ML20031A603
| ML20031A603 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 07/27/1981 |
| From: | Gilberts D NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. |
| To: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20031A598 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-81-255 810724, NUDOCS 8109240204 | |
| Download: ML20031A603 (4) | |
Text
...
o -.
~
NorthIrn St: tis PowIt Ccmprny m-i 414 Nico!!et Mall D. E. Gilberts ManneapOhS. Minnesota 55401 Senior Vice President Telephone (612) 330 6071 Power Supply July 24, 1981 Mr. Jam,es G. Keppler Director, Region III office of Inspection and Enforcement U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137
Dear Mr. Keppler:
MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT Docket No. 50-263 License No. DPR-22 Emergency Preparedness Public Notification System Your letter of July 1,1981 requested information on the status of the subject systems as related to the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, Section IV.D.3 for a system to be established by July 1,1981.
Our letter of February 6,1981 submitted copies of the upgraded Emergency Response Plan and in this letter we' furnished status reporting infonnation -
on the public notification system.
It was pointed out that, although we l
hai a consultant developing system design alternatives, it was certain at that ' time that a fully expanded system consistent with the guidance of NUREC-0654, Appendix 3, could not be functioning by the prescribed date of July 1, 1981. The following paragraphs represent an updated status reporting on the system for our Monticello plant site.
We have decided to commit to an all-siren alerting system consistent with l
the Appendix-3 criteria for the 0-5 mile zone surrounding the Monticello plant. Approximately 29 additional sirens will be installed to complement the existing Civil Defense system of 7 sirens located in the 0-5 mile zone.
l Commercial radio alert units will be provided for appropriate institutional The required sirens have been specified by our consultant and we use.
anticipate the following schedule:
Issue request for proposal for sirens 7/81 Award siren contract 9/81 Delivery of sirens 12/81 Begin installation 3/82 l
Complete installation 4/82 Field testing / start-up testing complete 5/82 Full system test and turnover 6/82 The extended installation time is due to winter weather conditions which create a severe handicap.
l h' W'j i 8109240204 810853 9
-.UDELL81-2SS PDR v
r: c-a
.L
'r Mr. James G. Keppler Page 2 July 24, 1981 Due to regulatory and technical uncertainties, we are continuing to study the 5-10 mile zone. Options being considered, with cost effectiveness also a factor, are:
1.
Reliance on existing Civil Defense system of fixed sirens and committed use of mobile sirens.
2.
Added mobile. siren capability to compress the notification time scale.
4.
Installation of additional fixed sirens together with radio alert units.
As mentioned in our February 6 letter, it is our position that adequate -
interim compensating actions are represented by the existing Civil Defense This warning system recognizing the low population density in the area.
existing warning system is described in the Minnesota emergency response plan which has been ' evaluated by. FEMA against the joint NRC/ FEMA criteria l
(NUREG-0654).
Copics of the Minnesota plan (including plans cf local govern-ment entities) were submitted to you with our letter of December 18, 1980.
For your reference on the existing capability, attached is the following extractious from the state plan:
Section V Notification Times Paragraph B, Pages 20-21 We will keep you informed -if changes occur in the projected schedule for installation of sirens in the 0-5 mile zone and furthermore we will inform you of the results of our continuing study for the 5-10 mile zone which we expect within 3-4 months.
Yours truly, redx D. E. Gilberts Senior Vice President Power Supply cc:
Mr. C. H. Brown Mr. G. Charnoff
. Brian Grimes, Director Division of Emergency Preparedness Vashington, D. C.
20555 Mr. Ralph A. Olmos, Director Division of Emergency Services, Minnesota Mr. R. E. Connor, Acting Regional Director Federal Emergency Management Agency Chicago, Illinois 60602 Attachment DEC:nk
in the casa of ic=ediate. evacuation., Immediate evacuation, because of 4.
t2eicvalofgeneralemergencywillbecoc=unicatedasIollows:
j..
1.
Contact from plant to appropriate county sheriff 2.
Sheriff will activate warning sirens 3.
Sheriff will contact media for public service announcements 4.
Sheriff will contact Division of Energency Services to start c=crgency procedures S.
Contact from sheriff and Division of Emergency Services to local agencies will initiate door-to-door notification.
Any sheltering /cvacuation other than described above cust be ordered by the Governor and these notifications and procedures a're outlined on pages 27-29.
IV.
_ VERIFICATION PROCEDURES A.
