ML20032D788
| ML20032D788 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/30/1981 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20032D789 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8111170486 | |
| Download: ML20032D788 (79) | |
Text
'
m.. w:
'2 -
...y..
a@v ;.
4ys...,N - L..:..;.q~.., X. ~.,,._m 'Be,;
.~ z
.A. :,.v.
...s.
.~
' i ~ *.- :.,~. w. c.
.. ~.
.,.'f....h.,,,.,,r-;, j,**; o Q
^t. c i',' ~ '.*,. h.,.
ri,,,;[lg ;;) 0, %. ' *,'.., 4 (',.,'s
'l
- \\
..<-3,..;
^ ',.*
m.y[',
,.Q
,y
.'f*.. ; 3..
.....,.~,z.y r
-r y'
'^
. d:. >,.' J,'a s-
- .h,. 3 n$ip).fdjiT?N!.th.M GUI.ATORI COMM.~SSICN
~
~
,S. ': ;;. G...;.<.9 c -
~
e 7
.....v.
.... ~,
,c _,
a s
,' 4
' ",0;c...n; gipf..t.t, y ".-l
, Jg; _.._c.
- 7. w,.m
., n
..,. 7 > :-
- -,...n.-..
s
. p.
.,u
.....,,:... r
. - *.., ~
~
}
s2 K-
- as-'m..
.- ~ ;- -
.e 1
.M.i
. s-<<g.
, - -. r.,' -
- y
-.m
., i,
- 3.s.
+....
~.. n.~.
y'
.. j g.
- - m. : :. COMMISSION MEETING
,... g p.,,
.),.
r T
.-w.
s 1,...
4,.,
.n ;,..
s
. :2:,...;y,, -..Q.., : '~ , ^ ^, : ( y,.
N.,
y*. -
- a. -
'..c '
- ."~[
~
., ^-
y,..,f;.'.' %
.. ;.~):g-,. m....,p ;. m.;, ;,
t._,
', F
... >,u..,,.,.
.p..,
...s
~
P
. n:
.I
-..e e
r r
t' w.
e r
- d ge,... :-,.a : : ::,n~ +.
-:r
.s; s
1 s
I:r, tie : h ef:
' PUBLIC MEETING
- /;
J
, ~...
v y
_. 4:
s BRIEFING ON AMENDMENTS TO PART 50--
.-7 r
~m
- ;.. Y EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS REGULATIONS
}-
w
- - y e ~ -
r. ' s..._g.
- I
.?,-
s-f w.
- r....
l
-t P
f 6
CA=: October 30, 1981
~
PAczs:
1 - 77 i
,g.
Washington, D. C.
-.~.
t s
e e
4 i
LLDERSOXf.
' REPORTUG L
i i
r 4ao w _
4.1 w., s.w. m-<
=. _=, c. c. :a c : 4 l
I t
Talach=a : (20~} 554-2245 8111170486 811030 l
PDR 10CFR i
l PT9.7 PDR
1
. {
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
s.
J BRIEFING ON AMENDHENTS TO PART 50 --
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS REGULATIONS 5
PUBLIC HEETING 6
7 Room 1130 1717 H Street, N.W.
8 Washington, D. C.
S Fridar, October 30, 1981 10 The Consrission cc.3vened on the above-entitled 17 matter at 1s40 p.m.,
pursuant to notice.
12 BEFORE L 13 NUNZIO PALLADINO, Chairman
(
VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner 14 PETER BRADFORD, Commissioner JOHN AHEARNE, Commissioner 15 THOMAS ROBERTS, Commissioner 16 ALSO PRESENTL 17 W. DIRCKS S. CHILIC 18 F. REMICK L. BICKWIT 19 N. MALSCH B. GRIMES 20 H. JANG0CHIAN S. RAMOS 2t R. BONERS 22 L. THOMAS, FEMA 23
(.
24 25 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,'NC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 2002A (202) 554-2345
r 7
O 4
l l
l SJe 13, g n==n M 4, T'
_- 'h Cd L S$Q Cd.f*g. ~dM l* p St:acas E" 7==- Zag =las f C. -
'e 4 c he.Li c=
october 30, 1981 1 1 8.~. n c " - ' n ' x nm- - r= T.RT E scsec, s. w., *;asm,.
E C
-h E=M i m cpem ca. pts.t e U:-"d""* 2".d. Cb34:ll'r2M T=
"dia. - - = =-
^7e has. ::=c home #_asred,- c=: =e-=6== =d'
=d-a=d:.
i f l= =g7 -
s-d --w.=
_,J.,,
N
~
---f-^ ' Q Q 4 *meeded gMy &
mowe*=ri 4 -R
-" -ees ?
A M"%
M Y-dad C710 @ 3.M,. #.1 # S
"*.*.C 74.T Cd det i
L 2 a= '~' J :=
L af. " " -~ at t a ~~- =~w dt.sc saen.
I=;r==<* -~~ ci c 'd-" - ' =. " e =s=sQc da cc -ac u=- 7 i
- .M.,- sa-,t fgW
_ -., w_ m q.;... t 4. 4,,,
yg.
7,, g4.
g7 g,.w..
j M W DC 'd M *J'*
M /*
' eh '.:= 3l=7 p;;F?ad# ~7 43,;.*8**
=as"' ~ ad a= '=21e4 ::a zur s 1-"~: c: 1-
- a w '-=>
- = = + -, qc as; ;llf:,ar, '"'
- * * =E7"mt-8**# *.
r e
e p
(
W O
l 4
s e
T 1
W
--r---
r 2
n'
\\
1 21025E.aLEG1 2
CHAIRHAN PALLADINO The meeting will come to
~ ~ ' ' -
3 5rder.
- ----4 ~ -
The subject of today's meeting ir a briefing on
- ' u --
. ;.__5 amendments to Part 50 regarding emergency preparedness 6 regulations.
By way of background, I might provide the
- ~~ ~~
Tf5flowinc.
~
7-- 8~
In our discussions with FEMA regarding emergency (tpreparedness,we felt that would be significant advantage if
~
c-
-:_z-
.2 7 =..n
- .-- 10..we would divide-our activities and differentiate between ir_.
It reasonable-assarance that we have plans that can be 12 implemented, and the question of the exercise.
The concept 13 tha t led to the proposals today were based on the k
14 consideration that the exercise be made a part of the start 15 up testing, and it not be necessary to be performed' before is the operation at 5 percent power This led to SECY $ 54.
17 This led also to a consideration tha t the staff 18 felt had merit, and that was to not require even a finding 19 on the need for plans before starting on the 5 percent, and 20 that led tc. SECT-81-570.-
I think that they can be treated 21 separatelr, and we should give consideration first to 22 SECT-81-554, and then to SECY-81-570.
23 We do have with us today, in addition to the E
24 staff, 3 r. Thomas f rom Federal Emergency Management Agency, 25 and I expect t.1at af ter we have introduced the topic a w
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
' 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON O.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
T 3
-l f'
1 little further, we may call on him for some comments.
So, i
2 why t.on'.t I turnthe meeting over to Mr. Dircks to introduce 3 the subdect.
NR. DIRCKSc We are pleased to have Mr. Iee Thomas 5 here.
He-is the Associate Director for State and local 6-Programs a.t FEMA.
7 In addition. to the two papers you referred to, Mr.
8' Chairman, SECY-81-554 and SECI-8T-570, we would also like to 9 review with the Commission the status of our interaction to with FENA, and we-would also like to give the Commission it some idea of the work program ahead in the area of
- 12. regulation and rulemaking in the emergency 13 prepared. ness / emergency planning area.
(
14 Brian Grimes will carry the bulk of the discussion 15 today, and' on his left 'in Mike Jamgochian f rom the Office of 16 Research and Standards.
17 HR. GRIMESt As you requested, Mr. Chairman, we 18 vill go over the SECY-8 T-554 first.
Could we have the first 19 slide.
20 I would like to note as background that when the 2t emergency preparedness rule was. issued in August of 1980, it e
22 was issued after what I would call expeditious rulemaking 23 compared to most rulemakings that go on for major items.
It 24 was recognized at that time that the rule might be less than i
25 perfect, but that there was a pressing need for a ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
4 O
1 substantial upgrade in the level of emergency preparedness, 2 therefore, we took our best shot based on the comments we t
S had received over a few month period and issued a rule.
+
Af ter some experience with this process, we see a 5 number of opportunities to streamline the process and 6 clarify our regulations, and we will be-discussing several 7 of what we see as opportunities here today, and two specific
,8 pieces before the Commission for discussion related to the p
9 ro1+ of the emergency preparedna:gs exercise as it relates to 10 the hearing. process, and the role of FEMA in the issuance of e
It a low-power license 12.
let me first go to SECY-8 T-554, the change to 10 l
13-CFR 50-54., and TO CFR 50-47.
(
14 Slide please.
15 There are-two changes involved here.
One, a minor 16one relating to clarification that the four-month period in 17 the rule-does apply any time during the plant lifetime, and j
18 aould include such things as a prompt notification system.
19 Tha t was a matter of some discussion this summer at an
~
20 earlier Commission meeting.
21 Some members of the public, in particular, did not 22 find the regulation clear on that point, and we have 23 attempted to clarif y by inserting a pit 7.ase to indicate that 24the prompt public notification system, for example, 25 deficiencies f ound later in the plant lifetime would be ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
l 5
f
1 covered br the four-month period.
2 The other major item for discussion is a change to 3 50-57.
(-
4 C'ould we have the next slide, please?
E Mar I direct your attention to the bottom of the 6 slide, which is the mairt topic.
At least in the staff's 7 view, the requirement for an energency preparedness exercise 8 was. not contemplated as necessarily a subject for discussion Sin the hearing process.
10 CHAIRHAN PALIADIN0s Is that the slide that you 11 vant?-
12 HR. GRIMESL Yes.
The last two items on the slide 13 relate to timing and purpose of emergency preparedness
(
t* exercises.
The top of the slide relates to the minor change 15 that I just discussed.-
16 The staff sent down SECY-81-554 The Office of 17 General Counsel discussed that paper with the staff, and as 18 a result of those discussions issued a meno.
The memo is 19 dated October 15, 1981.
20 I am sorry, I an out of order in my presentation, 21 at least.
l l
22 HR. BICKWIT We thought about issuing a memo.
I 23 (General laughter.)
24 HR. GRIMESt As a result of discussior.s with the 25 0ffice of General Counsel and with the Chairman, we have ALDER $oN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINlA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
6 9
I
1 passed out today a clarification to the proposed change in 2 SECY-81-55 4.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNEs It is an interesting way of
{m, 4 phrasing it, clarification to change f ull power to 5 J
E percent.
6-NR. GRIMESc No, I think the clarification between 7the papers is simply a. matter of saying, rather than before 8 a f ull power license, it now read " prior to operation of S hoth 5 percent," which is more nearly in consonance with our 1& practice of issuing los power licenses, and also clarifies it some legal points that were in debate about whr.t the effect 12 would be.
13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Is tF.at going to be
('
1*something you are going to get into?
15 MH. GRIMES:
I would try to present the logic for 1Ewhy we believe that it is not necessary to have it part of 17the hearing process.
I think we will get into that.
1a COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What about why you think it 191s necessary to have the exercise before 5 percent is 20 exceed, as opposed to bef ore full power?
