ML19351D905
| ML19351D905 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/25/1978 |
| From: | Minogue R NRC OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19351D906 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-43FR37473, RULE-PR-50 SECY-78-044, SECY-78-44, NUDOCS 8011200361 | |
| Download: ML19351D905 (14) | |
Text
.
680 07HCLAL USE ONLY January 25, 1978 warso s m es SECY-78-44 NUCLEAR REOULATORY COMAM$slON CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM For:
The Commissioners From:
Robert B. Minogue, Director, Office of Standards Development Thru:
Executive Director for Operations p
Subject:
ISSUANCE OF EFFECTIVE AMENDMENT TO O CFR PART 50, APPENDIX E,
" EMERGENCY PLANS FOR PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION FACILITIES"
Purpose:
To obtain Commission approval of the effective amendment to Appendix E, 10 CFR Part 50, that will address emergency plan-ning outside the Low Population Zone (LPZ).
Category:
This paper involves a minor rule change which has been previously reviewed by the Commission.
Discussion:
At Policy Session 77-48 (October 25,1977), the Commission discussed SECY-77-461 regarding emergency planning policy.
The C wdission approved the proposed rule change (10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E) and requested revisions in the " Statement of Considerations" to reflect the separation of emergency planning from the considerations of overall site suitability in a memorandum dated October 28, 1977.
A memorandum from the Secretary of the Commission, dated November 3, 1977, provided additional guidance to the staff in preparing the final rule change and accompanying statement of considerations.
The rule change has been modified, in accordance with an NMSS request, to assure its applicability to only nuclear power reactors.
Minor word changes for clarity have also been made.
Recommendation:
The Commission:
1.
Approve the effective amendment to Appendix E, 10 CFR Part 50, and the supplementary information (statement of considerations), which will De published in the Federal Register to be effective immediately upon publication.
2.
Approve the draft letter to be sent to the Subcommittee h
on Energy and the Environment of the Committee on Interior g and Insular Affairs of the U.S. House of Representatives, w
and the Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation of the Commit-tee on Environmental and Public Works of the U.S. Senate.
Coordination:
The Offices of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards concur in the recommendations of this paper.
Contact:
M. Jamgochian y
443-5317 O
l sonnu M k OFFHCHAL USE ONLY
s The Commissioners 2
The Office of the Executive Legal Director has no " legal objec-tions to the recommendations of this paper.
The Office of State Programs concurs with the proposed rule change but has identified, in Enclosure 3, a potential conflict with the EPA /NRC emergency planning task force recommendations.
Standards Development has attached, as Enclosure 4, its evalua-tion of SP's memorandum.
February 20, 1978 Scheduling:
For affirmation at an Open Session the week of kbj [b hLwc
~ ~ '
Robert B. Minogue, Director Office of Standards Development
Enclosures:
1.
Federal Register Notice of Effective Rule Making 2.
Draft Congressional Letter 3.
Comments from Office of State Programs 4.
Standards Development Evaluation of SP comments Commissioner comments or consent should be provided directly to the Office of the Secretary by close of business Tuesday, February 7,.1978.
Commission staff office comments, if any, should be submitted to the Commissioners NLT February 3, 1978
, with an information copy to the Of fice of the Secretary.
If the paper is of such a nature that it requires additional time for analytical review and comment, the Commissioners and the Secretariat should be apprised of when comments may be expected.
DISTRIBUTION Commissioners Commission Staff Offices Exec Dir for Operations Secretariat
Title 10 - Energy CHAPTER I - NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PART 50 - LICENSING OF PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION FACILITIES APPENDIX E - EMERGENCY PLANS FOR PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION FACILITIES AGENCY:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ACTION:
Final Rule
SUMMARY
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is amending its regula-tion on Emergency Plans for Production and Utilization Facilities to address emergency planning considerations that may extend to areas outside the Low Population Zone (LPZ).
EFFECTIVE DATE:
Immediately upon publication, but comments are invited with a view to possible changes.
COMMENT PERIOD EXPIRES:
(Date 45 days after publication in the Federal Register.)
ADDRESSES:
Written comments or suggestions concerning the amendment should be submitted to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555.
Attention:
Docketing and Service Branch.
Copies of comments received may be examined at the Commission's Public Document Room, 1717 H Street N.W., Washington, D. C.
1
l FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Michael T. Jamgochian, Office of Standards Development, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555 (phone:
301-443-5317)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A major objective of the Commission is to assure that emergency plans exist which provide reasonable assur-ance that appropriate measures can and wili be taken in the event of an accidental release of radioactive material from a nuclear power plant.
The intent of the Commission is to assure that the decision-making process for licensing nuclear power plants will include an analysis by the applicant and a review by the Commission of each nuclear power plant license or permit application to determine the feasibility of tak;ng suitable protective actions on a timely basis under postulated accident conditions within and outside the proposed site.
