ML20005E010

Responds to 891117 Request for Status Rept on Readiness of Plant Alert & Notification Sys,Including Vehicular Alert & Notification Sys for Commonwealth of Ma Portion of Plume Epz.Sys Design for State of Nh Portion Acceptable

ML20005E010
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	12/18/1989
From:	Gordon Peterson Federal Emergency Management Agency
To:	Gabe Taylor NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
References
NUDOCS 9001030112
Download: ML20005E010 (10)

Text

-.

n[.

L 4,n t

e Federal Emergency Management Agency ,

I- Washington, D.C. 20472 l

[

l (EC 18 W Mr. James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations i U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Dear Mr. Taylort This is in response to your November 17, 1989, memorandum requesting a status report f rom the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) on the readiness of the Seabrook Public Alert and Notification System (ANS),

including the Vehicular Alert and Notification System (VANS) f or the  !

Massachusetts portion of the plume emergency planning zone (EPZ). f i

in the findings on offsite emergency preparedness for Seabrook Station that FEMA provided to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on December 14, '

1988. FEMA found that the Seabrook ANS design for the New Hampshire portion of the Seabrook plume EPZ met the design requirements of FEMA-REP-10. FEMA's finding s1so stated that when the proposed enhancements to the ANS for the New Hampshire portion of the Seabrook EPZ were installed and operable, i the plans and preparedne6s would be adequate to protect the health and  ;

safety of the public living in the New Hampshire portion of the Seabrook EPZ, by providing reasonable assurance that appropriate protective measures can be taken offsite in the event of a radiological emergency and are '

capable of being implemented.

As the enclosed December 1,1989, reports prepared by the Regional Assistance ,

Connittee (RAC) Chairman fnr Seabrook state,' these conditions have been  !

met for the ANS in the New Hampshire portion of the EPZ and those parts i of the New Hampshire Radiological Emergency Response Plan covered by NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1, Evaluation Criterion E.6, are now adequate.

The State of New Hampshire has the capability to provide an alert signal and instructional message in the New Hampshire portion of the Seabrook

-plume EPZ within the required time frames in FEMA REP-10 and NUREG-0654/

~

FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, Appendix 3. In addition, the FEMA Region 1 Director notified me on December 4,1989, of his reviced interim evaluation of the ,

State of New Hampshire of f site plans and preparedness and his recommenda-tion to grant formal approval. The capability of the State's ANS to ,

directly alert the public will be confirmed by a telephone survey to be conducted following the integrated Seabrook ANS operational test currently schedaled for May 1990, and as always, FEMA will review the operability against FEMA-REP-10.  !

9001030112 891218 EDO --- 005011 1\

PDR ADOCK 05000443 i F PDC '

.j ,- ,

di- *

[

l It is FEMA's position that based on the current status of the alert and notification system for the Massachusetts portion of the Seabrook plume' EPZ, the means exist to notify the transient and resident population in that area and NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1 Supp. 1, Evaluation Criterion J.10.c, is adequate for the Seabrook Plan for Massachusetts Communities (SPMC). However, it is our understanding that the VANS will l not become operational 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> a dcy, 7 days a week until January 3, 1990. We will advise you as soon as we have verified that operational status. It is TEMA's position that parts of the SPMC covered by Evaluation -

L Criterion E.4, will be adequate at that time. The capability of the VANS to directly alert the public will be confirmed in conjunction with the integrated Seabrook ANS operational test scheduled for May 1990. 'As stated in FEMA's findings to the NRC on December 14, 1988, when the VANS is installed and operable, FEMA's position in that at that time, a positive finding can be made, i.e., that plans and preparedness will be adequate to protect the health and safety of the public living in the Massachusetts portion of the Seabrook EPZ by providing reasonable assurance that appropriate protective measures can be taken offsite in the event of a radiological emergency and are capable of being implemented.

Finally, as you may recall, FEMA approved the Maine Ingestion Pathway Plan for Seabrook Station in accordance with 44 CFR 350.12 on March 16, 1989.

If you have any questions, please feel free to conta'ct %e at 646-3692.