INITIAL CONDITIONS It is the responsibility of the duty officer, Division of Emeracncy Services, in coordination with the Minnesota Department of Health to verify im=ediatelv the incident notification from the utility in accordance with standard procedures.
B.
ALERT /MOBILI?.ATION MESSAGES All off-site contacts frcm the utility receive a second call from another agency, as a part of the notification plan, except the first off-site contact, the duty officer, Division of Emergency Services.
These repeated contacts are highlighted on the notification block diagram (page 2 3 by matching letters on the right hand side of the blocks.
Verification of alert / mobilization messages is also effected through the State-local coordination between agencies sharing a co= mon objective such as law enforcement, transportation, public infor=ation, etc.
V.
NOTIFICATION TIMES A.
T"ne nucicar posuc plant operator will notify the State Division of Emergency Services duty officer uichin 15 minutes after an indication of. an event within any of the four categories outlined in this plan.
The operator will notify the appropriate local officials also within this 15 minute time limit on any event within the alert, site, or general e=crgency c Legusf es as outlined in this plan.
B.
The local goternment will notify the following within 30 minutes of receiving initial notification of an alert, site, or general energency from the. nuclear power plant operator:
1.
Population within '3 miles of the plant - 1007.
DES-80 V
Population within 3 - 10 miles of the plant - 757.
C.
The State Division of Emer:;cncy Services will notify their call list i:=ediately upon contact from the nuclear power plant operator.
Cor.nunicator tests have indicated that first responders calls (see II., A.,
(2) or II.,
B., (2) are completed within 10 minutes.
~
D.
Contact of Federal agencies is shared by the Division of Emergency Services, Power Plant operator, and Department of Itcalth. This contact would be accomplished in 15 minutes.
, DES-80
. a 'h Northern States P:wir CcmpIny
.~e e.
D.E.hi!berts J_
414 Nicollet Mill Minneapohs, Minnesota 55401 Senior Vice President Telephone (612) 330-6071 Power Supply July 24, 1981 5
l Mr. James G. Keppler Director, Region III Office of Inspection and Enforcement U. S. Nucicar Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137
Dear Mr. Keppler:
PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT Docket Nos. 50-282 and 50-306 Emergency Preparedness I
Public N >tification System Your letter of July 1,1981 requested information on the status of the subject systems as related to the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, Section IV.D.3 for a system to be established by July 1,1981.
Our letter of February 6,1981 submitted copies of the upgraded Emergency Response Plan and in this letter we furnished status reporting information l
l on the public notificathn system.
It was pointed out that, although we l
had a consultant developing system design alternatives, it was certain at that time that a fully expanded system consistent with the guidance of NUREG-0654, Appendix 3, could not be functioning by the prescribed date of July 1,1981. The following paragraphs represent an updated status reporting l
on the system for our Prairic Island plant site.
l We have decided to commit to an all-siren alerting system consistent with the Appendix 3 criteria for the 0-5 mile zone surrounding the Prairie Island l_
plant. Approximately 37 additional airens will be installed to compicment the existing Civil Defense system of 6 sirens located in the 0-5 mile zone.
Commercial radio alert units will be provided for appropriate institutional l
The required sirens have been specified by our consultant and we anti-l use.
cipate the following schedule:
Issue request for proposal for sirens 7/81
' Complete installation 3/82 Field testing / start-up testing complete 4/82 Full system test and turnover 5/82 The extended installation time is due to winter weather conditions which create a severe handicap.
~
sW CL"
3 'r
?-
EMr. James G. Keppler.
Page 2 July 24,-1981 ei Due to regulatory and technical uncertainties, we are continuing to study the 5-10 mile zone.
Options being considered, with cost effectiveness also a: factor, are:
1.
Reliance on existing Civfl Defense system of fixed sirens and I
committed use of mobile sirens.
2.
Added mobile siren capability to compress the notification time scale.
3.
Installation of additional fixed sirens together with use of mobile
~
'4.
Installation of additional fixed sirens t_gether with radio alert units.
- As mentioned in our February 6 letter, it is our position that adequate interim compensating actions are represented by the existing Civil Defense These warning system. recognizing the low population density in the area.
p
[
existing warning' systems are described in the state (Minnesota and Wiscon-
~
sin) emergency response plans which have been evaluated by FEMA against the l-
' joint NRC/ FEMA criteria (NUREG-0654).