2t CHAIRHAN PALLADINO:
This is operation of both, I 22 p re sume.
23 NR. GRIMESt Operation of both 5 percent, that is 24 right.
I a5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
As I said, why didn't you i
t l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, j
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2346
7 I'
1 leave it as it was, before 5 percent is exceeded?
2 HR. GRINES:
Hight now,. Appendix E states that the 3 exercise must be held before a full power license is 41ssued.
The practice since that time has been to make the 5 distinction between full power and. low power at five
$ percent.
T CONETSSIONER AHEARNE&
I see, so it is just a 8 different war of saying it.
MR. GRINESt It is just a different war of 10 expressing it.
11 CONHISSIONER AREARNE&
All righ t.
12 EH. GRIMESt Of more substance is the fact that we 13 believe that we can obtain reasonable assurance that the
(
14 plans are-adequa.te, and can be implemented based on a FEHA 15 review of the off-site ' plans, and an NRC-review of the 16 on-site plans, and that verification that these plans are 17 actually in place can be lef t as part of the operation and 181nspection process.
19 That is the concept that the staff has had for 20 some time, but it was not directly addressed in the rule, 21 and we believe it is appropriate to clarify it, and have the 72 potential for saving some time in terms of particular 23 hearing boards deciding to litigate, or wait until the 24 exercise had been completed until closing the record, for 25 exam ple.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
[
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-234S
8 1
Another reason for doing this is that oftentimes 2 utilities and State and local governments f eel pressed to 3 have an exercise at a very ear 1r time.
If they have 'his s
4 exercise < too long before the plant is completely ready to 5 operate, there is the risk of having a poor performance in athe exercise because the procedures have not been completed, l
T and all the systems have not been checked out, and the final
& configuration is not in place.
9c So.we think we will have been assurance of a 10'vell-performed one time-exerciser rather than taking the 11 risk of having it too early, and having a laundrr list of.
12 items which need to be corrected, as we did at San Onofre, 13-for example, before the plans are felt to be implemented.
(
14 I think the change is an attempt to give direction 15 to the hearing boards in particular that the reasonable 16 assurance finding car be based on the plan review tr MR. THOMASt From our point of view, we worked 18 jointly with NBC, obviously, on all of these.
We Yeel that 19 that change actually ties the process that you use for 20 licensing more directly with the process that is used by 2r State and-local governments and utilities as f ar as 22 esercency preparedness is concerned.
23 The plan review and findings on the plan at your 4
(
24 h ea ring process is a logical step.
Then, as you move on 25 forward and the licensee and the State and local governments o
i l
(
l l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, l
400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
9 1
C 1 prepare for their full scale exercise and hold that 2 exe rcise, then we present you with findings on that prior to p
3 your actual issuance of that license.
We think that it is a-41ogical sequence of events based on the expericace we have 5 had over the last year,. it-fits in.
E COHHISSIONER AHEARNES What will FEHA, then, be Tproviding prior to the exercise?
8-HR. THOMASL We will be providing a complete 9-review of the pl&ns themselves at your hearings, that is the 10iState plan and annexes of the county plan 11' COHNISSIONER AHEARNE:
In that review what kind of 12-a judgment will FEMA be reaching, assuming that the plans 13 are adequate?
(
14 HR. THOMASs That the plans are adequate.
15 COMMISSIONER'AHEARNEs Would that be, in essence, 16.a finding that at least based upon the plans, they appear to 1T he able to be implemented?
18-MR. THOMASS That is correct.
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE Then the one caveat would 20 be lef t open, the exercise at a later point?
i 21 MR. THOMAS:
It is basically a statement of 22 findings on the plan versus a f ull statemen t of 23 preparedness, which is basically our evaluation of the 24 exercise itself would be given prior to the a-tual issu ance i
25 o f th e licen se.
ALDERSoN REPORTING CCMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
O 6
10 1
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Would you be inclined to make 2 a statement that based on the plans, there is reasonable
{.
3 assurance that these plans can be implemented, or would you
&aake such a finding?
E NR. THOMASt-Yes.
I think it is a process that 8 we, la effect, go through now, where we review the plans, Tand based on the plans themselves we make a finding as to e the adequacy of the plan and the adequacy and the
~
E feasibility for implementation.
Those are the kinds of to findings we would. make.
Then you.get into the actual tt implementaton, and that is the second step, and we make 12 findings on that.
13 HR. DIRCKSt I think it would be good to clarify
(
14 some of the terms, Brian, regarding the licensing.
I think 15 we are making a distinction between the license and the 16 operation of the plant above 5 percent.
17 HR'. GRIMESS Yes, af ter discussing this with ELD 18 and OCC, I think I have a better concept of how the actual 191ssuance would go f orward.
There might be indeed be an 20 actual license issued before the exercise was completed, but 2t that it would be conditioned on not going above 5 percent 22 power before the exercise was completed, in effect what Mr.
23 Thomas said, but with a slightly different administrative 24 way.
25 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO4 As I recall, recent action j
l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
i 11 1 resulted in our saying that the operating license would be 2 granted and be stamped for not over 5 percent until such g,
3 time as the Commissiom had decided that that stamp could be 411f ted.
5 I gather this concept now goes to the point of 6saying that the exercise is really a demonstration that is 7 comparable to other start up procedures, and would be done
& prior to going to above 5 percent.
HR. GRINEFt Yes.
It is comparable to low pouer 10' physics testing.
17 MR. DIRCKSt That is why we feel it fits in well 12 with what the Commissioner was saying.
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Is thic something we
(
14 haven't seen before?
15 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
There is a slight change.on 16 the bottom.
1 17 MR. GRIMES:
The change is indicated between the 18 double asterisk and the strike out comments from the 19 Commission paper.
It is, for Commissioner Gilinsky's 20 benefit, a change in how we stated the matter of when the 21 exercise should occur.
The way it is stated, it would allow 22 a license to issue but be clearly conditioned so that one 23 could not go above 5 percent power prior to completion of i
24 the exercise.
25 COMMISSIONER AF3ARNE:
One of my concerns on the i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINfA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
12
( )-
1 original paper had been, it seemed to me you were going away 2 from using a FEMA finding as to whether plans are capable of (m
3 being implemented.
Now it sounds that.you will be using a
- EEM A finding as to whether the plans are capable of being E inglemen ted.
S HB. GBIMES:
We have a slight distinction of 71an guag e.
We will get a finding from FEMA on the plans, and' 8' a-statement that there is reasonable assurance that they can Ebe implemented.
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKI:
What you are saying is
^
. hat an exercise is not something which is the subject of a 1:d hearing.
17 MR. GRIMESt. That is correct.-
(
14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa-2he reason for t.
is 1Ewhat?
i 16 MR. GRIMESt Verification that th e reasonable 17 assurance findin7 that you have made based on the plans, as ta we do for the FSAB for other aspects of the plant -- you 19 have made a verification that those plans are in place and 20 can be worked, just as you would ascertain that the 21 containment leak rate was at an appropriate level, or that 211ow power physics testing had been performed before you went 23 above a certain power level.
24 If I may amplify, there is no equivalent 2s inspection' process off-site that the Federal Emergency ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 j
13 J
l
.f' 1 Hanagement Agency has.
They look at the plans, and to soae 2 extent it is standard operating procedures, but there is no S inspection arm of FEHA, and this is the equi alent of their 4 inspection process.
E COHHISSIONER AHEARNE:
Let me ask Mr. Thomas, so I 6 can bet.er understat.1 exactly what FEMA would conclude ther 7 would do.
8 Let's consider a plan where there is only one plan 9 that is involved, a-countr plan.
Would rou see, before the 10 exercise, in other words, a finding or whatever it is that 11 You would be making which would go into our licensing 12 process, would that be based on a review of the plan against 13-something, say,. something like this, and conclude, yes, all c
' 14 the elements are there; or would you review the plan against 15 this conclude the elements are th ere, and then also do some e
16 kind of a check to see, if they say that there is a link-17 that is to be made between this county f acility and n at Iccounty facility, that, yes, the arrangement actually is in 19 existence?
20 HR. THOMASs No, I think you are getting into the 21' exe rcise portion, that is where the checks on the actual zzimplementation of the plan will be made.
When we review the 23 plan and provide. you with findings, the review of that plan 24 against the criteria for that plan, and all the elements are 25 there, and off-site preparedness will be provided based on ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
14
,~
1 that. plan..
)
2 Then the actual implementation of the plan to I
("
3 determine whether it can be, in other words, you are 4 checking out the links between the counties, the links 5 between the counties, the links between the State and. the E cou nties etc., is a part of the exercise.
e 7
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Are all th e plans a suf ficiently detailed so it is clear without doing any kind 9 of a-checking that what they are saying is in the plan?
1g MR. THOMASs There is generally quite a bit of it discussion that goes on between our personnel who review the 12 plans and the State and county personnel who are preparing 13 the plans.
(
14 There is generally, during the draft. plan stage, 15 review that goes on between the Regional Assistance 16 Committees, which are our people, as well as other agency 17 representatives that are involved in reviewing those plans 18 for clarification purposes on what is in th e plan.
19 COEMISSIONER GILINSKY:
At what point does FEMA 20 make its finding that we rely on, is that before the 21 exercise has beea conducted?
22 MR.-GRIMES:
Yes.
let's take the case of a Z3 con tested proceeding, and how it might typically run.
24 Before the hearing commences, we would normally 25 have a finding by FEMA on the plans.
Then we would also l
l I
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
15 1 obtain testimony from them en specific contentions related 2 to that proceeding.
The Board need only rule on the 3' specific contentions before it in that proceeding.
Often c
+they are broad enough so that an overall FEM A finding on the 5 plans is also 'an integral part of that proceeding.
If the Econtention'happens to be very narrow, perhaps that plan 7 finding would not be needed fer that particular proceeding.
8 COHHISSIONER GILINSKYz Does FEMA not make any Efinding af ter the-test is run?
to:
HR.iRIMESt Then ther would provide us with an 1t exercise critique which is supplied by the Region, and the 12 covering memo from their headquarters making the finding 1:Lwhether there were major deficiencies identified so that we
\\
14 could take any appropriate action based on that 1
1Eidentification of any big things identified during the 16 exercise.
So we do get -- The staff and the Commission 17 would have --
18 MR. DIRCKSt That would be a vailable for the 19 Commission's review before that plan went above 5 percent.
20 It is part of the regime that you outlined the last time, 21 rou would issue a license with a 5 percent limitation, but zz this exercise result would be available before the 23 Commission made its decision to go above 5 percent.
24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
That would not be 25 available in the hearing process ?
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
16
()
1 HR. DIRCKSa It would not be available in the 2 hearing process.
("-
3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What is your purpose here i
41n doing things this ' way?
Is it that if you did arrange 5 things so it was part of the hearing process, you feel that-6the timing would-delay the plant?
7 HR'. GRIMES:
The timing is very difficult.
8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is that what motivates Syou?
10-MR. GHINES:
Yes.
. ', those cases where there has it been an exercise very early in the process, many, many 12 months before-the Commission decision date, the plant is 13 generally really not ready and of ten the of f-site 14 authorities are not entirely ready, and we get an exercise --
15 COMMISSIONEH GILINSKYL This way you get a more 18 effective exercise later in the process?
17 HR. GRIMES:
Yes, a much more effective exercise 181f it is just before plant operation, and all the procedures 19 are finally written, and the people are finally trained.
