ML19345H192

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Unofficial Transcript of 810422 Meeting in Washington,Dc Re Briefing by IE on Status of Emergency Preparedness in Ny State.Pp 1-30
ML19345H192
Person / Time
Issue date: 04/22/1981
From:
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
References
REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8105010193
Download: ML19345H192 (36)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:- [' 5 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSICN g e-p@g-/a o s COMMISSION MEE'"ING. 2 I 51 0 b,\\ h 9 /y,.,c(\\' I In the Ma h of: BRIEFING BY IE ON S"'ATUS OF DTRGDICY PREPAREDNESS IN NEW YORK STATE I ~ f DATE: April 22, 1981' PAGZS: 1 - 30 ( AT: Washington,-D. C. l 1 1 l C 400 Vi_ginia Ave., S.*#. ~4ashispen, D. C. 20024 Talaphc=e : (202) 554-2345 Q 8105010\\93

s =**~ -n 1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION {, 3 4 BRIEFING BY IE ON STATUS OF EMERGENCY 5 PREPAREDNESS IN NEW YOR U TA*E 6 ~~ L. .. ~ 7 Room 1130, 8 1717 H Street, N.W. Washington, D. C. 9 Wednesday, April 22, 1981 10 11 The Commission met at 11:10 p.m., pursuant to 19 n c + 4 re., Joseph Hendrie, Chairman of the -Gemaiss-lon, l 13 presiding. .(' 14 Commissioners present: Chairman Jooegh Hendrie, l - 15 Commissioner John Ahearne, Commissioner Vic+ e c i l i n etr y and 16 Commissioner Peter Bradford. 17 Present for the NRC Staff / OPE 4 18 D. Rathburn 19 Present for the NRC Secretary's Office: l 20 S. Chilk 21 Present for the NRC Office of General Counsel: { 22 L. BICKWIT, Esq. 23 Present for the Office of Inscection and Enforcement: i l f 24 Y. Stello B. Grines 25 At.DERSON REPORT!NG COMPANY. I,NC._,,, 00 VIRGINIA AVE S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345 4

9 s ,DISCLCf!1 O ni,i = o=.- d-, Stacas Ene? mar ZaGu.Lacarr Commission held os===a==1p= of

an

82 *a. e=t.ad. or - 4* F8 1s. che Cammission's. officae at 1717 E Sc=mac, 3. W., Wash 1sg:na,. _ _ _. . D. C. h anec1=g was apen en public at==d-e= and obserratica. - 2 . Dia. &~7c has =mc beaur raviserad, cerrac=ad, or ud-% ami is any contain d'=e-^=. h - -er-7e tz 4*=da sola17 far ganaraL 1misz=m & -? 1 purposes. As providad, h710 CII 9.103, is is not part of e J formsL or infz=ma.L record of A d =M of -J.a mat:ars discussed. Izpressians of opf=1an is, this =ans@c da sac sacassarily _ reflac: ** M decazzinazicas or baliafs. No pt -=dd*! or acher paper may be. filad. 31=h. che Commi.sstan is any precand1=g as -J.a. resul= of or add =assed, em any sta amane or a..a; :=n*->d-a_ hara1s, azcape as che. Camusissian say an=hed.a. ~ ~ ~ ~ I e

( '-

w e o e e

  • M e i e

w usesen-w.se me*-

  • =--- *- * * " -
  • l____.____

. -.... - -= = *

  • h

2 1 E E 2 C I E D. I. E E E 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs The Commission is meeting this -p 3 morning for a briefing by the Inspectio'n and Enforcement 2. 2: :: _ -- _3 e..: ; :: -, Office on the status of energency prepdfidh'ess;;ep En I-dyLWoF4~ 1-4 =- = i.

.: :i: :u

~ e:. ~.J. A :se.- 7 ._s ::c - - :2 =: : s._--.5_-_s_ ta t e. ~-

==: _: -:: :e: 2. 6 Commissioner Bradford will jctin-3s $Utr-gg),1yx,-.:, ;, 7 Fcr those who are interested in sehpd.u.1.ing a - --., - --f matters,1 vill gavel this meeting down_mrpcIs,ely, at 12- ~ - - - - - - - - -

^

ac:=. 2 -:::;r: 1.: =:: :.

    • '*M~~*
  • A ;** ;

=

- : a: ::.: -- 9 noon.

12 s r :==

s:::--- - :.:-
a----
r : :::

rud- -- :: 10.; _ Mr. Stello is here, and Kevis:TRneT1J t i-

  • a 7:r% : :- :: :. ::1 J.s.

f 2;=c: 11 Vic, go ahead.

~- ':::: : u 22 :.

12 MR. STELL0s As we indicated at our last meeting, 13 when we discussed Indian Point., that we wanted to meet with (# 14 all of the parties to understand what the issues were. The 15 parties being the various licensees within the State of New 16 York, and various officials from the State of New York who 17 have responsibility for emergency planning, the various 18 local officials, principally and chiefly the County 19 Executives in the counties affected, the officials from FEMA 20 and, of course, ourselves. 1 i 21 We had that meeting on April 15th. It was a very 22 large meeting. I guess probably on the order of 100 23 people. There were members from the legislature of the (. 24 State of New York present. 25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE4 Were there any significan t v ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, l 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345

I l r 3 O -y 1 absencies of people sho should have been there? ~~~ ~ ~ 2-MR. STELLO: No, everyone, as I-recall was ~ (T} ' 3 represen ted. For the counties, I think in most-cases the : ~2+'i -4' County Executives themselves showed up. The: utilities all-5 had one of their principal officials at the:Vice president & level attending the meeting. The Director of FEMA attended - -' ~ ~ ~ ~~ 7 the meeting as well, and the principals from the New York-

' ~-

' ' ~~ - 8 Sta te organizations were there. 9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Did this cover emergency 10 planning throughout the state? ~- ~~ 11 MR. STELLO: Throughott the state. It covered the - ~ 12 issues within the surrounding sites for all of the operatingi-13 ~ plants, and also included Long Island Lighting, who - ( 14~ obviously doesn't have the same time schedule-in terms'of - ~ 15~ get ting the problem resolved, but they were: represented as'- 16 well. 17 COMMISSIGNER GILINSKY Who ran~the meeting? 7 18 MR. STELLO: Mr. David-Dorf. 19 MR. GBIMES: David-Off of the State of New York. 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You will recall that he was 21 here when we met with a number of State emergency planning 22 officials. 23 MR. STELLO: What I will do at this point is to ks 24 ask Brian to summarize the status as we see it. I think if 25 I can identify what I think is the biggest hurdle to ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 63 VlfPRNia AML @3.W W@ HIST @N @.@. 8M84 g8B _554_2345 y g

