emergency facilities and reactor shall be determined in relation to respond and to aug=ent its iniual equipment to support the emergency to local emergency response needs and rssponse on a continuous basis.

response are provided and mamtained.

capabilities as they are affected by such (2) On-shift facility licensee (9) Adequate methods, systems. and conditions as demography topography.

responsibilities for emergency response equipment for assessing and monitormg land characteristics, access routes, and are unambiguously defined. adequate actual or potential offsite consequences lunsdictional boundanes.The size of the stiffing to preside initial facility of a radiological emergency cond2non EPZs also may be determined on a case-accident response in key functional are in use by-case basis for gas-cooled nuclear creas is mamtamed at all times, timely (10) A r mge of protective actions reactors and for reactors with an cvrnentation of response capabilities is have beer. developed for the plume authorized power level less than :50 c',ailable and the interfaces among exposure p.:thway EPZ for emergency MW thermal. The plans for the ingestion various onsite response activities and workers and the public. Guidelines for pathway shall focus on such actions as offsite support and response activities the choice of protective actions during are appropnete to protect the foes cre specified.

an emergency, consistent with Federal ingestion pathwsy.

gu dance, are developed and in place.

3. Se. tion 50.54 is amended by adding

'Then cand

d..re eddre.ed by spectic and protective actions for the ingestic'.i five new pararaphs (q). (r). (s). (t), and entere a m;prua54. FWA-aIP-I neGed exposure pathway EPZ appropnate to (u"-

e7oe ir.a e N Re. N N N nd the locale have been dereloped.

a Preperecnese m %pport of %ciear Power Plante (11) Means for ControUing radiological l 50.54 Covesons of uceennes.

For Intma t'w and Commest* Janury 1980.

exposures, in an emergency, are A-11

55410 Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday. August 19, 1980 / Rules and Regulations (q) A licensee authorized to possess within 60 days of the effective date of significant for the plant in queston. er and/or operste a nuclear power reactor this amendment the radiological that adequate intenm compensat:ng shall follow and maintain in effect emergency response plans of State and actions have been or wtH be taken emergency plans which meet the local govemmental entities in the Unitid promptly, or that there are other standards in i 50.U!M ard the States that are wholly or partially withm compelhng reasons for contmued requirements in Appendix E of this Part.

a plun a exposure pathway EPZ as well operation.

A heensee authorized to possess and/or as the plans of State govemments (3) The NRC will base its finding on a operate a research reactor or a fuel wholly or partially within an ingestion review of the ET.MA find:ngs and facility shall follow and maintain in pathway EPZ.' 8 Ten (10) copies of the determinations as to whether Cute and effect emergency plans which meet the above plans shall be forwarded to the local eme gency pkns are r 4,cate and requirements in Appendix E of this Part.

Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation capable of being l=plememnt, and on The nuclear power reactor licensee may with 3 copies te the Director of the the NRC assessment as to whether the make changes to these plans without appropriate NRC regional office.

licensee's emergency plans are aNuate Commission approval only if such Generally, the plume exposure pathway and capable of being implemented.

changes do not decrease the EPZ for nuclear power reactors shall Nothing in this paragraph shall be effectiveness of the plans and the plans, consist of an stea about to miles (16 km) construed as limitmg the authority of the as changed. contmue to meet the in radius and the ingestion pathway EPZ Commission to take action under any standarifs of I 50 c(b) and the shall consist of an area about 50 miles other regulation or authonty of the requirements of Appendix E of this Part.

(80 km)in radius. The exact size and Commission or at any time other than The research reactor licensee and/or the configuration of the EPZs for a that specified in this paragraph.

fuel facility licensee may make changes parncular nucler r power reactor shall (t) A nuclear power reactor licensce be determined in relation to local shall provide for the development.

to these plans without Commission approval only if such chanss do not emergency response needs and revision. implementation. and decrease the effectiveness of the plans capabihties as they are affected by such maintenance of its emergency conditzons as demography. topography, preparedness pregam. To this end the and the plans. as changed. continue to land characteristics. access routes, and licensee shall provide for a review of its meet the requirements of Appendix E of junsdictional boundaries.The size of the emergency preparedness prog am at this Part. Proposed changes that decrease the effectiveness of the EPZs also may be determined on a case-least every 12 months by persons who approved emergency plans shall not be by-case basis for gas-cooled nuclear have no direct responsibility for reactors and for reactors with an implementation of the emerEency implemented without application to and authorized power levelless than 250 preparedness program. The review shall approval by the Commission. The MW thermal The plans for the ingestion include an evaluation for adequacy of licensee shall furnish 3 copies of each proposed change for approvah and/or if pathway EPZ shall focus on such interfaces with State and local etions as are appropriate to protect the govem=ents and of licensee drills, a change is made without prior food ingestion pathway.

exercises, capabilities, and procedures, approvat 3 copies shall be submitted (2) For operating power reactors. the The results of the review, along with within 30 days after the change is made licensee. State, and local emergency recommendations for improvements, or proposed to the Director of 'he response plans shall be implemented by shall be documented, reported to the appropnate NRC regional off. e Apn!1.1981. except as provided in licensee's corporate and plant specified in Append:x D.10 CPR Part :0.

Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E of this manage =ent. and retained for a pened with 10 copies to the Director of Nuclear Part. If after Apnl1.1%1. the NRC finds of five years.The part of the review Reacter Regulation, or, if appropriate.

that the state of emergency involvmg the evaluation for adequacy of the Dttector of Nuclear Material Safety preparedness coes not provide interface with State and local and Safeguards. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory reasonable assurance that appropriate governments shall be available to the Commission. Washington. D.C. 20555.

protective measures can and will be appropriate State and local (r) Each licensee who is authonzed to a en emn a ra cal gmm=ents.

possess and/or oEerste a research or emergency and if the deficiences are (u) Withm 60 days afte the effective a

test reactor facility with an authorize

• not corrected within four months of that date of this amendment. each nuclear power les el greater than or equal to 500 finding. the Commission will determine power reactor licensee shall submit to kW thermal under a license of the type wheth'er the reactor shall be shut down the NRC plans for copmg with specified in 150.21(c). shall submit until such deficiencies are remed:ed or emergencies tb meet standards in emergency plans complying with 10 CFR whether other enforcement action is i 50.ctb) and the requirements of Part 50. Appendix E. to the Director of appropnate. In determming whether a Appendix E of this Part.

Nuclear Reactor Regulation for approval shutdown or other enforcement action is I=fE appropriate. the Commission shall take 4.10 CFR Part 50. Appendix E. is c ee w i mto account. among other factors.

amended as follows~

authanzed to possess and/or operate a whether the heensee can demonstrate to research reactor facihty with an the Commission's satisfaction that the Appendix E-Emergency Planning and,

Preparednew for Production and l'tazauon authonzed power levelless than 500 kW deficiencies m the plan are not Facities' thermal under a license of the tge

- specified in i 50.21(c) shall submit

.rse me, pia'es Zones trPZs) m dacmed Table of Contents s

emergency plans complymg with 10 CFR in NrREm EP A sm;ws-ote. r: acnes L tetroduction for ** D'"lopmen' of Stat' and t.ocal Cournment Part 50. Appendix E to the Director of Raddocal Eme gency Rnpoen Ratna Suppen Nuclear Reactor Regu!ation for approvaI of Lght W mr Nder Power P ents,- December 2.s. -Eme Mcy P!annes for Rena ch Reahtors."

• NRC staff has deWeped *wo regulatm fu: des:

withm two years from the ef'ective date to a

'If the swe and loca;, 3erse cy runon. ptans and 3 41'Eme sency P'annes in Fat Cyc:e of this amendment.

. ban bus prmnsh reced m se NRC for Fach ana Piants acensed Under 10 Cnt Par's (s)(1) Each licensee who is authorized inclus.on m the fac2Lty dociet. the appbcast need 50 and *Ct* and a lot tt NRCi FEMA report. NLTdC-to possess and/or operate a nuclear only prowde he arpmpnm refmace to mut this oER TEMA-REP-1. ' Cniena for P ernt.oe and Notnotes conunued on next case power reactor shall summit to NFC reSmment.

A-12

Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday. August 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations 55411 It ne Prehminary Safety Analysis Report consideranone av eccess routes, surrounding exprenion of fee overall concept of III.ne Mnal Safety Analysis Report populatmn diatn satens. land use, and local operation: the-eheH dncnbe the eessutia!

IV. Cor: tent of Emergency plans junedienonel boeadence for the EPZa in the elements of sovance pienmng that have been V. Implementmg Procedures case of nucleet power reactors as well as the consadered and the proviemas that have been means by wiuch the standanfo of I 50E'(b) made to cope with we y situanons.ne c

U"8O*"

will be met.

plane shad incorporate mfwinanon about the Each appbcant for a construction permit is As a trinimum, the following items shall be emergency response roles of supportmg reqmred by i 50 3s(a) to include in the desenbei o

ations and odfswe agences ht prehminary safety analysis report e A. Onstte and o8fsite organizations for atson shall be sufficaent to prenda

&scussion of prehmmary plans for coping coping with emergencies and the means for assurance of coordinatica menene the with emergencies. Each applicant for an nonficanon in the event of an emergency, of supporting groups and mth the hceasee, operstmq bcense is required by I 50.34(b) to persons assigned to the emergency The plans submitted must include a include in the final safety analysis report organizatmns.

descnpuon of the eiementa set out in Section plans foe copmg with emerges cies.

B. Contacts and arrangements made and IV for the Emergeocv Plamams Zonee (EPZs) :

His appenes establishes muumum documented mth local State, and Federal to an extent sufficiens to demonstraw thet the requirements for emergency plans for use in governmental agenctee mth responsibility for plans provide reesceable aneurance that attain'ng an acceptable state of emergency copmg with emergencies. includmg appropnate meaan.res can and mM be taken preparedness These plans shall be desenbod identification of the pnncipal agencies.

in the mot of an argency.

generally m the prelirmnary safety analysis C. Protective meesures to be taken within IV. Content of Ernergency Pleas report and svbmitted as a part of the final the site boundary and withm each EPZ to apphcant's mayncy plans sha3 safety analysis report.

protect beelth and safety in the event of an c ntam. but not necessanly be hmited to, ne potennel radiological hazards to the

,.cident W by which these ini rmaton needed to demonstrate public eseociated mth the operation of g,ssures ett to be carned out (e g,in the comphance m6 ee elenta set fore research and test reactors and fuel facihtfes case of an evacuanon, who authorizee the below. te, orgamzation for copmg mth licensed under 10 CFR Parts 50 and 70 evacuanon, how the pubhc is to be nobfied re ahm mync:n. annsmm action.

involve consaderations different than those and instructed. bow the evacumuon is to be

" " Y"#I"4' Ossociated witb *

• lear powe reactors.

carned out): sed the expected response of

1. C 4"'I Consequently, t

ze of Emergency offsite agen-ies in the event of an emergency.

ns."maintamma an e W e.tn Planrung Zones ': Is) for facihnes other (D) Feetaree of the facihty to be provided

"#"'I N'"

"*#N than power reactors and the degree to which for onsite emergency first aid and an m cgm decontaminabon and for ciergency b tt d by pp nu sne indinduals to offsite power reactor opeentmg !! cense sha!! contain necessary will be determined on a case-by*

tf information needed to demonstrate case basse.:

E. Provtstons to be mede for emergency compliance with the standards descnbod in II.W Pr,nminary Liety Analysis Iteport treatment et offsite facilites ofinanduals Section 50.4?(b).* and they mil be evaluated injured as a result of heensed activites.

against those standards. ne nuclear power ne I relimbury Safety Analysia Report F. MMor a tnming program for reactor operating hcense app!tcant shall also shall contam ufficient informanon to ensure employees of the licensee. including those provide an analysis of the t:me required to the ccmpanbahty of proposed emergency who are sesigned specific authonty and evacuate and for takmg other pmtective plans for both onsite arees and the EPZa.

reep naibility in the event of an ememency.

actions for various sectors and distances with facility demgn features. site layout. and and for other pereces who are not employees m;hin the plume exposure pathway EPZ for site location with respect to such of the licensee but whose asustance may be transtent and permaneet pop:alanons.

needed in the event of a radiological A O'8 8A880'"

Footnotes continued from last pase emergency.

pf, soppNo G. A preliminary analysis that projects the ne ogenrzation for copmg with Power Planta for intenm tlse and Comment tim and means to be mployed in de raeological mqMes shall be desenbed.

January taso. to prende swdsace m developing notification of State and local govemments includmg deEninon of authonties.

plana for copmg w th emergencies Copies of these and the pubhc in the event of an emergency.

responsibthties, and dunes of individuala I

docuses are evadeble et the Consmisanon's Public A nuclear power plant oppheant shall esmgned to the lunode ewgency Document Room.1m H Sevet. NW. Washmg*on.

perfomt a prehmmary analysis of the time organizanon and se means for naficanon of D C. 2c555. Copies of these documents may b5 requiad to evacuate various sectors and such individuals in the event of an Purch***d from the Coummt Pnnung Met distances within the plume exposure emergency. Spes,4=Hy. the following shall Information on current pnces may be ob'amed by pathway EPZ for transient and permanent be mciuded-Populations, notmg maior impediments to the t A description of the normal plant

%a t.

Pb uans Sales Manager.

evacuation or takmg of protective actions.

operstmg orgamzatnon.

8tTZa for power reactors are discussed in H A pMinunary analysis reSecung the

2. A descriphon of the onsite emergency Nt* REC-ee: EPA 5:D't-4@6. Tannmg Besis need to include facthhes, systema. and moponse ogemaatsoa mth a detaded

&scussion oE for the Oe.copment of State and local Govemment methods for identifymg the degree of Ra&ological Emergency Response P!ans m Support seriousness and potent:s! scope of

a. Authonnes. responstbthfie,s. and duties of Liskt Wate Nuclear Power Plants." December radiological consequences of eme*gency of the indmdual(s) who will taae charge tra The mae of the EPZs for a nuclear power plant situations within and outside the site dunaR an emergency; b.

ant.aff wrgency assignments:

l shei! be determmed a relation to local emergency boundary,includmg capab4ities for dose l

response needs and capabilibes as they are affected

c. Authorttles, responsabahties. and duties by such conditions as demography. tcpography, projection uomg real-time mirteorological on an oniste emergency coordinator who bad charactensucs access routes. and information and for dispatch of radiological shall be in charge of the exchange of jur secuonal boundaries. De mze of the EPZa also monitormg teams withm the EPZa; and a gg, g,g,gg, may be determined on a cas4y<ase bests for gas.

prelimmary analysis redecting the role of the "ble f"

"'I ""d cooied nucleer reactors and for reactors with an onsite technical support center and of the authortrod pown levelless than :so MW thermal near-site em"8'"'I P'"tions fackh'Y n

3. A descnpuoc. by position and functon i

Cenersay. the phame exposure pathwey EPZ fa, aesing inf nnetion. mcommnding to be performed, of the h-*e's neckeer poww pines wite se sothonzed power protective action. and disseminatmg levet greetar than 250 MW thermal shaa consist of an aree about to cales (t6 kal m re&ua and the inforr% son to the pubhc.

g l

irtgesnan pathway EP: shad cocasst of an area III.N Fleal Sdsey Analysis %ert cntena na Rh NEP4 sound ebout 5o mdes too km) m radius-

• Cr tena for Preparanon and Evabacon of iterulatory Cmde 18 wn!! be used as gudence ne Final Safety Analyms Report sha!!

Ra&c% cal Eme se icy Response P!ans ud I

for the accepeutnhry of research and teet reactor contam the piens for copmg with Preparedness m Support of Nuclear Poww P' ants emergency roepense placa.

emergencies. The plana sha!! be an for interts tJee and Coenement"lenmary tenia l

A-13

_~

SM12 Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.182 / Tuesday. August 19, 1980 / Rules and Regulations headquarters personnel who will be sent to noted for such agencies. The emergency

2. Equipment for determinmg the magnitude the plant site to augment the onsite classes defined shallinclude:(1) notification of and for contmuorsly assess.ng the impact emergency orgeruzation.

of unusual events. (2) alert. (3) site area of the release of radioactive matenals to the

4. Identification. by position and function eme gency, and (4) general emergency. These environment.

to be performed, of persons withm the classes are further discussed in NUREG-0654

3. Facilit2es and supplies at the site for heensee organizanon who will be responsible FT.MA-REP-1.

decontamination of onsite indmduals:

for making offsite dose projections, and a

4. Facthties and medical supphes at the site descnprion of how these projections will be D. Notifican.on Pmeedures for appropnate ernergency fdst aid treatment; made and the results transmitted to State and

1. Administrative and physical means for

5. Arrangements for the semces of local authonties. NRC and other appropnate notifying local, State. and Federal off cials physicians and other me6 cal personnel governmental entities.

and agencies and agreements reached with quahfied to handle radiation emergencies on-

5. ! dent Scation. by position and function these officials and agencies for the prompt site:

to be performed. of other employees of the notification of the pubhc and for public 6 Arrangements for transportation of licensee mth special quahfications for coping evacuation or other protective measures, contammated injured individuals from the with emergency con 6tions that may anse.

should they become necessary, shall be site to specifically identified treatment Other persons with special quahfications.

descnbed This descnption shallinclude facilities outside the site boundary such as consultents. who are not employees identification of the appropnate officials, by

7. Arrangements for treatment of of the licensee and who may be caUed upon title and agency, of the State and local in&viduals miured in suppo t of heensed far assistance for emergencies shall also be government agencies withm the EPZs.'

actmties on the site at treatment facihties identified. The special quahfications of these

2. Provisions shall be desenbed for yearly outside the site boundary; persons shall be desenbed.

dissemination to the pubhc within the plume

& A licensee onsite technical support

6. A description of the local offsite services exposure pathway EPZ of basic emergency center and a licensee near. site emergency to be provided in support of the hcensee's plannmg mformation, such as the methods operatiens facihty from which effectne emergency organization.

and times required for pubhc notiScat on and 6tecton can be gisen and effective control 7.Identfication of and assistance the protective actions planned J an accident can be exercised dunng an emergency:

expected from, appropnate State. local. and occurs, generalinformation as to the nature

9. At least one onsite and one offsite Federal agencies with responsibdities for and effects of radiation. and a bsteg oflocal communications system each system shall coping with emergencies.

broadcast stations that will be used for have a backup power source.

& Identification of the State and/or local dissemination of mformation dunng an All communication plsns shall have officials responsible for planning for, emergency. Signs or other measures shall arrangements for emergencies. inclu6cg ordenng. and controllmg appropnate also be used to 6sseminate to any transient titles and alternates for those in charge at protective actions. mcludmg evacuations population withm the plume exposure both ends of the communication links and the when necessary, pathway EPZ appropnate information that pnmary and backup means of would be helpfulif an accident occu s.

commurucation. Where consistent with the B. Assessment Act2ons

3. A licensee shall have the capabihty to funcuen of the governmental agency these ne means to be used for determining the notify responsible State and local arrangements mllinclude:

magnitude of and for continuaUy assessmg governmental agencies withm 15 mmutes

a. Provision for comtnunications with the impact of the release of radioactive after dec!anns an emergency. The licensee contiguous Sts'e/ local governments within matenals shall be desenbed, including shall demonstrate that the State / local the plume exposure pathway EPZ. Such emergency action hve!s that are to be used ofEcials have the capability to make a public communications shall be tested monthly.

as cnteria for determmma the need for nottfication decision premptly on being

b. Provision for communications with notification and participation of local and informed by the licensee of an emergency Federal emergency response organizatiots.

State agencies, the Commission. and other con 6 tion. Py July 1.1981, the nuclear power Such communications systems shall be tr.sted Federd nencies, and the emergency action reactor licensee shall demonstrate that annueuy.

lesels that are to be used for determming administrative and physical means have been

c. Provision for communications among the when and what type of protective measures established for alertmg and providmg prompt nuclear power reactor control room. the should be considered within and outside the instructions to the public within the plume onsite technical support center, and the near.

site bound.ry to protect health and safety.

exposure pathway EPZ. De design objective site emergency operations facihty: and The emergency action levels sha!! be based shall be to have the capability to essentially among the nuclear facility the pnncipal State on in-plant :onditions and instrumentation in complete the initial notification of the pubhc and local emergency operations centers. and addition to unsite and offsite monitonng.

withm the plume exposure pathway EPZ the field assessment teams. Such These nergency action levels sha!! be mthm about 15 minutes.The use of this commurucations systems shall be tested discussed and agreed on by the apphcant and notification capabdity will range from annually.