20 HR. DIBCKS4 I think it is the conclusion of FEM A, 21 too.
22 MR. THOMAS:
It is.
As far as the State and local m authorities r-concerned, and the licensee, they are 24 looking towau.s the operation of the plant as the date ther 25 are really aiming towards as far as ensuring that all of ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (2 { s 554 2345
17 9
1 their systems are go off-site.
2 When you have a hearing as far ahead as you have, 3 oftentimes you are dealing with a licensee that has g-4 facilities that have not been completed, either his 5 emergener operating facility or whatever.
The State and 61ocal authorities have not completed their facilities a year 7 ahead.
So we feel that by moving that exercise up close to 8that point of actual operation or going above 5 percent, it 91s a much more timely exercise, and a much more meanin;rul 10 exercise for you as-well as for them.
11 CONEISSIONER CILINSKY:
I am sorry that I was not 12 here before, and I don 't want to take you over ground that 13 has been covered.
But will any of those comments aDout the 14 four-month periods affect the February 1 deadline that we 15 have-set.
16 MR..GHIMES:
We have not gotten to that yet.
17 COMMISSIONEH GILINSKY:
You have not gotten to 18 that, ~ okay.
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So go ahead and ask.
20 MR. GRIMES:
What that is meant to clarify is that 21 there has baen some discussion of shether the four-month zaperiod applied to all parts of our regulations and 23 throughout the plant lifetime.
This is meant to clarify l
24 that, indeed, that is true.
What we do for the specific l
25 February 1st, the Commission will not have to decide --
I l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON O.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
18 t(
1~
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE This does not modify our 1 previous position?
3' HR. GRINES&
ho.
{
COMMISSIONER BRADFORDt Why not?
It is a matter S of' legal technique,- so. what doesn ' t itT Don't you need a 8 sentence saying that it doesn;t?
7 I understand that it is your intention not to,but 8 don 't you have to sa-x that?
~
9-NH. GRIMESs We have a rulemaking, which if put in to: final f orm, would specifically say with respect to the It February Tst date for completion of the facilities, the 11 notification f acilities, the four-month period would not 13 apply.
What this says is that sometime later during the
(
1*11fe of the plant, if you have a test of the system,and a l
16 third of the sirens don !t operate because they are arrested 18 or there is some other reason, then indeed the four-month 17 period does app 1r*
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Where are we in the process 19 of that first statement, the life for fixing?
20 NR. GRIM ES :
The first proposed rule, the 21 commentary was over last week.
We have received comments, Ztand the comments are being evaluated, and a final rule 23 change is being written now.
24 CHAIRMAN PAllADINO.
I am still not clear.
Where j
25 does that leave the February 1st date?
I understand what l
l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
19 I the intent is, but is this going to appear to add four 2 months to -the February 1st date?
(-
3 HR. GRIMEUs No, it does not.
r 4
CONHISSIONER BRADFORD:
On its face, though, I I
5 t'. sink it does.
If you just put out the February 1st date in O final form now, and then three or four months later a. rule 1
7 comes out which makes no mention of that date one way or the 8 o ther, b ut a ppears to just have general application for 9'energency planning considerations, you could at least get an 10 argument going that the second one supersedes the first.
11 It should not be hard to fix..
12 3R. GRINESS The words were writte.m specifically.
)
13 I took the February T rule change with this one in i
14 conjunction with lawyers to make sure that they did not.
15 COMMISSIONER'BRADFORDt You were probably in line 16 in the first place.
17 As I understand it, the protections are all 18 written in the February 1st rule, and none into this one.
4 19 This one is just stated in general terms, with no statem._;
20 in the statement of considerations, or anywhere else to the 2t eff ect of the - '
22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNEs It certainly should be 23 incorporated.
24 COMMISSIOMER BRADFORD That is all.
25 CHAIBHAN PALLADINot I have the same feeling.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINTA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
20 O
1:
HR. DIRCKSa That will be no problem.-
i 2
NR. GRINESt There is one other aspect before I
[
3 close the discussion on this SECY-81-554 paper, and that is 4 the Office of General Counsel has advised us that they would 5 muck prefer that the amendment to the regulation be 6 published for comment rather than published as a final T amendment as proposed in the staff paper.
We believe that 8 that would be an acceptable procedure.
We don't see any Simmediate impacts on the facilities that are now in the 10 hearing process.
11~
CHAIRHAW PAL 1ADIN0s With regard to 540,is there 12 a possibility you might also be proposing. a change to 13 paragraph (a)(2) with regard to using the words that you are
(' -
14 discussing' with FEMA 7 I am not saying that you-are, but 15 using their words more like there is reasonable assurance 16 that they can be implemented, is there a possibility that 5
1Trou are going to come back with that as an additional change 4
18 to 540?
19 ER. GRIMES Yes, we are examining th a t.
There is 20 a statement in one part of the regulation that hcs words 21 that things can and will be implemented, reasonable ZL assurance that things can and will be implemented, and 23 another section that you referred to that says things a re
- 24. capable of being implemented.
25 To avoid confusion between the two, we probably ALDER $oN REPORTING COMPAtlY,INC, 400 VIRCINIA AVE., S,W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2346
O 21 I
/'
1'should put the reasonable assurance words in both places, 2 and we will discuss that with FEMA, and get their opinion on
(*
- 3. tha t.
If they agree, we will come back with a change
- probably connected to one of the other things we have coming 5: through.
8 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO I think before we, as a 7 Commission, decide that we want to vote on this, we probably.
8 would like to see tne revision with the February 1st item.
9: Even though you. have given us a version here, we would like 10 to see that incorporated in the final proposal we work on.
It If you develop something that arises out of your FEMA 11 discussion, that probably ought to be presented to us, so 13 that when we vote, we know what we are voting on.
(
14 ME GRIMESS All right.
15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Before you depart this.one, 16 just trying to make sure I get clearly in m y mind, Mr.
17 Thomas, you will be providing -- In those cases you find 18 acceptable, you will be making a finding on the feasibility 19 of implementation.
20 MR. THOMAS:
Yes, based on the plan review.
21 dR. DIRCKS:.
Not the facility?
22 MR. THOMAS:
It is a plan finding.
It is a reviev 23 of a plan based against the criteria or the requirements for 24 th i plan t.
25 MR. GRIMES:
Lee, perhaps I could read the words ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 00024 (202) 554 2345
~
o 22
!m 1 that we ag :aed to.
2 NR. THOMASz Okay.
f' 3
BR. GRIMES
" Based on the review of off-site 4 plans, EENA will provide NRC with findings on their 5 adequacy, including a statement as to whether there is 6 reasonable assurane" that tha plans can be implemented based 7on available information,ana recognizing that an exercise t is not required for such a statement."
COMNISSIONER AHEARNE:. houldyoureadthatlast 10 part af ter " reasonable Tsurance"?
11 ER GRIMESL "tfsat the plans can be implemented i
i 12 based on available information, and recognizing that an
(
~13 exercise is not required for such a stacement."
s 14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I understand everything 15 except the " based on available information. "
16 MR. GBIMES:
That is to reflect the review of the 17 plans, and any other information that FEM A might have.
18 CHAIREAN PALLADINO:
It comes out a little bit 19 differently.
20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
21 Ion are not saying --
22 CONMISSIONER BRADFORD.
Supposing you keep some 23 information 24 I am sorry, John.
Go ahead and finish with your 25 question first.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
23 i
1 NR. CRINESs-When we get a little later in the 2 process, I will hand out a piece of papor that indicates our r'
3 agreement.
4 CONNISSIONER AHEABNE:
If what you were saying is 5 based; upon the plans and other available information, there S is reasonable assurance that the plans can be implemented, 7 recognizing,-and sp on, about the exercise, it does mean one E-thing, but that is not what I get.
9 NR. GRIMESS That would be the in tent, and T ICL suspect. that we could. move that clause.
11-CHAIREAN PALIADIN0s That is why I wanted to see ti the writing on tha t one_,I knew they were discussing the 13 phraseology, and not knowing what it is, I said, whatever 14 ros come up with, we would like to see it, and I would like 15 to see it all in a package.
16 MR. GRIMES:
We have, which I will pass out, an 17 agreed but not yet signed piece of paper.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Clearly it has to be 19 something that FENA is comfortable with.
20 NR. THOMAS:
It is.
What we have written here, we 21 are comfortable with.
Brian just read thro ugh it, and there ztare a couple of other paragraphs that go with it.
I think 23 you need to be very clear on what it is we are saying that 24 will make you comf ortable.
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
d 24 O
1 COHNISSIONER GILINSKYs Are we going to have that 2 paragraph?
r~
3 MR. GEIHESL Yes.
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I think it might be a good 5 time to hand it out.
6-CONNISS10NER GILINSKYa, Let me ask, is there 7 arything in there about adequacy of the plans?
8 MR. THOMAS:- Yes, findings on their adequacy, 9 including a statement as to whether there is reasonable 10 assurance the-plans can be implemented.
It is a finding on 11 adequacy.
~
12 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0s Does it read the way you had
~
13:said, Brian, or does it read the way the gentleman has
(
1 14 sta ted?
15 NR. GRIMESS It currently reads the way that I i
18 said it, but I think it would be a correct statement to move 17 the phrase.
It is the first item under item 2 that we are 18 talking about.
It would be accurate to move the phrase 19 " based on availablo information" up behind plans.
20 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Yes, I think that would be 21 importan t I think you got the sense of what our concern is i
l 22 o n th at point.
23 HR. CRIMES:
Yes.
I am sure we will not sign this 24 until you have some time to 'give us any feedback.
25 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO,;
I think when le get to the ALDER $oN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
25 1 point of voting on 554, wo will see what words, if any, have 2 been changed in 554 that reflect this.
3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYs May I ask you, is this 4 f air game, or should we leave this now?
5 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0s What is that?
6 COHEISSIONER GILINSKY:
This paragraph.
7 CHAIRHAN PALLADINO:.
I think you can ask questions 8 abou ' it.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
This may have been asked, 10 but when you say, "and recognizing that an exercise is not 11 required for such a statement," why do you need that?
12 MR. GRINES:
In 554, f rom FEM A 's standpoint to 13 sak e it clear that they are doing this prior to the 14 exe rcis e.
15 CHAIRNAN PALLADINO:
Why isn't it enough, Brian, 18to say that "our finding will be based on a review of a FEM A 17 finding and determination as to whether State and local 18 emergency plans are adequate, and that there is reasonable 19 assurance that they can be implemented. "
20 NR. BICKWIT:
Because you are talking our findings 21on the license, and under this particular concept you 22 probably will not have had the exercise.
23 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
No, I am not talking about 24 tha t, "there is reasonable assurance that they can be 251aplemen ted. "
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
26 I) 1 HR. BICKWII:
No, I think that would be all 2 right.
r{~
3' CHAIRFAN PALLADINO:
That is why I think it is 4important that we see what wording comes out, with any 5 questions or guidance you have.
6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I guess I an a little 7 bothered, even understanding that you don't plan to have an 8 exercise at this point.
It seems to me telling them that --
9 It seems to me that FEMA has to be able to say something 10 about the adequacy of the plans.
11 MR. GHIMES:, The early part of that sentence 12 covers that.
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKIs.