Copies of these state plans (including plans of local governmental entities) were submitted to you with our letter Jof December 18, 1980. ;For your reference on the existing capability, attached are the following extractions from the state plans.
1 Minnesota Section V Notification Times,' Paragraph B, pp 20-21
^
Wisconsin Section IV Concept of Operation, Tab A, pp 0-55 Items B, C, D and E We will keep you informed if changes occur in the projected schedule for installation of sirens in the 0-5 mile zone and furthermere we will inform you of the resuito of our continuing study for the 5-10 mile zone which we L
expect within 3-4 months.
i Yours truly, h
'l' W D. E. Gilberts Senior Vice President Power Supply l
l
,cc:
Mr.. G. Charnoff
[
-Mr.
C..D. Feiercabend pNf'. Brian Grimes, Director -
Division of Emergency Preparedness Washington, D. C.
20555 I
Mr. Ralph A. Olmos, Director Division of Emergency Services, Minnesota
-Mr. Joseph L. LaFleur, Administrator Division of Energency Government, Wisconsin l
-Mr. R. E. Connor, Acting Regional Director
. Federal Emergency Mar 2gement Agency Chicago, Illinois 50602
.DEG:nk i
-=-,
Immediate evacuation, bec,ausa of uation.
.in'the case of'ic=ediate evac ill be communicated as followst the level of general emergency w h iff
Contact:
from p.lant to appqopriate county s er 1.
Sheriff wi11' activate warning sirens l
- 22 announceacnts i
Sheriff will contact media for public serv ce i
Services to start 3.
Sherif f will contact Division of E=crgency i-l.
4.
emergency procedures o local from sheriff and Division of Emergency Services t otification.
d agencies will initiate door-to-oor n be ordered by
~5.- Contact other than described above must Any. sheltering / evacuation fications and procedures are outlined on the Governor and these noti
~
' pages 27-29.
-IV. - VERIFICATION PROCEDURES _
INITIAL CONDITIONS fficer, Division of Emergency A.
/:
is the responsibility of the duty o Deparcaent of Health to dance i
Services, in coordination with the Minnesotanotification frem the utility in ac It
~
verify immediatelv the incident c
l with standard procedures.
B., ALERT / MOBILIZATION MESSAGES _ i e a second call frem another l
All o ff-site contacts fran the utility rece vlan, except the first of f-site agency, as a part of the notification pEmergency Services.
These the duty officer, Division of ification block diagram repeated contacts are highlighted on the not(p ide of the blocks.
- contact, l -.
Verification of alert / mobilization messagesagencies sharing a co==on o the' State-local coordination betweentransportation, public informat ion, etc.
L l
such as law enforcement, NUPIFICATION TIMES _
ill notify the State Division of
-V.
fter an indication The nuclear power plant operator wEmergency Servic he four categories outlined in this plan.l o A.
f
-of an event within_any o t The. operator will notify the appropriate locaon any event within site, or this 15 minute time limit d in this plan.
' general emergency categories as outline ithin 30 minutes of The local government will notify the following wsite, or general emerg
- alert, receiving initial notification of an 3
from the nuclear power-plant operator:
he plant - 100"
-1. - -Population within 3 miles of t '
DIS, _,
o 4
?,
2.
Population within 3 - 10 miles of the platit - 75%
C.
The State Division of Emer;cncy Services will notify their call list i:=ediately upon contact frera the nuclear power plant operator.
Cor=unicator tests have indicated that first responders calls (see II., A.,
(2) or II.,
B., (2) are completed within 10 minutes.
D.
Contact of Federal agencies is shared by the Division of Emergency
- Services, Power Plant operator, and Department of !!calth. This contact vculd be accomplished in 15 minutes.
i DES-80
1 AB A yo e.
i 4
WARNING r
1.
PURPOSE To identify warning equipment and prceedures to reach higher and lower echelons of government for support of county response to an incident at the fixed nuclear facility, and to reach the endanger ~ed public.
II.
RESPONSIBILITY 1he County Warning Of ficer, as stated in Annex C - Warning of the Emergency Operations Plan, is responsible for County Warning operations.
III.
REQUIREMENTS Warning capabilities include county-wide contact to the endangered population through public broadcasting media, mobile public address equipment and outdoor warning sys tems.
Warning to higher and lower echelons of government include radio and wire systems of communication.