Sincerch,,' /

s eeM~

/

~

rant C. Peterson Associate Director State and Local Programs and Support Enclosures As Stated l

l l

~

s 44 t,g'M.y Federal Emergency Management Agency j a

3 9 9[)N k Region X Federal RegionalCenter Bothell, Washington 980219796 l

Lw = har 1, 1989

)DDRNiDUM IDR: Craig S. Wirgo, Chief Technological Hazards Djvision SIrNT 'IH 1 % w .L a . W Richard W. Donovan, Chairman FRCH:

for Seabrook Regional Assistance Ccumittee

SUBJECT:

Status Report on the Seabrook Public Alert ard Notification System (NE)

On November 17, 1989, the Nuclear Rcqulatory Camission requested from FDM a l Status Report on the Seabrook Public NE. By separate memorardum, I have forwarded my Preliminary Findirg of Adequate for the Seabrook Station NE in the ,

State of New Hampshire. 'Ihis mcmorardum presents my Status Report for the Seabrook Station NIS.

On % 2 13, 1988, FDR Region I provided our Interim Evaluation and l Recommendations for the Seabrook Nuclear P wer Station. At that time our Interim l

Evaluation was that plans and preparedness for both the New Hampshire ard ,

1 Massachusetts portions of the Seabrook Plume EPZ would be adequate when the NE is installed and operational in New Hampchire and Massachusetts. Our evaluation

~ of plans ard preparodness irdicated that E.6 for New Hampshire was inadequate ard that E.4 ard J.10.c was inadequate for }hssachusetts.

In my separate mer.orardum, I have provided to you my Preliminary Firding of Adequate for the ANS in New Hampshire. I now fird that E.6 is adequate. FD%

Region I will forward revised Interim Evaluations ard Rom.erdations to FD%

Headquarters for the State of New Hampshire.

I have roccived New Hampshire Yankee's comitent that they will make the NE operational in the State of Massachusetts on January 3,1990. I have verified that the NG does exist for the State of Massachusetts. I now find that J.10.c is adequate. When New Ilarpshire Yankee declares the NE operational (January 3, 1990), I will fird that the NE system is adequate (E.4 will be adequate) for the State of }hssachusetts. FD% Region I will forward Revised Interim Evaluation l and Rwndations for the State of Massachusetts at that tim.

If you have any questions, please contact me at 206-487-4693 (or FPS 390-4693).

l

p- .. ,

• i*

j

, Federal Emergency Management Agency Region X Federal RegionalCenter Bothell,Washintton 980219796 l

't  !

I i

1 W r 1, 1989 l 1

i l

1 MDORNJDUM IUR: Craig S. Wingo, Chief l 7bchnological Hazards Division SIrNI 'DI l IT m :

(OM M d. h Richard W. Donovan, Chairman i

l for Seabrook Regional Assistance Ortnittee j SUB7I:ct: Preliminary Firding of Adequate for the Alert ard Notification System for the Seabrook Station in the State of New Hampshire On November 23, 1988, you forwarded to me preliminary technical review material on the Alert ard Notification System (MG) for the Seabrook Station. You requested that I review the draft technical material ard make a Preliminary Firding of Adequate or Inadequate for the Seabrook ANS. This memorandum ard attachment present my Preliminary Firding of Adequate for the Scabrook Station N4S in the State of New Harpshire.

I fird that six of the seven evaluative criteria (identified in FD%'s REP-10) are adequate for the State of New Harpshire. There is insufficient data to rake i

a finding on evaluative criteria N.1 at this time. Following is a sunnary of my preliminary firdirg:

NURD3-0654/FD% REP-1. Rev.1, elements E.5, E.6, F.1, N.2, N.3 ard N.5 for New Hampshire are adequate. Please see the attached report for details on New Hanpehire's planning ard preparedness. There is ,

insufficient data at this time to make a finding on evaluative criteria N.1 for the State of New Hampshire-only insofar as a telephone survey has not been corducted. I am noting that the month of May 1990 has been set for the NG demonstration ard telephone survey. Following the ANS demonstration and telephone survey, I will incorporate the telephone survey results and available operability data into my Final Finding and Rm -ardations for the Seabrook ANS in the State of New Harpshire.