It may be that they may 14 find themselves in the situation where without an exercise 15 they can 't say that the plans are adequate, or the state of 16 affairs is adequate.
Somehon this seems to lean them a 1711ttle bit in the direction of, put an exercise out of your 18 min d.
19 MB. THOMAS:
Based on our experience to date, we 20 think that the plans which are drawn in conformance with 21 SECY-81-554 and FEM A Rep 1, you can make a finding of 22 reasonable assurance on there, sufficiently detailed, and in 23 depth, and cover all the points.
24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
It may be true in general, 25 but any particular instance, tnings may be different.
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
1 27 I'
1 ER. BICKWITs What about "is not a,1 ways required 2 in a certain state."
3 CHAIBHAN PAL 1ADIN9s. I think we are getting into 4an area that concerns me as well.
By saying, "and
-5 recognizing that an exer,cise is not required for such a 6 sta temen t,." it is sort of like rubbing salt in a wound.
7 What we need at this stage, if we are going to 8 follow this concept, is a clear cut statement on the S,tdequacy of the planning, and a statement that there is 10 reasonable assurance that the plans can br implemented tt taking advantage' of all the information that is avaiLible, 12 p eriod.
Th e a., that is understood.
Now, you make the 13 exercise as part of the start up test, with the requirement 14 that the licensee not go above 5 percent power until that is 15 done.
16 I think if your wording came out somewhat the war 2
1TI have described it, I believe, at least I speak for myself, 18 I could vote favorably for it,. but I would want to see it 19 before I said that..
I would like to see the whole package.
20 MR. THOMAS:
Clearly, I think, from our point of i
e 21 view, we feel that in order to make a complete statement of 22 adequacy of preparedness, you have to complete the exercise 23 process.
To you give you a statement on the adequacy of thef 24 plan, findings on adequacy of the plan, and reasonable
{
25 assurance that we feel it can be implemented based on yhe I
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
~.
28 1 plan, I think that that is what we are trying to say.
2 CONHISSIONER AHEARNE:
I think that language would
.r '
3 b e --
4 CORBISSIONEB BRADFORD:
The thing that is 5 concerning me is that a number of the parties in 6 proceedings,. I have in aind particularly states, and to the 7 extent that local communities get into them, primarily on 8 this issue it is go13g to be one of the issues of greatest r
9 concern to them.
10 To set up a process that contemplates their not 11 being able to raise questions based on the actual practical 12 exercise is pretty troublesone.
13 HR. GRIMES:
We have a procedure for getting
(
14 public input into that.
The Federal Emergency Management 15 Agency has a public meeting on the plan, and then after the i
~16 exercise we have a critique open to the public to observe, 17 which is also a place af ter which we get letters, and things
'1811k e this, based on what has gone on.
19 So there is not a complete absence of opportunity 20for public comments, but it is not an easy thing to litigate 21 at any rata as to whether someone dialed the phone right in zz a particular instance.
23 COMMISSIONEB GILINSKY:
How does that get fed into 24 the decision-making process?
25 HR. GBINES:
It comes back into the FEMA critique ALC&RSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
29 en F
1 inf ormation that we receive.
2 MR. THOMAS:
The critique that we would provide on 3 the whole participation exercise would come back in as a 4part of your pre-operational inspection process.
5 CONNISSIONER BRADFORD&
But it is not really a 8 matter of whether or not somebody dialed the phone richt.
I 7 mean if that is all that is at issue, of course, one 8 understands that a dialing mistake the first time doesn 't 9 have to be made the next.
10 The kind of issue that would be more important 11 would be if what arose in the exercise suggested some 12 fundamental unf easibility due to geography, or something 13 that turned out to be much more difficult in practice then t
141t was in theory.
15 ER. GRIMES: ' That could occur any time during the 16 plant lifetime.
17 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But it is most likely to 18 show up at the first exercise.
19 MR. GRIMES:
If FEMA saw that that was a major 20 item, they would tell us, and we would take some appropriate
~
21 enforcement action to assure that it was fixed.
22 COMNISSIONER AHEARNE:
In fact, if there was a 23 fundamental flaw that showed up, FEMA, then, would not be 24 able to make their finding.
In the absence of that final 25 finding ALCZRSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
30 i
1 HR. GRIBES:
We would expect some kind of finding, 1 be it f avorable or unfavorable.
3 HR. TH0HASt It would be a finding.
COHNISSIONER AHEARNE:
It would not be a favorable Eone.
6 HR. TH0HAFs That is right.
7 BR. GRINES:
Then we would have to make a decision 8 on what action to take based on those deficiencies that were Sidentified.
Outside of that process,. there is always what 10 the legal staff describes as opportunities, but one can file 11 a. 2.26 petition om any particular item that arises.
'12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
But gather public input is 13 provided in the FEMA process.
14' MR. THOMASt On the plan itself, there is a public 15 meeting that is held to review the plan.
16 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
How about a critique of the 17 exercise?
18 MR. THOMAS:
There is a public critique of the 19-exe rcise for observation.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I suppose we would have 20 21 the opportunity to allow people to appear before us when we 22 consider the full power license.
23 MB. GEIMES:
Yes.
24 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I guess that that is an 25 option that the Commission always has.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
31 1
Are there any more questions on this one befcre we 2 go to 570?
If you have other questions.
. /"1 3
COMMISSIONER BRADFORDs One other, and don't cover 4 it again if you already have.
5 In terms of the practical impact of all this, are 6 there a number of proceedings in which you now think the 7 plant operation would be delayed if the FEM A exercise had to 8 be done at the earlier stage, rather than the stage the rule S change contemplates, or that just a hypothe tical 10 possibility?'
11 ME. GRIMES:
At this point it is hypothetical, but 12 there are a number next spring where the hearing process is
(,
13 scheduled to start in the winter, but the exercise is 14 currently not scheduled to be held until the summer.
15 If this did become an issue in those hearings, one 16 could foresee either a forced exercise before th e he a ring,
17 perhaps before the parties are ready, or as an alternative is some delay in the hearing process until the exercise wa s 19 completed.
20 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO.
You would have to have the 21 exercise in advance of the hearing, would you not?
22 MR. GRIMES:
Yes, tha t is wha t I said.
You would 23 need either an accelerated schedule on the exercise, or a 24 delay of the hearing.
25 COMMISSIONER'BRADFORD:
In how many of those ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W, WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (2021 554-2345
o 32 t plants would a delay in the hearing actually produce a delay 2 in plant operation, do you know?
3' MR. GRIMESt I can't speak to thht.
It would 4 depend in each case on the time needed for the Board to make 5 its decision-Generally, they are on a pretty tight
&timeline in terms of number of months between the hearing 7 and the Commission decision.
8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORDs I mean, if yov hypothesize 9 a. six-month delar in the hearing, and I gather that that is.
1Cr what you are saying,. hearings that are scheduled to begin 11 next winter would not begin until next summer, do you know 12 how many plants?
13 MR. GRIMES:.
That is one alternati"e.
The more
(
1 1411kely case would be that there would be the forcing of an 15 acceleration of the exercise date to accommodate that which IEwould reec'.*,
I suspect, in less than an adequate exercise 17 and a large number of deficient items.
18-CONMISSIONER BRADFORDs If you were not just 1
191ooking at these plants, if you were locking out five years, 20 do you have the same kind of difficulties?
That is, is this 21 a process that -- Is it that the system that we are not l
22 under is a process that, in fact, is unmanageable, other 23 than in the short term?
24 MR. GRIMES:- I feel that even in the long term, it 25 is highly desirable to have the exercise within a very few ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
33
(])
1 months of the time the plant starts up, so that all the 2 equipment is in place, and the procedures are in place, and r-3 the personnel are completely trained on those final 4 procedures.
5 COMMISSIONER BRADFORDA That part was puzzling me
]
8 a little because, of course,once you have done the first 7 exercise, then, in effect, you have a 30-year commitment 4
8 there anyway.
9 HE. GRIMES:
I am sorry, I was speaking of new 10 licenses issued five years from now.
It COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I meant the same thing.
12 0nce you have done that exercise, whether it is within a
- 13. couple of months of the plant start up date, or whether it 141s 12 months earlier, you in effect are in a situation where I
15 whatever is in place then, you are committing yourself to la keep adequate for the life of the plant.
17 MR. GRIMESL Yes.
18 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Don ' t you ha ve subsequent 19 exercises?
20 HR. GRIMES:
Yes.
21 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:.
The same point, I think.
22 CH AIRMAN PALLADINO:
Then I miss your point.
23 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Just that if you did your 24 first exercise tu months before operation, you then are 25 going to have a series of more exercises.
It is not as ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C 20024 (202) 554 234S
34 1 though the plan is then going to fall apart before the plant 1 starts to operate any more than if you do your first 3 exercise two months before, and it will then f all apart one 4 year later.
5 COHNISSIONER AHEARNE:
I don't think that was his 6 point.
I think his point was, as you are starting up this 4
7 new plant, there are a number of people, there are a number 6 of items that begin to be put together, and the pace that S ther nocmally begin to be put together, makes it that you 10 can get a much more effective exercise if you wait until a 11 few months before start up.
12 If you were to push that back 14 months, or 10 13 months, you would do one of two things, either have less of 14 an opportunity for an effective exercise, or else readjust 15 the pace-at which those items come toge ther.
18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
What I am wondering is 17 whether the latter change is all that significant in terms 18 of, for exam-ie, equipment procurement.
If you are talking 19 about some':hing five or six years out, I take it there would 20 not be any great difficulties.
21 MR. GRIMES:
Then, the plant is ready to start up
'2 at that point.
23 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Yes.
24 MR. GRINES:
Once the procedures are in place, and 25 the equipment is all there and checked out, people are i
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
Q3 VIRGINIA A% @,W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (SSED 554-2345
35
^
I trained,you are ready for start up.
1 CHAIRNAN PALLADINO:
You would have on hand the n
3 personnel that are really going to operate the plant, and 4 the-prior exercise may be --
5 COHNISSIONER BRADF0BDs What, in particular?
60perators would not be there a year before, who would bet 7
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO Yes.
8 HR. CHINES:.
If you had all the pieces in place 9:that you need for an effective exercise, and all the 10 equipment, and all the procedures written, and all the 11 people trained, you 'are ready to start the plant.
There is 12 no reason to wait for another yea'r to start.
11 COMMISSIONER ERADFORD:
All right, but as to the
(
14 first two, it is clear that if you had to do that 12 or 14 15 months befo re the plan t sta rt up,. yo u could.
The only real 16 difficultyseems to me to be with the people.
17 NR. GRIMESa Generally, these things are all put 18 on timeline so that they will come together at the earliest 1E possible time.
20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Yes, but what I am saying 2t is that if you knew.--
22 MR. GRIMES:
If I knew I had the first two, I 23 would train the people.
24 COMMISSIONER AHEABNT:
It is certainly true that 25 1f you go out three, four, five years, it definitely could.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGIN A AVE., S.W., W ASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
f 36 I If it was mandatory to do it that way, it could be done, I 2think that is certainly true.
The question then is, is the
- 3. gain sufficient?
{.
4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORDs.
Exactly.
5 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Any more on 5547 J
6 You are going to provide us with these revisions T so that we can see them in place in their totality when we 8 come to vote?