4 O) 1 overcome, it is the need, as perceived by all-pkrties, for: 5

2 legislation to resolve the several issues. at Barnwell

-(TT ~ 3-specifically. -. -.__.4. - : Brian, why don't you start with.-.;.. 7-. y.. 5_. COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: State legislation?. HR. STELL0s Yes. 6-J. MR. GRIMES: The first area of concern _ expressed,_,, 8 by the State and the counties was some conf usion in the-. _ _ - - : existing State law over who evaluates the-need to take-10 protective actions among the-outside authorities,- and-11 -determines whether protective action, such as sheltering or -12 : evacuation, should be taken. 13 The state believes that legislation is needed, and - 14: has introduced legislation in the current. session to give -the S tate clear authority to evaluate and decid.e-on the-need 16 for protective actions. 17 The second aspect, not apparently covered by the 18 currently introduced legislation, is a concern by the 19 counties that the County Executive should have more 20 operational authority over local ~ response agencies. We l 21 pointed out that in some other jurisdictions this is done by i 22 agreement of all parties to the plan, but they felt that it 23 would be clearer and it would also give them authority over I 24 other emergency areas if they nad legislation to that 25 effect. ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, .._. _ _ 00 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 4

5 - h) 1' This was taken under consideration -br :the State. - -

~. :

2-On both of these issues there will be committees. formed to ('. ; 3 resolve the various problems. One of those vill:be a. ~ - - 4 committee on legislation, which will have-representatives of. - 5 the counties, the State and the utilities, which will :vorX ::_ 6 with the legislature to try to expedite tha t legislation. : ~ -. ~~ - 7:: ~ - The third area where the State and counties 7 -8 believe legislation is required is on the: resource : : - _- 1" ~ 9 question. How resources will Se made available -.on a 10' con tinuing basis. -- ~ The St' ate and the counties were of -somewhat 12 ' different opinions as to where the. money should.go under the 13-law, but that will need to be worked out also. 22' 14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: In this-legislation, are _ 15 they -talking still on State, or are they talking about - 16 national? 17 MR. GRIMES: State legislation which would,'in 18 9ffect, tax the utilities to provide resources. The State 19 would like that to be controlled by the State, and the 20 counties would like that to come directly to the counties. 21 COMMISSIONE3 AHEARNF4 Were they saying that they 22 need a law to require it, or they would need a law to permit 23 it? k _, 24 YR. GRIMES: To require it. l 25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: But at the moment, the l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W WA5HINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345

6

nk )
--

1 IState Public Service Commission could permit it; is that-2:' correct? l :(]) 3 MR. GRIMES: At the moment, there: have been- ~ " ~ ~ 4' ' voluntary contributions by all of the uti-lities to-the State: ; ~ 1 - 5 -to hire consultants to develop plans. .+ :: -. 1-6- So there is a mechanism to get 'the-resources:- p- - t here, but they bell' eve that on a continuing basis, to ~ ~ ' 8 finally resolve the resource question, ther: find" legislation:- ll~- 9 highly desinnble. 10 MR. STELlos These resources that:we are talking:. ~- 11 'about, I am not certain of all the numbers, but I tho6ght l 12 :that the two utilities at the Indian Point site, it was-some l 13 $7 million that the utilities had provided for emergency (} -14 pla~nning, and at Nine Mile Point it was on the order of '53: ~ ~ 15' million. = 16 There are sizable suas that the utilities have 17 already provided, and pretty much on a voluntary basis. ~ l 18 MR. GRIMES: Those are start up costs, and the 19 legislation would address the continuing costs. 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: You are saying that the 21 bullet is only one on which legislation has already been 22 introduced? 23 MR. GRIMES: There is legislation on the general () 24 area on both who determines the protective actions, and the 25 resource question. It is not evident that there was (, ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC. I nrq ggggg33 qgsg @c-R _ _._

l 7 ..(k:-_ 1 included in'the legislation something to solve-the_cqunties' 2 operational authority and problems. -( ) -- -3 All of these first three items, we accept the. -- L- - 4: -Sta te 's and counties ' concerns. We think that;if - - - 5 legislation were not passed that there might-be_ ways;to._.;- l 6 reach the state of emergency preparadness, but they are very-. _ - 7 interested in achieving this legislation in -a =short. period ;___ 8.of. time, and believe they can do so. 3-9 They believe in the next couple. months that the.,- -10 legislation is likely to act on this. 11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Is the first bullet _ ag reed - - - 12.to? __. _ You say that the legislation will give_the State , the authority, do the counties agree with_that approach? 15 MR. GRIMES: The counties don't:have_a. problem, I 16 believe, with the State evaluating the need for action. 17 Their concern was with the operational authority to-control l l 18 local response resources in the event of an emergency. l 19 There was some discussion of that,.and I am sure. 20 that will be further discussed in the committees they are 21 forming, but I did not peyceive a fundamental difference ZZ there. 23 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Is it unlikely that some ( 24 agreement would be reached in the absence of State laws? 25 MR. GRIMES: The State and the counties seem to ALDERSON REPORTING COMDANY,INC, di3 MTiNYfD3 Ni L fiWe WGHIMBT@N, D.C. 20024 (2023 554 2345

8 -(: - - 1: :believe that that is the most expeditious way: to do it, and. - : _. 2 that there are contradictions in current Staterlaw that maker - ~ . (? - 3 -for at 1 east theoretical problems that they would like_ to - f 4 get resolved immediately. 1-5 MR. STELLO: I don't think that they_need to have - - - 6 :the legislation. I think at least one or two-c f the County- -i.- - 7 Executiv;s indicated that they already had reached-agreement _ e t the urban ~ounties, like +__4' 8 and understanding with some of c 9 Oswego County around Nine Mile Point. 10 They think they have the problem solved,-and ther_. _ 11-think-that whether they have legislation or not, ther- ~-- l 12 certainly could make it work. l l 13 In the counties where they don't' have it solved,. I L - (_/ 14-don't see any reason why they couldn't effect-an agreement. 15 For example, if it is the 50-60 State police department, or.. 16 police departments, municipalities, or whatever, ther.could-l 17 effect an agreement that if there is an emergency, the - 18 direction for what needs to be done would be provided by 19 ' form of government it is, county, or whatever. 20 So the problem can be solved, certainly with 21 legislation, but I think it can be solved without 22 legislation. 23 MR. GRIMES: We should note that Mr. Del Bello (, 24 specifically stated that it would be much more difficult for 25 in his case to achieve that agreemen t without the (. ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC. NiLMT;T4my.\\/yi1JWl] 68 giffpMMM_

9 . 0._ - 1. legislation. He didn't say that it could not.be done, but.- s 2~. he indicated a strong preference f or having -the r - (( - -

3. legisla tion.