State and local governmental authonties and immediate notification of the public (within

d. Provisions for communications by the approved by NRC. They shall also be 15 mmutes of the time that State and local licensee with NRC Headquarters and the reviewed with the State and local officials are notined that a situation eusts apprepnate NRC Regions: OfSce Operations governmental authonties on an annual basis.

requiring urgent action) to the more hkely Center from the nuclear power reactor events where there is substantial time control room. the onsite technical support C Actironon ofEvetyency Orycnization available for the State and local center, and the near. site emergency The enttre spectrum of emergency governmental officials to make a Judgment operations facihty. Such commurucations conditions that involve the alerting or whether or not ta activate the pubhc shall be tested monthly.

activating of progressively larger segments of notification system. Where there is a decision the total emergency organization shall be to activate the notification system. the State I' I#Di"I"I desenbei The communication steps to be and local officials will determme whether to The program to provide for (1) the training taken to alert or activate emergency activate the entire notification system of employees and exercistr:g. by penodic personnel under each class of emergency simultaneously or in a graduated or staged dnlls, of radiation emergency plans to ensure shall be desenbei Emergency action levels manner. The responsibihty for activating that employees of the licensee are famihar (based not only on onsite and offsite such a pubhc notification system shall remain with their specific emergency response duties radiation monitonng information but also on with the appropnate government authonties, and (2) the participation in the training and readings from a number of sen= ors that dnlla by other persoa whose assistance may indicate a potential emergency. such as the E Emergency Focilitses and Equipment be needed in the event of a radiation pressure in containment and the response of Adequate provisions shall be made and emergency shall be descnbei This shall the Emergency Core Cooling System) for desenbed for emergency facihties and include a desenption of specialized buttal notification of offstte agencies shall be equipment. includmg-training and penodic rettaming programs to desenbed. The eustence, but not the details.

1. Equipment at the site for personnel be provided to each of the follo*ving of a message authentication scheme shall be monitonng:

catesones of emergency personneh A-14

Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday. August 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations SM13

a. Directors and/or coordmators of the licensed for operation each year a full-scale furnish the Director of Nuclear Material plant emergency organization; exercise is not conducted which involves the Safety and Safeguards. U.S. Nuclear

b. Personnel msponsible for accident State (s) within the plume exposure pathway Regulatory Commission. Washington, assessment, including control room shift EPZ.

D.C. 20555, with a copy to the personneh All training, including exercises, shall appropriate NRC Regional Office

c. Radiological monitoring teams; provide for formal cntiques in order to specified in Appendix D. Part 20 of this

d. Fire control teams (fire brigades);

identify weak areas that need corrections.

e. Repair and damage control teams.

Any weaknesses that are identified shall be Chapter, each change within six months

f. First aid and rescue teams; corrected.

after the change is made. Proposed changes that decrease the effectiveness

g. Medical support personneh G Afaintdning Emergency Pmpedans of the approved emergency plan shall

h. ljcensee's headquarters support personneh Provisions to be employed ta ensure that not be i;nplemented without prior

1. Secunty personnel the emergency plan. Its implementmg application to and prior approval by th?

In addition. a radiological orientation procedures, and emergency equipment and Commission.

training p ogram shaU be made available to supplies are maintained up to date shall be local services personnel, e g, local Civil desenbed.

(Sec.181b L and o Pub. I.83-703. Se Stat.

Defense,locallaw enforcement personnel.

R Recuery 948 (42 U.S.C. 2:o11. Sec. 201. as amend?d.

local news media persons.

The plan shall descnbe provisions for the Cnteria to be used to determine when.

Pub. L 93-438,88 Stat.1242. Pub. L 94-79. 80 conduct of emergency preparedness fouowing an accident. reentry of the facility Stat. 413 (42 USC. 5341)1 exercises. Exercises shall test the adequacy would be appropriate or when operation Dated at Washington. D.C. this tith day of of timing and content ofimplementmg could be resumed shan be desenbed.

August 198a procedures and methods, test emer: mcy V. Implementing Procedures For the Nuclear Regulatory Comnussion.

equipment and communication nets orks, test No less than 180 days prior to acheduled SamueI L Chilk the public notification system, and ensure that emergency organization personnel are issuance of an operstmg license for a nudear Secretary of the Commission.

famihar with their duties. Each licensee shan Power reactor or a license to possess nadear p on so. sw Pud s.ta es mal exercise at least annually the emergency plan material 3 copies of each of the applicant's aswsuocooe m us detailed im;'lementing procedures for its for each site at which it has one or more power reactors bcensed for operation. Both mergency plan shall be subautted to the fall-scale and small scale exerc:ses shall be Dinctor of the appropriate NRC Regional 10 CFR Part 50 Office with to copies to the Director of conducted and shallindude participaton by appropriate State and local government Nudeir Reactor Regulation or. if appropriate.

Emergency Planning-Negative the Director of Nudear Matenal Safety and agencies as follows:

Declaration; Finding of no Significant

1. A full-scale exercise which tests as much Safeguards. In cases where a decision on an of the licensee. State. and local emergency operating license is schedu!ed less than one impact for Effective Rule Changes plans as is reasonably achievable without year after the effective date of tius rule, such AGENCY:U.S. Nudear Regulatory mandatory public participation shall be implementing procedures shall be submitted C m in h as soon as practicable but before full power conducted; a For each site at which one or more operation is authonzed. Pnor to March 1.

ACTioet Final negative dedaration; power reactors are located and licensed for 1981.11censees who are authorized to operate finding of no significant impact.

operation at least once every five years and a nudear power facility shall submit 3 copies SUMMAny:The Nuclear Regulatory at a frequency which will enable each State each of the license (s emergency plan and local government withm the plume i*cplementing pmcedures to the Director of Commission s regulations require that the appropriate NRC Regional Office with to the environmentalimpact of certain exposure pathway EpZ to participate in at least one fu3. scale exercise per year and copies to the Director of Nuclear Reactor regulatory actions, including substamive which will enable each State withm the Regulation. Three copies each of any changes amendments to 10 CFR Pkrt 50, be ingestion pathway to participate in at least to maintain these implementing procedures evaluated to determine if an one full-scale exercise every three years.

up to date sha!! be submitted to the same environmental impact statement shodd i

b. For each site at which a power reactor is NRC Regional Office with 10 copies to the be prepared. Ifitis determined an Director of Nudear Reactor Regulation or, if environmentag impact statement need located for which the first operating license for that site is issued after te effective date appropriate, the Director of Nudear Material of this amendment, within one year before Safety and Safeguards within 30 days of such not be prepared, a negative declaration will be issued. The NRC has evaluated the issuance of th s operating license for full changes.

the environmentalimpact of the power which will enable each State and PART 70-DOMESTIC UCENSING OF proposed changes to Part 50 dealing local gosernment within the plume exposure i

EpZ and each State within the ingestion SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL.

with emergency planning requirements for nuclear power plants (published pathway EPZ to parMcipate.

2. Section 70.32 is amended by adding elsewhere in this issue), and has 1 The plan shall also descnbe provisions for involvmg Federal emergency response paragraph (i) fo read as follows:

determined that the rule changes wil!

9 70.32 Conditions of licenses.

not have a significant impact on the prepare ese reise lo e e at which e-e e

e uman en nment. bnfon, an one or more power reactors are located and tscensed for operation at least once every 5 (i) Utensees required to submit environmentalimpact statement will not years; emergency plans in accordance with be prepared, and a negative declaration

3. A small-scale exercise which tests the l 70.22(i) shall follow and maintain in is being issued.

adequacy of communication links.

effect emergency plans approved by the DATv.s:The rule changes for emergency estabbshes that response agencies Commission.%e licensee may make planning will become effective understand the emergeng action levels, and changes to the appoved plans without November 3.1980.

[ffsite Commission approval only if such Aoonasses: Copies of the Final edical offs te mo t f

changes do not decrease the Environmental Assessment.NUREG-erriergency response plan for licensee. State.

and local emergency plans for junsdications effectiveness of the plans and the pla* A 0685, and the comments received by the within the plume exposure pathway EpZ as changed. Continue to meet the Commission may be examined in the shall be conducted at each site at which one requirements of Appendix E,Section IV.

Commission's Public Document Room at or more power reactors are located and 10 CFR Part 50.De licensee shall 1717 H Street NW., Washington. D.C.

A-15 i

L

5M14 Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday. August ?9.1980 / Rules and Regulations and at local Public Document Rooms.

environmental impsct statement will not specified in the regulation that the Single copies of the final Environmental be prepared for these rule changes.

Commission will use in each case to determine whether a shutdown is Assessment (NUREG-0685) are Analysis f Comments warranted. When considered together.

available for purchase through the NRC CPO sales program for $4.25 (USNRC, The groups that submitted comments the lack of any sigraficant adverse Attention Sales Manager, Washingtori, are identified on the Table together with comment from State and local D.C. 20555).

their pnncipal comments. No comments governments. the necessity for were received from State or local Commission action before a plant will Foft Ft;RTMEA iMPOftssATIOct CONTAC Michael T. Jamgochian. Office of governments, other Federal agencies, or be shut down, and the conditions for Standards Development. U.S. Nuclear public interest groups.

whether a shutdown is warranted all The mam pomt of each set of argue convincing!y that the assumption Regulatory Commissicn. Washington.

comments was that an Environmental that shutdowns will be infrequent and of D.C. 20555. Telephone: (301) 443-5968.

impact Statement should be prepared short duration is sound.Thus, the y,

g for the rule changes and that the assumption is retained in the final January 21.1980 the Nuclear Regulatory Environmental Assessment ".

Environmental Assessment (NUREG-Commission published a " Draft inadequately addresses the 0685) and the impacts of extended Negative Declaration: Finding of N environmentalimpact of the Emergency shutdowns are not considered valid Significant Impact (45 m 3913. January PlannLg Proposed Rule and the impacts of these rule changes.

21.1980) for proposed changes to 10 CFR economic and socialimpacts on U.S.

The 14 reconstructed general Part 50. Ii 50.33,50.47,50.54 and industry of long. term or permanent comments and a discussion of each Appendix E that deal with emergency premature shutdowns of nuclear plants" follow:

planning requirements for nuclear power (AEP). The comments have been

1. Three commenters (see Table) plants (44 m 75167. December 19,1979).

reconstructed into 14 general criticisrns.

contend that alternatives to the A draft Environmental Assessment which have been analyzed for their proposed rule changes are inadequately accompanied the draft Negative relevance to the validity of the addressed. They specifically mentien Declaration.The comment period ended conclusions in the " Draft Negative alternative ways of achieving the same on February 18.1980.

Declaration: Finding of No Significant end such as proposinglegislation.

Sixteen sets of comments were Impact."

In view of the existmg safety recerd of submitted and have been analyzed.

One matter warrants additional the nuclear industry and the lack of Although all16 commenters felt that the mention here. An assumption was made effective preparation for the TMI draft Environmental Assessment was in preparation of the DEA that accident. the Commission had the inadequate to support the Finding of No shutdowns of nuclear power plants as a following three alternatives from.which Significant Impact, the staff analysis result of actions taken under these rule to choose:

does not support this view.The changes would be infrequent and of A. The Commission could take no commenters suggested that some points short duration. This assumption is immediate action itself while in the draft Environmental Assessment entical to the decision that an encouraging other parties, i.e., the were.n error, some required much more Environmental Impact Statement should Cong ess. other Federal Agencies. the detailed discussion. and some points not be prepared. The basis for this States, and the utilities themselves to had been ignored.The errors have been assumption was that, since State and take effective action. This "no action" corrected and do not significantly affe>:t local authorities have the responsibdity, alternative would be counter to the the earlier conclusion. The levels of in common with the NRC, to protect Commission's legislative mandate to detail and the omissions are gener. ally public health and safety and are protect public health and safety. In fact, related to the penalties associated with concerned with meeting the energy the TMI accident was a clear indication nonco:npliance with the rule.The staff needs of their citizens,it is likely that that this " urging without requiring" originally judged that invocations of the they will cooperate to ensure the emergency preparedness had proved to noncompliance penalties (i.e nuclear continued safe operation or timely be ineffective. This alternative clearly l

power plant shutdown) would be commencement of safe operation of could not stand in the face of the infrequent and of short dmation and the nuclear generation capability within Commission's responsibility in this area.

associated impacts would thus be their junsdiction. The only significant B. The Commission is a regulatory insignificant. Commeoters asserted that adverse reaction by the State and local agency and has as one ofits chief tools there will be frequent and long-term covernments that must bear this burden the authenty to issue regulations that shutdowns which will have severe ha. 5een that complications in funding bind those parties that it regulates. If an l

impacts which would require detailed of State ; regrams and lead time for effective method for achievmg consideration in an Environmental equipment acquisition might make it protection of public health and safety is impact Statement.The staff analysis has difficult te completely satisfy all of the available through promulgation of supported the judgment of infrequent, planning and preparedness regulations with specific requirements short-term shutdowns and thus requirements by the date set forth in the and penalties and conditions governing concludes that no additional detailed proposed rule changes. As a direct result those requirements and penalties. this studies are necessary.

of this, the deadline for plans and should be the proper way for the Mmor revisions have been made in implementation has been extended to Cc.mmission to proceed. -

the environmental assessment reflecting Apnl 1.1981, and the deadline for C. If the Commission judged that comments received, but its conclusions having waming systems in place has danger to public health and safety was have not been altered. Based on $is been extended to July 1.1981. These significant and imminent because of assessment. a final determina aon has extensions should be sufficient in most contmued operation of existing plants while effective regu!ations are been made by the Director. Office of cases.

Standards Development. that the It should also be noted that the developed. it had the authonty to proposed rule changes will not have a Commission has chosen the alternative impose immediate shutdowns until a signficant impact on the human that requires Commission actim to solution could be found.The safety environment and therefore, that an initiate a shutdown. Condinons are record of nuclear power. including the A-16 s

Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday August 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations SM15 nil accident, does not support an industry-wide judgment of imrninent, significant danger. However. potential does exist for significant harm to the public in the event of a severe accident and the events at BU suggest that plans must be made to accohnt for this potential problem. Notwithstanding this potential, given the likelihood of an accident requiring off-site emergency protective measures,immediate industry-wide shutdown and the attendant severe long-term impacts are not warranted.

Alternatives A and C are clearly unacceptable. The discussion of alternatives in the Final Environmental Assessment has not been changed from that in the Draft Environmental Assessment,

2. Seven commenters (see Table) assert that the impacts of shutdowns are underestimated and that shutdowns of multiple unit plants or severalin the same State were not considered.

swwo coce 7sso-oi.as A-17 f

55416 Federal Register / Vol 45. No.182 / Tuesday. At: gust 19.1980 / Rules and Regulations

[7590-01J

• atrix Disclay of Cave

• tees aM *a ce Came*ts Camenters' E*

De j

j 2

5 x

E d

3 i

m G

3 j

t 5~

~

w m

1 nefoe c _ ts 1.

Attematives taaeeovately a

g aseressed 2.

Iscacts of s*vtws 3

O s

x I

I uncerestimated (costs) 1 I

3.

mealt.9 eects of foss11 1

sastitstion weresttnated I

4 Cha11eme assectica 9f i

E t

x-x sg s n

x s

9eese.t, s cet *arsesa, 19 s

sNt M Juo;eet on State I

z I

g r

cococcation ursastamtf ated 6.

Locut-teru iacacts act 1

I I

I I

a$ dressed F.

Psyc%olecical a M p>ysical risks cf false alarus nct I

I I

I I

1 evaluated 8.

Use of f el-ets isseccc.

variation to c st of I

I I

I I

roolacaneet omee 9.

51991f fcaet fac4 cts eve to linaage betwee9 a;9eoval I

I I

I I

and contiawed operation

13. Preocted rule pef or to I

I FE=A

11. Costs too 1m (15 etaute I

I I

I I

2 I

warnias systan act incided)

12. Pecisicas graati g c anctices or ressction of coeration I

s%ould be classif+ed as cats *;orical escf.sfees a te.

r Canrission's *E8A re;ataticas 13.

• c conside atica of costs l

1 a

l l

to utt11 ties l

l l

l 14 40 corsiceratf oa of p!aets Il v ce* ccestruction l 8 l

a I

I

'ter to Cemeaters I

l AIF Atzic IMustrial For-e PA3Y Pw* A+tNetty of toe $ tate Yeat. at.. Vaanee Atmic Elec*ric Co.

of *e= fort I

Com. Ed.. Cseca=ealt_9 Edisoa2 SA4E. Saltim re Gas aad Elect *1c Coa. Ed.

Coesolf cated Edtson Cortaay 3 & L - DeBevets & L9 bema 9 (':e of 9ew fore. Inc.

taree at11' ties)

AIP Ame*1can Electric Pomee 1e vice Dwas. 3 se 8 wee C mcaer t

Corocestiv

$7en? - Paw. Pitt se. *ctts 4 EI!. Esissa Electric testf tste t W rtete (for eisat LLL4 Le4ceuf. Laat. LetDy & *ac at 4CTIlties) e (for 'ive utillttes)

DCT. V. $. DeCartreat of E*e*Ty j

• J 9ecteeast utiltttes L*tAst. Lo.e.stete. =cw aa, sets.

Aselroc & ?oll (for two stilities )

l A-18 k

Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday. August 19, 1980 / Rules and Regulations 55417 The DEA was prepared with the Assessment. In any case. it would Sin.e the basis for the assumption of understanding that ever increasing fuel appear that whether these impacts, if infrequent shutdowns has not received prices make it difficult to make stable severe enough constitute "other substantive challenge from the parties predictions of the costs of replacement compelling reasons" to permit continued directly involved. but there has instead power. While individual values of operation will be determined in the been activity that tends to confirm the replacement costs may be in error, the individual reviews.

assumption. it will remain as a upper end of the range of costs of

3. Fourgroups comment that health fundamental assumption of the final replacement power, which is compared effects offossilsubstitution are Environmental Assessment.

in the Environmental Assessment to the underestimatedin the draft The availability of replacement costs of compliance,is only changed by Environmental Assessment and that capacity also hinges on this assumption.

about 36% when the heat rate is changed other effects are ignored.

Part of the purpose of reserve capacity as suggested. The response to comment The critical assumption in the draft is replacement during plant outages. As eleven indicates that the costs of and final Environmental Assessment is long as shutdowns are infrequent and of compliance were also underestimated.

that shutdowns will be infrequent and of short duration, they should fit into this the relative comparison of these two short duration. In such a case, the fossil normal pattern of utilization of costs was used to demonstrate the generating capacity is simply that which replacement capacity. No additional strong economic k.centive that exists for is available for normal replacement discussions of this topic have been all parties to strive for effective power durmg refuehng and maintenance prepared for the final Environmental emergency planning and p eparedness.

outages and would probably be used in Assessment.

'Ihe staff agrees that the net plant heat periods of peak demand until the utility

5. Seven commenters contend the rate assumed in the DEA is low and phases it out of the generating system Judgment that,. it is likely that the therefore changed the assumed heat rate completely. (The impacts are thus ones

• @ d C * * @ " " 6N from 9.400 BruikWh to 11.000 Bru/kWh.

that occur anyway, but at a different continued safe operation or timely According!y. the cost figures have been time. Short, infrequent shutdowns will

1. 8***"C#**"# DI##I' #P'"###" OI modified in the Fma! Environmental only change the time period for suffering

""CI'C#8'"####.n capability within Assessment but these modifications do an impact that will most hkely be felt

1. A*[h eif' bstfn ated d'

not alter the conclusions of the eventually anyway.) For such short. term p n.,

.n Environmental Assessment.

replacement. no new plants will be built. the absence of first. hand information.