9-MR. GRINES:
Yes.
10 CHAIBMAN PALLADINot Do you want to go to 570?
tt NH. GRIMESs Yes.
12 If we could go back to the slide, the proposed e-13 change to 10 CFR 50.47 requirements for FEM A finding.-
(
14 The paper here is SECI-81-570 as supplemented by 15 Nr. Halsch's memo of October 15, 1981, which provides, after 16 some discussion with the staff, a slightly revised version.
17 CONNISSIONER GILINSKY:
Did the Commission say 18 that we did not want to have a finding on off-site emergency 19 preparedness for low power?
20 MR. GRIMES:
I have a note on my slide that is in,
2tresponse to the Chairman's direction after a FEMA /NBC zz consultation.
23 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0s We addressed this subject, 24 and you were not here.
I indica ted that this whole process 25 grew out of the separation of the plan being adequate before ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
6 37
^
1 we even start fuel loading for icv power, and that then we i
2 have the exercise as part of the demonstration process, as 3 part of the start up activities.-
4 I indicated that the staff extend this to include 5 the process in 570.-
In truth, I did not think that it was 6 necessary to consider 554. attached to 570, that they could 7 be treated separately.
Staff found some merit in that.
8 There mar also have been, and I gather from there has been, 9some misunderstanding as to what we had agreed to when we 10 started to develop this.
It I thought that there was merit to consider this, 12 and so we proceeded to consider this, and then we can 13 deliberate as to what we want to do about it.
(-
14 MR. GRIKES:
The next vuegraph, please.
15 The amendment would eliminate the need for 16 findings on the adequacy of off-site emercency planning and 17 preparedness either by the NRC or by FEMA prior to the 18 issuance of lower power license.
The rational for this 19 being that low power operation risks are much reduced.
Th e 20 fission product inventory is much less because of the lov 21 power operation, and the short period of operation 221'nv olved.
Because of this, any accident which might occur 23 would not require the full capacity of systems design to 24 mitigate such accidents.
25 Third, and most importantly with respect to ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
38 1off-site preparedness is that the time scale for taking 2 protective actions to mitigate accidents are much longer at p
- 3. low power, at least 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br />, and in the la test calculations SI have seen on the order of 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br />.
So that substantial S time is available for ad hoc decisions.
8-In addition, the area on'e is. concerned about is 7much closer to the plant, so there is a much smaller area 8 involved.
COHNISSIONER GIIINSKY.
Before you go off that.
I i
10 wonder whether we have not made too much of the point about 111ow power operation, risks being reduced.
They certainly 12 are reduced, and" that is wh2 we treat that phase 13 dif ferently.
But in sor.e respects,.they are increased.
You 14 have operators who are inexperienced of ten.
It is the first 15 time ther have operated that plant.
The plant is going 18 through maneuvers it has never gone through before.
You can 1Trun the plant up to f ull po wer if you, perhaps, determine to 18 do so.
You can't entirely exclude malicious action.
19 On balance, I think it is still true that lower 20 power operation risks are reduced --
21 COHNISSIONER AHEARNE:
But ther are not zero.
but they are not zero.
22 COMKISSIONER GILINSKY;.
23 MR. GRIMES:
That is why we have looked at the 24 outer-bo und cases, and looked if things did go completely 25 w ro ng, and you eventually did get to a core damage situation ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
39
(]\\
1 by boiling out water, or losing water from the reactor avessel because of some kind of a loss of coolant accident, 3 that there is a long period of time before one could get C...
4 fission products f rom the core into the containment even in 5 the worst case because of the relatively low power and short 6 duration of operation history.
7 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Okay.
That assumes that 8 you start from low power.
9 MH. GRINES:
Yes.
10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
And conceivably you might 11 not be at low power when you start.
I mean, it is extremely 12 unlikely, but nevertheless it is not impossible.
13 All I am saying is, I know we have repeated these
(
14 words over and over again, manIr many times, and I think it 15 was actually the chairman at one point who pointed out that, 16 at least as far as the number of operators are concerned, we 17 have got to be caref ul at this stage because in some 18 respects it is an important turning point in the plant's 1911fe, and you have got to be caref ul.
20 MR. GRIMES:
I think the points you made are 21 valid, but they are partly balanced by a much higher --
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I was not suggesting tha t 23 the things you have got up there are not correct, but there 241s a bit of another side to this.
That is why I was 25 concerned that you were thinking of not making any finding ALDERSoN RE*ORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20224 (202) 554 2345 s
l 00 Ii 1 at all about the adequacy of off-site preparedness.
2 In.other words, I guess what I am saying is, the
(~
3 risks are not reduced so much that I would ignore all 4 off-site
- preparedness.
Narbe instead of 10 miles, you.want 5 to worrr about two miles, or you may just want to be 6 concerned about a few of the items that would normally 7 concern you at full power.
But I would not entirely reduce 8 our concern to the site itself.
S NR. GRIMES I will describe a little more that we 10 do have some confidence that there is some capability in 11 place based on our review of the licensee's plan, and 12 perhaps if I proceed we will come back to the degree of 13 confidence, and you can see whether it is great enough.
14 The-next vuegraph.-
15 The staff has consulted with FEMA on this matter, 16 and FEM A agrees that it can be dropped as a requirement that 17 we have a FEMA finding.
Their agreement is based --
18 CHAIRMAN PAL 1ADINO:
I did not follow that.
Say 19 tha t again, Brian.
20 MR. GRIMES:
FEMA has agreed with us that they do 21 not need to give us a finding on low power operation.
In ZZ o th er,wo rds, they agree with our logic based partly on the 23 low risk, but also partly on the f act that they have 24 knowledge of the preparedness that is going on, and the 25 improvements in preparedness that are in process at all th e ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., W/.SHINGToN, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
i 41 (N
1 plants under construction because their Regions are working 2 with State and local individuals.
3~
We have provided you with a page change to Mr.
&Nalsch's version of the paper, which unfortunately is titled 5 "Replacemen t page for SECY-81-570."
Actually, it is a 6 replacement page for Mr. Malsch 's paper which we have worked Tout with FEH A, which adds the phrase that their confidence 8 is based on reviewing the level of general planning and i
9 preparedness activities that are taking place in the State l
10~ and local jurisdictions where nuclear plants are expected to i
1t be licensed, in addition to our finding of low risk.
12' We also look at the licensee 's on-site plans, and i
13 there are a number of aspects of these on-site plans from
(
14 which one can infer some degree of off-site preparation.
In 15 particular, the licensee is required to have communications i
1E with off-site authorities, and that implies that there will j
17 be someone at the other end of the phone, if the licensee
[
18 has a' problem, to take his call and be concerned about the l
19 situation.
20-COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
If you are just concerned 21 about on-site preparedness, presumably to take the call to 22 help with on-site problems --
23 MR. GRIMES:
But they would be the f ocal point --
24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I realize that the i
25 telephone works both ways.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
42 e"
1 NR. GRIMES:
But they would also be the focal 2 point, and if ad hoc measures were needed, the licensee
('
3 recommend those and many hours are involved.
COHHISSIONER GILINSKYt I understand, but once you 5 have said that only " adequacy of on-site emergency planning 6and. preparedness," you know it may be true that if you take 7 care on on-site preparedness, and a number of other things 8 go on, and there is some chance that you will protect to a S degree for off-site problems, I frankly think that there 10 ought to be just a short list that applies to the problems 1t of low power operations, and those ought to get checked off 12 for off-site preparedness.
13 As I said, maybe that applies to a very small 14 region around the plan t, but to disregard it entirely, I 15 think, is just not right.
16 MR. GRIMESt I had not regarded this as a 17 substantial decrease in the amount of confidence that we had i
18 in these off-site plans for low power.
Previous to this, 19 the NRC/ FEM A agreement was that if there had been a previous 20 NRC concurrence in our voluntary concurrence process, back l
21 when NRC had the entirely lead on on-site and off-site 22 planning, that was adequate.
In my view, that did, indeed, 23 provide some level of assurance there was someone at th e 24 other end of the telephone, and that there was some 25 organiza tion there to cope with a problem.
But it in no way ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
a 43 C
1 compared with the review thrt FEMA now perf orms for the ' full 2 power license.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Let me ask a question on p
4 something related to what Peter asked earlier.
5 Let's suppose we look three years or four years in 6 the future, so then it will have been many years since NRC 7 would have had under the previous process, let's say six 8 years ago.
Are you saying that in the checking of the 9 on-site elements, perhaps this is taking an absurd extent, 10 would you check whether the phone number was still accurate 11 for the off-site?
12 MR. GRIMESt.
Yes, because, for example, part of 13 our on-site inspection process is for the team members on i
14 the appraisal team to call up the off-site authorities and 15 verifT that indeed they know they are on the other end of 18 the telephone line f rom the plant.
I would quess, because 17 they also review the procedures, they would notice any 18 difference in the telephone numbers.
That is probably where 19 ther would get the telephone numbers, too, to call the 20 off-site authorities f rom, the emergency procedures.
21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What else would you see 22 actually being checked on the off-site portion of this 23 finding?
24 MR. GRIMES:
If I may consult my notes. I.think we 25 have one back-up slide on this matter.
I think there is a i
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
46
^
1 back up slide.
2 These are the planning items, and these are the
{
3 planning standards.
In the left-hand column there is a 4 reference to a 50.47 listing of them, and the CEFIL, de the 5 same planning standards listed in SECY-81-554.
6 COMMISSIONER GILIN, SKYS What is this, the back up Tslides?
8:
HR. GRIMESs The first pages 9
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What is your objection to 10 Ari;ag that a limited finding will be made for limited 11 operation?
17 MR. GRIMES:
It actually stream 11nes and 13 uncomplicates the process.
14 CONMISSIONER GILINSKIs You say tha t, will make no 15 finding.
16 HR. GRIMESs.
No finding on off-site plans, but we 17 make a review the licensee plans for all elements, and then 18 j udge, if there are eier.ents missing, whether that is 19 particularly significant fcc the low power license.
For 20 example, NUREG 654, under (c), would involved the support 21 organizations in particular, whether Federal government or 22 other support.
Item (e) involves the notification of 23 ott.eite authorities, establishing procedures for mutually 24 agreeable bases for notification.
25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
These are all tied to ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 454 2345
i 05 n
2 MR. GRIMES:
This would be looked at in the 3 on-site, but they cove r --
^
4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY.
I understand there is a 5 certain spillover.
Just the fact that we are in the United 6 States of America, telephones work, and local authorities 7 are in place, it gives you a certain amount of confidence.
I 8
MR. GRIMES:
We think that that is bolstered by 9 the actual review of the detailed procedures on-site, and 10 that there are interfaces that have been accomplished, that
' 11 there are letters of agreement.with off-site authorities for
'12 support on-site, gives you an adequate degree of assurance 13 f or the low power operation.
Then we think we can, in 14 effect, eliminate the need for FEMA to provide witnesses and 15 support us --
16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
That is a whole different 17 story.
It is a different aspect of it, and it introduces a 18 new element.
But I wonder if we can disentangle the 19 question of the hearing with the adequacy of preparedness 20 suf ficient for allowing the plant to move f orwa rd.