4 MR. STELLO: Again, that is quite : logical becaure e._: .2 - 5 that is a rounty with the largest population, and the -T. - largest number of municipalities, and different. police _-- =- -- ~ 7: departments, fire departments, and school systems, which _:t EL.would have to be brought together a blanketsof an. -.; :. : 9 agreement. But I don't see any reason why it.can'tEbe-

10. :done.

11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNEa It would be-a lot easier.if-12 there is legislation. - 13. MR. STELLO: If there is legislation, then it is. - (' 14:-done with the stroke of a pen. .15-MR. GRIMES: The other item on the.page-of. 16: significant deficiencies is that FEMA has_ identified 17-deficiencies. Here is a letter of April 2nd summarizing 18 those deficiencies, and then the regional office sent to the 19 State on April 6 a letter detailing those deficiencies. 20 In summsry, they are: conflicts in the 21 organizational relationship and assignment responsibility 22 which the legislation is designed to help; a lack of 23 specificity in several areas; and some portions of the plan ( 24 were yet to be developed, some subportions of the. plan. 25 I think we should also say that I got a general ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC. NiLtilT1FID NTL ELCmDCCDEBTsN, D.@. SHE4 (202D 554 2345

10 At il - ~ 1~ sense that the plan deficiencies were resolvable _and : ~ 2 fixable, and that FEHA is committed to work -with :the - State r - () 3 and coun ties. There vill be a working group-for_each site '4 put-together to make sure that things are worked out. ~~ 5-I got a general sense that there is.nothing-in the. 6 ~ FEMA comments that could not be resolved.: u-- iI ::~'-- 7-MR. STELLO: Before you go on to the -current ..:-.+ -i' 8 status. = 9 There is at least a couple of points-I-think tha t : 10 ought to be made, I will make then personal. observations for 11-at-least the moment. ~'-~ r l 12 The state of preparedness around the : Indian Point _ _ 13 site, I think there was general complete tyr.eement that it~~_. 14 is significantly better now than it had been in the past, -- 15 bout the issues that came to pass, and the items that vere. _. 16 being requested by some of the county officials.in what.ther. - 17 vere dealing with is a very f undamental basis.of _ l 18 preparedness. 19 I had at least a simplistic view of our problem i 20 with nuclear plants was going to be an add-on, and what we 21 had was a level of preparedness, and then we were going to 22 add on. 23 CHAIRMAN HEN 7RIE: In general, earthquake, fire, (., 24 flood, or what-have-you. 25 MR. STELLO: Based on what I saw on the state of ~ ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, S VQi@ AQ S.W., WASHINGTON. O.C.,20024 (202) 554-2345_.

11 O ~ ^:t 7-2 1 preparedness in New York, what we were having.to face is. :_ - that first and fundamental level of preparedness,-and-it , - (a;, - - - 3: 'just -isn 't there. So now, when we try to add on this: 2 4 increment, it is obviously a much greater-increment-that-ve-- ~; '~- ~~ ' ~':7 ~ ' ~ 5 :are adding on, and it makes the job a great deal more~. - -

+

f-6 difficult.

7. '

--- = - t): ~ ; 74 - CORNISSIONER AHEARNEs In many cases, what we,are"__. 8 doing is forcing counties or locales, who: had:never really 9 ' developed a coordinated emergency plan, to develop an' -:- _ 10 -emergency plan. 11 MR. STE110: Yes. L: 12-Again, I certainly want to note.that the progress. E (., - ~ 13~ is significant that has been made, but the level fron.which l 14 :ve began was much, much lower than I thought:it should, have ~ 15 ' been. ~ ~ 16 What the utilities are being f aced-with, and what 17 they are being asked for, at least in a sense-of fairness I 18 would like to note, is to provide a state of preparedness 19 that has to deal with issues that are not particular to the 20 issues raised because of the existence of the nuclear plant, 21 but for the very fundamental state of preparedness that is 22 needed. 23 It is certainly unclear to me tha t the resource k-24 impact ought to just automatically fall on the utility to 25 sarve that purpose. I think it is going to be a difficult ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 2? 24 (202D 554 2345 J MittilECD flik Pd2L W/33X0NST@N, D.C. J

i r 12 t

1
issue in terms of resolving the resource question. :

r -.- 2 Nevertheless, the utilities are clearly cooperating-in3that .3 I -( ' 3-regard. \\ - - ~~'4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Could you tell-me-what are: l I S'the most important things which are not in place - tha t o ugh t-6 to be, and what would these resources that you' talked about 71 go for?

I :_

~= '~'8-MB. STELLO: Do you have the list?..- 9 MR. GHIMES4 Yes, the April 2nd letter. - 10 HR. STELLO: Let me try to do it more-from memory, 11 rather than trying to go through some list. 12-One of the issues that Brian has already covered, 13 is-there was a need to take action, where_does.the. authority 14 to start taking that action lie? 15 It is not brought together in one. place with a 16 County Executive, for example. '17 HR. GRIMES: Or the Governor. 18 ER. STELL0s Or the Governor. If it were to 19 happen, they would do it, ad hoc, case by case, calling and 20 getting agreements. So the need to have that level of 21 authority straigh tened 'out is clearly an issue, and one of 22 the more significant issues. 23 The resource question, in terms of one of the 1 24 example, if we call the fire department or the police 25 department, and we put them on overtime pay, who is going to ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, Glvt&fPM A"lL E1.Wm WEHW87@N, D.C. 2@3E4 (202D 554-2345

4 4 $h + %is% \\\\N l MAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) k i 1.0 lllm su y,'3] R&& l ildmIOIM / -j l.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 % %i +<$4 4

  • $k7 h 4)p.;k$

y,,,

4't.ps% $sf\\A k\\ IMAGE EVALUATION NNY TEST TARGET (MT-3) -llHED24 l.0 l8 EM u \\i'" Ea s u 1.25 1.4 1.6 / 4 6" s

  1. 4 44
  • %f,,p///)/3> '

h+h.,( ,4,

13 ~ 1 pay for it. I couldn't care less, that is all;after the ,7.