The question of multiple plant The draft and final Environmental the experience of the Commission since shutdowns because of a common Assesament accepts these impacts as a December 1979, in attempting te work with state and local government reason. i.e. an unacceptable State plan consequence ofinfrequent and brief.

or multiple umts on a site where the shutdowns. (A more accurate analysis officials, has confirmed the accuracy of local plan is unacceptable. is a more might conclude that there is rero

, %[o m* enters assert that difficult problem. The State plans are cumulative impact because the useful only a part of the overall Federal life of the replacement capability is impacts of/ong. term shutdowns are not addressed Emergency Management Agency unaltered.) The discussions in the Final The assumption that shutdowns will (FEMA) program to enhance the ability Environmental Assessment are be infrequent and of short duration of State governments to handle unaltered on this subject.

defines the scope of this Environmental emergencies. The economic incentive for

4. Nine commenters challenged t/e Assessment. As desenbed above,long.

the utilities to help the States in every assumption that shutdawns wcula be term shutdowns are not the expected way possible should result in the infrequent andofshort dumtion and result of these rule changes.The goal of preparation of plans and equipment for questioned the lack of treatment of the these rule changes is timely a nuclear plant emergency that will be a availability of replacement capacity.

Implementation of adequete emergency sound. significant contnbution to the The assumption that shutdowns will plans and programs. The draft and final overall capability of a State to handle be infrequent and of short duration is Environmental Assessment address the many different kmds of emergencies.

critical to the validity of the impacts of this action sesed on the The provision of conditions that permit Env.*onmental Assessment. At the time expected consequence and practical issuance of an operatmg license or whe3 the Draft Environmenta' considerations ofimplementation of the continuation of operation. the extension Assessment was prepared, thi, provisions of the rule changes. No of the compliance date and deadline for assumption was based on the assertion analysis of the effects oflong term warning systems to be in place, and the that State and local governments shutdowns has been added to the final record of cooperation from the States up (having in common with %tC the Environmental Assessment.

to the present time make it unlikely that responsibility to protd public health

7. Six cornmenters contend that any State's program will be so deficient and safety) will cooperate to provide psychologicolandphysica/ risks to the that shutdown of all plants in the State fully for protection of the public. Since public offalse alarms are not evaluated.

will be required.

that time. the Commission. in The Emergency Action Level The potential that an unsatisfactory cooperation with FEMA. has been Guidelines (NUREG-4610) recommend local pian might result in the shutdown working diligently to help State and nottfication of the public when a " Site of all units on a specific site appears to local governments develop satisfactory Emergency" has been declared %

be sigmficantly greater. Depending on emergency plans and programs. The expected frequency of an event of this the size and number of the units response of the State and local type is predicted to be t in 100 to l in insolved. the incentive of the utility for governments has confirmed the validity 5.000 per reactor per year.The high end aiding the local gosernments is also of the earlier assumption. In addition. no of this range indicates that two such greater. The potential magmtude of the State orlocal government provided any warnings might occur over the effective impact of shutdown in these cases is omment on the Draft Environmental life (40 years) for every five units. The two to three times greater than for the Assessment. thus indicating at least low end indicates one event over the life smgie unit case and this determination tacit agreement with the basis for the of 125 units. Far from causmn, <*ve has been added to the Environmental assumption.

psychological and physical asc o e

A-19

Federal Register / Vo) 45. No. : ~ ? / Tuesday. August 19.1980 / Rules and Regulations SM18 kind cf behavior should lead to a more

11. Seven commen ers assert that the implement the National Environmental accurate public perception of the true costs ofimplementation are too lev cad Policy Act of 1969. The Commissicn wd!

incidence of risk from nuclear power that there ecynot be enough time consider this as a comment on the f cilities and a more ; ctical and allowed to achieve edequacyin all ongoing rule =aking on 10 CFR Part 51 considered response to.n emergency crees of emergencyplcnning and (45 FR 13739).

when one occurs. No change has been prepcredness.

13. Two commenters noted that no made in the final Environmental The draft Environmental Assessment consideration wcs pren to the costs to Assessment.

based its e<timates of cost of the utihties of those pcrtions of the r:de

8. Five commenters assert that the use implementation on information chenges that upgicde previous onsite of the mix offuels alrecdy in use in the contained in 'Beyand De!ense in Depth:

regwrements.

State is a poorpredicter of whct would Cost and Funding of State and Local This oversight has been correctei be the fuelreplacement cepec tyfor a Government Radiological E=ergency While these costs added a sig:uScant specificplant shutdown.

Response Plans and Preparedness in increment to the total cost of A generic assess =ent must make Support of Commercial Nuclear Power imp:ementation. this total cost is stdl some averaging assumptions or become Stations." NUREG-0553. October 19 9.

Iow co=pered to the reference costs of hopelessly lost in detail in this case. the This report did not consider the costs of (1) replacement power. ( ) tax and fee commenters are correct that this is a a war:ung system that would effectively burden and (3) capital mvestment.

" gross assumption." It is, however, wam everyone within 10 miles within 15 While several of the cost figures in the sufficient to establish the range of costs minutes of the time when the decision to faal Environmental Assess =ent hase for replacement power, which is ie way warn the public is made. The cost been revised upward the comp.nson of the detailed information was used. No estimates in the draft Environmental these costs has remained unchanged change has been made in the mix of Assessment thus do not include the and the conclusions of the fuels used to generically assess the costs of 15-mmute notificatio:1.The Environmental Assessment are range of costs of replacement power.

estimates provided by the commenters unchangei

9. Five commenters observe thct allof have been used to revise the cost

14. One commenter observed thct the significantimpacts are due to estimate in the final Environmental there is no consideration given to pl:nts hnkcse between cdequacy of e=e:gency Assesi=ent. It should be noted that all under construction.

plans and continuedplant operction.

cost fipres are approximate and are The cost estimates were forecast for These cocunenters agree that the only in ended to give an estimate cf the all plants scheduled to be operating by impacts of cc=phance are insigmficar t normal =agnitude of costs and fees the time the rule was to beccee and that if there were no penalty associattd with build =g and operating a effective. To go beyond this period tssociated with inadequate emerge'4 nuclear power p! art. Significant would only coc:phcate the estimates preparedness the-an Environ.m..tal variaticns tom these costs fer with future costs of g eater uncertai.ty.

8 Assessment or no Envirumnental individual cases saould be expected.'

The purpose here was to present an Assessment would be appropriate.The These changes do not affect the earber approximation of the relative thrust of the rule is to protect the pubhc conclusions of the draft Environ = ental significance of the cost i= pacts to through adequate emergency planmng.

Assessment-de'termine whether a more detailed The u.. s of the shutdown provision is in response to comments that more analysis is necessary. The relative ta protect the public in the event that time might be needed, the deadline fer magnitude of these costs is well adequate provision has not been and is plans and implementation to be estabhshed by the information at hand not being made to provide adequate completed has been extended to Aprill. and these are clearly sufficient to emergency planning and preparedness.

1981. and the deadline for insta!Iation cf support a deosien wi$ cut the The decision of how the public should warning systems has been extended to preparation on env:ronmentali= pact be protected has been made. Le either.

July 1.1981 to allow for procurement statement.

emergency planning and preparedness is

[roblems. Apprcpriate changes base Dated at Bedesda. Maryland. thu Sth day adequate or a plant may be placed in a een made in the Environmental cWgust 1980.

condition of safe shutdown.The State Assessment but the earlier conclusions For de Ldear Regulatory Co.mtssion.

and local authorities have the remain unaffected.

responsibility to determine which opt:on

12. One commenter suggested thct Robert B. Minogue, is in the best interest of their c1taens.

decisions on shutdowns. allowing Durctor. 0".ce of Stand ?ds Develc;=ent.

The linhage remains in the effective tule continued operation despite inadequcie l?S.&clearReguic:o:y Carraussica changes. No additional discussion has plans. or the resumptwn of operaten lF8 D* ** F**-82 " W been provided in the final after a shutdown should be hstedin 10 eusco coce me-*"

Environmental Assessment.

CFR Part $1 as a cctegancci exclusion.

10. Two cornmenters observed that The catetencal exclusions in part 51 thepropcsedrule was issuedpnor to are those Commission actions that have the expandedrole offE44 Jn been judged as a class not to have any cme:gency planning for nuclearpower significant environtnental impact and I

F C##8-thus have been excluded from further The NRC and FDtA are working consideration under those portions of closely to establish and carry out their de Cassion's regulations that respective roles m emergency planning for nuclear power plants. The effective

, %,g, % %,,w m M u rule has been changed to reflect this z3 e,

ww. e, gn,nemaw Change in relationshlp between the two Amument but Eso cmd mse camps.cances agences. Howeser. the substar tive swa a tesmebm at toca'so enes **t Provisions of the rule have not s.' san ed.

"'*ld $"e try oan s"'em w w"'. y c-ven s

nor cont.rm only the pa-ties responsible for s;. c:fic e, %

m cou w m d be n netae w a m ae actions.

of costs.

A-20

APPENDIX B FEMA PROPOSED RULE, REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF STATE AND LOCAL RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PLANS AND PREPAREDNESS l.

i I

l B-1

Feder^l Register / V21. 45. N.123 / Tu;sday Jun) 24. 1980 / Proposed Rules 42341 government to effectively implement lead iri <ffsite emergency planning and these plans and preparedness measures response. It provides for the review of for specific sites. Such findings and plans by a formal procesa for evaluation determinations and, where appropriate, and approval by FWA of State plans plan approvals are to be submitted to (which include loca. plans as annexes to the Covernors of the affected States and the State plan) and evaluation and to the NRC for use in licensing assessment of the adequacy of proceedings of the NRC.

capabilities of State and local OATE: Comments are due on or before governments to implement the plans.

August 25.1960. It is intended, after Basis for FEMA Assignment careful consideration has been given to The Di ector. FEMA. pursuant to the comments and appropriate Reorgamzation Plan No. 3 of 1978 and adjustments made, to mcke the establishes pohca,12148 of July 20,1979 Executive Order regulation, which is primanly es for, and coordinates procedural, effective immediate!) upon C2Vil emerSenCY planning. management.

its adoption.

m@an n and assstance function of ADORESS: Send comments to Rules the Executive agencies of the United Docket Clerk. Federal Emergency States. The Director FEMA. represents Management Agency. Room 801.1725 I the President in working with State and Street NW Washington. D.C. 2G172.

local governments and the private sector FOR ADOmONALINFORMATION CONTACT: to stimulate vigorous participation in John McConne!!. Assistant Associate civil eme:gency preparedness.

Director. Population Prep,iredness.

mitigation. response and recovery telephone 202/56H550.

programs.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIO8C The term " civil emergency"is defined jn 24 oWecutive Order 12148 to Presidential assignments mclude any accidental, natural, man-On December 7.1979. the President, in caused. or wartime emergency or threat response to the recornmendations of the thereof, which causes or may cause President's Commission on the Accident substantialinjury or harm to the at Three Mile Island (known as the pcpulation or substantial damage to or Kemeny Commission) announced, in loss of property.This definition clearly part. a series of decisions and took a encompasser an accident at a nuclear number of actions in the area of power facility.

emergency planning and preparedness.

Under section 201 of the Disaster particularly with respect to offsite Relief Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5131), the emergency planning and preparedness.

Director is to establish a program of The President directed FEMA to:

disaster preparedness which includes.

44 CFR Part 350 (1) Take the lead in offsite emergency amoq other matters, preparation of planning and response:

disa ser preparedness plans for warning.

l Docket No. FEM A-PP-3501 (2) Complete by June 1980 the review emergency operations, training and Review and Approval of State and

- f State emergency plans in those States exercises, and coordination of Federal.

with operating nuclear power facilities:

State and local programs. Further, the Local Radiological Etrergency Plans Cooc!ete as soon as possible the Director is to provide technical and Preparedness review of State emergency plans in assistance to States m developing Agency: Federal Emersency those States with nuclear power comprehensive plans and practical Anagement Agency (FEMA),

facilities scheduled for operation in the programs for preparation against Action: proposed rule.

near future; disasters.

14) Develop and issue an updated The agencies which were combmed to suuMARY:This rule proposes to series of interagency assignments which form the nucleus of FEMA, as well as esubbsh policy and procedures for delineate respective agency capabihties NRC have been for some years involseu

.w.0w and approval by FlatA of'.ete and responsibdities and clearly define in planning for radiological emergencies

..r. I lixa! emergency plans and procedures for coordmation and at nuclear power facihties.These preparci.wss for coping with '.e offsite direction for both emergency planning activities were voluntary, as neither effects of radological emoncies and response.

Federallaw nor regulations required whmh may occur at.. sear power FEMA is presently reviewmg esisting States or local gos ernments to have fsdities. The rule does not cover other State and local plans iri accordance with peacetime nuclear emergency plans. nor Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

he Presidential directive.

r quired States with plans to test those twensed facil' ties. The rule sets out FEMA is also in the ricess of p ans.

tntena which wdi be used by FEMA in developing interagency mnments The Atomic Energy Commission reviewing. assessing and evaluating which will replace a description of

( AEC)later NRC. implemented a these plans and preparedness:it assignments set out in a Notice nonstatutory program of planriing and specifies how and where a State may published in the Federal Register on assistance to the States which included.

submit plans:it describes certain of the December 24.1975 l40 FR 59494). It is The formation of a FederalInteragency processes by which FEMA makes FEM A's intent to publish these new Central Coordinating Committee findings and determinations as te the assignments in separate rulemaking.

(FICCC): th n eparation and issuance cdequacy of State and local plans and The rule m this part largely involves of Guideon :hecklistforDevelopment the capabihty of State and local the process FEMA will use in taking the andEvoluotion ofState ondl.oco/

B-2

42342 Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.123 / Tuesday, June 24, 1980 / I'Toposed Rules Covernment RadiologicalEmergency

'ne agreement applies to emergency and their capability ofimplementation Response Plans in Support of F2xed preparedness for all commercial nuclear has been placed in ITMA and there is Nuclearfacilities, reissued as NRC power plants. certain nuclear fuel cycle no longer an NRC voluntary concurrence NUREG-75/111: and the formation of facilities, and nuclear materials licenses program for State emergency plans. This task forces on training and exercises whose operations have a potential for activity is now ended. and to that extent and emergency instrumentation.

significant accidental offsite releases of the notice of December 24.1975. is

. The Office of Emergency Planning radiation. However, the parties intended superseded. 'Re previous NRC (OEP). later the Federal Preparedness that the initial program emphasis be

" concurrences" do not satisfy all the Agency (FPA) and now FEMA issued placed on emergency preparedness at requirement for FEMA approval of State descriptions of agency assignments. In commercial nuclear power plants. This and heal plans under th.s regulation.

January 1973. the OEP issued a rule deals only with nuclear power FEMA review and findings and statement that the AEC, as lead agency.

facilities.

determinations w 'l be based upon would provide planning assistance to Among other matters under the MOU, guidance jointly issued by FEMA and State and local governments for the FEMA's responsibilities are:

NRC entitled CriteriaforPreparation preparation of radiological emergency (1) To take the lead in off. site andEvoluation ofRadiological response plans.

emergency planning and review and Emergency Response Plans and On December 24,1975. the FDA assess state and local emergency plans Preparedness in Support ofNuclear reissued a revised and updated Federal for adequacy.

Power Plants NUREG-0654/ FEMA-Register Notice (40 FR 59494). I.ead (2) To complete by June 1980, the REP-1.This guidance and acceptance agency responsibility for " reviewing and review of State and local emergency criteria provides a basis for NRC concurring in State radiological plans in those States with operating licensees and State and local emergency response plans." was reactors.

governments to develop radiological assigned to the NRC and the planning (3) To complete. as soon as possible.

emergency plans and improve assistance was expanded to include the review of State local emergency emergency preparedness associated transportation of radioactive materials.

plans in tnose States with plants with nuclear power facilities.The NRC also issued guidance-scheduled for operation in the near document combines the guidance to RadiologicalEmergencyResponse future.

V.ie md local governments with the Planning. Handbook forFederal (4) To make findings and gu, Lace to the licensees of NRC and Assistance to State andl.,ocal determinations as to whether State and supersedes previous guidance and Covernments A7/ REC 0093. June 1.

local emergency piens are adequate and criteria p iblished by FEMA and NRC. It 1976-applicable to other Federal capable of implementation (e.g.

is intendD for use by reviewers in agencies.The number of involved adequac) and maintenance of reviewing and assessing the adequacy agencies who all agreed to the procedures, training resources, staffing of State. local and nuclear power facility assignment 3 increased to eight These levels and qualifications and equipment operator emergency plans and included the Environmental Protection adequacy).

preparedness. eta-REP-1/NUREG

1. gency (EP %). the Department of (5) To assume responsibility for 0654 contains a series of planning H ?alth. T6. cation and Welfare, now the emergency preparedness traning of objectives (which are part of this rule)

De partment of Health and Human State and local officials.

and a listing of specific cnteria for Service. (DliHS) and the Defense Civil (6) To develop ud issue an updated preparation and evaluating of the Preparedness Agency (DCPA) whose series ofinteragency assignments which planning and preparedness actisities of functions have now been transferred to would delineate respective agency State and local governments as well as FT.blA. Other agencies included the capabilities and responsibilities and of the licensees of NRC.The document Department of Transportation (DOT),

define procedures for coordination and is presently being revised by NRC and the Federal Disaster Assistance direction for emergency planning and FEhtA as a result of public comment Administratior. (FDAA HUD)(now a response.

submitted pursuant to a Notice part of FEhtA) and the Energy Research The NRC resporaisilities for pt.blished on February 13.1980 at 45 FR and Development Administration emergency prepare >ess are:

9768. It is the intent that the planning (ERDA)(now Department of Energy (1) To assess licensee emergency objectives in this rule will be in exactly (DOE)).

plans for adequacy.

the same words as the planning This interagency process s.. h NRC as (2) To verify that licensee emergency obiectives in a NRC rule on Emergency lead agency continued for the next few plans are adequately implemented (e g..

Preparedness (See 44 FR 75167).

years. The NRC established a program adequacy and maintenance of That NRC rulemaking procedure of voluntary concurrence and concurred procedures. training. resources, staffing contains additional material relevant to I

in seseral State plans.The accident at levels and qualifications and equipment thin rule in the materials cited therein the Three hble Island nuclear power adequacy).

This rule has been prepared in facility which occurred on hfarch 28.

(3) To review the ET.MA findings and coordination with the NRC emergency 1979. caused a major rethinking of the determinations on the adequacy and planning and preparedness rule.

whole area of eme*2ency plans and capability ofimplementation of State In this connection it should be noted prepandness by NRC and by other and local plans.

that the wording of I 350.9(e) may be i

aui%.ities. The accident led to the (4) To make fecisions with regard to somewhat different from that in NRC Kemeny Commission Report and the the overall state of emergency regulations because their rules are Presidential actions.

preparedness (i.e integration of wntten for licensees. But it is the intent To imp'ement the President's emerg:ncy preparedness on-site as that the meanings af the respective rules assignment. NRC and FEhtA on January determined by the NRC and off-site as are the same.

141980. signed a Memorandum of determined by FEMA and reviewed by NRC retains overall responsibility for Understanding (MOU) describing each NRC) and issua/ce of operating licenses making decisions under their enabling egency's responsibilities in preparing for or. hut down of operating reactors.

legislation in determining whether cmergencies at nuclear facilities and 7 hus the lead for review of the licenses should be issued or operations cctivities (45 ER 5647).

adequacy of offsite emergency plans suspended.NRC expects to evaluate B-3

+-

Federal Register / Vol. 45. Nr.1:3 / Tuesd;y. Juna 24, 1980 / Proposed Rulis 42343 deficiencies,if any, identified by FEMA Further the NRC statement addresses Regiono/ Director means a Regional to ascertain whether those deficiencies the subject of cost and it is clear from Director of EMA:

are significant and if they are this that neither the NRC rule, nor this Associate Director means Associate significant, determine whether FEMA rule is a sigruficant regulation Director. Plans and Preparednesa compensatory measures have been or which requires a regulatory analysis (FEMA):

will be taken by the licensee.

under Executive Order 12044.