21 I wonder if FEMA is comfortable, really, in 22 let ting the issue go at the low power stage, or letting it 23 go entirely as far as off-site preparedness.
l
{
24 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I was going to ask the 25 question sligh tly diff erently.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
46 1
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Sure 2
CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0s Suppose we did something such 3 as ve were talking about in 554, and we did not pass 570, 4 what would be the consequence, what would we lose and what 5 would we gain?
6 MR. GRIMESS There would a continuing requirement 7 for FEMA to give us a finding on low power operation.
8 CHAIRMAN PALLADIFOs It would require FEMA to make GFits.Finai, an nians before we would go ahead with even low 10 power operation, is that right?
17 MR. GRIMES:
Yes.
12
. CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Does that add greatly to th e 13 scheduler problems?
14 MR. GRIMESs It just adds an additional complexity 151n the area of debate at the hearing stage, knd the burden 16on FEMA.
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I thought we agreed that 18 the FEMA finding on the plans would come in advance, and 19 would be the subject 20 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Unless ;e pass 570 as well.
21, MR. GRIMES.
If I could clarify, th at would be for 22 the full power hearing.
That is for the hearing as a whole z3 on the entire operating license.
This would be a provision 24 whereby 25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
If someone requested a ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W. WASHINGTON 0.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
47 0
tseparate low power hearing.
2 COMNISSIONER AHEARNE:
Or an interim low power
(~
3 license.
4 HR. GRIMESa If it is a situation where someone 5 requested a low power hearing, or interim low power license, 6 that could go forward before that had been done.
T CONHISSIONER GILINSKY:
I tho ugh t that the key 8 word here was preparedness, and I assumed that the finding 9 on the planning would still take place beforehand.
10 BR. GRIMES We are saying that no finding, either 11 by NRC or FEMA on the off-site plans, would be required.
12 CHAIRHAN PALLADIN0s For what situation.
13 NB. GRIMESs For the low poyer situation.
14 CHAIRNAN PALLADINO:
For all low power 15 situatio ns?
16 ER. GRIMES:
For any low power site.ation, that it 17 would adequa te that NRC had issued a safety evaluation based 18 on the on-site plans, and had confidence --
19 CHAIRHAN PALLADIN0s Are you talking about the 23 situation where there is a separate request for lov 21 power?
22 HR. BICKWIT:
I think you are talking only about 23 those situations.
24 MR. GRIMES:
Only where there is a separate 25 request for low power.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, IMOMTWEBZEL fW1 MTill&f0RN, D.A. F*iFO #Wh GPWEtn
48 1
MR. BICKWIT:
Not the typical situation.
2 CHAIRMAN PALLADINot Wouldn't 570 apply to the 3 typical situation 7 4
MR. BICKWIT:
No, 570 would not apply to the 5 typical situation.
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE But, 554, rather.
7 MR. GRIMES:
Yes, 554, and the exercises would be 8 the typical situation., 570 refers on1r to the low power 9 special situation.
to CHAIRMAN PALLADINOt I missed that, I am sorry.
It COMMISSIONER GILINSKYr N'ormally, if you had a 12 full power hearing, there would be a FEMA finding on the 13 plans, even at the low power stage. -
14 MR. BICKWIT4 That is right.-
15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYt What you are saying is 18 that there is another route, and you have to go through a 17 proceeding for a low power license specifically, you don't 18 need to have --
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Of if there is low power
~
201egisla tion which allows --
21 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
The Commission to grant zz the license.
23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Right.
24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
You, again, would not hava 25 to have at that point a FEMA finding.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
~
l l
49 l
l f5 1
MR. GRIMES:
That is correct 2
COMMISSIONER GILINSKYs I guess I think you have 3 gone too f ar.
I do think the finding only needs to be a 4 finding on certain specific items that apply to low power, 5 but I would not eliminate a finding al to gethe r.-
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Brian, can I ask a question.
T Sup po se we did not concur in 570, and we had a request for a 8 low power license, what would be the situation with regard 9 to findings on plans?
10 MR. GRIMES:
Then we would need to ask FEMA for a 11 special letter on the plans for low power, and the adequacy 12 cf preparedness as they know the situation in the off-site 13 arec, and would then also have to ask them for witnesses and
(
14 testimony on that matter-This is an area that has impacted 15 FEM A at some hearings-16 CHAIEMAN PALLADINO:
But that is not going to be 17 the usual situation.
18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
That is what I am asking, 191f a typical case they are going to have to supply the 20 witnesses anyway, why does this make a big difference, 21 unless you expect this to become the typical case?
22 MR. GRIMES -
Lee, do you want to comment on how 23 FEM A feels about this?
24 MR. THOMAS:
I think clearly there was a lot of 25 discussion within FEMA about this proposed change as well, ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINtA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
50 1 and I.think the technical aspects on whether there is any loff-site danger or not is what it hinges on.
Clearly with
(~'
3 the page that was passed out, the indication that we have 4 from NRC is they feel that the review of on-site Epreparedness is all that is required, and the interfaces.
6 that are required. f or on-site support is all that is 7 required.
8 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I guess I am having the
& following problem.
If we go the-usual route, we would have to a finding from FEMA on the adequacy of the plans, and the 1t reasonable assurance that they could be implemented.
That 12 would come into the hearing process, and then we would get 13 up to a point where we would give an operating license, and 14 we would stamp it " limited to 5 percent," then the execises 15 follow.
16 Now, suppose there is a request f or a low power 1711 cense, wh y ca n ' t the same process operate, and what do we 18 lose or gain by it?
19 MR. GRIMES It is primarily a ma tter of 20 efficiency in attempting to make a generic finding through 21 rulemaking on the risk, rather than a case by case finding, ZtWe believe that we can make an overall finding based on the 23 low risk, the time available to take ad hoc actions, the 24 f act that FEMA has programs going to improve preparedness 25 around all these plants, they are all working on something ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINfA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
51 4
^
1 anyway looking toward full power, and the fact that we check 2 the specific interf aces during our review of the on-site p
3 plans.
4 All those things are going to be true of every 5 sites, and why not make that judgment once instead of taking estaff time and FEMA time to litigate these over and over 7 again-in each such case.
8 HR. BICKWIT:
Why not make that judgment in the 9 typical situation.
In the typical situation, why not say, 10 no FEMA finding on off-site matters until you go to full 11 power 12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINOr Until that day having only 13 one hearing.
s 14 MR. BICKWIT:
That is true.
15 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO And they are treating the 16 operating license.
17 MR. BICKWIT:
Then you would not have the hearing 18 process.
You want to hang on to '.he hearing process with 19 respect to that finding.
20 MH'. GRIMES:
For full poser, typical case, one 2t would expect the FEMA finding on the p1'an to be able to 22 forwa rd, and make the reasonable assurance finding that 23 there is eneroency planning that is adequate in place.
24 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Brian, if we get a request, 25 or when we get a request specifically for a low power ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, E
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (207) 554-2345
'5 52 1 license, there would'be a low power hearing, wouldn't 2 there?
3 MR. GRIMES:- Tes.
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
If it is contested.
E MR. GRIMESs Yes.
6 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Then the next step would be, 7 go full power above 5 percent, and you would have a 8 hearing.
9-MR. GRIMES:
Yes.
10 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
So you are saying now, for 3
11 the low power hearing, you don't want to have to decide 12 every time that they have an emergency plan, and you can do
- 13. it generically?
(
14 MR. GRIMES:
Typically, it requires testimony from 15 the staf f on how much the risk is reduced compared to full 16 power operation, which requires a couple of technical peole, 17 and it requires emergency preparedness from the NRC to 18 testifT that the on-site plans are all right.
It requires a 19 person, at least, from FEMA to testify --
20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Wait a minute, suppose --
21 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
John was waiting.
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa I am sorry, go ahead.
23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Mr. Thomas, I gather that 24 FEM A, perhaps because of resource or other reasons, doesn't 25 feel comfortable with also being asked to make an additional ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC '
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
?
53 I) 1 finding which would be a low power finding?
2 ER. THOMAS:
As I understand the process, when we
{}x 3 are talking about what is a typical and what is not a 4 typical case, if you are looking at the potential f or a low 5 power license,. you are also thinking in terms of a full 6 power license.
7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
8 HR. THOMASs We are in the process of working with 9 the plan, on its staffing and preparedness, so obviously we 13 are going to make a finding, when you have the hearing for
~
11 full power,. and we are going to have an exercise before th er 12 go to f ull power.
(.
As I understand the approach we are taking here is 13 14 based on the technical finding.
If you make a decision that 15 technically you feel that at low power there is not a level 16 of danger off-site around that plant such that it would 17 require off-sito rescarces beyond th e plan t, then you don't 18 need a finding from us until you take up the full power 19 issue which is going to be coming up.
20 COHHISSIONER AHEARNE:
Sure.
21 What if we were to say, though, we think there is 22 some danger off site, and we do believe that there may be 23 some needfor off-site resources, what would FEMA's position 24 be if we asked, in addition to these other two findings we 25 are asking from you, namely, (1) the adequacy and ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
o 54
/^
1 feasibility, and (2) the post-exercise -- what would your 2 position be if we said that in some cases, we would like a
(~
3 finding on the adequacy for low power?
4 MR. THOMAS:.
Our position would be that we would 5 provide you with those findings.
6 CHAIRHAN PALLADINO I guess the issue here is 7 that ther feel they don't have to do this over and over 8 again.
I am not saying that we agree with that, but I am 9 saying. that that is his position.
to MR. GRIMES &
Of course, we have spent a good deal 11 of time talking about this issue at specific hearings.
12-COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Brian, you said tha t we 13 have got to send in people to talk about the relative risks 14 of low power and full power, and so on.
Suppose the 15 Commission just said, what you have to do is one, two, 16 three, instead one, two, three,. four, five, six, seven, 17 eigh, nine, ten, and so on.
18 I don't see why you have to present witnesses on
~
19 the risks of low power versus full power because the 20 Commission has decided wha t is necessary are 'he following 21 three items.
Then what the hearing could be about is 22 whether those three measures have been carried out.
23 NR. GRIMES:
What we are proposing as those items 24 are the licensee plan, and the interfaces.
25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I understand.
It is clear ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINlA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2340
55 I
1 that we disagree.
2 MR. GEIMES:
We think we have got it defined to
(~
3 some f airly straigh tfoward --
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO-Do you have any feel for hov 5 such farther we ought to go in doing what they are 6 proposing?
T A possible example might be that there be a 8 finding that at least up to X miles, X maybe being two.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Maybe that is it.
10 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
That there be s finding.
One 11 possible finding, in addition to what you propose, is if 12' FEM A comes in with a statement of adequacy of up to two 13 miles that that would satisfy the additional requirement.
(
14 MR. GRIMES:-
I am afraid of specifying it that var 15 because it requires full preparedness up to that distance,
~
16 and we believe that the additional time available would 17 allow you not to have full preparedness.
18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Maybe it is 50 percent 19 preparedness.
UP to that distance, it is about 10 percent.
20 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
But then you would not have 21 treated it generically, and you have the problem.
22 MR. GRIMES-That is right.
23 MR. BICKWIT.
I think that that is the clear case, 24 and in the technical judgment risk is not worth the effort.
a If you want to redefine the risk more than the technical ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
l
-e 56-57
\\
('
1 staff, then we have to come back with some other --
2 COHHISSIONER GILINSKYa We have technical 3 Commissioners somewhere, over there.
4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINot I think what we are being 5 told that if we want a generic settlement to that issue for.