I confirm that the State of New lh W has the capability to provide an alert signal ard instructional message in the New Hampshire portion of the Seabrook Plume EPZ within the required time frames in FD% REP-10 ard NUREG-0654/PD% REP-1, Rev.1, Apperdix 3.

I confirm that New Hampshire has an acceptable routine siren testing procedure.

. . . . . I y *s 2.

Follcuing is a sumnary of the supplemental special alert and notification l procedures of the State of New Hampshire for the Seabrook Plume EPZ: '

he State of New Hagshire Radiological Emergency Pasponse Plan contains prwisions for notification and request for alert and l notification to the U.S. Coast Guard (DOT) ard the U.S. Tederal Aviation Administration (ICT). mese two Federal Agencies have the responsibility, authority, and jurisdiction for effecting clocures of navigable waters and airspace in the Seabrook Plume EPZ.

We State of New Hagshire has prwided specialized alert and i notification equi; rent to the deaf ard hard of hearing. his equipment is to be utilized in confirming whether or not the person needs transportation assistance in the event Protative Actions for the public are implemented. %e State of Ncw Harpshire has offered and provided tone alert radios to schools, day care centers, nursing homes, hospitals, medical facilities, campgreurds, hotels and rotels, and businesses with 50 or more employees, he State of New Harpshire has supplemental notifica-tion procedures for parks, hunting areas, beaches, campgrounds, 1 etc. j I am noting that this specialized alerting equipent ard the supplemental alert ard notification procedures are not a part of the primary ANS.

I certify, to the best of n1y knowledge ard belief, that the statments contained in this memorardum ard attachnents are true ard accurate. My Preliminary Finiing is that the Seabrook ANS for the State of New Harpshire is Adequate.

If you have any questions, please contact me at 206-487-4693 (or PTS 390-4693) .

1 Attachment l

.,. *g

'nIC SIATE OF ND4 }%MPSHIRE'S AIDC & N:frIFICATIQi SYSTD4 -

. KR

'IHC STABROOK NOCEDR PDWER STATIQi l TDR RD3IQi I, DDCEMBER 1989 REVIDi uumdA  !

12 DENT. FINDDG OCHMDR l

E.5 ADEQUATE 1. We State of New Hanpshire's Radiological Dnergery -

Response Plan (!G{RERP) describes the systen for disse:si-nating instructions to the public relevant to information -

contained in the initial ard follow-up messages receivcd fran Seabrook Station. %e Stata has designated the l Seacoast Operational Area EBS Network as the notification i systan for Seabrook Station. Radio Station WO1Q-IN, l located in Dover, New Harpshire, serves as the CKS-1 '

station for this notification systan.

2. he State of New Hampshire has made arrargements  ;

(letter of Agreement) with Radio Station WO1Q to serve as the CPCS-1 EBS station for the New Hanpshire Seacoast Area. We Seabrook Regional Assistance Ctanittee (RAC)

Chairman has confirned that Radio Station WolQ has adequate signal strergth (50,000 watts) to be picked up throughout  !

the New Hanpshire portion of the Seabrook Plume EPZ; has backup power; operates 24-hours-a-day; and has a backup -

transmitter in the event the primary transmitter should fail. Radio Station WOlQ performs a weekly test of the EBS network. >

, 3. he State of New Hampshire has two dedicated lir0:s to l Radio Station WKQ--a FAX line and machine, and a dedicated l- telephone. %ese dedicated cirulits are located at two

State locations, the State D3C and the State Police l Cumunications Center. Both facilities are located in l

Concord, New Hanpshire. Radio Station WO)Q has the l r-ory equipnent to activate the tone-activated radios that were distributed. Radio Station WOlQ has the capability to record and rebroadcast such EBS messages.