NRC means the Nuclear Regulatory FEMA's approval of State and local Pending adoption of the final rule, Commission:

plans and preparedness should be FEMA intends to us= generally the EPZ means Emergency Plannirg Zone.

considered independently of any rules process descnbed herein in " approval" f 350.3 sacaground.

of the NRC with respect to its licensing of any plan which might be submitted to proceedings. The rule proposed in this it before the rule becomes fin < l.

(a) On December 7.1979, the President part is in no way dependent upon any Accordingly,it is propos< 2 to amend directed the Director to take the lead in authority available to the NRC.

Subchapter E of Chapk.1. Title 44 Code State and local emergency plant.ing and However. recognition must be given to of Federal Regulations by adding a new preparedness activities with r,espect to the fact that the NRC now will base its Part 350 as follows:

melear power facilities. This mcluded a findmgs on a review of FEMA findings review of the existing emergency plans and determinations as to whether State PART350-REVIEW AND APPROVAL both in States with operating reactors.

or local plans are adequate and capable OF STATE RADIOLOGICAL and those with plants scheduled for of being implemented. The regulation EMERGENCY PLANS AND operation in the near future.

l described in this part is designed with PREPAREDNESS (b) This assignment was given to that FEMA review function in mind.

FEMA in view ofits responsibilities g

under Executive Order 12148 to Proposed i 350.12(f) provides an appeal 35a1 Purpose.

procedure to the Director from the 350.2 DefirMons.

establish Federal policies for, and decision of the Associate Director.

350.3 Background.

coordinate civil emergency planning.

Procedures for processing appeals are 350 4 Exclusions.

management and assistance functions, not established as yet but will be 350 5 Cnteria for eview and approval of and to represent the President in incorporated in the final rule or will be State and locc Radiological Emergency working with State and local the subject of a separate rule dealing Plans and Preparedness-governments and the privata secwr to with appeals in Federal Emergency 350.a Assistance in development of State stimulate vigorous participation in civil and local Plans.

Management Agency programs eme;gency preparedness programs.

35a Applicauon by State fonniew and Under Section 201 of the Disaster Relief generally P$r'ut alIIMA Action on State plan.

Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5131) and other Hearing procedures will be made a 35a8 part of the final rule.

350 9 Exercises.

statutory functions, the Director. FEMA.

This regulation describes a procedure 350.10 Public meeting in advance of FD(A is charged with the responsibility to by which FEMA evaluates and assesses approval.

develop and implement plans and State and local emergency plans and 3 7 n Action by FEMA Regional Director.

programs of disaster preparedness.

preparedness to deal with a radiological 356 t2 ITMA Headquarters review and (c) To carry out these responsibilities, emergency, and "appros es" such p. ins.

pproval.

FEMA is engaging in a cooperative Further. FEM \\ may use the date 35a; withdrawal of approval.

effort with State and local governments 35al* AmendmenMo State plana.

and other Federal agencies in the obtained irilu approval process to 350.15 9 earings [ Reserved).

. support its findings in Nuclear development of State and local plans Aut 42 U 5

52m US Regulatory Commission licensing and preparedness to cope with the proceedings and any related court g

3g,8 3 CFR 19*3 Comp. p. 329). Execuuve offsite effects resulting from radiological i

schons: and dunng any related Order 12127144 FR 19367). Execuuve Order emergencies at nuclear power facilities.

discovery proceedings.

12148 H4 FR 43239).

(d) FEMA has entered into a Insofar as EMA is concerned. there memorandum of understanding (MOU) is no requirement in law that a State or i 350.1 Purpose.

with the NRC to which it will furnish local government submit its plan to The purpose of the regulation in this assessments, findings and FEMA. and FEMA's failure to approve part is to establish policy and determinations as to whether State and such plan is not accompanied by any procedures for review and approval by local emergency plans and preparedness sanction or refusal to accord a becefit.

the Federal Emergency Management are adequate and continue to be capable insofar as the procedure may have Agency (FDIA) of State and local of implementation te g., adequacy and economic, environmental or legal emergency plans and preparedness for maintenance of procedures, training, consequences or impact. these result the offsite effects af a radiological resources, staffing levels and from NRC action on its rule and ham the emergency which may occur at a qualification and equipment adequacy).

role which FEMA plays because of the nuclear power facility. Review and These findings and determinations can MOU in the NRC licensing process. NRC approvalof these plans and be used by NRC under its own rules in has in connection with its rule adopted a preparedness involves preparation of connection with its licensing and

" Finding of No Sigmficant Impact" and findings and determinations with regulatory requirements and FEMA will has made an environmental assessment respect to the adequacy of the plans and gupport its findings in the NRC licensing which covers actions covered by this the capabilities of State and local process and related court proceedings.

regulation. In the interest of reducing governments effectively to implement paperwork and pursuant to CEQ the plans.

I 3W Escluh regulations 40 CFR 1506.3. FEMA herein The regulation in this part does not adopts as part of its own decision f 350.2 DefWtions apply to, nor will FEMA apply any making process that part of the NRC As used in this part the following cntena with respect to, any evaluation, assessment applicable to this rule. For terms have the following meanings:

assessment or determination regarding the final rule FEMA plans to develop its Director means. the Director. Federal the NRC licensee's emergency plans or own assessment.

Emergency Management Agency:

preparedness, nor shall FEMA make any B-4

42344 Federal Register / V:1. 45. Na. u3 / Tuesdr.y. Juna 24. 1960 / Proposed Rules similar determmation mth respect to local response plans call for reliance on deficie, des identified as a result of integration of offsite and NRC licensee information provided by fac.!ity exercises or driUs are corrected emergency preparedness except as these licensees for determinst: ens of mini =um (15) Radiolcgical emergency respcnse assessments and determinations affect imtial offsite response measures.

trainmg is provided to those who may the emergency prepar+dness of State (5) Procedures have been established be called upon to assist in an and local governments. He regula tion in for notincation by the licensea, of State emergency.

this part appbes only to State and local and local response orgamzanons and for (161 Responsibdities for plan planning and preparedness with respect notification of e=ergency personnel by development and review and to emergences at nuclear power all response organizations; and content distnbuton of emergency plans are faclities and does not apply to other of initial and fo!Iowup messages to established and planners are properly facilit es which may be hcensed by response ortanizations and be public trainei NRC.

have been utabushei and means to (b)In order for State or local plans provide ea ly notification and clear and preparedness to be appros ed. such 9N Crwa WM eM aW of instruction to the populace within the plans and preparedness must be state and us%cas emogency

?ume exposure pathway Emergency determined to adequately protect the P!anning Zone have been estabhshei public heals and safety by proddeg (a) The following joint NRCrFEMA (6) Provisions exist for prc=pt reasonable assurance that apprepnate planmng objectives. which apply insofar communications amor:g pnncipal protectve measures can and wdl be as FBtA is concerned to State and local response organizations. to emergency taken offsite in the esest of a gosernment, are to be used m personnel and to the public.

radiological emergency. Plans and cNuatmg. assessmg. reviemng and

(?) Information is made available to preparedness wtH be evaluated using approvmg State and local radiological the public on a period basis on how they the objectives set forth in paracaphia) emergency plans and preparedness and would be notified and what their initial of this section and as detaded in FEMA in maims any findmgs and actions should be in an emergency (e g.

REP 1/NtJREC 654 and other ct;tena as determmat ons mth respect to the listening to a local broadcast station and specfied in this part.

r.dequacy of the plans and the re=aming indoors) the pnncipal points capabdines of State and local of contact with the news media for IN ***' stance in upment of guvernments to implement the plana. It dissemination ofinformation dunng an a e and Wlana, is the intent that the planna.g object 2ves emergency (induding physica! !oca tion (a) An integ sted approach to the set out herein are ident2 cal to those of or lccations) are estabushed in advance; development of offsite radelog2 cal NRC.

and procedures for coordinated e=egency plans by States. locahues (1) Pnmary responsibdities for disse =mation ofinformation to the and the licensees of NRC with the cmergency response by the nudear public are estabushed.

assistance of the Federal Gos ernment is facdity lic.csee. 2nd by State and local (a) Adequate emergency fachties and the approach most hiely to provide the organ:zations with:n the Emergency equipment to support the e=ergency best protection to the pubbc. Hence Planning Zones have been assigned, the response ars provided.

Federal agencies. induding FD!A smegency responsibilities of the (9) Adequate metods, systems and regional staff, wiu be made available sanous supportmg orgaruzations have equipment for assessing and mcmtonna upon request to assist State and been specificauy established. and each actual or pote;.al effsite consequences localities in the develop =ent of p!ans.

pnnepal response organization has staff of a radiclegical emegency condition (b) There now exists m each of the ten to respond and to aug=ent its imtsal are in use.

Standard Fedcral Regions, a Regional response on a continuous basis.

(10) A range of protective actions has Assistance C.cnuttee (RAC) (for=erly (2) On. shift facihty operator baen developed for the plume exposure the Regional Advisory Com=ittee) responsibihties for emergency response EPZ paiway for emergency werkers chaired by a FBtA reg onal official and tre unambiguously defined adequate and the public. guidelines for the choice having members from Nuclear staffing to provide initial facility of protective actons dunng an Regulatory Com=is sion (NRC).

cccident response in key functonal emergency, consistent with Federal Cepartment of Heal $ and Hu=an treas is mamtamed at all times, and guidance are developed and in place.

Services (DHHS). Department of Energy timely augmentation of response and protective actions for the Insestion ICOE). Depart =ent of Transportation capabdities is avadable and the exposure pathway EPZ appropnate to (DOT). Environmental Protecton interfaces among vanous onsite the loca:e have been developei A ency (EPAl. and Department of F

response actmties and offsite support (11) Means for controlling Aniculture (DOA).The basic functions cnd response actmties are specdiei raiological exposures. In an emegency, of the RAC are to assist State and local (This objective apphes to NRC licensees are established for workers. The means government officials in prepanns and but is inc!uded here for completeness).

for contro!!ing radiological exposures revis:ng radiological emegency plans.

(3) Arrangements for requesting and shallindude exposure guidehnes and improving trie preparedness affectively using assistanc? resources consistent with EPA Emergency Worker capabdites of State and local have been made, arrangements to andIJfesaving Activity Protecove Fovernments for deahng with accidents accommodate State and local staff at Action Guides.

and emegencies at nuclear power the licensee's near-site Emergency (12) Arrangementa are made for facuities.

Operat ons Facaty have been made, medical services for contaminated (c)In accomplishing the foregoing. the ted other orgamzanons capable of injured individuals.-

RACs wdl use the enteria in FEMA-cugmenting the planned response have (13) General plans for recovery and REP-1/NUREG 654. and wdl render such been identifici reentry are developei technical assistance as ma> he requirei (4) A standard emergency (14) Pennd:c excrcises are (wd! be)

The RACa wi!! also observe and clasedicat on and action level scheme condacted to evaluate maior portons of evaluate exercises and identfy m a whose bases include facaty system and emergency response capabihtes, umely fashion deficiences m the cfSuent parameters is in use by the penodic dnUs are (wd! be) conducted to planrung and :reparedness effort rudear facdity licensee. and State and develop and maintain key ski'..:

including defic 2ces in resources.

B-5

Federal Register / Vol. 45. Na 123 / Tu:sday Jun? 24, 1980 / Proposed Rules 4234S training of staff, equipment. s'affing approval of a State plan, and of the during regional review and prior to the levels, and deficiencies in the plans necessary for specific nuclear forwarding of the plan to the Associate qualifications of personnel.

power facilities in a multi-facility State.

Director. These are the requirement for a while not approving or acting on the complete exercise, see i 350.9. and for I 350.7 AppEcatton D State for review plans necessary for other nuclear power public participation, see i 350.10.

a Sta e which seeks review and ub isnt e a approp a 1350.s Ezwefoes.

approval by FEMA of the State's adjustments in the State plan may be (a) FEMA approval of State plans radiological emergency plan, with (and appropriate local government necessary.

annexes (which for purposes of this part (f) ne application shall contain a annexes) shallin each case be site includes the plans of alllocal statement that the State plan, together specific.

governments for all jurisidictions wholly with its annexes. is. In the opinion of the (b) Before a Regional Director can or partially within the plume exposure State, adequate to protect public health forward a State plan and annexes to the pathway EPZ for the applicable nuclear and safety ofits citizens living within Associate Director for approval, the power facility and for the host the emergency planning zones for the State together with all necessary local jurisdictions in the event of an nuclear power facilities included in the governments must conduct a complete evacuation), shall submit an application submission by providing reasonable exercise of that State plan, involving for such review and approval to the assurance that appropnate protective participation of appropriate local FEMA Regional Director of the Region in measures can and will be taken by State government entities, the State and the which the State is located. The and local governments within the appropriate licensee of NRC. To the applicatior in the form of a letter from emergency planning zone in the event of extent achievable, this exercise shall the Governi r or from such other State a radiological emergency for the site in include participation by appropriate official as tl e Governor may designate, question.

Federal agencies. nis exercise shall be shall contaiz one copy of the completed observed and evaluated by FEMA and State plan. it.:;luding the plan for the I 350.8 Initial FEMA action on State plan-to the extent possible by representatives ingestion patiway. The application shall (a) ne Regional Director shall of other agencies with membership on specify the site or sites for which plan acknowledge in wnting the receipt of the RACs, and by NRC with respect to approvalis sought.

such an application to the State within

' licensee response. Following the (b) pathw, Generally, the plume exposure ten days cf its receipt.

debriefing of allinvolved parties.If the ay EPZ for nuclear power (b) FEMA shall cause to be published exercise discloses any deficiences in the facilities shall consist of an area about in the Federal Register within 30 days State and local plans. or the ability of to miles (16 Km)in radius and the after receipt of the application, notice the State and local governments to ingestion pathway EPZ shall consist of that an application from a State has implement the plans, the FEMA an area about 50 miles (80Km)in radius. been received and that copies are representatives shall make them known De exact size and configuration of the avellable at the Regional Office for promptly in wnting to appropriate State EPZs surrounding a particular nuclear review and copying in accordance with officials and, to the extent necessary, power facility shall be determined in 15.28. Subpart C of part 5 and Appendix the State shall amend the plan to relation to the emergency response A to Part 5 of this chapter.

Incorporate recommended changes or needs and capabilities as they are (c) The Regional Director shall furnish improvements.

affected by such local conditions as copies of the ;,ian to members of the (c) The Regional Director of FBtA demography, topography. land RAC for their analysis and evaluation.

shall be the FEMA official responsible characteristics access routes, and local (d) ne Regional Director shall make a for certifying to the Associate Director Jurisdictional boundaries. The size of the detailed review of the plan together with that a complete exercise of the State EPZs may be determined by NRC in its annexes, and will assess the plan has been conducted, and that any consultation with FBtA on a case-by.

capability of the State orlocal deficiencies noted in the exercise have case basis for gas cooled reactors and governments to effectively implement been corrected and such corrections for reactors with an authorized power the plan.Such redew should,in incorporated in the plan.

i levelless than 250 Mw thermal The addition to application of the criteria (d) On an annual basis, all nuc! ear l

plans for the ingestion pathway shall specified in i 350.5. consider (1) the power facilities will be required by NRC

(

focus on such actions as are appropriate integration ~ f planning of the NRC to exercise their plans and the exercises o

l to protect the food ingestion pathway, licensee with the localities around the should involve annual exercising of the (c) FEMA and the States will make nuclear facility and the State, and the appropriate local government plans in suitable arrangements in the case of linkage between plans and (2) elements support of these facilities.The State overlapping or adjacent jurisdictions to dealing with notification, may choose to limit its participation in permit an orderly assessment and communications. pubile information.

exercises at facilities other than the l

approval of interstate or interregional equipment, accident assessment. drills facility (site) chosen for the annual plans.

and exercises and emergency planning exercise (s) of the State plan.

(d) Only a State may request review tones recommended by FEMA. NRC and (e) For continued FEMA approval, of a State or local radiological EPA for planning around nuclear power each State and appropriate local emergency plan.The State will fac lities.

governments shall conduct an excrcise designate the unit (s) of the local (e) In connection with the review, the jointly with a nuclear power facility at government whose plans will be Regional Director may make suggestions least annually. However. States with submitted as annexes to the State plan.

to States concerning perceived gaps or more than one facility (site) shall (e) A State may sabmit separately its deficiencies in the plans. and the State schedule exercises such that each plans for the EPZ's and the loed!

may amend the plan at any time prior to individual facility (site) is exercised in government plans specific to the plume forwarding to the Associate Director, conjunction with the State and exposure pathway EPZ for individual (f) Two conditions for FT.MA approval appropriate local government plans not nuclear power facihties.The purpose of of State plans (Including local less than once every three years for sites separate submissions is to allow govemment annexes) call for activity with the plume exposure pathway EPZ B-6 L

42346 Federal Register / Vd. (

e.123 / 'Itesdty, Juni 14. 1980 / Puposed Rules partially or wholly within the State and or near the.auclear power facility site appr,aprista protective measures can not less than once every five years for for which the State is seeking approval.

and will be taken offsite in the event of sites with the ingestion exposure a radiological emergency; and pathway EPZ partially or whol y within f350.H AcSon in FMA RW (2) are capable of being implemented Dwector.

the State. The State shall choow. on a (see i 350.3(d)). the Associate Director rotational basis. the site (s) at wtich the (a) Upon completion of his/her review shall approve,in writing the State plan, required annual exercise (s)is to be including conduct of the exercise The Associate Director shall conducted. and prionty shall be i;iven to required by I 350.9 and after the public communicate this FT.MA approval to the new facilities seeking an operatiig meeting required by I 350.10. the Governor of the State in question and license from NRC. and which ha se not Regional Director shall prepare an the NRC and immediately shall cause to had an exercise invoking the Sr te plan evaluation of the State plan. including be published in the Federal Register a a

at the facility site.

plans for local governments. Such notice to this effect.

(f) After FEMA approval of a State evaluation shall be specific with respect (d)If ;he Associate Director is not and local plan has been granted. failure to the plans applicable to each nuclear satisfied with the adequacy of the plan to excercise the State and local plans on facility so that findings and or preparedness with respect to a the frequency descnbed in this section determinations can be made by the particular site. he or she shall shall be grounds for withdrawing FEMA Associate Directc a site specific communicate that decision to the approval (see i 350.13).

basis.

Governor (s) of the State (s). to any (b} ne Regional Director shall involved licensee, to the NRC or other i 350.10 Pubec meeting in advance of evaluate the adequacy of State and local interested pr,n. together with a FEMA approvat.

plans and preparedness on the basis of statemem.

iting explaining the During the FT.MA Regional Office the criteria set forth in i 350.5. and shall re c o-2ecision and requesting review of a State plan, and prior to the report that evaluation with respect to app.

. y. n or preparedness submission by the Regional Director of each of the planning objectives revis... Such statement shall be the plan to the Associate Director, the mentioned therein as such apply to State transmitted to the Governor (s) through FTA1A Regional Director shall assure the and local plans and preparedness. The the appropriate Regional Director (s).

conduct of at least one public meeting in Regional Director evaluation report may (e) The approval shall be of the State the vicinity of the nuclear power facility. ' also address any of the other criteria plan together with the local plans The purpose of such a meeting. which contained in FEMA REP 1(NUREG 0654) (which are annexes to the State plan) for may be conducted by the State or by the " Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation each nuclear power facility (including Regional Director, shall be to acquaint of Radiological Emergency Response out of State facilities) for which the members of the public in the vicinity Plans and Preparedness in Support of approval has been requested. FEMA of each facility with the content of the Nuclear Power Plants." or in other may withhold approval of plans State and related local plans, to answer. guidance issued by FEMA or by NRC as applicable to a specific nuclear power any questions about FEMA review and such apply to State and local offsite facility in a multi-facility State. but to receive suggestions from the public radiological emergency plans and nevertheless approve the State plan and concerning improvements or changes preparedness.This evaluation will not associated local plans applicable to that may be necessary; and to describe include a recommendation on approval.

other facilities in a State. (Approval may to the public the way in which the plan (c) ne Regional Director shall be withheld for a specific site until plans is expected to function in the event of a forward the State plan together with his for all jurisdictions within the real emergency. The Regional Director or her evaluation and other relevant emergency planning zones of that site should assure that representatives from record material to the Associate have been reviewed and found appropnate State government agencies, Director for Plans and Preparedness.

adequate.)

local and county agencies and the (f) Within 30 days after the date of affected utility appear at such meetings i 350.12 FEMA Heedquarters review and notification of approval for a particular to make presentations and to answer approval nuclear power facility or within 30 days questions from the public.These (a) Upon receipt from a Regional of any statement ofinadequacy or meetings shall be noticed in the local Director of a State plan. the Associate withdrawal of approval of a State plan, newspaper having the largest circulation Director shall cause copies of the plan any interested person may appeal the in the area on at least two occasions one together with the Regional Director's decision of the Associate Director to the of which is at least two weeks before evaluation to be distributed to the Director; however, such appeal must be the meeting takes place and the other is members of the FederalInteragency made solely upon the ground that the within a few days of the meeting date.