2. fact.

.= =:. =.-: (^] 3 But in terms of some equipment that:vould be 4.needed, radios, and what-have-you, there are some of those_,- ._ details which have not been settled, which I don' t think are. 7 +: -. _ 6-quite important. 7 HR. GRIMES: There are a few examples,. FEMA mainly 8 points them out in terms of need for iden.tification of-9 radiological monitoring resources. Part of the resolution of that will depend on . :14 11 whether the county agrees that the State-has.the. 12: responsibility 'for making off-site monito. ring, confirmatory ,y .13_. measurements, rather than the county trying,to staff up to-(I 14 do it. We believe that that can be worked out.. 15.- If the roles are straightened out, many of the 16 resources that had been identified, for example, by 17 Westchester County would not really be needed. The primary-18 resource concern that I see lasting, after the authorities

19. and responsibilities are straightened out, is additional 20 people at the county level required to keep these plans 21 upgraded and in place.

22 Should there be a funding of person or two in the 23 country by whatever means, normally known in other counties 24 as the civil defense director or some kind of a staff which x,, 25 would devote a r'easonable amount of attention to keeping ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 20024 (202) 554 2345 .__ __ -.. _ _ _.. _ _... _. _ _. _ _. _ _ ___ _.400,VjRGifA A[E,S.W,WAS_HINGToN. D.C..

14 tr$fl -1: these things current. 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: As I recall,-in that series . - (~ l - .3 of letters from Westchester County, some of the items,. in.- ss -'i:- - - - 4 addition to what they were saying they wo uld-need, resourcess -

5. for, were such things as vehicles for transportation.. : For 6 example, they were saying that they just would not-have:
7 enough school buses, and such, additional hospital

~: __ _i. -8 facilities, or at least staff to staff the hospitals-in-case- - 9 of emergency, medical supplies. -10 MR. GRIMES: Cots., 11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. _ HR. GRIESSa In most of those cases, I thinks .J 13 probably State resources or other resources-will:very.likely (N' 14 be identified, which could be brought in,- o r the. local 15 resources could be scpplemented by the transport of people-I 16 to a different hospital, or wha tever the case-night be. = 17 I think it is important that both the State and 18 the counties identify who is going to do what, and that 19 there be adequate resources identified for each. task. I am 20 not sure that in the end there is going to be a need for a 21 lot of specific additional medical f acility equipment, for l 22 example. 23 One item of interest was that during the / 24 afternoon, as we were leaving, there was a session starting 25 between Westchester County and the State consultant who had ~ \\_ ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC. 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345

15 () 1 been paid for by the utility, and I think there -was.also a r- : - ~= i-- 2: utility representative, on the items listed in Mr. Del. -~ ;. ((} - 3 Bello 's letter. The consultant had detailed responses-to- -r-Er --. 4 those. - t :_ _-- s- -. + 5 In talking to one of the county representatives,._-- 8 sy impression was that most of those items would_probably.be- : 7 taken care by the consultant responses, but+there were: stills: ~ 8 some'-concerns by the county in the transportation. area, - for-f- 9 example, and that was yet to be discussed. : 10 I think these things need to be worked out, and~~ 11 maybe some specific resource items. 11 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY: Suppose-there was an- ~ - = 13 incident today, and some form of public protection was : O~ 14: recommended by the NRC, or suppose an evacuationevas 15 recommended, how would that work today ? ~16 Is it clear who would direct people from:the 17 area? I there a plan which could be followed? 18 ER. GRIMES: Both State and counties indicated. 19 that if something were to happen today, they would use the 20 newly developed material as best they could. The State 21 specifically said that they were working the new changes to 22 the plan into their operation as they developed it. 23 With respect to who directs an evacuation, vno k/ 24 implements, for exsaple, an evacuation, there is no 25 disagreement that the local authorities would be the ones ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC. 400, VIRGINIA AVE S.W WASHtNGT,C,N. D;C.,20024 (202) 554 2345.

16 . (7% s c 1 -with that would be doing th a t. The question-vould be,-who 2 -recommends the evacuation. The State believes it is the one that should.be - ():--- 4 doing that. There might be some consulta-tion-or maybe even + + - 5. confusion between the State and the counties as to who-as.. ~ --6. going to finally make the decision, but I: aa sure-that: they-2: 74 -both know who the other party is. .5 &+. The four counties do have a coordinated-lead ; ~~ ~ 9 betveca the State and the county, which would.just have to. to be worked out as to what should be dono in that particular-11 case, and they would have to get a consensus, rather than-12 just one decide. 13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Do the four-counties have (, 14 any kind of an emergency coordina',or amongst-the-four of 15 them? + -- 18

53. STELLO:

Yes. They got together quite some 17 time ago, and they have been working on a coordinated 18 response in the four-country area. The'y are pulled together 19 under 4 common purpose. 20 MR. GBIMES: Westchester County is designated as l l 21 the lead county. 22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I am all for clarifying 23 these lines of responsibility, but is there any suggestion 24 here that if, say, the NRC vere to recommend evacuation, or l l 25 some other form of public protection, that one or another of l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, _._ _ _., d3 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345_

1! - ($)- - : 1: -these groups might turn a deaf ear? 2 MR. GRIMES: Absolutely not. .(.- 3-MR. STELL0s No. On the contrary, I think ther 4 all indicated that if there was a need, they; would-follow = - - = - 5-the plan as it is laid out to the best of their _ ability,. and

:- 6 they-did not expect to have any lack of coope.' tion.-

7 That is still not the way it ought-to be6 There - -- -- r - : - Ib ought to be a very clear -- 9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKI: I agree, we want to get it 10'.cla rified. There is no question about that.; 11: HR. STELLO It is a significant improvement over 12 what was there several years ago. 13: COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I am still no t clear cn- - t ~ hat is lacking on the resource side. You talked-about 14 w l-15 measurement capability. 16 HR. GRIMES: It has not been really defined 17 closely. We have what I would call an initial.wish-list 18 from Westchester County which is being responded by th e 19 State consultant, a"d it will just have to be worked out. 20 COHNISSIONER AREARNE: If you recall, we got all 21 of Westchester County's requirements. 22 MR. GRIMES: The March 24th list of items, I am 23 saying that not all of those items will result finally in l ( 24 the need for more resources. FEM A did not speci'i. ally i 25 identify major resource lapse. l u ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,lNC, ... GyRGWy AE py73ASMNgTON. Dy]M2Q2g2} W@5-