4. he State of New 11ampshire has procedures for activa-tion of the notification system. Eey address quick-breaking situations and situations when the State EOC is activated. Certain EBS messages have been recorded and

! are located at Radio Station W3}Q ard at the Rockingham l County Dispatch Center. S e State Police have the l authority to activate the ANS in the event of a fast l breaking event. h e State Police Cennmunications Center l

operates on a 24-hours-a-day basis. Upon activation of the State EOC, the New Hampshire Office of Energency Management assumes the responsibility for activation of the notification systan.

1

l MIE STATE OF ND4 HAMPSHIRE'S ALDT & ICTIFICMt'N SYSTEM FOR DIE SEABROOK NUCLTAR IWER SIATICH 112% RD3ICH I, DOCD4BER 1989 REVIDi QuuudA JIDDU FINDIlG CrtHDR E.5 (Cont.) 5. Se State's procedures call for the EBS messages to be broadcast every 15 minutes for a mininn of 2 to 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> (if the ressage does not change) or otherwise directed.

EBS messages will be monitored by the Media Center and Joint Telephone Information Center.

E.6 ADD 20 ATE 1. We NHRERP specifies the organizations, ard irdividuals within those c ganizations, who are responsible for activat-irg the ANS. Administrative means exist to ensure a 24-hour response capability for notification ard activation of the ANS.

2. W e NHRERP procedures specify the steps to be employed to activate the ANS. Se primary siren activation ard control point (alert system) is the Rockingham County Dispatch Center with backup activation fran the Seabrook Station Control Room. m e New Hampshire municipalities within the Plume EPZ can also activate the sirens within their boundaries. In the event of fast-breakirg emergency, the State Police Communications Center can direct Rocking-ham County Dispatch Center to activate the sirens. Se current administrative ard physical means meet the 15-min-ute design objectives of IURD3-0654/FD%-REP-1, Rev.1.

3. he New Ha::pshire Yankee's 1TMA REP-10 ard FDR REP-10 Adderdum reports have been reviewed by ERC International, a FD% technical assistance contractor. S e Seabrook RAC Chairman has reviewed the contractor's draft report titled "Seabrook Station Site-Specific Offsite Radiological Emergency Preparedness Alert ard Notification System Quality Assurance Verification." The Seabrook RAC Chairnan concurs with the firding that Seabrook Station's Public Alert ard Notification System Design does meet the specific design requirenents of FD % REP-10.

4. We Seabrook siren system within the State of New Hampshire consists of 94 sirers. Se Seabrook RAC Chairman has verified that the siren system has been enhanced as specified in the FD% REP-10 ard FD% REP-10 Adderdum reports ard as described in the NHRERP Volume 1, Rev. 3.

W e Seabrook siren system became operational effective October 1989.

5. Tone alert radios have been provided to institutions, special needs facilities, and special needs persons. Rese 1

tone alert radios will be activated by a signal broadcast by Radio Station IO}Q. Reso tone alert radios are a -

supplemental system to the primary siren system.

2 l

1

7EE STATE OF NDi }W(PSHIRE'S ALERP & }CITTICATIN SYSIIM FOR {

7nE Srmoox NoCtra racR mTim  ;

FD4A RD3 ION I, IOCDGER 1989 REVID4 CRITERIA EUMDfr. FD7DDE O}MNT E.6 (Cont.) 6. Means of alertirq boaters in offshore waters will be {

prwided by the U.S. Coast Guard (USO3) . The State of New Harpshire has an agreement with the USO3 statirg that the  :

State will request the establishment of a narine safety ,

zone. Se USO3 will establish a narine safety zone with ,

appropriate notices to nariners broadcast over mariner i radio channels. S e State can provide personnel and ,

equiIrent frun the Department of Safety Services, Division of Boating Safety to supplement the USO3 alerting and i notification activities. By agreement with New Harpshire Yankee, the State of New Hanpshire requests such marine alerting ard notification by the USO3 for the offshore ,

waters in the Seabrook Plume EPZ. .

7. The State of New Harpshire has an agreement with the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (DOT) for the establishment of an air space restriction and the '

notification of aircraft. Dy agreement with New Hampshire Yankee, the State of New Hanpshire requests such alerting and notification by the DOT for the Seabrook Plume EPZ.