Central Coordinating Committee Associate Director's decision based on Local radio and television stations (FICCC) and to other offices of FEMA the available record was unsupported should be notified of the scheduled with appropriate guidance relative to by substantial evidence. See 1350.15 for I

meeting at least one week in advance.

their assistance in the FEMA review heanng procedures.

Representatives from NRC and other process."

l appropriate Federal agencies should (b) De Associate Director shall I 350.13 withdrawalof approval also be invited to participate in these conduct such review of the State plan as (a) If, at any time after granting meetings. If. in the judgment of the he or she shall deem necessary.

approval of a State plan, the Associate FEMA Regional Director the public (cl Within 30 days after submission of Director determines, on his or her own meeting or meetings reveal gaps or the State plan by the Regional Director.

Initiative, motion or on the basis of deficiencies in the State plan. the if the Associate Director. finds and information another person supplied.

Regional Director shall inform the State determines that the State plans and that the State orlocal plan is no longer of the fact together with preparedness:

adequate to protect public health and

(

recommendations for unprovement. No (1) are adequate to protect the health safety by providing reasonable FEMA approval of State and local plans and safety of the public living in the assurance that appropriate protection I

shall be made until a meeting desenbed vicinity of the nuclear power facility by measures can be taken, or is no longer in this paragraph shall have been held at providing reasonable assurance that capable of being implemented. he or she B-7 l

Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.123 / Tuesd:y. Jun2 24.1980 / Ptoposed Rules 42347 shallimmediately advise the Governor unnecessary in connection with an of the affected State and NRC of that amendment.

initist determination in writing. FBfA (d) A significant change is one which shall spell out in detail the reasons for involves the evaluation and assessment its initial determination and shall of a planning objective or which descr:be the deficiencies in the plan or involves a matter which if presented the preparedness of the State. If, after with the plan would need to have been four months from the date of such an considered by the Associate Director in imtial determination, the State in making a decision that State or local question has r.'t (1) either corrected the plans and preparedness are:(1) deficiei.9* r Jed. or (2) submitted an Adequate to protect the health and acceptable pl..n for correcting those safety of the public hving in the vicinity deficiencies. the Associate Director of the nuclear power facility by shall withdraw approval, and shall providing reasonable assurance that immediately inform NRC and the appropnate protective measures can be Governor of the affected State, of the taken offsne in the event of a determination to withdraw approval and radiological emerEency; and (2) Capable shall cause to be published in the of being implemented.

Federal Register and the newspaper having the largest daily circulation in 3 350.15 Hearing (Reservedl the affected State, notice of its Datedyune 8.1980.

withdrawal of approval Such action by John W. Macy. jr.,

the Associate Direc:or is subject to the Duector. Fedem/Emegency Afancrement appeal procedure specified in i 350.12(f). Agency.

(b) In the event that the State in p %. % %%

question shall submit a plan for

- coa,.7,w correcting the deficiencies, the Associate Director shall negotitte a schedule and timetable under which the State shall cure the deficiencies. if. on he agreed upon date, the deficiencies nave been cured. the Associate Diriator shall withdraw the initial determinatie and the approval previously granted shall remain valid and shallinform the Cos ernor(s), and the NRC. If, however, on the agreed upon date, the deficiencies are not cured. FEMA shall withdraw its approval and shall communicate its decision to the Goverwr of the State whose plan is in question, to the NRC. and to the appropriate Federal agencies and notify the public as above.

I 350.14 Amendraents to State plana.

(a) The State may amend a plan submitted to FEMA for review and approva! under i 350.11 at any time dunng the review process or may amend a plan at any time after FEMA approval shall have be*n granted under i 350.12.

A State must amend its plan in order to extend the coverage of the plan to any new nuclear power facility which becomes operational after a FBfA i

approval or in case of any other significant change. The State plan shall remain in effect as approved while any significant change is under review.

(b) Ummportant changes (such as a change in a telephone numberl should be forwarded to the Regional Director.

i (c) A significant change will be processed in the same manner as if it were an initial plan submission.

However, the Regional Director may determine that certain procedures, such as holding a pub!!c meeting would be B-8 b_

APPENDIX C-

' DECEMBER-1980

~ STATUS OF REVIEW.0F STATE AND LOCAL PLANS PROVI'sEC BY FEMA FOR THIS REPORT ~

s xxxxxxxxxx -- ACTION COMPLETE

.////////// LCOMPLETION NOT VERIFIED PROJECTED DATES FOR COMPLETION ARE SHOWN WHEP.E.AVAILABLE C '

4 4

i l

l 0

4 O e EM E mWgw e

W M

em b he m

m**

m m

N 99 9 e

US m "m

@pp 3

W J

sw n sw m m

ew Dw 4

444 AE w

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmm mmme mmmmmmm egeSeGeeeeeeeeeeeese emeeeeeeeses Secesse

• W O C L' O W C W O U O O O C O O O O C U C eOOOOOOOeOOW POCUOGO E t a

mmm N

mw CM 444@ @@@@ @@@@

ONNNNNN 7w 2

O mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mammmmmm==mm nuevSom m

W eW eeeeeeeeeeeemeWee SWeeeeeeeeem emeseB S d

O emmmmemmammenmmmamme emmmmennmmem um um emo e

m menmmm E IE 2 4 M g O e90 Og gggg gg90 90qg4 gg g9 60gg gW 9e RNNNNNN 0J3 m mmmmm

• A@

W m

umm n

A Qm e

ese e

wWe m **

m*m o

& M we G J d

e.

• W

.* O m

azo we eomu mommmmmm m m ema n n m e n e nmm mmone m u memm*m E

eseSeSeeeeeeeeeeeeee meGemmedesem W499969 3*

Wd Nma**m m m mm m m m en mm m m m N NNm m m m m mm m m m m o m m m e m tih 44 g 64 N PG m Pt m PG m W D 4 64 g 444444 4444444444444 90 94 44444444 gam?m me ETQ M M MM MM MM = p MM M M MM MM M M M M M M M M M M M M 4 MM M mMMM MM MM M M eM M M MM M m"eeM W

m M M MM MM M M MA MM MM MM M M M S

MM MM MMMM 4M MM MM M w

W WM M MM MM MM M M M M MM MMMM M 4

% M M mM mM M M mM g M mM gM uM m g% gM mM mM M M wM gM mM M M m

e mMMM M MMM M M mM MM M M M 8

O "M

M MM MM M MM M MM MM M M M MM m

O d

M M MM MM M MM M M MMM M M MMM M MM MM MM M M MM MMMM M

& Ew

% M M MM MM MMMMMM MM MMMMM

%% %M MM MM MMMM

%M M M MM M

1. g M M M M M M M M N M MM M M M M

w* e m W M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M g

h Jb M M M MM M M MM MM MMM M MM MM M M MM MM M M

mM MM M M M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

E 40 M M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M e

4 og EG em umemommemeemmenenemm meomammommeo mommmmm w u GW N5 O

s.e E

W

=

g E

4 4

2 Z

W O,

3 p

EQ m*

O adx

.E x3 a

3 w

z u e o=5 50w w

m 2

M m

w

=o w

s w.

m ww em m

em M

WO3e OsE4 Ow 3

CE 2 ooc O

m I

m e a. e

• u E wo m e4 WYm2 OS2w w

20*E JO M @

2 v ww e =

On am wwsEZztaOwea zOQw a

uwaa m3mes a

A wa wwwm I e

e m e a d o M a m ws w E Ows2 J

E s g J we m awJcA O

e u= Wow & amp caswedwm 3meww==

w*

ww*>=

d mW 24p ec We g Je w w 4 A O m w'

• J s o w e e' O E m 2 O 3 0 G E

• d d WMWE wO w0 Q d 2 Q 3 a vewe = O C E J d*g Gwo w" d=4 wA w eO vs G W En z3w de44 me=OwwswJen*g M*

W S wD WWOOWWZdEE&&W JUEEdW J We S 2 W Q J we E d G O wt y m we e c e a s e "U

EO m

am 4 4 AU E

m E e

O "w' w W

E C-2 O

9-

e a

a Q

3 m

e e

o m

m 89 aug N

N m

o mumummmM nommmm momummmen mmum monmmmmm u m mm um enmm em WeSeeeeeeeeeSe WeSetememeSee meeeeeem Seeeeeeeeeem DOUCGCOOUCVCOO

• OGODOLOO09OU UOUOUOOO OCCUOGCDCOCQ w

\\%%%%4 %%

NNNNNNNNNNNNNN MNNNNNNNNNNNN uNNNNNNN ONNNNNNNNNNN unusuSuma amum w S 3%%%%%%%%%%%%

v3%%%%%%%

n%%%%%%%%%%%

egeeeeeeeeeeeg e%%%%%%%%%%%%

e% %%%%%%

e%%%%%%%%%%%

mmmmmmmemmmumo m%%%%%%" %%%%%

m%%%%%%%

m%%%%%%%%%%%

memmmmmmmmmmmm M%%%%%%*=%%%%%

m%%%%%g%

M%%%%%%%%%%%

NNNNNNNN4 NNNNN N%%%%%%%%%%%%

N% %%%%%%

N%%%%%%%%%%%

emammmmmmmmmmm w%%%%%%%%%%%%

m%%%%%%%

m%%%%%%%%%%%

U Q

C e

e e

=

m m

9%

Pg pg ew o

m n

- WG WG m mm mmm mmm mm m mm mSW OuCVOWOWSU M OuSUOOO mwcucumond eu messegegesegWe ese9eteW S $acM memeeece ee9 Bee 9eease

% g% g % % % % % g% % % g

% % % %% %% %% g% %%

% g% g% g% %

% % %% %% %% g% g %

m m o m em m**mmm u m m m m mmmmma m mmm m u m m m mm e m m mm m m memmmm PS pg 89 pg # 6 pg P G pg P 9 R #9 pg Pt pg WDpg #6 pg Pt pg 99 pg Pt pg Pt m WG et pgPtpgP9pgPtpq m

Pt pg 8 % pg W 9 pg Pt pg P G m #6 m m m mmmmmm mmmm e NNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNN NNNNNWNNNNNN m menonea mmmo ammo m m m mennm enmm mn M MM M MM M M M MM M M M MM MM MM MM MM M M M E MM MM M M MM MM MM MM MM M MM M M M M M M M M MM M W MM MM MM MMMM M M W MM MMMM M MM MM MM MM MM M M M MM M M MM M M MMMM M aMM MM MMMM MM MM eMM MM MM M eM MM MM MM MM MM M M M M M M M M M M M kM M

% M M MM MM MM M M MM

% M M M M M M M

% M M M M M MM M M MM M M M M M p; M MM MM MM M mMM MM MMM M MM M M M MM M MM M M mM MM MM MM MM MM M MM M MM M M M MM MMM M MMMM MMMM MM MM MMM MMMM M MM MM MM MM MM MM M M M M M MM M M M M MM M

%MM MM MMMM MMM M

%M MMMMM M

% E MM MM MM MM MM M M M M M M M M M M M M M M ho M A M M MM M M M M MM tw M M MM M M M NA M M M M M M MM MM M M MM MM M M M M M M MM mMMMM M M M M M M M M mM MMMMM M mM M M M M M M M M M M M M M M

M M

M M M M

M M

M M

M M gM g M

M M

M M gMg M M

M M

M M

g g

g g

g g

g g

g g

g menmum mommmmmm mmmmmm meumMW w M e*mmmmme oeownmmmmmem E

o e

J Z

E 4

O W

' W 4

m

=

3 3

y g

2 m

W we C O W

O g

O mg M

Q su m a

we was m

a =

w w

w-ra we 3W

>M U

em3Em w m

EdwCE 4 K 4

vs w w OOD E

Um 4 4 J we 8 5 we e O R wt m e

> R34meOK3m p

CR m

m g G

&KG34 4

m3 eaQww34

& J we w

y2Twm=wwm e w3 Zu w2wu 3

4 w we = Q >

wQ J W8 ZEm J OWUZZm4 we E w s m 3 A we A EJ4&J3 e44 4 dw&m I wd as4m wZ34 M d E 4 = m we e wo w

• m mu

• w m T h e Q Q w we g g w e g 3p gg gwem3 wmsgaE4 d= 2 Ob 0323 3 m g w d 3 3 3 ws wa Ez432MaugZapamp 0 43asww2E wgu4 443 24 2 em3 JTdOJX 4 2wyJSwm mcmO434 =44 = J4To E w.g u m e. Q4 E mJ gmode mOG4 G 3ed e m e Q O W d wS W J 3 4 JwleWQ2WJEE4JC4 3 we e W W W d3 2WeuuVw2&EdW3 we em W

4 dE y y

M 4

E C-3

e 4 e e 2u K

• e u eQg In# 2 e no ism les e se

,e se

• • se se se es as e

e es 48 %

e at S u2 a= ne "J

p p

e3 e si e

.d>=

Pt 44 Eg

==

,e we,e

& w 3 4.J re Pm rm tf'n d\\ d fL E w

.e es se se se se se.e e se se e se as.e.e en se.e

• * = = *e to eeeeee eeeeeee eeeeeee ee eee ee eee em

%%%g%g%

>= U gg) se se se *e **

tf% en e= se se se se gi se se,e,e se se

@O OO O@

tf4 C Ef%

se se g$

se

• e**

N N a= l.J OM Pe y M @ # #

f* e e e e e e Po e e s e e e MM NNN af% e eee yw 3

0

.e S u M c *S we ee me

,e ee e,e,e ee eeee eeeeese eeemeee n,e se se

. e g

,e,e,e,e,e J

4A N em se me.e se e

es em P'l M P) P%

e E EK E e e se N N f%8 O g N

• • "4 p'n 89 *1 og p1 se est M Pg Pg og M Cw3 ee

• e *e ee ne u

.h e A es as A es A M wA ge me se A

tad se na M M M M M M MM M E Q **

a a

e M M M M M M M M M BE yw e M M MM M DE M MM M e4 44

.g A 38 M 8h M A ta na M M a se gy M SE MM M M M Es M M g e oJ M M MM M M M M M M se em me A 3e pp w rg A M 1e A te A w me 4 3 pm 34 M M M M Bs as as tt M M BE SE MM M 3a 3a MM M

M % %

we se se se se me me se se se se se ewe se se e se ** ao se M

is % %

2 e3 4eS9 99ee3me e e e-9eee M

M% %

J e

% g % %% g

% g% g% g%

% g s g% g%

g% g M

M g g tot.A et so ** *e sese yeeqqege ygggagg M

M % %

M Pi M 8't sg 64 eg N gw E4 c N gg d4 gg t'g 8E M % %

-E E4 Pg uD M

M g%

e tad 6 8% em se se se se p) gg Ngggygygg pt gg gg gg m e, g M

M % %

y

,g Q M

1s % %

l M

M % %

M M M Et MM MM MM M ia M M M M M

M % %

M O

se M M M M M 8" MMM 35 N M

• e 3g M Eg M Eg M i

M M % %

lag taJ e 34 M M M 38 eMM 38 M M M e at 35 EE M 38 35 88 38 % %

A M M M

% M M 3a M ga A

% Be M MM M M w % %

% gg y,

i 2

O e4 is M M M M

+4 as M M Bt te M NM M 1s M M M M

M %%

Q

.e as M M DE M M M MMMM M MMMMM M

M %%

& 2 te,A

%M BE M MM

% SE M MM 1s M

%M M M sa M Et A

M %%

A M M M sin gg M gg M gg M e* ts M Es M as M A

DE %%

• e as e m y,

b d neJ M M 38 MM 3E BL 34 M 3a M M M 34 M M g;;

M

= M M

M=M

. =

M M

M

= M M

=,,, o M M M

e 6

• E K O eme se se es ** * * *

• es am se ce se se se e

,e em se so NN NNN NN NNN wg ew l

m E l

t.

e e

l O

w O,

W u

w a

=

w X

as 3

3 d

oof

=

=

ned

.e.g w,a ee-zfo i.,

=

a w

=

M o

o ew m i o -

c..

o-2 w

O Oe q,a ga ou se 3

.a 2 P WO p

3 a,s M 2 ve o

3ogg34 3-LE Ud

• e u

O see Y oOd4O3 w

.e..a.a.e..o E

5 O

au e

z

= o wa$

e,a G D ee.

Ja.

eN a

w a ie.

I 4 e w*

• wEw o

4v s

w-o r - a.e - - s a 4.,-

a t.e

-au zey E-G

- tas e M q 8"

led 8e ET a-r v.

g e g,,

d se q g

%8 8'" O4 I ** Y m$ I E tad 44 4 3 J 4 4.3 C4

.J E 444 3 g g se E I

E O 4 LaJ S I

We.$

E *" 2 ** z ve i o s e'* g,3 3

e g, yy me J ese ags g g g.3 zzcu m s i.z e s c o a ve c.s m a.. a w ~~ am uN-*

e

=o f

"3 vs we u J We we y s" as we O A vt JE w

g toe g

e

• e j

y tea

& M go SS V8 J 4e,

• W eg J g

\\

, ene gap I

ned w

w

<a x a

a S

E l

L I

e C-4

e mmmem am SeSM S Se em em m em em um u mm NNNNN et ommmm um emo emum e nn Gemme Se GSG emme ese g % %

C0200 mm OLO PPPP mee e

um Mmm ammm mmm et eet mm mam meed 444 M M MM M MM MM MM M M M M M MM M MM MM MM M MM M M MM M MM MM MM M MM M M MM M MM M MM M M M M

M M MM M MM M M MM M MM MM MM M MM M

%%MM

% g%

g M M MM M M M MMO

%%MM mm g

M M MM M MM M e9

%%MM

% g%

@ B g

M M MM M MM M% %

% %MM m

M M MM M MM M m m

%%MM m

M M MM M MM Mhh

%% MM m 'e M M MM M MM M % %

%% MM M M MM M M M MNN

%%MM m #l g

M M M M M MM M me

%%MM M M MM M M M M

%%MM M M MM M MM M M M

%% MM M

M M M MM M M M M M M

%%MM M

M M M MM M MM MM M

%%MM M

M M M M M M M M M M M

% % M M

% g %

M M

MM M M M M M MMM

%%M M M

M M M M M M MM M M M

%%MM M

M M M MM M MM M M M

%%MM M

M M M M M M M M M M M

% % M M M

M M MMMM M M M MM

% %M M M

M M

M M

M M

M

%g Mg g

g g

g M

% g M

M I

l NNNNN N N Mmm m

mmmm mmm ene mmm mmm l

l e

m O

w e e

a W

e O

E O

e W

D J

w D we we W

O O

2 30 m

46 h.

O M

y W

m O

p -

WW 3

W G4 4

0 0 2 E

3 W

E OW d-p OO E

O w

Wm m

W w

O w

w OM u

d a

w m

we O U U U

J J

de w e

O-ea Ug w

2 e

O

'M 8 d6 3

% U U

M M en m

QQ m 4 4

M O 2

wm 4

4wE J

O 9

4W O

2%w O

E 22 EZ 3

wt Q e

AM m WJ

1. WW aw

• Ww4 Z SwJG 4

WWQ Sw4 Iw2E wWJQ4 Ew e Ed 2 E m w se p

= * **

cEm# Ew e mm p4p #w p ug wmw3 4 4 W9uem 4 J 2 K4 25 Ww e AweJ X

Z4g2 JW4 4J Z4 E2 J g NJ st JmJ O m wC43 wm we g wwww p

g #w 4mJ u my4 M #m wd We m

p m

we O

Q WD J3O4 2 W9 O 3 J W8 3 g 3 J wt J.J yt W we Q g wp yX ye 4 wp e g g

M we we a y 3

m 4 4 W e M4 M

8W D

M.