IV.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS Pierce County Sherif f Department A. When the Pierce County Sherif f's Department, or the local Civil Defense Directer is informed that a problem has developed at the Prairic Island Nuc1 car Generating Plant, the Sheriff and the Civil Defense Director will es tablish a Command Pos t at the Sherif f 's C.2 office and the Civil Defense Dispatch Center, Courthouse Annex in Ellsworth, Wisconsin.
A deputy will be dispatched to the plant near H.3 site EOC.
B. All Sherif f's Department personnel will be called to duty, and will H. 4 report to the Command Pos t.
All orders will come f rom the Command Pos t.
Notification to the Public to be accomplished within 30 minutes subject to refinement by testing and completion of study by NSP (see I-6-o-29).
C. All warnings of residents in the 5 mile radius of the plant will be handled by Pierce County Sherif f's Department personnel and Civil Defense personnel, if needed.
D. Warning will be accomplished by squads driving in the area with the
" yelp" turned on.
- lhe PA (Public Address) systems may also be used.
People camped along the river will be warned by the Pierce C.2 County Boat Patrol.
J.10.c E. Warning in the 19 mile radius will be done by police and fire departments from Prescott, River Falls, Ellsworth and Bay Cit'y.
Each municipality will have specific areas of responsibility marked on a county map.
/dditional warr.ing will be provided by area radio and TV stations.
Spring Valley, Elmwood, and Plum City Police and Fire Departments F.
will be used for traf fic control and reserve, if needed.
All departments will need some reserve personnel in their own jurisdiction for traffic control, police and fire protection.
O-55 L_
a El V NIAGARA IM U MOHAWK NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION /300 ERIE BOULEVARD WEST, SYRACUSE. N.Y.13202/ TELEPHON 4f I
July 24,1981 Mr. Boyce H. Grier, Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 671 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Re: Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Docket No. 50-220 DPR-63
Dear Mr. Grier:
Your letter of July 1,1981, requested that Niagara Mohawk provide information regarding the Prompt Hotification System for the plume exposure Emergency Planning Zone around Nine Mile Point Unit 1.
The informacion below addresses your reqJest.
Niagara Mohawk' ; letter to Mr. H.R. Denton dated June 30, 1981 indicated that the Prompt Not'fication System requit ed by 10CFR 50 Appendix E would not That letter described the compensating actions be completed by July 1,1981.
A brief description of being taken to fulfill the notification requirements.
the proposed notification system was also included.
A detailed description of the proposed system was submitted by Mr. T. J.
Perkins, to Mr. Donald B. Davidoff, Project Manager, Nuclear Emergency Planning Group, New York State Department of Health, on May 27, 1931.
He believe that this information was subsequently transmitted to the Federal Since the Federal Emergency Management Administration, for their review.
Emergency Management Administration is responsible for reviewing the design and acceptance of this system, we do not believe that a duplication of the However, the information to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is necessary.
basic design objectives of the notification system are to achieve the criteria for acceptance listed in Appendix III of HUREG 0645 Rev.1.
Your letter also requested a description of problems hindering installation of the Prompt Notification System.
Niagara Mohawk has experienced difficulties with manufacturers delivering the necessary equipment for installation of the ou.tdoor siren system and the tone alert radio system.
Specifically, long delivery times have been encountered for the outdoor siren system radio activation equipment as a result of a backlog of orders at the Additionally, delivery of the tone alert radios is not expected manufacturer.
until October,1981.
An extended delivery time of these units has resulted from depletion of the manufacturers' parts inventory.
gg 4
.j f
'41r. Bryce H. Grier, Director
' Rag 2 %
July 24,1981 1
As. stated in our June 30,1981. letter to Mr. Denton, the Prompt Notification System is currently scheduled for completion and verification testing by the end of October 1981.
This schedule is highly dependent upon 4
receipt of equipment in a timely manner.
Very truly yours,
- /
T.E. Lempges Vice President Nuclear Generation GJG:bd cc: Mr. Brian Grimes Director, Division of Emergency Preparedness U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
=--e-e g
c
w J
.*=*,
i Omaha Public Power District S-1623 HAMNEY e OMAHA. NE8HASMA 68102 e TE LEPHON E 536 4000 AR E A CODE 402 July 24, 1981 Mr. K. V. Seyfrit, Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Inspection and Enforcement Region IV
'611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011
Reference:
Docket No. 50-285
Dear Mr. Seyfrit:
The Commission's letter dated July 1,1981, requeeted information concerning the administrative and physical means which have been es-tablished for alerting and providing prompt instructions to the public within the plume exposure EPZ in the event of an emergency.