18 ( 1 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa Are the State-and: counties- - 2 deficient in their ability to monitor around the site-in the -{ } -. 3 event of an accident? 4-MR. GOIMES: No, in the sense that _they.can-call-

~~

5--DOE to perform most of that task, and the State alsoihas- _- _s - 6 some capability it would bring. --- = 7 COH5ISSIONER GILINSKYa How fast could DOE get. - 6 *nere? u; 7 MR. GRIMES Since they are at Brookhaven, I:- -- ~ ~- 10 believe it would be on the order of a couple _of. hours. 'That -11 was the questiaste we heard. 12 COMMISSIONER AHEABNE: As I recalls.one:of-the-(- 13" : things that the county argued is that they wanted to have~. ~ 14 their own people. 15 EB. STELLO: They also wanted their-own - 16 laboratory. The State has a laboratory for doing 17 independent measurements, and the counties were suggesting 18 that they ought to have, again, their own laboratories. 19 COMMISSIONEB GILINSKY: You have got division of 20 Brookhaven. 21 (General laughter.) 22 MR. STELLO: It is a continuing problem. You are 23 going to have a great deal of redundancy of off-site k 24 neasurehents going on. You are going to ha ve the utility 25 first and foremost, he is required to put out the monitoring ALDERSON PEPORTING COMPANY,INC, _ _400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W. WASHINGT0_ _N. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345

t 19 f---- -I k- .1

teams and does so.

.2 - - Then you are going to have State _an.d_ local. 3 officials, the NBC, EPA, various county organizations that (]}

4 have-monitoring equipment.
=- - -

. :5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Those respo_nsibill. ties - 6 have not been clarified either. .7 NR. STELLO: I think the State thinks that that is 8 a State function, and they have the labora tocy.,: and they '9 have the equipment, and if there is a need for independent 10 : measurements, they have it. 11 I think it is question as to whether the counties 1 12 ought to have, in addition to what.the State has, more. i \\ l 13 COMMISSIONER AHEABNE: Do the FEM A. rules or our (",) 14 approach require the State and the county to have 15 monitoring? 16 HR. GHIMES: They have to have that capability, I 17 but part of that capability can be DOE capability. So that 1 18 I would not expect the current State plus DOE capability to 19 be at all deficient. 20 MR. STELLO: All the states have monitoring 21 programs. 22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: But da our requirements 23 require separate programs by State and local? 24 MR. STELLO: No. 25 COMMISSIONEE AHEARNE: This is more of a desire on ALDERSON REPCRTING COMPANY. INC. 400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345

20 ( 1 the county's part rather than our requirement? ; - ~.: - - 1 ER. STELLO: Yes. We are attempting not to.get in .m--._.3 the middle of the debate between the county-and-the Sta te, l.a 4 and they are sitting own, and as Brian indicated, and: did

-r-

_ _ _.5-sit down to resolve these kinds of diff erences. If there:is; 6 an augmentation needed, I assume they wil-1 reach-an 7 agreement on how to do that. 8 MR. GRIMES: The only other item of: interest-from 9 the~aeeting before I go to the status is that there was a - 10 good bit of discussion on notification during.eaergencies,- 11 and the credibility of the utility. 12 While this is not an area that _ve:vould find 13 deficiencies in, there may well be legislation introduced in 1 - ' ~ 14 New York State to require some kind of automatic. 15 transmission of parameters, or an individual.f ron - the State 16 -- 17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Eaybe ve can tap into it.- 18 MR. GRIMES: Yes. 19 Or an individual from the State or county in th e 20 control room 24 hours a day. Soma of the founties, in 21 particular, expressed dissatisf action with having to rely on 22 the utility for judgmen*.s as to when problems were 23 occurring. 24 I believe myself that this should be cured over 25 time by, I hope, some forced favorable experience requiring ALCERSoN REPCRTING COMPANY. INC. 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345

i 21 r + I. h ~ 1 notification even on ainor, events, which will build.a - - - 2 relationship between on-site and off-site. - { )- - -3 COH3ISSIONEB GIIINSKY Is legislation _ being-4 drafted on the first point, the business ofi resolving:--; 5-NR. STE110s There is legislati' n..- I believe:.. - o 6 taere are bills in both the Senate and the Assembly side. I-7 have seen ~ draf ts of them, and they had a hearing-to-discuss - :8 ~that ' up in New York City not too long ago. I think there: : :_ -9 say -te bills on both sides. to MR. GRIMES: There is a Governor's: hill, and then 11 there is a bill by the Speaker of the House, which are both. 12 going toward the same objectives, evidently somewhat ~ 13 -dif ferently couched. 3 14 On the status -- 15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Before yourget-to that,. l 16 was there any other result of that meeting?-- 17 HR. GRIMES: I think we have covered the results 18 of that meeting. 19 The State indicated it believes that both the 20 legislation and the plant deficiencies could be resolved 21 within the four months. 22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: When you have the conflicts 23 in organization relationship and assignment of (._ 24 responsibilities, is FEMA's conclusion that legislation is 25 required to sort that out? ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC. 400 VIRGINlA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345

22 ( t-j ~ -- 1 MR. GRIMES No. In fact, we suggested -in.otheru - 2 sta tes, everyone signing the front page of the : plan,. and all - ~ : /TT -

3. the parties to the response sign the front of the plan ~, 'is.

- - 4 an-adequate agreement that the parties will respond as

- 5--described in the plan.

6-- However, there is, I think, a strong. desire ta.get 7 this authority straight on the county level, at leasts _for 8 ~oth~er than nuclear emergencies. - J 9 MR. STELLO: Nor do all the County Executives 10' 'believe in New York that tha'. is needed. 'They are not alr-- - 11--in agreement that it is required. 12 MR. GRIMES: On the status, we have some detailed 13 deficiencies identified by FEMA in the FEMA Region data, k's' 14 plus six letters to the State. We have discussed the '15 meeting of all parties held on April 15th in Albany. 16 We have mentioned already that the State counties 17 indicate new plans would be used to the extent feasible for 18 any curr en t emergencies. We also mentioned that the State 19 believes that these problems can be resolved within a 20 four-month period. 21 We are in the process of starting a four-month 22 period under our regulation. 23 COMMISSIONE3 BRADFORD: How do you do that, Brian, i 24 just by a letter? 25 MR. GRIMES: Yes, a letter, very likely from our ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, ..~ _., _ _ _, _. __ _ _ _ _...._ __ _....__ 00 y@N!A AyE. S._W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345 4

23 b) : .1 regional director, as an enforcement action on the 2 regulation, which sets out the provision of;the_ rule and_ - - ={ 3-asks for a response on the plan for correct-actions within-a.