=

d J de we y ag w g

y 33 a

We w

m 4

W O

O E

i C-5 e

4 9

• 2U Kmu

• OW b2 E em bbM MM M m amme M M M emSB S M M M 0

M mM WI 44 444 M M M a ma m M M M m

d" ggggg M M M hw NM NNN M M M W

M MM AE M A M M mW MN%%%%

M MM m M M mm mm m M M M W

M% %%% %

M M M M M M mmmmmmm emeee M MM d

M%%%%%

M M MM M M egegegg w

MN%%%%

M A M E M A

%g %gsg %

M au dd 444 M M M "U

M%%%%%

M MM M M M ceaseccc mm mm m M M M R E M% % %%%

M M MM M M mammmmm M MM W

M%%%%%

M MM M M M

%%ggggg "O M mmNnn M mW M%%%%%

M MM M M M ppppp,y M M M 76 M%%%%%

M MM M M M M M M M%%%% %

M mM M M M M

M M M MM M MM I

NM M M M M M M MM O

eM M M M MM M MM

%M M MM MM M MM mM M M M M M M M W J

d M

MM MM M M M M 8

%M M m MmM M M M EIE W M MM M M M M M M E* E M

MA MM M M a M OMO M

M A MM M M A M b bd M A M A M M R M M M MmM mM M d

W M m MmM M M M EO" MM MmM M M M bb4 M A MA M M A M J #

m MmMM M M m x e# c Ma MA N MA m Od M A M A M M A M

-T *m M M MM M M M M 43p

+

M m M M M M m M MM MM M M aM M% %% %%

M% %% g g N g t gg gg NN MM MM M M M M M% %% %%

M % g% g g ag o gg gg g+

GS MA MM M M ( M M% %% %%

M %g% gg u g g gg gg MM M M M M B M J4 M% %% %%

M % g% g %

M g% g% g g

1. 1. O M M MM M M m M WJ M% %% %%

M % %% g %

M gg gg gg "m

MM M M M M M M "4

M% %% % %

M % %% g %

A g% g% g g MM MM M M M M UD M% %%%%

M % %% gg M g % gg gg et MM M mM M M M

• hk M% %%%%

M% %% g g a g g gg gg nam M M M M.

24 0 M % %%%%

M g gg g g ag g gg g g MM MM M Mab M% %% % %

M % %% g g a gg gg gg E

M " M E M M R M M E MA M E M M m e M a a M mM E M E A N MM MM M mmM C

MM M M M m u m MM M M A M M M mM M 2 9 MM MM M M M M W

W MM MM M M M M MM mm M M M M M mm a g M A M A M M aM M A A M mM A Mm c

M A M A N A M et M A 2

O mM M M MM M mMn M M M M M M mm a Mm M M mM M M M M M

M aM MM M M m C

J MM MMmm umMM mM mM MM MM M M %

M M M M M M M M

&2W MM MMMM M M M M M M mM M M MM M wa a

M A M M M A M E M M M m E M AM mM n mm N A M E M M aM g

m mM M M

.m M M M MM M M WW mM MMM M M M M M m M mM.MM. m n

MM M

M.

a M

w M

-=.O

=M m m M

M M m

M m

e 4

• E EO ee t eSee l

em ememem enemmm mmmmmme em l

WO

• w t

l m5 l

l 6

w d

O WC U

e O

9 O

wE e

U O

O U

O U

4 x3 we g A

we W

G

=

0 c%

Ez e

3 WO t

O W

W 3

l w

=

3 0 0 e

2 3W m m W3 w

O b

O W

m w' WE Ew usw e

Je ge aw w

u E

awwJ O

w a

..s..l u w w u O. v.

m s.

O m

Ow w

k e

e us u

s n 4

- a w

ou O

e zu a

a aam a

a O

. - asx.

O l

w 3

we.

m, u

O-

- - - vza a

(

g ws Ewge wg a w,, wa s s g we we om g

wa Ow e wwawe m we m M

w'*w2w Pp W8 E "e

egw J

gem w M

4 MC G W

p

• • G Sd z

3W.kgg a-u 24 E 32 weJ4 4 w p g as 33a

-wgg l

w19 302 g

T W4 3 EE m

-use.3 s

J

-oos s

uw l

,,m.

a -

vO

• * *3 4

ve m 7 p 3

4 gg Z eJW7 OWddEJ 3 we Z E t

AWJWEg@

E wa EWOJPWJ M

.a ow a

-u x

eO 4 e ee Td a

e m W W w

J WS $

D 3

4 I.

f*

C-6 l

l m

~.

e o

MM M MM MM mmm maa mmm MM MMM MM ese eew ade MM mMM MM Mn MM M MM EGG See See M M MMM MM 44 N EM tw N tw 44 m tw M M M M M MM M M MM m MM M M M MM M M NAN NNN NNN MM M M M EM M A A W M MA M M E M M M M M M M M M M M emm oem oem ese ese met M M M M M Mm M A A M A MA ese see ese M M MM M MM M M M M M M M N NN NNN NNN M M M M M M M NNN NNN NNN WM M MM M M M M MM M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M mMM

%MW

%$w

%3u W M M M M M M Wee

%ew

%ee

%ee M M MM M M M M M MM M M M mam

%wm

%ma

%wm M M M M M M M

%MM

%MM

%MM MM M MM MM MM mMM MM mmm

%NN

%NN

%NN Mm M MM MM mam

%wm

%mm

%=m MM mMa MM MM A MM MA A

MA A MA M m

.M M M M M M M M

MM M MM MM M

MM M MM Mm M

A MA e MA MA MA A MA MR M

A MM A MA MA A

M A A MA M A MM M MM MM M

MR M Mm MM M

MM M MM MM M

MMM OMO WeQ UMu Ma mMM MM M

M NN mm am See ese des See MM M MM MM M

B ee eSee g% %

Ma mMM Mm M

c et e unu uno unu MM m Mm MM m

et en m m me a ** m Pt M Pt et M pe Pe M es Mm aM M Mm m

• • .m

• • Met,.

M MM mMM M m ama NNN NNN NNN Mm mMm Mm M

MOu mm ma m mm mm e Mm m am m MM M M M MM M

m m Mu M Mm Mm A

A 4 4 4 M

A MM E ME M M M M 4 mM m Me M MM M MM A M R R MM MM mMM Mm M

M MR hM WP Mee M MM MMM M MM M M M Mm MM M

M MM asse M

A M A A M A AM A A MM M A A Mm M m MwM M M M Mum M MM Mm aum MM M

M M M "m*w M 9 g M MM MMM MMM M MM MM M Mm MM M

M MM MMMM M% g MMM MMM MMR MM M MM MM M

M MM A

A M M

'4 N #4N M Wp M M A A M A A M M mm aM A M m M

MM M MM M M M M M M M M M Mm M

M M M "m*w M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M M

M m

M M

m M

M M

M get ed e etO Wem Oe eeg e ma t e m

a w

00 u

0 uu 3

3 3

e WO

=

W g

3 W

3 O

3 pWg 3

J OY m

U2 U

=

g w7 w

w du g

O u

8 O

UOgm a

W e

m U

wU m

U O

-wwas y

O J

U U

Od 2

Om 3

G w

3 0

• w g

teJ a

v w

w 3

2*J Z

Ed WWW v

w U2 e

Ww e

aveOQ4 m

ww3m w

WP w m4@

2 W w W 4 3 W nde J w 3' W W

m2 ZE 2*uws

• w "e Q

• Jeb e e*2*

u*J*

M*we

• • J wasma m y

g Www M J w ed 2E e z De3J em e*D 34 3

w ec2 4 w1 5 Z4AG2m m J

4

• 3

• e"J #

E*M**

d*4 W adm e st* A J O m

J W9 J Q m > Wt U J WS W9 2 W8 OE

@ A W9 w w WD 4 su g m

o de e 3 3 W8 O r g We g e y d=40 W We* *

• J**E e 4

=

w sa p

3 se e

O

& 5 4 U We m

3e 2

g W

W d

J h

C-7

e 4 O e EW E*W W

b E

em W 48 MMMM MM MMM M MM Mm MMM M MM em MMMM MM W

MMMMMM ud 33 MMMM MM Mm MM MM M M d*

MMMM MM W

ed MM MM M X W

MM MM M M 4E MMMM M M MM MM MM m m MMMM MM W

eg WMM M MM W

%g M MM MM M mm MM M M M M "E W M M M MM M E

MMMM M M "O M W

PM MMg MM M M MM MM M 7b MM M

M M

MMMMM M M

2 MM M

M M

M M M MM M M

Q MM M

M M

M FM MM M M

M M M

h M

M MM MM M M

W M M M

M M

M M M MM M M

J M M M

M M

MM MM MM M

\\

M M M

M M

MM MM MM M

I E

M M M

M M

MM MM MM M

MM MM MM M

M, E *

• M M M

M

, M uM gM y

g Od3 M y

" AO A

W E O" g%

• W4

%g g

d M"

E

• W8 fy A,*

g g M

M M

MM MM MM M

M M

M M

MM MM MM M

M

% g W'

M M

M MM MM MM M

M I

M M

M MM MM MM M

M 3*

M M

M MM MM MM M

M WM

% g M

M M

MM MM MM M

M M

M M

MM MM MM M

M W M M

M M

MM ** M MM M

M

• Wb M

M M

MM MM M M M

M I IG M

M M

MM MM MM M

M M M g

g g

M M M M MM g

M M M M MA MM MM W

M M

@G MM MM MM MM MM MM W

M M g

M E MM M M g

M M MW g

g

'O MM M M MM MM M M E

O d

MM g%

MM MM MM M M p#

g g

g M M MM M M g

L IW M M M M M M M M W Jb M

M M

M g

g g

E*Q g

9 e

4 82 EO gg gg g gg g Og gOg&e emOOOe em WW '

em 8

e **

2 W

o O

G a

3 O

y u

u o

e.

u o -

u o

o u

o@

O

=

w 4 =

a u us

=

g o

4 W

m 3

Os a

g g

3 W

W

-. m.

a, u

-O uu u

Wuauw u au 4

3 OO2 w3 g

G u

g E

W 3

m uO 3

Cu u A **

g g gg ugg g.

g.

m g g

3 gg, CW

.g g

g

=

gg e3 O

u E

Ou 24 W 2 =

M4*O WJade we o

O ve W

WWJ 30WJ W' W es 2 O 3 4.W 4

W.EWu 4 WJ3

• @w a W4 E

• W W'.E

, j "..

4 4

4 Mu

.-M u-0 4..

.-M.

" 4 838 uJ4 22 WS O 4 4 Q 4 W' W W' 4 32 J 4 W W8 "4 64 8 W

" 4 W 5 W8 W*

I we 3 e d de*

dedw 4p W 4 dm 4 T4y JmW w43 4 W m 4o e 4m Q 4 W' J m g WB u J Wp M E J W9 3 3 p we E @

EdeJu&a te we E J gp = u 3deQgQ g am v3 -y W E W

m 3 4

4 u

W

• 4 W"

"U ss @

p va W

4 SW o

44 4

de "W

g 3

et 3 C-8 O

b cw

8 4

mumme eemme emeem A mmme ommum omeun eseem Se@ Sa NNNNN NNNNN M

u M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

w w

M M

M M

M M

M M

MM MM M

M M

M M

M MM MM mmmmm M

M M

M M

M M M M M esees M

M M

M M

M M M MM

% g % g%

M M

M M

M M

MM MM 0 0e0m M

M M

M M

M M M MM m m m m m M

M M

M M

M M M M M g gg gg M

M M

M M

M MM MM mam me M

M M

M A

M M MMM M

M M

M M

M MM MM M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M g

g% % %

% g% g%

M M

M g

% g% g%

M M

M M

M M

N M

M g

% g% g%

M M

M u

M M

g %g%g M

M M

I I

000 0 000 00e0e 0e00 0 ese esece 0 0 0 00e et ee O

a w

w O

3 u

WO O

O

=

u O

3 O

O a

e uGuO O

O 3

u

=

O

=

u u

Ou r aO u u u

2 y

=

3 y

J Qu Omu e

O 2

m w

O w

OO O

u o M

G WO a

Ou 2

h wocuu 2

v2

=

w u

2 mm u

w3OO w

2 3

Ju

=

u OO J

e'Ju w

we g

wo WO g22 3

w su w E W8 2

EwgG

=

m3OO w

w n

R u wt J

Q 22 e

Zwa wwo wwwE Qwm*Zu w.w2E w32 W

ww3 Z

" W wa Z2Ow ww2=

M mag weduw w e s we we ge geme w

Sw wAwdC M m

w M

• J m u va d we mswJ O gd t w40uG 242w2w w em 3Mu J4 2d we u e 4 300

• • 4 0mudE ge 3wd g

ve d e Jod2

• = 4 E4 md e 4 3 4 =60 d ewed m eg aww E*gw w"

= "e g "e gd y avs3ggg 2 wt = we E 3 ye A. p led We y M O W9 O & 4 e WB o u 4 J g W9 h 2J 4 We g J we Z

W O

3 O

ma e

I w

4 x

ws a

tw b

b W

m C-9 e-,-

,v

-e,,

w p

a 7.

._g

---g y

M M M e

M M M M M M ec

• 2U MM M Em u MMM eO M MM M M M W 2 em M M M g gW M M M MM M MM M M M M MM M M M M M M M M M M M M mmm t3 M M M M M M M M M M M ea w2 M M M M MM M M M M mm M M F M M MMM M M OAO wp M A M M M M M M M M NNW D M M M M M MM M M

&w 3W FM M M MM M M M M ese AE M M M M M M M M M M MM M M M M M M M M M MM M M M M M M M W

M M M M MM M M M M mmmm mm N

N M MM M M M M M M M esce me e

e a

M M M M M M M M M M My M M M MM M M M M M

1. F W W W @

O E3 2 3 MM M M M M M M M M NNNN mw M MM M M M MM M M OM M MM MM MM M M M emme em u

W 7w M MM MM MM M MM M M M M M M M M MM 2

M MM MM MM M M M C

M MM M M MM M M M m

M MM MM MM M MM W

M MM MM MM M M M J

d M M M M M M M M MM l

4 MM M M kM MM M M E ZE MM M M MM MM M M

& e f MM M M MM M a M M OJ3 MM M M M M MM M M g Ed M 4 M M M M M M M M M M M M

M A

W M M M M

M E O*

M M X M

M ww e M M M M

M w e m M M M M

M K e we MM M M

M O J MM M M

M vmm M M M M

M

% g % g E Ep MM M M

M g %% %

MM M M

M M M M M

M M MM M M g g

M M M we MM M M

M M MM M M g gamm M

M M 2

MM M M

M M M M M M g gag s g

M M M Je MM M M

M M MM M M g g% %%

M M M wJ MM M M

M M M M M M g gMMM M

M M

• 1 MM M M

M M MM M M g gM m*

A A M uD MM M M

M M M M M M %

g% %%

M M M e wb M M M M

M M MM M M %

%C@@

K M M

% 2 0 M M M M

M M MM M M g g

K M M M M M M

M M MM M M g M

M M MM M M

M M MM M M M M

M M

M M C

MM M M

M M MM M m M M Mm mM M m M

M M w

w MM M M

M M MM Ma MM M eme M e M

M M I

g.

4 M M M M

M M MM M %

M M M 4 % %

M M

M M g

M M m M

M M N

O M M M M

M M M M M m M M M m w O

J M M M M

M M MM M M M M

M M

M M l

& Zw MM M M

M M M M M %

M M M % %%

M %

M M M f

v6 4 3 M M M M

M M M M M "

M M M "m" M

M M W M

6 sw M M M M

M M M M M M M M

M M

M M M

z O

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M g

M M

M M

e e

• 2 i

E 3 l

e4 OeO O gece cf de f e ff ffff ff fff ffff i

wO ew h 2 w

2 W

J

=

m

=

3 W

W e

O 3

O

=

W 2

3 W

O e

CW w

W 3 3

4 3

w a

3 2

O m we u =

O w

G OW u

u we 4 w

=

OW J

2 COO w

JOO y

u a

06 e

2 UCC w W

w 3

=

ve m u 3

3 w =

e* w u Om E

O gu 2

J Ow y

Om K

= w 4

WE W

X M a ug a

w m ye y

2m 3

2 Kw w"

AwC4 4

wwa

=W wP w

wW 2

• w"8 20 4 JJJ ew d - w' W 4

pp m Q p

2 Jp M w' y p 2W JM geg Up Med eP w p* =O w"m*3 X

04E4 W8 4WE"4 04 I

" Q432J2 gg de 4WM 2 4 6 4 d4 Eh J 4 h 34

= euwO w=4 d ve p Zwme g p g wed Tw 2*g d J"34 e " is W J we Q Jm 4 X P

e wp vg g g ye 4 3E 3 d4 J 4 = WS tan J 2 48 J W8 Q w ie O wt & g M wt4 E E 3 J WS X 2 g we'J g 3 g M Q W

G W

= m 4

3 M S 4

4g A

P JS g

J M

Q s E

wW J

2 p2 m

1 i

I C-10

e a

e g%%%

M MM M MM M MM M M MM M mm emmme MMM MM M M MM M D 4 94 GW W MMM MM M M MM M MMM M M M M MMM e4 GGGG S MMM M M M M M M M N m M M M M M M M MM M M MM M M M M M M M NN mmmmm M MM MM M M MMM MMM M M M M MM M M M M MM M M M MM M M M M M M M M M M M M m m mmmmm MMM M MM

%N M M MM M M M MM M M k MW M M M M M M 5 9 WSSGG M MM MM M

%S M M MM M M M M M M M M M M M M MM MM M M M M MM

1. m MMhMM M M M M M M

%m M M MM M M MMMM NN MMM MM M M M M M M M MMM M M M M M M M MM MM M M M MM M N N mmmmm M MM M M M

%e MM MM M M MMMM M MM M M M MM MM M M M *4 MM M MM M MM 9

g%

ed M

M g%

M g%

g M

M M

4 M

g%

g

%N M

M M

M M

a

% s s

s M

M M M M M MM M MM M M M M% M M g MM M M

MM M

M M M M MM M MM M M M M % MM %

MM M M

M M Mm M M M M MM M MM M M M M% M M g M MM M

M M MG M M M M M M M MM M M M M% MM g MM M M

M M M %

M M M M M M M MM M M M M %M M g MM M M

M M MF M MM M M M M MM M M M M % M M g MM M M

MM MW M M M M MM M MM M M M M%M M %

MM M M

M M M %

M MM M MM M MM M M M M % M M %

Mk M M

M M MN M MM M MM M MM M M M M%Mug MM M M

MM Mm M MM M M M M MM M M M M% MM %

MM M M

MM M

M MM M MM M MM M M M M%M M %

MM M M

MM M

M M M M M M M MM M M M M%MM %

MM M M

M M M"

M MM M MM M MM M M M M %MM %

MM M M

MM M G M

M M M %

M M M M M M M M M M M M M % M M %

M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M % MM %

MM M M

MM M W M MM M M M M MM M M M M%MM %

M M M M

MM M

M M M M MM M MM M M M M % MM %

MM M M

MM M %

M M A M W M M M M M M M M M M M M M %M M %

M M M M M M M M M M MM M M M M %M M %

M M M M

M M M

• M M

M M

M M

M M

M M g%

M m

x g

y m

g g

m g

g g

l l

l I

i

1. ff F ff ffff

1. f effff f q. c

1. f ett ff i

I O

e O

i m

u O

O O

u 2

u uO J

e O

O 3 O

u e O

w e

w O

o =

O Y

2Wu u

OW d.