6 the specific case where you have a low power application, a 7 separate low power application, then they say this is the 8 var to go..
If we want to do anything more, it becomes Snon-generic.
10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY I don't think -- It is 11 still a generic solution.
It is just a solution that 12 involves more work.
13 CHAIRMAN PALLADINOa It is generic in principle,
(
14 and non-generic in application.
15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa Every rule is generic.
3 1
I 16 This is a rule just happens to dispose of the problem.
~
17 MR. GRIMES:
Our pcoposal would involve the NBC 18 staff ' treating with the licensee's preparedness which they l
19 would want to do anyway for in-plant reasons before the lov 20 power operation, and does not involve off-site authorities 21 and FEMA in this particular aspect.
It is just a
-22 sim plica tion, a judg' ment to try to streamline the process.
23 CHAIRMAN PALLADINC:
Can I ask you a question, l
24 Brian.
With regard to this situation, even though maybe 25 there is no FEMA finding on a plan, will the NRC have looked ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
58 1
1 at the situation at, let us say, two miles, or will you have 2 basis for knowing that things are good up to two miles, or
( ~
3 whatever distance?
4 NH. GRINES:
Not in.that sense.
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Let me piggyback on that.
SI didn't necessarily feel that FEMA had to make that 7 finding, but I think that someone has to.
8 MR. GRIMES:
I think FEMA feels that if there is 9 to be an off-site finding made that it should be done by 10 FEM A.
It COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So do I.
12 MR. THOMAS:
Particularly in view of the fact that 13 FEM A vill be working with those same State and local 14 authorities on the planning that is going on for the full 15 power.
16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That is why I ask whether 17 you. could make that additional finding.
18 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I gather there is a sense of 19-a little bit of lack of desire to go to nothing.
20 MR. GRIMES:
We did not believe we had nothing.
2t (General laughter.)
22 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:.
To this minimum.
23 MR. JAMG0CHIANs Could I address that point just 24 once?
25 I would really hate to.see the regulation focus on l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
?
2 59
.r ~
1 a specific distance.
In other words, that a finding he made 2 within two miles.-
Whereas, if you really look at what is
{'
3 on-site preparedness, and what does NRC verify when they say 4on-site preparedness is in good shape, they basically look 5 at organization, that is the first thing, and, yes, the 611censee's organization has to have its ducks in line,
- T eve ry thing has to be straight enough.
8-Also, ther have to know the organization off-site Sto contact during.an emergency.
They have to have first-aid 1aon-site as well a s of f-site.
They have got to have it arrangements with the local hospitals.
As far as policing 11 powers, they have got to know who to contact in order to 13 block roads.
14 COHNISSIONER AHEABNE:
Mike, f or example, aren 't 15 the arrangements with the hospitals arrangements to handle 16 people who might be exposed on-site.
17 MB. JAMGOCHIAN That is true.
But my concern is, 181f you say get prepared up to two miles, you may not have a s
19 hospital --
20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
That is another cycle 21 approach.
22 CHAIRHAN PALLADINO:
Don't attach significance to
~
23 the distance.
'24 HR. GRIMES :
Let me try something else in the 25 overa].1 context of emergency preparedness.
Emergency plans ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
60
(*
1 are meant to preposition, people, equipment, and other 2 resources so that there are not many hours involved in
{'
3 arranging for those things.
Things, for example, which go 4 beyond a day are not really part of our focus in emergency 5 plans.
3 Here the number of hours we are talking about are
-7 on the order of at least half a day in the worst case.
We 8 are saying there is no real need to spend resources or to 9 verify that there are emergency plans in place because the 10 reason that those plans are there is to provide for very 11 quick reaction, and very quick reaction is just not required 12 in the low power case.
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:.
There are people who think x
14 we have got that many hours at f ull power.
15 ER. GRIMES:
Yes.
16 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0s There are those people who 17 a re --
18 Have you got as much information as you need on 19 this?
20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNEt My feeling is, as I tried 21to express earlier in my comment sheet, I share with Vic, I 22 think there ought to be something off-site.
I also believe 231f there is off-site finding made, it should be a FEMA 24 finding.
But, unfortunately, I have not been able to cr.me 25 up with the specific that want to be addressed, 'which is the I
ALDER $oN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINtA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
61 1 veakness of saying that there ought to be something else.
2 Mo. GRIMES:
I am not sure how much additional 7-3 time you want to spsad, Mr. Chairman, but we are prepared to
(
4 go over the slide called NRC/ FEM A interaction, which is 5 essentially an outline of the typed two pages that you were 6 just given.
7 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0s The new page?
8 HR. GRIMES:
No, this is part of the original
& package, the NRC/EEMA interaction slide.
What it does is 10 outline the page we just. passed out in describing the plan 11 reviews and what FEMA will give us in the NRC licensing 12 process.
13 We have worked with FEM A extensively on this.
It 141s the seventh slide in the main package.
15 For -the construction permit applications, FEMA 16 will give us a determination on whether or not off-site 171apediments exist.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What is an impediment?
19 MR. GRIMES Any reason to believe that emergency 20 plans could not be developed during the construction and 21 preparation for operation of the plant.
It conforms to the 22 need for finding in our rule for construc+1on permit that f.3 there is nothing that would prevent the development of an 24 off-site plan.
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE Mr. Thomas, could you give ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 4:9 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
i 62 I'
1 se an example of an impediment.
MR. THOMAS:
If we had a local unit of government 2
3 that we have been working with who showed no interest or
{'
4 inclination.for emergency planning.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
For how long would you have a been working with the local government at the CP stage?
7 MR. THOMAS:.One of the things that is the basis 8 for FEM A 's involvement in emergency planning is its on-going 9 activities with Stata and local units of govarnment.
10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
When you say, lack of 11 interest in emergency planning, this would be the broad 12 eme rgency planning, not just focused on minimum.
17 MR. THOMASL We would see that an impediment.
(
i 14 MR. GRIMESs.
Perhaps we could take an example of 15 Allen 's Creek,. there was discussions of the FEMA 16 repre'santative with the NRC staff reviewer duriLg that time 17 and a site visit made, and general FEMA interactica with the 18 local governments, and there was some initial indication 19 that perh,tps local flooding migh t be a problem that would 20 have to be addressed in the emergency planning.
21 We got another letter that said they had looked 22 into that, and it was not a problem for the main access 23 r oa d s.
But it is that sort of thing that might require 24 special attention during th e re vie w.
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The issue that was puzzling ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
63 O
\\
~
1 me was, normally the time between CP a pplication and 2 operation, even using optimistic projections in some
('
3 quarters, you have got at least eigh t years.
4 HR. GRINES Yes.
5 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN04 And a couple of 6 Administrations locally and statewide.
7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNEs So if the roads are in the 8 wrong place, that is something is fixable in eicht years.
9 If the local government is intransigent, many local to governments may come and go in the time.
I was curious as It to what would be a --
12 MR. GRIMES:
To the extent needed to fulfill the 13 requirements of our regulations for CP findings in the 14 emergency preparedness area.
15 COMMISSIONER'AHEARNE:
It certainly would 16 highlight items which ought to be worked on in the 17 intervening years.
18 MR. GRIMESa Yes.
19 The second item on the slide concerns operating 2011 cense hearings, and the re we have discussed extensively 21 earlier the findings on the off-site plan, adequacy and 22 reasonable assurance on implementation which FEM A will give 23 us for our hearing process, and also witnesses, and 24 responses to contentions, and interrogatories require FEMA 25 resources, and they are committed to support us in that ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
64 I way.
2 Until any NRC rule change on low power, they have
/~ '
3 also agreed to continue giving us a finding on.the low power 4 where that is needed in our licensing process.
5 Prior to operation above 5 percent power, they 8 will also give us, which is item 3, findings on an exercise 7 which involves all the principal parties around the site.
8 For operating reactors, item 4,
they will give us 9 an initial exercise evaluation, and an exercise of the site to and the off-site authorities as soon as possible in 11 accordance with our Simpson Report schedule, which we hope 12 will result in almost all plants being exercised by next 13 A p ril.-
(
1*
On an on-going basis in the future, FEMA will 15 provide us findings on significant deficiencies as they 16 become known to FEM A, either as a result of exercises or as 17 a result of other public input, alsc evaluations 18 specifically of the of f-site aspects of exercises as those 19 are held.
4 20 The last item I wanted to go over is the next 21 slide, which is just a brief overview of the other 22 activities going on in the emergency preparedness area, and 23 the rule changes that you have already under consideration 24 or which you will receive in the near future for 25 consideration.
These are all designed to perfect the ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
65
'~'
1 existing rules-2 The first item, sf course, is the extension of the 3 public notification system implementation date, which might 4 Mike has described the status of.
We have also been working 5 extensively with FEMA on the second item, which is a 6 relaxation of the exercise frequency required for off-site 7 authorities.
8 We have also met with FEMA and the State end local 9 authorities and the inter-organizational advisory committee, 10 members of which met with the Commission during the It rulemaking proceeding..
I believe we will'have a proposal 12 shortly for you which will both maintain a on-sitc frequency 13 adequate to keep up the on-site plans, and adequate
(
14 f requency of participation off-site which will reduce the 15 burden on of f-site authorities but still provide periodic 16 exercises.
17 HR. JAMG0CHIAN:
Relative to the first one, I 18 would -like to-say that we have received about 15 comments 191etters, but just yesterday we received a letter from the 20 Governor of Connecticut, which is quite unusual.
The 21 Governor has said that 22 The Governor took the po sition that February 1, 23 198 2, was too early of a date to pick.
His primary concern 24 was that he would ra ther wait and little bit longer, but 25 have an efficient system, rather than worry about a system ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
f 66 1 tha t would not work properly..
2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNEa Did he say anything about 3 why he could not get an efficient system by February 1st?
c 4
HR..JAMG0CHIANs He did not say why.
He just said 5 that he would rather wait a little longer and make sure he 4
6has got a good system, rather than rush it'.
7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Did it have anything to do 8 with the f act that on one of your charts that Adam Neck has 9 an estimated completion date 'af ter February 1st?
10 NR. JANG0CHIANs Ask the Governor.
11 HR. GRIMES:
Millstone is in the same bag, I 12 think.
13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
14 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0t I was going to ask the same 15 question, why did he think he could get one by February i
161st?
17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Not according to the back 18 u p job.
19 HR. GRIMES:
The third item, extension of the 20 completion date for emergency response f acilities, that is 21 currently scheduled for October of 1982.
We are looking at 22 whether that needs to be hooked to a fueling outage to make 23 it more realistic.
24 There would also be an item attached to that which 25 codifies the requirement for the SPDS system of which much ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
't 67-1 has been written, but was' not explicitly included in the THI
~
2 action plan in such a way that it was a requirement.
. (
3 Movever, ~there is a good deal going on in that area by the 1
4 industry.
5 The f ourth item. is an item which will be coming - to 6 you, I believe, f airly shortly.
We have a minor problem on 7 the fact that burried in our original rule was a requirement 8 for one year after the effectiveness of the rule, which was 9-not spelled out in the rule r which happened to be November 1a3rd,1980, certain research reactors were supposed to submit 11 emergency plans.