--4 sho rt pe riod of time, le t 's sa y, 20 days,-and indicates;the 5 language of the rule that if these deficiencies:are not -

. 6 -corrected at the end of 120 days, then the Commission-must:- - 7: make' a decision whether to shut the plant'down,..- -- - - r3_ 8 COREISSIONER AHEARNE. The triggering -ites - you :are-c. 9 using is FEMA's notificatio.ns? - 10 MR. GRIMES: Yes, the FEMA letter -of _ April-6 vill-- 11 he used as the list of deficiencies, and-the-start.date will -12 be.our letter to the utilities which will. start the ~13 four-sonth period. 14 MB. STELL0s I would like to make sure _ that 15 something is clear, again, a problem that is clearly in.the.- 16 : reg ulation. l 17 We send such a letter, we are going to send it to 18 the utility. We give him that responsibility, but I think 19 you have to recognize he has absolutely no authority with 20 which to cause these deficiencies to be removed whatsoever. 21 CONMISSIONER AHEARNE: I assume you are also 22 sending copies of the letter to everybody. 23 MB. STELLO: We vill do all that that we can, but 24 again we have a requirement that we are placing on the 25 licensee. ALDERSoN REPCRTING COMPANY. INC. ..__ _.____ ___ _400 VIRGINI A AVE., S.W W ASHINGToN D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345

24 ~ ~ ( h-1 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY. None of the : deficiencies: _ 2 relate to the licensee's own activities, or: things under bi - { J 3 control? --4i NR. GRIMES: Not at this point.- We-have+not 2 5 ' identified any. ..+ 6: HR. STELLO: If there are, it is nothing-major - + _ 7 that I have seen that would come into that category. : _The - - 8 liste is quite long, and I would not speak that not one..of _ ". 9 those is in that category s but clearly that.would be'an - '10- exception to what I said which I think would be rare. - 11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: We understood.that-when we. 12 were putting the rule together, it.was the inherent-13 difficulty of trying to reach to the State and: local O 14 governments through the mechanisms that we had available to - ~. 15 us. 16 MR. STELLO: I clearly understand-that, but I 17 wanted to make sure that while we are doing so, the utility 18 is placed in a position where he has absolutely no authcrity M3 with which to resolve and remove the deficiencies that are 20 identified. 21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Nonetheless, by putting 22 eve rybody on notice, the people who would suffer would be 23 the people who get the electricity from the utility that had ks 24 to be shut down, and those are the voting constituents in 25 the area that are directly affected by the people who are ALOERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC. _ _ _. _ __, _ ___ _ _ 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345

4 25 m V,-- ~ - = - 1 ^able to make the improvements and changes. 2-3R. STELLO: Truly, but with the letharry of the _ :. - 3 political process before the people 's voice -can - be heard, I l {'; l ::- 4 am sure in most instances it would be somewhat longer -than a. :. 5 four-month time period. ..=:. _- 6-COMMISS!0NER AHEARNE: We have representatives in___. l. 7 the -corner there. 8 3H. GRIMES: I think your statement-is true.ia N9w. 9 York State. It is not always true that the-users of 10 electricity are in the service area. 11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: But in this particular 12 case, it is certainly true. 13 MR. STELLO: That is where we would.stop. O 14-COMMISSIONER GILINSXY: Has the o rder-gone out?. 15 HR. STELLO: We are drafting it-now. We are going 16-to send it out to all of the utilities in New York State. 17 My expectation is that at the time we send the-letters out, f i 18 then the issues will sharpen site-by-site, and I fully i 19 expect, from what the' County Executive in Oswego told me, 20 that it ought to be a minor problem. 21 But e vill have to go through that process, and 22 then, of course, we will have to wait until the exercise is 23 finished. k-24 This idea of this four-month clock, there are a 25 variety of places within the regulation where this issue e. ~.., ALDERSCN REPORTING CCMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTCN, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345

26 I I-1 could be raised. It could be raised in July: vith-respect-to. - - ~ - -2 warning system. It could be raised later when the exercises _ _. - { 3 =are conducted, or the problems identified. : __:_: _ -- 4: I think it is appropriate in ligh t-of.what-we: now.- 5 know about the status of the planning in New: York.that.this 6~ -is what we ought to do. It is rea2 ustration knowing-tha.t: 7 Je are laying on a requirement, and telling.somebody to do 8;something, which we also know he has no authority to do. -~ 9 COH5ISSIONER GILINSKYa But it has got to get done- - 10 one var or another. - ' 11 - MR. STELLO: I am not sugges ting that we have any 12 other tools to use. It is the only tool ve: have._ I_ a m : j us t. 13 expressing a frustration in going forward on this matter. - ~ 14-COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Was there a re presen ta tive 15-- of the Governor's Of fice at this meeting? t 16 MR. STELLO: Yes. I don't knos 4hether the actual 17 assemblymen were there, or some of the senators,- but there 18 were a large number representing them. 19 NR. GRIMES: There was at least staff. 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Did you get any sense where 21 the Governor would come out on either assisting or resisting 22 this kind of legislation? 23 ER. STELLO: The Governor, I think, as Brian 24 indicated, has proposed some form of legislation to resolve 25 this, or is in the process somewhere in his administration ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC. , 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W, WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345__

27 Ib: -. - 1":3f~doing so. So he is right on top of wanting_to.nove.this ~ as well. ._r -{_ - 3 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Our letter,- I-gather, - is : - 4' keyed to the FEMA letter. Does FEMA letter itself pick-up 5 -all the deficiencies that we want corrected,- or should there 6 1Ha a further listing in our letter above and. beyond. wha t-is 7 in the FEMA letter? 8 MR. GRIMES: We ely on FEMA for the.off-site- -9 deficiencies, and we have identified any others than what- - - 10 FEMA is flagging. 11 For on-site deficiencies, if, we find those during~. 12 our subsequent reviews of the plan.or inspections, then we. 13 ~ will start another four-month period basrd on-the. time ve-C ' 14 find those. 15 COHNISSIONER AHEARNE: As I recall, the rule-says ="- 16 that we will base our findings on the FEMA findings for the ( 17 State and local energency plans. { i 18 MR. STELLO: To answer your question, as.I recall, l 19 they do raise issues of authority, and those are questions 1 l 20 are raised. I cannot think of any of them that are missing, l 21 at least of those that came to our attention. 22 COEMISSIONER GILINSKY Did I understand you to 23 say before that the situetion varies from site to site. In l 24 some cases, the counties have worked out a reasonable 25 arrangement with the State, or have decided to pursue some l i ALOERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, I 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345 l

i I' 28 cm -1 -course of action in the absence of legislation.._: - - 2 MR. STELLO: The County Executive.in.Csvego County ..(1-. 3 essentially said, legislation or not, they think they-have:::

--
.. 'L_got it solved.
r-
5..