This letter provides Omaha Public Power District's response to your request.
' The administrative means for alerting the public were thoroughly addressed in the District's letter to the Commission deted June 26, 1981, concerning NUREG-0654, Rev.1 (specifically pages 40 and 40.1-40.16).
The physical means for alerting the public were addressed in the District's letter to the Commission dated December 12, 1980 (page 8),
which identified implementation dates for NUREG-0737, and June 26, 1981 (pages-39 and 39.1), concerning NUREG-0654, Rev. 1.
These letters provided the description and schedule for implementing the Early Noti-fication System (ENS) designed to meet the criteria in Appendix 3 of NUREG-0654, Rev. 1.
The ENS will consist of 95 radio controlled outdoor sirens (24 sirens in Iowa and 71 in Nebraska) designed to ensure cover-age of the 10 mile radius plume exposure zone.
Siren installation is expected to be completed by November 1,1981, with testing requiring 60 additional days. -Thus, the earliest expected date for full implement-ation of the ENS is January 1,1982.
Until the ENS is fully implemented, the District has egreements with local fire and police departments where they will alert the general public. Available methods are use of tornado warning sirens in the major population centers and use of portable notification systems for the outlying population..This interim system is detailed in the Dis-trict'.s June 26, 1981, letter.
face usrg
, ~a;. r '
J-Mr. K. V. Seyfrit 1
~ July 24, 1981 Page Two.
The District believes appropriate administrative and physical means
- have ocen implemented and/or proposed to satisfy the Commission's re-quirement for alerting the public in tha plume. exposure zone during an emergency.
Sinc ely, y
il W. C.;j]ones Divisten Ma.1ager.
Production Operations WCJ/KJM/TLP/RWS:jmm cc:
Mr. Brian Grimes, Director l
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Division of Emergency Preparedness Washington, D.C.
20555 LeBoeuf Lamb, Leiby & MacRae 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W.
Washington, D.C. ' 20036 l
i e
i i
'o
... o 4COimlIULST LFFII.ITIES
$ T *" 5 "~ ** ' ""' '"'"* ' " '"'
NsI:U v
]
a am RTFo O GoNNECTICUT 06101 ms n is.c naessww :r g,,
'U' "
July 24, 1981 HANDl.ED ON Docket Nos. 50-213 JUL 25 1981 50-245 50-336 E. L. "!MTE" COBER A01823 Mr. Boyce H. Grier, Director Region I Office of Inspection and Enforcement.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 631 Pa::k Avenue King of Prussia, Pt. 19406
References:
(1)
B. H. Grier letter to W. G. Counsil, dated July 1, 1981.
(2)
W. G. Counsil letter tc D. G. Eisenhut, dated February 13, 1981.
(3)
A Feasibility Report on Evacuation of the Area Around the Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Station, dated March, 1980.
(4)
A Feasibility Report on Evacuation of the Area Arour.d the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, dated March, 1980.
Gentlemen:
Haddam Meck Plant Millstone Nuclear Power '.3tation, Unit Nos. I and 2 Prompt Notifications and Instructions to the Public in the Event of an Emergency Pursuant to Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E to 10CFR50, administrative and physical means must be demonstrated for alerting and providing prompt instructions to the public within the plume exposure pathway emergency planning zones (EPZs) by July 1,1981.
The design objective for such capability is defined in Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E to 10CFR50 and i
Section B.2 of Appendix 3 to NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Revision 1 (NUREG-0654).
In Reference (1), Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (CYAPCO) and Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO) were requested to provide confirmation that the July 1,1981 date has been met or, if not, to provide a description of the compensating actions t*1at are being taken until such means for alerting an. providing prompt instructions to the public exists. Additionally, if the July 1, 1981 date has not been met, CYAPCO and NNECO were requested to advise the NRC S*aff of the schedule for compliance with the above design objective, a descriptio,n of our means for compliance, and the reasons for delay in compliance.
JL
~
(
(
O
1,.
4 In Reference (2), CY.PCO and NNECO informed the NRC Staff t. hat even though work was progressing in a responsive and expeditious manner, compliance with the intent of the above design objective prior to early
- to mid 1982 is unlikely.
In addition, CYAPCO and NNECO indicated the reasons for delay in such compliance.
Therefore, as an update to Reference (2) and in response co uference (1), the following infor-mation is provided.