Suitable protective actions would include measures which could mitigate radiation exposure to the public from the. facility or f c radioactive material released to the environs.
Immediate emergency protective measures could include evacuation of the public from the area or the public taking protective shelter until the danger had passed.
The principal aspects of the NRC staff review for emergency planning includes the protection of persons within the exclusion area, the onsite emergency response organizations, the protection of l
2 l
l
the public beyond the exclusion area and the offsite emergency response organization consisting of local, State and Federal agencies.
There are two elements of the NRC staff review required by the Commission's regulations as stated in 10 CFR Part 100, " Reactor Site Criteria," and 10 CFR Part 50, " Licensing of Production and Utiliza-tion Facilities."
The first review element is to determine compliance with the siting criteria of 10 CFR Part 100.
Reactor site criteria are established in Part 100 which, in conjunction with postulated acci-dent calculations performed by the applicant for the proposed facil-ity design, establish boundaries for an exclusion area and a low population zone (LPZ).
In this connection, the Commission has, from the earliest days of licensing reactors, required the use of conserva-tive assumptions and calculational methods in assessing consequences of a hypothetical release from the nuclear facility.
The review conducted in conformance with 10 CFR Part 100 requirements establishes, for an acceptable site, that certain numerical exposure guidelines are met and in addition that the number and density of people within the LPZ are such that appropriate protective measures could be taken on their behalf in the event of an accident.
Beyond the siting criteria and the question of site suitability is the second review element which is to determine compliance with the licensing requirements in 10 CFR Part 50 and Appendix E thereto for emergency plans.
A principal aspect of this review is to deter-mine whether the applicant has or will make appropriate arrangements 3
1 N
with appropriate Federal, State and local officials to assure that, in the event of an actual emergency, necessary evacuation or other protective actions will be taken to protect offsite members of the public.
Although these arrangements include the protective measures needed to satisfy the LPZ requirements defined in 10 CFR Part 100, they need not be precisely limited in scope to application within the LPZ, nor to measures intended to cope primarily with the air-borne pathway (cloud passage) covered by Sections 100.3 and 100.11 of Part 100.
Such arrangements are expected to be guided by emer-gency action criteria, arrived at through a coordinated effort among local, State, and Federal authorities.
Such criteria are believed to be a sound and prudent approach to the management of the small residual risk involved in the operation of nuclear facilities.
Indeed, their application to ingestion exposure pathways involving accidental spills into drinking water sources and accidental deposition of radioactive material onto agricultural crops or areas used for forage for milk cows has long been included as part of the review of emergency plans.
Since one would anticipate that there would generally be time to monitor the actual situation for releases impacting from these pathways and to takc appropriate action based on existing condi-tions, the Commission review has generally not emphasized postulated accident scenarios for evaluation but rather has assured that there are adequate arrangements for prompt notice to appropriate officials and arrangements to perform the appropriate monitoring, even though this has typically involved areas of considerations extending beyond the LPZ.
4
i J
The principal considerations used in assessing emergency plans during the siting and licensing review of nuclear power plants are summarized below.
1.
Physical Characteristics - The Commission considers that the ftflowing physical characteristics in the vicinity of the site are relevant to the evaluation of protective actions which may be taken in the event of an a.ccidental release of radioactive material:
the numbers and proximity to the site boundary of resident and transient persons and the relative speed with which warnings can be communicated to them, the availability and character of evacuation routes and means of transportation, the availability and locations of structures suitable for sheltering people, and the presence of institutions (such as hospi-tals, nursing homes, and schools) which may require special emergency planning arrangements.
Measures to compensate for those charac-teristics that may be adverse to the effective implementation of emergency actions should be identified and proposed by an applicant and reviewed by the NRC staff.
These may consist of special emergency action plans, practicable alterations in the tite environs, and/or design changes to the facility itself through additional engineered safety features to mitigate radiation levels from postulated accidents.
Particular atten-tion is to be given to the foregoing as they affect the need for and practicability of taking protective actions within a i
j 5
3 proposed LPZ pursuant to the Commission's siting criteria of 10 CFR Part 100.
This should not preclude, however, the consider-ation of utilizing emergency plans to provide additional protective benefit to persons beyond a LPZ as a matter of reasonable and prudent risk management.
2.
Protective Measures - An essential element for reducing indi-vidual and population exposures from accidental releases of radioactive material is effective and timely protective measures.
Emergency protective measures, such as evacuation or sheltering, may be necessary for all persons within an established LPZ in the event of a serious accident at a nuclear power plant.
The establishment of soundly based emergency plans which include appropriate protective measures prior to the initial operation of a nuclear power plant is a basic Commission requirement in its licensing process.
3.
Emergency Plans - Protection of the public from the effects of severe natural phenomena, such as hurricanes or tornadoes, and severe man-made events, such as dam failures or toxic gas releases, are typically considered in general emergency plans.
Such general emergency plans are developed and maintained by agencies of the State and local governments.