Ou a

E.

uO -

O O

Ouna v

u w

l a

OOu M

w m

u u u

su o

4 zzz w

a w u

mm

=

g w

E O

w w

34 w we 3

J m34 43 3

g w

4 2

4 ww eESw wwp Z WE G w J d' "WM O w S J "T w* w "we um s*"

WW" MOO W*3

• • 4 O*

wm Moda a

2 op ZwE

>4 ep w

4 Z4 4 E*

O N E We G Id 2 O ges meomwa Eg go w eg ve g e u

• 4 3

m eo M *3 m mP 3 4 mw gh 2 www m*

4 J w

1. 8 e3*O

• mdTe

= cMuwe vo m a vs m 4 e m

WX a se g 3 <e g woo g ve u swOs ace Z=

4 2 4 O

E Ow e

w we W

4 J "3

G m

E m

E E

O t

L C-11

-f

e 4

L" eEU E ** b om se, bEe bbe M

M M

es se se M se se me se M

3E w

eSaM e

S e# e M

M y3

%%% M 3E M

ee==

NNN M 4

NNN N

M s so tw N tw M N

N se N as 3E

% % % 38 M

M g,,

w es se ao M N

we ** ee M

M 4E M

8E M

af M

M

% M t.,

as ** ee.o

% ee ao se es se

% M g

,e

.e,e se me se vt eeee

%e ee&W M

%e eeeee se

%%%g M

% g am w se ao se se

%c se ao se se

% M OOWC E ;3 fte N N N

% N NNNN

% M NNNNN M

e a= aina O DE so *e se se

%N es se se se

% M

%e e e o en c 7 gas M

% M 2e em W9 J

e e.

E 2E 2 4 &

OJ3 es> & vt

=A 6

E O *=

tas 6., 4 d an 8" b 4 wt W J. auf s..

b

=

M M M EE MM M MM M M SE M MM ve M

M M 34 M M M MM M M M M

• • ee *e se em 3E at 3

M M MM MM M 38 M M M M M M SSS&

EE DE 3e M

M M EE DE M M MM DE M M 35

% g % % %

at M

• e me ** ee **

M 3E 84 M M DE M 85 M MM M M st M yg se ab 3E 3E 3E E MM M 34 M M M 38 DE

89 #' 84

at M BE M MM st M M MM M M st M tt M wy M

M MM M3 M M DE M M M M M 35 a3 6b g3g M

35 at M MM M MM M M is mE at M M

M DE M 3E M M MM M mE st M MM M

M M st M M M at M st M at at g %

3E M DE M M 3E 8E MM 38 35 8'

DE b f b P*

gu,e M

MMM M RE DE M DE M as at M SSSSS g g w

g we A

M M st 85 ta M M M M M

85 M as 3

g M

SE 3E M at EE at at M 3E M M gg 64 squ.4 eg.4 g g g

a M

M M st MM M RE M M st 3E M NNNNN g g g 3 ans M

3E MM M SE M M BE DE DE 35 at y,

g gp M

M to M as M 85 EE 8E at M 84 3E

• N ** N $9 g %

ene

• tme M

M EE 94 DE M M DE M M at us

• • ee ** se **

M M

M M

E

• O M

M M

M M

M M

M t

e 4

I e2 EO e em

@@OO

@ et Of@&

& O e et 44444 44 W ta e es

= 3 i

l i

l G*

2 SS 4

O O

O Le J,

E O

OW WQ A

t ned W

W W

4 0

3

[

g we en t=*

O g

u se O

u w

i os, G

s-e wQO W

u OwO w.

W O

w l

em J

2 wJW W

4 3 ene W 4

32WO

.md

==

O laa EO we 2

ens Od en, g

we uO w

J g

3 vs WE 2 led kna 3 ** E W8 andO e tes = 3 2 WW W e,4 we 4 a we 2 g J e.g g O 8

• • • • • 3 4 ** O

1. ' W" " W I4 d E

s= WS X 4" E 5 * * ** 3 I

et E '" E 3

s= 4 2JO E4 w 4 2 4 2 *E eZOa g C4 2 3

ned 8 nea tre 3 4 3EO e "

.Q. =7 4 8" J 3 and as dE m ens g4 I Eu' en ame E"4 es X

" su 8*

W ** w W

g, a E

8" J

d 4 8*

g,g ye C WS Q O 3 W9 M ES W9 8

• e WD E $ $

4 W9 ein O #8 s E W**a we 4 vs =

em WW 4

O

~2 ee 4 m em 3 my q g5 "ne va g d

og a

se d q 3 we 4

O em a= y M

I

1. O 3 C-12 c-

e e

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

M M

=

=

=

=

=

=

M M e

e e

e e

e M M M M W

b e

b 4

P M M N

M M M M e

m e

N N

M M a

a M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M X M M M M M M

\\ %

s M

M M

M M

M M M M M M M M M g g M

M M mM M mm M m M M m M M M M MM gg M

M M GM M e4 M S M M e M M M 4 MM gg M

M M gM M g g M g y M g M M M M M M gg M

M M @M M c Ge M m M M A M M M M M M gg M

M M mM M

m M

m m

M M m M M M M MM g g M

M M gM M g%

M g M M g M M M M M M g g M

M M mM M m m M m M Mm M M M M M M gg M

M M

M M

M M M M M M M MM gg M

M M

M M

M M M M M M M MM gg M

M M

M M

M M M M M M M M M gM M

-M M mM M m W

Mm M M m M M M M M M gm M

M M SM M me M e M X e M M X M M M gm M

M M

M M

M g

M M M

g g g M

g M

M M M g M M

M M mM M

m M.

M Mm M M M M M M m

g M M

M M

M M

M M M M M M M M M g m M

M M gM M g%

M g M M g M M M M M M g m M

M M

M M

a M

m a

M M M M M M M M m

g M M

M M

M M

M M M M M M M M M gM M M M

M" M

M M

M M

M

% M I

4 4

4e 444

>>=

. cese l

I we..

de d3 e

=

22 03 3

u 4 4 WEE

=

O 2

2 W

3 u"A W

Ou 3

0 3

0 2

2 V9 32 2 3

We O

T V

y 3

= u

=

2 2

=

3 3 3 w

O 3

=

we w

w w

O 3

G e

wu-OGO

= "e U "e =4 m

d d

O O

2E w

w O

e 2

e U

O A

c wW 4

32 2

O E

Oe w

w =

2u

=

3 m

X J

s 3223 2.

r w

wh WSS 3

• I X

U2 a

we J we g

=

G w

we we e

a 2

uw wg aw

=

3W E3 4w a

g wwe vo w s awem w=

wZ eW" "W

C E p

2*=

h eW7

• 2*

u m w m ea O=e w=2,

=Em Z mE**

Wee Swe.ws=>

E e ve ve = wo we 2 e w e22 e2*

24 J e"O 2

eu d w eE e we c

e s32Y P

d Dew *="=

da mw p eo y*;

un do d

4*=

We 4*y "4

.*-wS 4 3 w

w awe 2asu3

• de de ve 4 de d e x we g a we e a we u we 3 a ve e e O ve 2 2 re 3 1 & Ws 2 e a w i

=

• 3 0

4 3

wa O E O O

OO z

2 Aq s

J A

We u b U w

yo O

=

W O

=

E 2

y i

l

[-

i C-13

l i

I l

l e

ec e&U E== W e Q t.J

)

InJ B E l

6 es= #

e om I

=

e S.

se ese as I

WI m

m Ps

= * *

• ee os ee i

1 es, s,e i

3 had ns. E se se se e

ee W

g g%

j Y

.n.

u n.

• • O E E N

NM

== w QM

~3 W 2

C t

==

l ae

==

E 2E Ee F Qe3 w&J la.8 E Q **

6 ta* 4 J P a=

a

• we O =6 w em O I

4 X ss=

se

(= u MM M M M M MM M S

eS MM M M MM MM M g

g %

MM M M MM M M M se se **

J e MM M M M M MM M m

e **

l ens.A MM M M M M M M M g

gg

• • 4 Bs M M M h M M M SE se N 84e y#

MM M M MM MM M

,e as Wb MM M M MM MM M E 23 M M M M M M M M M g

g en MM MM MM MM M g

yM M M

=18 M

C g **

%==.e M

1 w

a.#

ge

%e ga

%ae g

M M

=

M M M

I we

[

2 3

% ae

% ** se M M 8'

es O

.e M =

& 2 laJ se M ee

% ** ee M M we En t,,,, ed W l

3s O e

C t~

P L L* t rC

• 2 so **

ee **

E 7

• a=

pp pp ppppp ppp em d

• w w3 i

l O

w u

b

==

A o

em e

a 3 ee x

.6 s=

w*

O W

G Q

g ha O

O u

3 e

a og A

B O

4y e

u 6.e g

e es th 4

e 8

W O

==

e e"

w 3

3 O

P O =3 we OO

==

N g

a es w*

O O

3 8 O 9*

9 U C.s l

O kam 5

w0 C

• =

LO

&Q 3e in E

"'t and we

=* 6.a O d.e.J

.O d.i.4==

=

4 3

tad enA 4 X 3

4 3

=.s

• =,

,=s=

O==

g u 3

n=

s de

EzOg, in e==

J led G Q 4 4

.,A ceeJ we e a we g a u.lede Q 7 #

d WI 88 tad ed O lad O

=ae d

a= d 3 pJ 33 3

we s= g we,. ene 4

2' O =

s ee I

T ed 4 A O4 E ZeWe2a 3 4 4 3 o.3 de W

== 3 vs W 4 de <3

& gre a e ** 3 he== 4 E4e a== 4 e O2 E3 E

44.

O,,4*==*

vs O e,

4 we de g de Z 2 we we q we y 2 we J we y==

we e=

3 8

w se e= u

==

3 e

e a

e 4 e J M g

de 3

3 sm

• • 8 4

- we 5 Q

C-14 9

w

..--n

APPENDIX D NRC/ FEMA MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING JANUARY 11, 1930 h

h t

i t

0-1 Y

JAN 11 ISO MEMORANDUM 0F UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN NRC AND FEMA TO ACCOMPLISH A PROMPT IMPROVEMENT IN RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PLANNING AND PREPAREDNESS I.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE This memorandum of understanding establishes a framework of cooperation between the Federal Emergenc Regulatory Comission (NRC) y Management Agency (FEMA) and the Nuclear in. radiological emergency response planning matters, so that their mutual efforts will be directed toward more effective plans and related preparedness measures at and in the vicinity of nuclear reactors, fuel cycle facilities which are subject to 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix E, and certain other fuel cycle and materials licensees which have potential for significant accider.tal off-site radiological releases. The memorandum is. responsive to the President's decision of De: ember 7,1979, that FEMA will take the lead in off-site planning and response, his request that NRC assist FEMA in carrying out this role and the NRC's continuing statutory responsibility for the radiological health and safety of the public.

Separate memoranda will be negotiated covering NRC/ FEMA cooperation and responsibilities in response to an actual emergency.and Public Information activities.

In addition, an agreement has already been reached between

- the iiRC and FEMA on September 11, 1979, that chairmanship of the Federal Interagency Central Coordinating Committee should be transferred from

- NRC to FEMA. This agreement was transmitted to other Federal agencies by a joint letter from the Chairman of NRC and the Director of FEMA.

The NRC and FEMA also agreed in' principle on September 11, 1979, to the idea of joint participation in.the review, assessment and concurrence with regard to State and local emergency response plans. That agreement will be implemented by FEMA coordinating all Federal planning and.by FEMA's taking.the lead for developing a program for assessing State and-local emergency response plans in all elements of off-site radiological emergency planning, and for making findings and determinations as to the adequacy and capability of implementing State and local plans, and to make those. findings and deteminations available to NRC. The NRC shall review those FEMA findings and determinations for the purpose of making

~ determinations on the overall state of emergency preparedness for issuance of -licenses or shutdown of operating reactors. The NRC proposal to require concurrence in State and local emergency response plans is described in the proposed emergency planning rule

(44 FR-75167, December 19.-1979). This arrangement will make the FEMA

- staff responsible for evaluating'the adequacy of State and local plans and for. assuring that the plans are capable of implementation on a

. co,.cinuing basis,;and will. therefore substantially avoid duplicative efforts by.NRC staff.

p D-3

-'d"e-r-t=:n

-4 4

, e

--w-y e

r 9-t*-

t--

e e-+'T rar

- +

c r---+ewy=

g 4t W

m y e--rryy--m-tearsp w t-e e tw-$r i'r e

ir+ sr 1r -

wegerm 't y -

m--

y a y e -e =

's h et=y--'t&#ewee

_. = _ _.

2 II. AUTHORITIES AND RESP 0NSIBILITIES FEMA - Executive Order 12148 charges the Director, FEMA, with establishing policy for and coordinating all civil emergency) planning and assistance 3

functions for Executive agencies (Section 2-101.

It also provides that "The Director shall represent the President in working with State and local governments and private sector to stimulate vigorous partici-pation in civil emergency preparedness mitigation, response, and recovery programs." (Section 2-104).

On December 7, 1979, the president, in response to the reconinendations

' of the Kemen;, Consnission on the accident at Three Mile Island, directed that FEMA assae lead responsibility for all off-site nuclear emergency planning and response.

Specifically, the FEMA responsibilities with respect to emergency preparedness as they relate to NRC are:

1.

To take the lead in off-site emergency planning and review and 4

assess State and local emergency plans for adequacy.

2.

To complete g June 1980, the review of State and local emergency plans in those States.affected by operating reactors.

3.

To complete, as soon as possible, the review of State and local emergency plans in those States affected by plants scheduled for operation in the near future.

4.

To make findings and determinations as to whether State and local emergency plans are adequate and capable of implementation (e.g.,

adequacy and maintenace of procedures, training,) resources, staffing levels and qualifications and equipment adequacy.

5.

To assume responsibility for emergency preparedness training of State and local officials.

t t

6.

To develop and issue an updated series of interagency assignments I

which would delineate respective agency capabilities and responsi-bilities and define procedures' for coordination and direction for l-emergency planning and response.

j NRC - The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, requires that the NRC grant licenses only if the health and safe'y of the public is adequately i

protected. While the Atomic Energy Act does not specifically require emergency plans and related preparedness measures, the NRC has required consideration c7 overall emergency preparedness as a part of the licensing process.

I 10 CFR 50.34 and Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50 include requirements,for l

. the. licensee emergency plans.

In a-Federal Register Notice dated.

December 24, 1975, entitled " Radiological Incident Emergency Response L

Planning:

Fixed Facilities and Transportation" (40 FR 59494), the j

0-4 8

e-k._

.= - = _ _

3 Federa1' Preparedness Agency, a predecessor of FEMA, outlined responsibilities of various Federal agencies in providing assistance to State and local governments in their radiological emergency response planning.

Both FEMA and NRC recognize that these responsibilities are undergoing reevaluation i

and that this memorandum of understanding will require reissuance of that Federal Register Notice.

Specifically, the NRC responsibilities for emergency preparedness are:

1.

To assess licensee emergency plans for adequacy.

2.

To verify that licensee emergency plans are adequately implemented (e.g., adequacy and maintenance of procedures, training, resources, staffing levels and qualifications and equipment adequacy).

3.

To review the FEMA findings and determinations on the adequacy and capability of implementation of Strte and local plans.

4.

-To make decisions with regard to the overall state of emergency preparedness (i.e., integration of emergency preparedness or. -site as determined by the NRC and off-site as determined by FEMA and reviawed by NRC) and issuance of operating licenses or shut down of operating reactors.

III. AREAS OF COOPERATION A.

NRC Licensing Reviews FEMA will provide support for NRC reactor, fuel facility and material licensing reviews', as requested, with regard to the assessment of the' adequacy of State and local response plans for accidental radiological releases. This will. include timely submittal of a letter evaluation suitable for inclusion in NRC safety evaluation reports.

FEMA will provide NRC with an independent assessment of evacuation times around 12 reactor sites which have the highest population density within the 10 mile emergency planning zone or are mutually agreed upon-by FEMA and NRC. FEMA and NRC agree to discuss future arrange-ments for 'similar assessments to be performed by FEMA at other sites with operating reactors and at plants currently under construction.

Substantially prior to the time that a FEMA evaluation is required with regard to fuel facility and material license review, NRC will supply FEMA with a listing of'all fuel and material licensees, identify those with potential for significant accidental off-site.

radiological releases and for those NRC will submit to FEMA the emergency plans as they are completed.

D-5

.---.en_..w,

- - -e

4 FEMA routine support will include providing assessments of State and local plans related to reactor Construction Perndt and Operating License reviews and continuing assessments of State and local plans during the facility lifetime. To support its findings and assess-ments, FEMA will make expert witnesses available before the Commission, the NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, NRC hearing boards and administrative law judges, any court actions, and during any related discovery proceedings. Nothing in this document shall be construed in any way to diminish NRC's responsibility for protecting the radiological health and safety of the public.

B.

FEMA Review of State and Local Plans NRC will assist in the development and review of State and local plans through its membership on the Regional Advisory Committees.

FEMA will chair the Regional Advisory Committees.

C.

Evaluation of Exercises FEMA and NRC will cooperate in determining exercise requirements for joint licensee, State, local and Federal exercises and will jointly observe and evaluate su..h exercises. NRC and FEMA will also jointly agree upon the set of exercise scenarios from which the scenario for a particular exercise will be selected.

D.

Emeroency Preparedness Guidance NRC has lead responsibility for the development of emergency preparedness guidance for licensees. FEMA has lead responsibility for the development of emergency preparedness guidance for State and local agencies.

NRC and FEMA recognize the need for an integrated assessment of the degree of emergency preparedness by NRC licensees and State and

-local governments.

NRC and FEMA will each, therefore, provide l

opportunity for the other agency to review and comment on emergency preparedness guidance prior to adoption as formal agency guidance.

E.

Trainine of State and Local Officials FEMA will assume lead responsibility for emergency preparedness training of State and local officials. NRC will cooperate in assuring existing NRC sponsored training programs are impacted to the minimum-extent during the period January to June,1980.

I NRC will inform OMB in writing of its intention to pass responsibility to FEMA for its cv rent training program for State and local officials during FY 1980 and will support FEMA.in requesting OMB to transfer the l

training budget to FEMA in years after FY 1980.

l

[

l D-6 L

E e

L r

5 F.

Ongoing NRC Programs Ongoing NRC programs that are related to State and local emergency planning and preparedness that are supported by FY 80 funds, will continue without interruption unless modifications are recommended to the NRC by the FEMA /NRC Steering Comittee.

(See IV.4 below).

G.

Public Information Programs FEMA will take the lead in developing public information programs.

NRC will assist FEMA by reviewing for accuracy educational materials concerning radiation and its hazards and information regarding appropriate actions to be taken by the general public in the event of an accident involving radioactive materials. A separate memorandum of understanding will be negotiated for Public Information activities.

IV.

NEAR-TERM COOPERATIVE MEASURES In order to achieve a prompt improvement in the state of emerpncy preparedness at and around nuclear power facilities, and because of the need for an integrated assessment of the degree of preparedness, FEMA and NRC recognize the need for especially clo.se working relationship over the next six months. To this end, FEMA and NRC agree to the following mode of operation through June of 1980.

1.

NRC staff will proceed with the evaluation team review of emergency preparedness at each power reactor and will publish Safety Evaluations on each plant.

2.

FEMA will provide members to participate with NRC staff on the evaluation teams. The FEMA team members will participate in the preparation of assessments of the off-site plans along with NRC.

Team members will perform according to the procedures described in NRC Steering Committee Memorandum dated November 23, 1979, subject: Guidance on Team Reviews.

3.

FEMA will provide an interim evaluation of the adequacy of State and local preparedness associated with each power reactor suitable l

for attachment to the NRC Safety Evaluation.

FEMA will report to l

NRC-on the schedules of State and local governments to upgrade their plans and will prepare a final evaluation when the upgraded plans are completed.

l 4.

The NRC interoffice Steering Comittee on Emergency Preparedness l

will be-expanded to an NRC/ FEMA Steering Comittee consisting of equal number of members to represent each agency with one vote per agency.

Where the Steering Committee cannot agree on the resolution of an issue, the issue will be referred to NRC and FEMA management. The NRC members will have lead responsibility for licensee preparedness and the FEMA members will have lead responsibility for State and local preparedness. The Steering 0-7 l

6 Cont.ittee will oversee the evaluation team review activities and develop upgraded acceptance criteria for licensee, State and local emergency preparedness.