COHHISSIONER GILINSKYa We wo uld, ; the n, ha ve _ to _ - 6.look.at these places site by site. 2 7 HR. STELLO4 That is precisely my _ point.. Once _ - 7I _ 8 these letters go out, it will become a site specific issue : - 9 in: teras of the state of affairs. But I don.'t.know :how to-10 come to that point short of deciding now to move _with the .11 letters. 12 MR. BICKWIT: I just want to clarify one_ point. r. (3. :- - 13. The -rule does say that we will base our findings-on -a review s 14 of the FEMA findings. It is contemplated _under the rule I 15.that these are our findings. 16 MB. STELLO: Sure. 17 MR. BICKWITs As I understand what you are saying,- 18 the letter will include findings made by the NBC. 19 MR. GRIMES We would adopt, in reference to the 20 specific FEMA letter, those deficiencies which we believe -- 21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNEa If you will recall, what l 22 the language says is, we vill base our findings on a review 23 of FEMA's findings. (._ 24 MB. BICKWIT: That is what I just said. 25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: But it is our findings ALCERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC. 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345

29 4:---- 1 based on theirs.

' r::

-2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORDa Ye s, but if FEM A for some-i l }- 3 reason chose to overlook a glaring deficiency:in the State: 4 of New York, I would not expect that we would-haverto blind c-5 ourselves to it, too. - ~ 6 MR. BICKWIT: No, under our rule,- ve review-the

~-

7 FEMA findings, and'then we make our own findings. ~- -8' COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: That istrighti -=r: ~ 9 MR. STELLO: Nor do I read it tha t if ver find- - -- 10 something we thought was major, but not covered, we would - 11 not hesitate to sdd it. ~ 12 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: No. That is really what:I ,_~ 13 -w as trying to get at. Your list of significant deficiencies (' 14 had four bullets, the last of which was t-he: FEM A-letter.- I- - 15 gather from what you have said, though, that I'hA letter-16 picks picks up the first three as well. 17 MR. STELL0s The FEMA letter has a long list. It~ 18 is probably on the order of 100. 19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: But, Peter, at least the 20 sense I get from that is that neither FEMA nor we agree that 21 the first three are necessarily deficiencies that have to be 22 resolved by legislation. In other words, that the 23 legislation is not in our mind, nor in FEMA's, a necessary 24 deficiency that has to be resolved. 25 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I understand that, as long ALDERSON AEPoRTING COMPANY,INC. 400 VIRGINfA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345

30 (^ 1 as the substantive problems are cured some other way.. 2. COMMISSIGNER AHEARNE Hight. ,g_ .3 NR. STELL0s In fact, we intend-to cover.that

4. point in the letter.

5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Thank you all very such. l 6, (Whereupon, at 11:55 a.m., the meeting was I 7 Closed.) 8 9. 10 11 l l. 13, - ( ,14. I 1_5 16 17 18 19 ' 20 21 22 23 24 25 ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC. l 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345

l r ) i .- f ) NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION This is to certify that the attached pecceedings before the l , _in the matter of: Connission Meeting Date of Proceeding: April 22, 1981 Docket Number: ? lace of Proceeding: Washington, D. c. were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the Cc==issica Patricia A. Minson Official Reporter (Typed) jf f L f p a n y... Official Reporter (Signature) i l \\ l I m I 4

o RESOLUTIONCALLINGUPON3HEMAYORTOINSTRUCTTHEAPPROPRIATECITYAGENCIES'TO PREPARE SPECIFIC EMERGENCY PLANS TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTS OF NEW YORK CITY IN THE EVENT OF A MAJOR ACCIDENT AT THE INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR PLANTS SUBMITTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RUTH MESSINGER (RESOLUTION #1494) WHEREAS, The three-Indian Point nuclear reactors, located 25 miles north of New York City, pose a potential threat to the health and safety of 19 million people living within 50 miles of the plants, including all New York City residents; and WHEREAS, Portions of New York City are within 50 miles of two other nuclear plants, Oyster Creek in Toms River, New Jersey (in operation), and Shoreham on Long Island (in construction); and WHEREAS, The March, 1979 accident at the Three Mile sland nuclear plant served to alert the country of the possibility of maa accidents at nuclear generating stations; and WHEREAS, The Kemeny Comission, Rogovin, and Congressional investigations of the accident all emphasized the lack of emergency preparedness at Three Mile Island anri the need for emergency plans to protect the public in the event of future nuclear plant accidents; and WHEREAS, The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has enunciated a new safety policy to the effect that, henceforth, emergency planning will be considered of equal importance to plant design and siting; and WHEREAS, In August,1980, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission published new regula-tions requiring emergency planning for 10- and 50-mile Emergency Planning Zones (EPZs) around nuclear power plants; and I WHEREAS, These regulations require sheltering nnd evacuation plans for the 10-mile EPZ, but only the monitoring of ingestion substances (fresh foodstuffs, milk and water) for the 50-mile EPZ, requiring no further emergency procedures to protect the public beyond 10 miles from direct radiation L exposure; and l WHEREAS, In the aftermath of a major radiation release from Indian Point, wind and weather conditions could result in direct radiation exposure of New York City residents in excess of Environmental Protection Agency dose guidelines, which could cause large numbers of thyroid tumors, cancers, genetic effects, i and even early fatalities; and l WHEREAS, A major accident at Indian Point could necessitate emergency measures for sheltering New York City residents from dangerous levels of radiation and later evacuating them out of contaminated sections of the City; and WHEREAS, any evacuation called for regions within 10 miles of Indian Point could reasonably be expected to trigger panic and extensive voluntary self-l l-evacuation throughout the metropolitan region, including from New York City -- even if there were no radiation threat to our city; and l WHEREAS, New York City might have to serve as a reception center for evacuees from areas closer to the plant, requiring shelter, food, and medical care: and l -over-j l t