F.1 ADD;UATE 1. 7here exists a primary ard a secontlity ccsumanication system frun the licensee's facilities (control rocan and 7SC) to the Rockirgham county Dispatch Center, the State Police Carmunications Center, and the State EOC. The Rockirgham 0:unty Dispatch Center and the State Police Communications Center cperate on a 24-hours-a-day basis.

2. Provisions exist for hard-copy verification between the State's Incident Field Office at the EOF and the State EOC. Current procedures call for the use of this system.

3. Neither ccanmunications system is subject to preemption for lower priority purposes or for failure due to traffic overloadirg. The primary and secondary systems do not have a ccrumon failure mode under adverse environmental conditions.

N.1 NO FINDDG 1. The capability of the Seabrook ANS to directly alert the public will be confirned by a telephone survey to be corducted followirg an operational test to be held in May 1990. The cperational test shall include the activation of the siren system in an "all siren rode" ard in the " beach closing rode". -

3

t .

• O '  :

ME SIATE OF NDi HAMPSHIRE'S AIDC & }CTIFICATIQ4 SYSIDi  ;

FOR  !

DE SEAHROOK NOCIIAR 3%T:R STATIQ4 l FDR RIGION I, DOCDER 1989 .

i REVID4 CRITERIA i EIDDIT FDJDIN3 _COMNT ,

N.1 (Cont.) 2. Operability data frm the system-wide silent test routine is not available at this time.

3. Rockirgham County Dispatch Center shall perform three system-vide silent tests of the New Hampshire siren system every 2 weeks. S e system-wide silent test program was initiated in n==har 1989.

4. Ear.h shift shall execute the system-wide silent test procedure every 2 weeks. B ere are three shifts per i 24-hour day. For each test, the Rockingham County Dispatch '

Center will dispatch a person to a siren location. The r person will verify that the specific siren did or did not rotate about 90'. If the siren rotates, all lights on the siren's control panel will be illuminated. If the siren rotates, the person will verify that the lights were illuminated.

5. Appropriate documentation for the system-wide silent tests will be developed. 21s documentation will serve as a basis for the report on operability percentage achieved.

! me State will subnit an annual report on alert and

( notification tests, operability percentage, etc. to FDR (Annual letter of Certification).

N.2 ADDQUATE 1. We State of New Hampshire has cammitted itself to a series of communications drills. Quarterly drills will include the testing of the linkages frun the Seabrook Station to the State Police, ard frm the State Police to r Rockirgham County Dispatch Center and the State D3C.

2. Se State of New Hanpshire uses most of the equipnent identified in the NHRERP on a daily basis. Berefore, the cmmunication drill program is designed to test p.h rather than equipment. Se State of New Hampshire and ,

i Seabrook Station began the quarterly cmmunication drill program in the fall of 1989.

3. FD% notes that a more complete description of the State of New Hampshire drill program can be found in FDR's report, " Review and Evaluation of the New Hampshire Radiological Emergency Response Plan" (WWr 1988),

Planning Standard N.

4

1':..

i.,

o-EE STATE OF hTM HAMPSHIRE'S AIDG & }UTIFICATIcti SYSTDI l

KR WE SFABROOK NOC2 EAR IWER SIATIC14 II24A RD31C24 I, 00CDECR 1989 RLVID4 CPITERIA DD4Dir FINDI!*3 CrtHENP N.3 ADDQUATE 1. We State of New Hanpshire has ommitted itself to develop exercise scenarios that will p1 wide corditions to test the decision ard implementation chain for Alert ard Notificatien System activation.

2. We State of New Hanpshire adequately delcr. Lated its capabilities to activate the Alert and Notification System in the 1988 FD4A Graded D:ercise for Seabrook Station.

N.5 ADD 20 ATE 1. We State of New Harpshire has ommitted itself to a pu cece for evaluatirq observer's ard participant's coments concernin; Alert ard Notification System perforrance.

2. We State of New Hanpshire has demonstrated its ability to establish a management control system for resolution of planning ard preparedness issues.

1 5