NRC and FEMA will then consider and adopt criteria, as appropriate, in their respective jurisdictions.

(See Attachment 1).

5.

To permit the orderly transfer from NRC to FEMA of the lead responsibility for evaluating State and local plans and preparedness, the NRC staff who had been performing this function will be assigned through June 1980 to work directly with FEMA. Those incidental activities, such as responding to correspondence that would normally be handled by the NRC's State Programs Emergency Preparedness Staff will continue to be handled by these personnel while assigned to FEMA.

(See Attachment 2).

6.

NRC will ensure continuation of NRC computer and automatic data processing support (including TERA record keeping system support) to the NRC staff personnel detailed to FEMA.

7.

NRC program Support funds speci.fically identified in the FY 80 budget (including supplemental), for the emergency preparedness function of NRC's Office of State Programs, and NRC FY 80 travel funds in the amount of $25,000 will be maintained as is, and continue to be managed by the NRC staff detailed to FEMA, to ensure that ongoing programs affecting State and local government emergency preparedness are not interrupted.

V.

WORKIFG ARRANGEMENTS A.

The normal point of contact for implementation of the points in this agreement will be the NRC/ FEMA Steering Committee.

B.

The Steering Committee will establish the day-to-day procedures for carrying out the arrangements of this memorandum.

1 I

l l

i D-8 s

7 VI. TERM OF AGREEMENT A.

This agreement shall be effective as of January 14, 1980 and shall continue in effect through September,1980, unless terminated by either party upon 120 days' notice in writing.

B.

Amendments or modifications to this Agreement may be made upon written agreement by both parties to the Agreement.

Approved for the U. S. Nuclear Approved for the U. 5. Federal Regulatory Commission Emergency Management Agency

.Byd eO/

By:

C 4e V. Gossick Tank Cam Executive Director Associate Director for Operations for Plans and Preparedness Attachments:

1.

FEMA /NRC Steering Committee 2.

Duties of NRC Personnel Detailed to FEMA through June 1980 i

D-9 v

y ee,ep- - - -

y y-

,e

~--

-e

ATTACHMENT 1 FEMA /NRC STEERING COMMITTEE Purpose Coordinate efforts to promptly upgrade emergency preparedness for nuclear power reactors as described in NRC/SECY-79-450 and the President's statement of December 7,1979. Coordinate consistent criteria for licensee, State and local emergency preparedness.

Membership Co-Chairmen:

Brian Grimes NRC R. Ryan FEMA Members:

5. Wengrovitz FEMA J. Thomas FEMA H. Collins FEMA (detailed from NRC)

J. Sniezek IE/NRC J. Miller NRR/NRC K. Perkins OED0/NRC Duration The Steering Committee will provide coordination for these activities until the initial evaluation team reviews are complete (about June 1980).

Coordination When items involving responsibilities of other NRC or FEMA offices are discussed, the affected office will be contacted as appropriate.

l l

l a

l D-10 l

l

ATTACHMENT 2 DUTIES OF NRC PERSONNEL DETAILED TO FEMA THROUGH JUNE 1980 I.

List of NRC Personnel Assioned to FEMA throuch June 1980 R. Ryan H. Collins S. Schwartz R. Defayette H. Gaut R. Jaske M. Sanders S. Salomon R. Clevenger K. Green R. Van Niel S. Welch (administrative)

P. Weldon (clerical)

II. Description of Duties While Reassioned to FEMA A.

Participate in preparing an interim evaluation of the adequacy of State and locci preparedness associated with each power reactor suitable for attachment to the NRC evaluation team Safety Evaluation. This will include determination on the adequacy of State and local schedules to upgrade State and local plans and in preparing final evaluations on completion of the upgraded energency planning elements.

B.

Participate with FEMA members and with other NRC staff on the evaluation teams so that the assessment will proceed on a coordinated basis and, along with FEMA personnel, to f;1 fill the roles formerly defined for the evaluation team members from the NRC Office of State Programs.

C.

Review and assess State and local plans. This will assure consistency between evaluation team reviews and Regional Advisory Committee efforts.

D.

Participate as assigned with other FEMA representatives on the NRC/ FEMA Steering Committee. The Steering Committee will coordinate the evaluation team review activities and other NRC/ FEMA activities and develop upgradet' acceptance criteria for licensee, State and local. emergency preparedness

.to be published for comment.

E.

Participate in developing a FEMA emergency preparedness training

_ program for State and local officials and administering the current NRC programs in.this area.

D-11 9

L.1

2 F.

Perform other related duties as assigned by FEMA.

G.

Continue to monitor ongoing FY 80 NRC funded programs related to State and local government emergency planning and preparedness.

III. Duty Station W5ile Reassigned FEMA Offices in the GSA 8uilding at 18th and F Streets, N.W.,

Washington, D. C.

20472 IV.

Provisions Regarding Detail An employee detailed to the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will be returned to his/her permanent position when the detail is terminated unless the permanent position is impacted by a reorganization or restructure of functions.

Should a reorganization or restructure occur, the individual will be returned to a position of the same grade and in an occupational series for which he/she is qualified. A letter stating this will be sent to each individual detailed.

An employee detailed to FEMA in excess of 30 calendar days will receive an NRC Form 181 which will document the detail. A short description of the duties to which he/she is assigned should be entered on, or appended to, the NRC Form 181 to assure proper evaluation of the employee's work performance when detailed to FEMA. Such documentation will be filed in the employee's Official Personnel Folder (OPF).

At the conclusion of an employee's detail, and provided that the length of the detail is more than four months, an appropriate FEMA or NRC management official will prepare a Personnel Performance Appraisal (NRC Form 625A).

The appraiser will evaluate the employee's performance at FEMA and this evaluation will be considered by the employee's permanent supervisor when that supervisor prepares.the annual performance appraisal.

l D-12 F

e

APPENDIX E NRC/ FEMA MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING NOVEMBER 4, 1980 E-1

.s.

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN NRC AND FEMA RELATING TO RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PLANNING AND PREPAREDNESS I.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE This Memorandum of Understanding establishes a framework of cooperation between the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in radiological emergency response planning matters, so that their mutual efforts will be directed toward more effective plans and related preparedness measures at and in the vicinity of nuclear reactors, fuel cycle facilities which are subject to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, and certain other fuel cycle and materials licensees which have potential for significant accidental offsite radiological releases. The memorandum is responsive to the President's decision of December 7,1979, that FEMA will take the lead in offsite planning and response, his request that NRC assist FEMA in carrying out this role, and the NRC's continuing statutory responsibility for the radiological health and safety of the public.

A separate memorartum has been negotiated to cover NRC/ FEMA cooperation and responsibilities in response to an actual emergency including public information activities.

In addition, an agreement was also reached between the NRC and FEMA on September 11, 1979, that chaimanship of the Federal Interagency Central Coordinatir; Committee (now the Federal Radiological Preparedness Coordinating Comittee) should be transferred from NRC to FEMA. This agreement was trans-mitted to other Federal agencies by a joint letter from the Chairman of the NRC and the Director of FEMA. The NRC and FEMA also agreed in principle on September 11, 1979, to the idea ei joint participation fn the review, assessment and concurrence with regard to State and local emergency response plans. On January 14, 1980, the two agencies entered into a " Memorandum of Understanding Between NRC and FEMA to Accomplish a Prompt Improvement In Radiological Emergency Preparedness" that was responsive to the President's December 7, 1979 statement and was a framework for implementing the September 11, 1979 agreement. According to that memorandum of understanding, FEMA coordinates all Federal planning and takes the lead for developing a program for assessing State and local emergenc.y response plans in all elements of offsite radiological emergency planning, and for making findings and determinations as to the adequacy and capability of implementing State and local plans, and to make those findings and determinations available to NRC. The NRC reviews those FEMA findings and determinations for the purpose of making determinations on the overall state of emergency prepared-ness for issuance of licenses or shutdown of operating reactors. That arrangement l

makes the FEMA staff responsible for evaluating the adequacy of State and local plans and for assuring that the plans are capable of implementation on a continu-ing basis, and therefore substantially avoids duplicative efforts by NRC staff.

This memorandum of understanding builds upon the relationship that has been l

l developing between the two agencies and supersedes the January 14, 1980 memorandum.

II. AUTHORITIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES l

FEMA - Executive Order 12148 charges the Director, FEMA, with establishing policy for and coordinating all civil emergency planning and assistance functions for Executive agencies (Sectica 2-101).

It also provides that "The Director j

shall represent the President in working with State and local governments and l

private sector to stimulate vigorous participation in civil emergency prepared-ness mitigation, response, and recovery programs." (Section 2-104).

E-3 i

- On December 7,1979, the President, in response to the recomendations of the Kemeny Comission on the accident at Three Mile Island, directed that FEPA assume lead responsibility for all offsite nuclear emergency planning and response.

Specifically, the FEPA responsibilities with respect to emergency preparedness as they relate to NRC are:

1.

To take the lead in offsite emergency planning and review and assess State and local emergency plans for adequacy.

2.

To review State and local emergency plans in those States affected by operating reactors (report submitted to the president in June 1980).

3.

To complete, as soon as possible, the review of State and local emergency plans in those States affected by plants scheduled for operation in the near future.

4.

To make findings and determinations as to whether State and local emergency plans are adequate and capable of implementation (e.g.,

adequacy and maintenance of procedures, training, resources, staffing levels and qualifications and equipment adequacy). Notwithstanding the procedures which may be set forth in 44 CFR 350 for requesting and reaching a FEMA administrative approval of State and local plans, findings and determinations on the current status of emergency preparedness around particular sites may be requested by the NRC through the NRC/ FEMA Steering Committee and provided by FEMA for use as needed in the NRC licensing process. These findings and determina-tions may be based upon plans currently available to FEMA or furnished to FEMA by the NRC.

5.

To assume responsibility for emergency preparedness training of State and local officials.

6.

To develop and issue an updated series of interagency assignments which wcuid delineate respective agency capabilities and responsibili-ties and define procedures for coordination and direction for emergency planning and response.

NRC - The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, requires that the NRC grant licenses only if the health and safety of the public is adequately pro-

-tected. While the Atomic Energy Act does not specifically require emergency plans and related preparedness measures, the NRC had required consideration of overall emergency preparedness as a part of the licensing process.

10 CFR 50.33, 50.34, 50.47, 50.54, and Appendix E to_10 CFR Part 50 include requirements for the licensee emergency plans.

In a Federal Register Notice dated December 24, 1975, entitled " Radiological Incident Emergency Response Planning:

Fixed Facilities and Transportation" (40 FR 59494), the

-Federal Preparedness Agency, a predecessor of FEMA, outlined responsibilities of various Federal agencies in providing assistance to State and local govern-ments in their radiological emergency response planning. Both FEMA and NRC recognize that these responsibilities have been reevaluated and this will -be reflected in the reissuance of that Federal Register Notice.

E-4 L

Specifically, the NRC responsibilities for emergency preparedness are:

1.

To assess licensee emergency plans for adequacy.

2.

To verify that licensee emergency plans are adequately implemented (e.g., adequacy and maintenance of procedures, training, resources, staffing levels and qualifications and equipment adequacy).

3.

To review the FEMA findings and determinations on the adequacy and capability of implementation of State and local plans.

4.

To make decisions with regard to the overall state of emergency preparedness (i.e., integration of emergency preparedness onsite as determined by the NRC and offsite as determined by FEMA and reviewed by NRC) and issuance of operating licenses or shut down of operating reactors.

III. AREAS OF COOPERATION A.

NRC Licensing Reviews FEMA will provide support for NRC reactor, fuel facility and material licensing reviews, as requested, with regard to the assessment of the adequacy of State and local response plans for accidental radiological rel eases. This will include timely submittal of an evaluation suitable for inclusion in NRC s 'ety evaluation reports.

Substantially prior to 1 time that a FEMA evaluation is required with regard to fuel faci i and material license review, NRC will identify those fuel and i rial licensees with potential for signifi-cant accidental offsite ra.

logical releases and for those NRC will submit to FEMA the emergenc, 'lans as they are completed.

FEMA routine support will inci e providing assessments of State and local plans related to reactor t nstruction Permit and Operating License reviews and continuing assessment of State and local plans during the facility lifetime. To support 'ts findings and determinations, FEM?. will make expert witnesses ave 'able before the Commission, the fGC Advisory Committee on Reactor S.

quards, NRC hearing boards and administrative law judges, any court.tions, and during any related discovery proceedings. Nothing in this oveument shall be construed in any way to diminish NRC's responsibility for protecting the radiological l

health and safety of the public.

.B.

FEMA Review of State and Local Plans NRC will assist in the development and review of State and local

. plans through its membership on the Regional' Assistance Committees.

FEMA will chair the Regional Assistance Committees. Consistent with NRC's statutory responsibility, NRC will recognize FEMA as the interface with State and local governments for interpreting radiolog-ical energency preparedness criteria as it affects those governments and for reporting the results of any evaluation of State and local governments' emergency preparedness to those governments.

E-5 z

Where questions arise concerning the interpretation of the criteria, such questions will continue to be referred to FEMA head-quarte:3, and when appropriate to the NRC/ FEMA Steering Comittee to assure uniform interpretation.

C.

Evaluation of Exercises FEMA and NRC will cooperate in determining exercise requirements for joint licensee, State, local and Federal agencies and will jointly observe and evaluate such exercises.

EC and FEMA will also jointly agree upon a set of exercise scenarios from which the scenario for a particular exercise may be selected.

D.

Emergency Preparedness Guidance NRC has lead responsibility for the development of emergency prepared-ness guidance for licensees. FEMA has lead responsibility for the development of emergency preparedness guidance for State and local agencies.

NRC and FEMA recognize the need for an integrated assessment of the degree of emergency preparedness by NRC licensees and State and local governments.

MC and FEMA will each, therefore, provide opportunity for the other agency to review and coment on emergency preparedness guidance prior to adoption as formal agency guidance.

E.

Support for Automated Information Retrieval Systems FEMA and NRC will each provide the other witn continued access to those automatic data processing support systems which contain emergency preparedness data developed and/or utilized during the transition period.

At NRC this includes Automated Information Retrieval System (AIReS) support to the extent that it does not affect duplication or records retention. At FEMA this includes technical support to the Radiological Emergency Preparedness Management Information System. This agreement is not intended to include the autcmated infomation retrieval support for the national level emergency response facilities.

F.

Ongoing NRC Programs l

Ongoing NRC and FEMA research and development programs that are related to State and -local emergency planning and preparedness will be coordinated.

l G.

Public Information Programs FEMA will take the lead in developing public information programs.

NRC will assist FEMA by reviewing for accuracy educational materials concerning radiation and its hazards and -information regarding i

appropriate actions to be taken by the general public in the event I

of an accident involving radioactive materials. Public information activities will be addressed in the MOU dealing with response to actual emergencies.

l E-6

O

. IV. NEAR-TERM COOPERATIVE MEASURES In order to achieve a prompt improvement in the state of emergency prepared-ness at and around nuclear power facilities, and because of the need for an inte-grated assessment of the degree of preparedness, FEMA and NRC recognize the need for an especially close working relationship.

The NRC/ FEMA Steering Comittee on Emergency Preparedness will be the focal point ter coordination of emergency preparedness and response activities between the two agencies. The Steering Comittee will consist of an equal number of members to represent each agency with one vote per agency. Where the Steering Comittee cannot agree on the resolution of an issue, the issue will be referred to NRC and FEMA management. The NRC members will have lead responsibility for licensee preparedness and the FEMA members will have lead responsibility for State and local preparedness. The Steering Comittee will coordinatt the preparedness evaluation activities and develop upgraded acceptance criteria for licensee, State, and local emergency preparedness. NRC and FEMA will thei consider and adopt criteria, as appropriate, in their respective jurisdictior.s.

(See Attach-ment 1.)

V.

WRKING ARRANGEMENTS A.

The normal point of contact for implementation of the points in this Memorandum will be the NRC/ FEMA Steering Comittee.

B.

The Steering Committee will establish the day-to-day procedures for assuring that the arrangements of this Memorandum are carried out.

VI. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING A.

This Memorandum of Understanding shall be effective as of November 1, 1980, and shall continue in effect unless terminated by either party upon 30 days' notice in writing.

l B.

Amer.Jments or modifications to this Memorandum of Understanding may be made upon written agreement by both parties to the Memorandum.

Approved for the U.S. Nuclear Approved for the U.S. Federal l

Regulatory Commission Emergency Management Agency h%

h3. I106

?

&.86 A.

Alliam J. Dircks (date)

Frank A. Cam (date)

Executive Director for Operations Associate Director for Plans l-and Preparedness

Attachment:

FEMA /NRC Steering Comittee E-7

ATTACHMENT 1 FEMA /NRC STEERING COMMITTEE Purpose Coordinate efforts to promptly upgrade emergency preparedness for nuclear power reactors as described in the NRC and FEMA rules and the NRC/ FEMA MOU's on Planning and on Response. Coordinate consistent criteria for licensee, State, and local emergency preparedness.

Membership Co-Chairmen:

B. Grimes EC J. McConnell (John Dickey)

FEMA Members:

R. Jaske FEMA M. Sanders FEMA H. Gaut FEMA L. Higginbotham NRC K. Perkins EC F. Pagano NRC Membership Changes l

Changes to the membership of the NRC/ FEMA Steering Comittee may be made by the co-chairman representing the agency whose member is being changed.

Opercting Procedures The Steering Coranittee will maintain a record of each meeting to include i

identification o." issues discussed and conclusions reached. No meeting will be held without the attendance and participation of at least the co-chairman or two assigned members of each agency.

Coordination l

When items involving responsibilities of other NRC or FEPA offices are discussed, the affected office will be contacted as appropriate.

E-8 i

j

" # # D 0#

hR ao m 335 u.s NUCLE AR CEGUL ATCTaY COMMISSION NUREG-0755 BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET 4 11TLE AND SU8T 6TLE (A0J Vooume No, el appecprestel 2 (Leave Dichl Report to Congress on Status of RECIPIENT'S ACCESS 10N NO-Emergency Response Planning

7. AUTHoRG)

5. D ATE REPORT COMPLE TED MONTH l YEAR December 1980

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND M AILING ADDRESS (Incluoe 2,p Cooef DATE REPORT ISSUED I'1980 Division of Emergency Preparedness December Office of Inspection and Enforcement 6 ' *' * *" * #

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

20555 7 7t,,,,,,,,

12. 90NSORING ORGANIZATION N AME AND M AILING ADDRESS / tac'uor I,a Cooel p

II. CONTR ACT NO.

PE R800 COVE RE D I/nclus,ve darest 13 TYPE OF REPORT a

14 'Leme ##* /

15 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES N6. A8STR sCT 000 woras or lesse This report responds to a request (Public Law 96-295, Section 109) for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to report to Congress on the status of emergency response planning in support of nuclear power reactors. The report includes information on the status of this planning as well as on the oommission actions relating to emergency preparedness. These actions include a summary of the new regulatory requirements and the preliminary results of two comprehensive Evacuation Time Estimate studies; one requested by the NRC including 50 nuclear power plant sites and one conducted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for 12 high population density sites.

FEMA provided the information in this report on the status of State and local planning, including projected schedules for joint. State / county / licensee emergency preparedness exercises.

Included as Appendicies are the NRC Emergency Planning Final Regulations, 10 CFR Part 50 (45 FR 55402), the FEMA Proposed Rule, " Review and Approval of State and Local Radiological Emergency Plans and Preparedness", 44 CFR Part 350 (45 FR 42341) and the NRC/ FEMA Memorandums of Understanding.

17. KE Y WORDS AND DOCUMENT AN ALYS1$

17a OESCRIPTORS 173 IDENTIFIE RS.OPEN ENDE D TERMS 19 SE CURiTV CLASS iTn.s coorrt 21 *.O GF P AP,E S 18 AV All A8tLITY STATEMENT Unclassified Unlimited Availability 20S g g sg ious N,mCE P

uac seau ass i7 ni a

w4w=4y r