11 We have been working with the research roactor 13 community on guidance and are just now completing it.
In 14.f act, there was a meeting yesterday with the research 15 reactor community on that guidance, and we believe we are 16very close to agreeing on appropriate guidance for research 1Treactors.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE.
Meeting the couple of days 191s a little short.
20 MR. GRIMES:
It is a little short on the 21timeline.
We recognized this problem in September, but it 22 has -just taken a little time to get the Commission paper 23 down here.
24 We believe there are emergency plans in place at 25 these facilities, but to get an agreed on upgraded plan, we ALDERSoN REPORTING CoMPAl4Y,INC, 400 %9GINtA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2 68 1 think it is appropriate just to take the time to go through 2 i t.-
/-
3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is anyone complying with
- 4 this plan, or will anyone be complying with the plan by 5 November 30th?
6 MR. GRIMES:
I have asked my staf f to make sure 7 that all facilities have told us whether or not they are 8 going to be able to comply with that date by that date?
9 CONNISSIONER GILINSKYt Is that all they were 10 required to do?
11 HR. GRIMES:
No.
A plan submittal is required, 12 but they could reference existing plan submittals to us 13 because we have not guidance out --
14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKIs I am a little bit 15 disturbed to be in. formed at this point that we have a rule 16 out which is not going to be complied with, when the date is 17 a f ew days f rom now.
18 It is possible that the rule was not a wise one, I 19 don 't know, what the choice of date was and what it should 20 have been.
But the Commission makes the rules, and it would 21 have been nice to know sometime earlier tha t there are 22 problems about compliance with this rule.
23 Ihe Commission could have either said, there had 24 better be compliance or else, or we could have said, maybe 25 the date was a little early and we will extend the date.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
4 400 VIRGlklA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
69 4
4
('N 1 But to be presented with accomplished fact that here we are 2 November 3rd, almost, and no one is complying with the rule 3 because we have not given them guidance, is something that I
--(
4 am not very happy about.
5-MR. GRIMES:
I would have to --
6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Unless.you have notified I
7 us before, in which case I apologize.
8 (General laughter.)
9 MR. GRIMES:
I would just say that it did not come
- 10 to my attention that we are net going to,.make it until 11 September.
We started work on the Commission paper, but we 12 just did not make it all the way through the process.
So I 13 must say a minor. mea culpa.
(
14 However, we do not have enough guidance in the 15 regulations to say that currently submitted emergency plans 16 do not or are not effectively meeting the regulation because 17 we have made some general words about upgrading plans, but i
18 ve don't have anything specific.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Those are upgraded plans tha t 20 you want by November 3rd?
21 MR. GRIMESt There was a requirement for upgraded 22 plans, but there were no specifics beyond reference to an 23 existing regula tory guide.
24 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Maybe in future setting of 25 schedules, if there is going to be a regulatory guide that ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345.
1-70 1
1 is required befor they can comply, maybe we ought to tie 2 that to the existence of the guide.
3 MR. GRIMES:
I think that would be good.
r-4 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Did you say that nobody has 5.been able to upgrade because they did not what to upgrade 6to?
7 NR. GRIMES:
I believe ther have been upgrading, d
8 but they have not had anything before the draf ts to work 9 with, and the regulation is vague enough to argue that they 10 a re, indeed, in compliance.
11 CHAIRMAN PALLADIN0s John.
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Putting aside the 13 mitigating f actors which obviously cut to why compliance has 14-no t been met, I share with Vic the concern.
I think this is 15 an issue that came up before, and I believe it is necessary 18 that somehow there be a system, I suppose it is ICE, that 17 follows up on when rules are out with dates things must be 181n compliance with.
There has to be a pacing system that 19 enable ICE to know, and then us to know if there is going to 20 be a major missing of a date.
21-Certainly, on each individual case that comes up, 22 one can then go through the analysis as to why the general 23 date might have been bad, or what are the other factors that 24 have led to the missing.
But to find out about it, and have 25 to be faced with the accomplished fact, as Vic puts it, at ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
1 71 4.
1 this stage our hands are really tied as to what can be 2 done.
3 HR. DIRCKS:
I just found out about it now.
4 (General laughter.)
5 CONNISSIONER AHEARNE:
All right, you and we need 6' assis tan ce.
7 CHAIRHAN PAllADINO:
Is the situation that these 8 people already have draf ts, and they are no w bringing them 9 up to snuff because you have the guides out?
to HR.- GRIMESa I would like to ask Mr. Ramos, who 11 met with the research reactor community yesterday, to try to 12 cha racte rize what he think s the status of those plans is?
13 HR. RAHOS:
I am Steve Ramos also from DEP._
14 I talked with them yesterday concerning the fact 15 that we had a proposed ' rule change, rud they characterized 16 back to me that none of them have upgraded their plans at 17 the present time because the guidance is not out.
They all 18 h a v e pla ns --
19 COHNISSIONER GILINSKYa Did you h ear. a t some' point 20 that the guidance was not adequate, or that they are not 2tgoing to do anything until they have the guidance?
22 HR. RAMOS:
That is true.
Ihey have known for 23 some time that they could not upgrade because the guidance 24 was not out.
25 But, as I started to say, we have been working ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
O S-72 1 with them for over a year on developing new guidance, both 2 with ANS with the new ANSI standard, ANSI 15-16, and
~
3 upgrading Reg Guide 2.6.
4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Didn't you know all this 5 time that the guidance was not going to be ready until now?
6 MR. RAMOS:
We thought that the guidance would be 7 ready in June.
8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Who is preparing the 9 guidance ?
10 MR. RAMOS:
A combination of the people from 11 Brookhaven, people from several of the research reactors, 12 and people on our staff 13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
You must have known since 14 June-15 MR. GRIMES:
I knew that things did not come out 18 in June, but it was about a month-by-month slippage, and 17 until September we thought we were going to have something 18 done.
I guess, the process of getting a piece of paper down 19 here was unfortunately not very expeditious.
20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
It isn't just -- You know 21 the time f rom September until now, although it would have 22 been nicer to know a little earlier, I just can't believe --
23 Have we had any contact with them over the year, 24 before June?
25 MR. RAMOS:
Yes, sir.
We have had contact with ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
1 73 o
r' 1 them continuously since the rule has been out.
2-COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Well, something doesn 't 3 sound right to me 4
MR. DIRCKS There is a major gap here, and we 5L have to go back and find out how it happened.
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I think, though, in the 7 system we have, when we go out with rules, I don't believe 8 that there is a tracking system that then picks up, here are 9" all the dates that are now laid out, and then backs off 10 those X months ahead and try to just test, have we heard or 11 have we decided the contents and people, and do they know if 12 that is going to be met.
13 MR. DIRCK3: - I think there is a tracking system.
k 14 There is something obviously wrong in this one.
15 CbMMISSIONER'GILINSKY:
I am not extending my 16 remarks beyond this particular case, but did we basically 17 delegate responsibility to Brookhaven, or some sort of group 18 like this, to come up with the standards or the guidance?
19 MR. RAMOS:
ANS'is the lead agency or the lead 20 o rg aniza tio n that was designated to developed --
21 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
The American Nuclear r2 Society?
23 MR. RAMOS:
Yes.
24
-- to develop the ANSI 15-16, which we have been 25 participating with them.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
74 i
o
/~
1 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYs That is a standard for 2 research f acilities?
3 MR. RAMOS:
Emergency planning or research 4 f acilities.
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
How in the world could 6 they take so long when they knew that the date was November 7 3rd, where are they?
8 MR. RAMOS4 It takes a long time to develop 9 guidance on such an issue, particularly when you have so 10 many different kinds of reactors that are involved that run 11 all the way from --
12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I can't believe that they 13 did not know 14 MR GRIMES:
They knew.
1 15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:.
Well, then, they had a 16 responsibility to come here and tell us.
They are 1711censees, and they have got a responsibility to tell us if 18 we are counting on them to develop quidance.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Do you believe that they have 20 come and told you, and is the gap between you and us, or 21 between them and you?
22 MR. RAMOS:
I believe the gap is between us and 23 y ou.
24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Let's close the gap.
25 MR. DIRCKS:
I believe at several levels.
i ALDERSoN REPORTING ColIPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
75 O
1 (General laughter.)
2 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
I don't want to put you on 3 the spot, 'but I think it is important that we establish some i-4 sort of tracking system, so that we do have communication on 5 meeting dates such as this.
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
7 HR. GRIMES:
I agree that we need a better system 8 to do that, but I will say that the staff has had a lot of 9 balls in the air.
10 COHNISSIONER GILINSKYa Let me tell you how it 11 looks to me, and make a remark that seems appropriate.
It 12 seems that this group gave themselves an extension.
13 HR. RAMOS :
No.
We have been working very 14 clo sely r and we and them have worked very hard to come up 15 with some realistic guidance on writing emergency planning.
16 MR. GRIMES.
I think perhaps the time to reach a 17 consensus of-the research reactor community was 18 underestimated.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Is there more on this?
20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I have one question, but 21 1t is out of sequence.
i i
22 MR. GRIMES:
I have finished.
The last item just 23 mentioned is the SECT paper that is here all ready on 24 reporting requirements under 50.72 which streamlines the 25 reporting requirements, but since it is related to the ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIT.GINTA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
l 76 I?
1 emergency preparedness area, I. wanted to mention it on this 2 slide.
3 This gives the overview of the various-pieces 4 where we hope to improve the regulations and reduce the 5 requirements in many cases ' ased on our experience. to date, b
~
6and try to have a consiste_nt, effective, and minimum impact 7 package.
8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I had a specific question i
9 on the f ourth slide of your original package, and I gather ta it is something that you touched on before I came in.
The 11 second paragraph, I can 't find anything, at least in the OGC i
12 draf t of the rule with which I gather you are in agreement, 13 that actually touches on paragraph A of 50.47.-
14 MR. GRIMES:
You are correct..
In the rewrite by I
15 the Office of General Counsel, the matter relating to 16 paragraph A was made a new paragraph D, I believe, so that 17 the slide is out of date on that point.
18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Is the substance of the 19 slide still accurate?
20 MR. GRIMESs Yes.
21 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
In other words, you are i
22 saying that the same result is achieved through paragraph D 23 as what was in paragraph A.
24 MR. GRIMES:
Yes.
e 25 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Are there any other i
l o
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
77 l
(]
1 questions?
2 (No response.)
3 CHAIRHAN PALLADIN0s We thank you very much, and 4 we look forward to receiving the revised package.-
5 The meeting is adjourned.
6 (Whereupon, at 3 530 p.m.,
the meeting was 7 adjourned.)
e 9
10 11 12 13
- i 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2
25 ALDERSON REPORT 1rJG COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
N
,o
+.
NUCLEAR REGUIATORY COMMISSION i
i This is to certify that the attached proceedings. bercre. the COMMI'SSION MEETING LII the catter oft PUBLIC MEETING -- BR,IEFING ON AMENDMENTS TO PART 50 --
EMERGENCY PREPAREDENESS REGULATIONS
- Date er Freceeding;.
October 30, 1981 Docket Numberr Place-of Proceed.ing:
Washington, D. C.
were held as herein. appears,. anct that this is ~ the original. t: anscript thereof fcr che file of the Cec:sission Patricia A.Minson Official Reporter (Typed)
W 4 67 74Nwu Official Reporter (Signature) i J
S g,
, w/
. l j
Y
.