,6 e WHEREAS, After the accident at Three Mile Island, Robert Ryan, then Director of State Programs at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, stated: "...it is insane to have a 3-unit reactor on the Hudson River in Westchester County 40 miles from Times Square, 20 miles from the Bronx. It's a nightmare from the point of view of emergency preparedness. "Everybody says what a terrible situation we had at Three Mile Island, and I agree, but can you imagine what it would have been if it had been at Indian Point." and WHEREAS, At present, New York City has no specific emergency plans for coping with an accident at Indian Point; and WHEREAS, Prevention of panic and protection of public health and safety for New York City residents necessitates extensive advance planning-and public education, specific sheltering and relocation procedures, and possibly a potassium iodide distribution program -- none of which has to date been undertaken by our city; and WHEREAS, It' is the clear responsibility of the Council of the City of New York and the Mayor to protect the health and safety of. New York City residents; therefore, be it' ~+- is RESOLVED That the Council of the City'df New York requests the Mayor to instruct the Office'of Civil Preparedness, the Bureau for Radiation Control, the f Department of Health, and other appropriate agencies to.begin-immediately l to prepare. sheltering and relocation plans, advance public education programs, and'decontaminationsprocedures to: deal with potential' radiation fall-ou't 'resulting from an accident at Indian Point.(or other nuclear power plants near our city) affecting-all or part of New York City. 1 'o i., - 3 l s e, ) i s r, (THIS RESOLUTION WAS UNALIMOUSLY PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON APRIL 14,1981). l \\ I l l l

STATUS FEMA letter of April '6,,1981 identified specific deficiencies Meeting of all parties held on April 15, 1981 State and counties indicate new plans would be used to the extent feasible for any current emergency State believes legislation and plan deficiencies can be resolved within about 4 months A letter to all New York State utilities with nuclear power plants licensed to operate is being dispatched stating that the deficiencies identified by FEMA must be resolved within 4 months SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCIES State indicates legislation required to resolve question of who determines need for protective action

  • Counties indicate legislation required to give the County Executive clear operational authority over local response organizations during an emergency
  • State and Counties indicate legislation required to re' solve resource questions FEMA has identified deficiencies in State and County plans by April 6, 1981 letter to New York Strte Conflicts in organizational relationship and assignment of l

responsibilities Lack of specificity Portions of plans yet to be developed i I I m -- --

New york public INTEREST RESEARClf OgROUp,INC. NYPIRG S Beekman Street

  • New Yofk, N.Y.10038 e (212) 349-6460 offices in: At>ar'y Ebagrwmon. Bronniya 8#aio Long esaa<ut Marmanan. Dese Paat Queens Storea spend scacine Uhca April 21, 1981 Commissioners:

Joseph M. Hendrie, Chairman John F. Ahearne Peter A. Bradford Victor Gilinsky U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006

Dear Commissioners:

We have received no response to our April 1st appeal to the Commission for immediate relief from an intolerable threat to the public: the continued operation of Indian Point without an implemented emergency plan. At the April 7, 1981 Commission meeting, your General Counsel clearly stated: '%en you say that April 1 provides a target for the compliance by the states and the utilities, it does not; it,provides a, requirement."(our emphasis - see transcript of meeting, p. 35). Furthermore, Mr. Bickwit remarked -- prophetically, we are unhappy to note - "It never has followed that when a requirement of the Commission is not being met then an enforcement action follows automatically." (transcript, p. 44). We believe the Commission and the staff is side-stepping its responsibility to enforce its own reciuirement and we appeal once again for immediate suspension in accordance with the Emergency Planning Rule: "In any case where the Commission believes that the public health, safety, or interest so requires, the plant will be required to shut down immediately." In setting the April 1st deadline, the Commission clearly intended that implementation of emergency plans -- whether adequate or deficient -- was to precede the review, testing, and approval of such plans. The Commission recognized that the review process could take a considerable amount of time to accomplish for all operating reactors and thus decided that plans must be implemented first, i.e. by April 1, 1981. Our understanding of the Emergency Planning Rule is that the 120-day clock applies to deficiencies in the content or workability of plans identified during the review process, and not either to the January 2nd submission date or.the April 1st implementation requirement. If the Commission takes no further action beyond starting the 120-day clock, it will be enforcing one part of its Rule (i.e., deficiencies) while ignoring another (i.e., the April 1st implementation requirement). If the Commission did not intend to enforce compliance with the April 1st included in the Rule? why@wasit4 3SS ) retuirement ce T The Nd v York Put c Interest Research droup. Inc. (NYPIRG) is a not-for-profit, nonparbsan research and advocacy organization estabhshed, directed and supported by New York State college and unrversrty studints. NYPtRG's staff of lawyers, researtfiers, scientists and organizers works with students and other citizens, developing citizenship skills and s'iaping public pohey Consurner protectc 1. higher education, energy, fiscal responsibehty. pontical reform and social ustice are NYPIRG's pnnciprA areas of concem l

d NYPIRG - page 2 Right now,. Indian Point is in clear violation of the April 1st implementation requirement. The problems standing in the way of implementation are not going to be resolved easily or quickly. The history of New York State politics and governmental operations (especially with regard to'the decades-old home-vs.-state rule conflict) indicates that jurisdictional / authority problems cannot be expected to be resolved any time soon (regardless of reassurances to the contrary which State officials may-have given to Mr. Stello). Furthermore, legislation will not eliminate specific problems relating to population density, road systems, and proximity to New York City -- issues.of major concern to local officials in Westchester and Rockland Counties. The reality is that an emergency plan for Indian Point is not likely to be implemented within the foreseeable future. If you decide to permit further operation of Indian Point -- for one or for 120 days -- you will, in effect, be deciding to accept non-compliance with a major safety requirement: that there be an implemented plan by April 1, 1981. Though this would surprise no one -- it not being the first time the Commission has failed to enforce its own regulations -- NYPIRG believes it would be a major violation of your l responsibility and your mandate to protect the public. The Commission's record of delay and avoidance with respect to Indian 7 Point raises grave doubts in the minds of the public about its intent to confront and deal with the special problems posed by this plant. If a safety requirement at Indian Poinc, the most. densely populated reactor site in the country, is not scrupulously and strictly enforced, how can the public have any confidence whatsoever about the enforcement of other safety requirements? Respe tfully J n Holt P oject Director}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19345H192&oldid=4705723"