Emergency plans for protecting the public health and safety from accidental releases of radioactive material involve many of the same types i
i 6
l i
~
of actions and thus are designed to be compatible with these broader general emergency plans.
Emergency plans for nuclear power plants are designed to permit protection to the public by reducing individual and population exposures resulting from postulated nuclear accidents.
The benefits from the emergency plan must be commensurate with the risks to the health and safety of the public associated with the implementation of the protective action.
4.
Procedures - The general authorities and capabilities of Federal, State and local officials for carrying out emergency plans are recognized.
A goal of the Commission's review is to determine whether the applicant has developed adequate arrangements with Federa.1, State and local officials to assure that effective initietion of protective actions within and beyond the LPZ can be implemented, should the need arise.
An important factor in emergency planning is the availability to the decision-making official (Federal, State and local) of all information necessary to determine the magnitude of the emergency and to decide whether protective actions should or should not be taken in light of the total risk (nuclear and non-nuclear) to the public health and safety from the action.
Each licensee must establish procedures to assure that such officials are provided with adequate information throughout the course of any emergency.
7 6
8-h
N A general examination of emergency planning in the siting and licensing of nuclear power plants is underway.
In the interim, the Commission is firmly of the opinion that continued implementation of its practice to review the possible need for emergency plans beyond the LPZ as necessitated by circumstances in the vicinity of the site is required.
However, in the New England Power Company, et al., and Public Service Company of New Hamoshire decisions, ALAB-390, 5 NRC 733 (1977), the Commission's regulations were construed as not. permitting licensing consideration of evacuation plans for the protection of persons cutside the low population zone.
In light of the above, the Commission believes that its regulations in 10 Part 50, Appendix E, should be amended to make clear the intended meaning of the rule for emergency plans for licensing of nuclear power plants.
The change to the rule on the licensing requirements for emergency plans as stated in 10 CFR Part 50 and Appendix E thereto clarifies the intent that consideration of emergency planning beyond the LPZ is a factor in the licensing review and is not a factor in the site suitability review.
Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, and section 553 of title 5 of the United States Code, notice is hereby given of adoption of the fol-lowing amendment to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E.
The amendment is interpretative in nature, and is intended to more clearly reflect the current practice of the Commission in its licensing review of emergency plans.
There is also need for prompt 8
l l
t action because the cited decision (ALAB-390) has the effect of improperly restricting the scope of Commission review of emergency plans.
For these reasons the amendment is being made effective upon publication without prior notice of proposed rulemaking and public procedure thereon.
However, the Commission is providing an opportu-nity for public comment upon,the amendment with a view to possible changes.
All interested persons who desire to submit written com-ments should send them to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Attention:
Docketing and Service Branch, Washington, D.C.
20555, by Copies of comments received will be available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room at 1717 H Street, NW., Washington, D.C.
1.
Paragraph I of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, is revised by adding the sentences at the end to read as follows:
"For Nuclear Power Reactors, provisions for emergency protective measures to reduce exposures from an accidental release of radioactive material shall be considered, at a minimum, within the low population zone (LPZ) as specified in 10 CFR Part 100.
The extent to which emergency planning should extend to areas beyond the LPZ shall be based on the design features of the facility and the physical characteristics of the environs in the vicinity of the site, taking I'nsert date 45 days after publication in the Federal Regirter.
9
~
4 into account the emergency action criteria developed in cooperation with appropriate Federal, State and local governmental authorities."
(Sec. 161. Pub. L.83-703, 68 Stat. 948 (42 U.S.C. 2201); Sec. 201.
Pub. L.93-438, 88 Stat. 1242, (42 U.S.C. 5841))
Dated at Washington, D.C. this day of 197_.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Samuel J. Chilk Secretary of the Commission 10
>w Dear Enclosed for the information of the are copies of a notice of rule making to be published in the Faderal Register.
At the present time, a general examination of emergency planning in the siting and licensing of nuclear power plants is enderway.
In the interim, the Commission is firmly of the opinion that continued implementation of its practice to review the possible need for emergency plans beyond the low population zone, as necessitated by circumstances in the vicinity of the site, is required.
However, in the New England Power Company, et al.,
and Public Service Company of New Hamoshire decisions, ALAB-390, SNRC 733(1977),the Commission's regulations were construed as not permitting licensing consideration of evacuation plans for the protection of persons outside the low population zone.
In licht of the above, the Commission '
believes that Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50, Appendix E, should be amended to make clear tre intended meaning of the rule for emergency plans for licensing of nuclear power plants. The change to the rule on the licensing requirements for emergency plans, as stated in 10 CFR Part 50 and Appendix E thereto, clarifies the intent that consideration i
r-
-A
}
l 2-of emergency planning beyond the low population zone is a factor in the licensing review and is not a factor in the site suitability review.
Sincerely, Robert B. Minogue, Director Office of Standards Development
Enclosure:
Notice of Rule Making 4
9 l
1 1
e..-,.
._