Engineering studies have been performed for those areas within the plume exposure pathway EPZs of the Haddam Neck Plant and the Millstone Nuclear Power Station to determine what fixed alerting equipment already exists and how many local community vehicles with public address (PA) capability are available.
The engineering studies also identified what additional fixed alerting equipment is ' required to comply with the intent of the above design objective.
These studies are presently being reviewed by the State of Connecticut and twenty-eight (28) of the twenty-nine (29) local communities within the plume exposure pathway EPZs.
(Plum Island, New York is a Federal research center and due to the nature of its experimentation, adaquate alerting capability, as well as an emergency plan, already exist).
After completion of such review, the studies will be sulnitted tc. FEMA and. the NRC Staff for review.
Upon completion of
^
FEMA and NRC Staff review, specifications will be sent to potential vendors, their proposals will be reviewed, and a contract will be awarded.
After delivery, installation, and testing of new equipment, it is intended that administrative and physical means exist for alerting and providing prompt instructions to the public within the plume exposure pathway EPZn will be demonstrated by early to mid 1982.
Regarding compensating actions between July 1, 1982 and early to mid 1982, a radio pager. system has been available since June 1, 1981 at both the Haddam Neck Plant and the Millstone Nuclear Power Station to promptly (within 15 minutes) notify responsible licensee, State, and local com-munity officials, including Plum Island, after an incident is classified.
Therefore, CYAPCO and NNECO are already in compliance with portions of Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E to 10CFR50.
During the above-mentioned interim period, public alerting capabilities within the plume exposure pathway EPZs.of the Haddam Neck Plant and the Millstone Nuclear Power Station will con-ist of existing fixed and mobile alerting equipment.
Wese capabilities are well known due to the efforts involved in pe paring the engin~e'esinli"s~tudie's 'and 'in~ revising ~ Annex' V, ~ State ~ of ' Connecticut Radiological Emergency Response Plan (Connecticut _RERP),__to the State of _ _
Connecticut Emergency Operations Plan.
In addition, public alerting capabilities within the low population zones of the Haddam Neck Plant and Millstone Nuclear Power Station are addressed in the Connecticut RERP currently in effect.
Once notified by the radio pager system, the local community responsible officials could use the current public alerting capabilities to alert the public to the emergency.
The local Emergency Broadcast System (EBS), which is activated by the local com-munity responsible officials, and/c-local community vehicles with PA capability can be used to provide the affected public with the necessary instructions.
The State Office of Civil Preparedness, under the direction of the Governor, can activate the State-wide EBS network.
7.
~ *.-
w.y 4
'i Estimates of the tine required to notify the public using only current i
public alerting cap Wilities within the plume exposure pathway EPZs of the Haddam Neck."
. and the Millstone Nuclear Power Station are well documented in Refu..ces (3) and (4), respectively.
Licensee, State, and local community officials are cognizant of these estimates and,. as suchi these estimates could be utilized to establish priorities for use of the mobile alerting capabilitiea in order to notify the.affeeted public as quickly as possible.
As mentioned above, licensee, State, and local officials are knowledge.21e of current public alerting capabilities within the plume exposure path-way EPZs of the Haddam Neck Plant and Millstone Nuclear Power Station as well as estimates of the time required to notify the public with such alerting capabilities since this information is contained in the current and draf t revisions to the Connecticut RERP, References (3) and (4), and the engineering studies.
In addition, the probability of requiring the use of public alerting capabilities that meet the intent of the design objective 'of Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E to 10CFR50 and Section B.2 of Appendix 3 ' :o NUREG-0654 during the above-mentioned interim period for
. those incidences where the present public alerting capabilities would I-
. not be adequate are extremely small and are judged to be negligible.
~
Therefore, CYAPCO and NNECO have concluded that there is reasonable assurance that there are no undue risks to the health and safety of the general public in the vicinity of either the Haddam Neck Plant or the Millstone NL: lear Power Station that are related to the above imple-mentation dates.
We trust that this ' submittal adequately responds to Reference (1).
Should.you have any questions, please feel fr.e to contact us.
l Very trub yours, l
CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY NORTHEAST NUCI. EAR ENERGY COMPANY W. G. Counsil Senior Vice President -
cc:
Mr. Brian K. Grimes, Director Division of Emergency Preparednrss U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission -~
~ - ~
Washington, D.C.
20555 7
--w
. +
gr e--
a