ML20055A274
| ML20055A274 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 01/29/1982 |
| From: | Carey J DUQUESNE LIGHT CO. |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20049H237 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-82-216 TAC-46213, NUDOCS 8207160051 | |
| Download: ML20055A274 (11) | |
Text
MS
/
W
'Af M
H m 4564000 Q,^;"*
January 29, 1982 15219 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Chairman Washington, DC 20555
Reference:
Beaver Valley Power Station, Uni.t.IM. 1 Docket No. 50-334, License DPR-66 Emergency Public Warning System
Dear Chairman Palladino:
Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50-54(s)(2) and Section IV, D.3 of Appendix E requires the licensee to demonstrate that administra-tive and physical means have been established for alerting and providing prompt instructions to the public in the event of an emergency at the Beaver Valley Power Station.
The compliance date was extended to February 1, 1982 by the Commission on August 27, 1981.
Duquense Light is committed to the installation of a public warning system responsive to the guidance of Appendix 3 to NUREG-0654 and has been actively pursuing the installation of this system.
However, the install-ation of this system has been delayed as a result of several factors.
Specifically:
1.
The Beaver Valley Power Station emergency planning zone is comprised of three counties in three states and numerous local municipalities. Although cooperation by offsite authorities has been excellent, negotiations for locations, system design, right-of-way and other similar considerations have been com-pounded by the numerous political entities that we have had to work with.
2.
Relocation of sites, due to right-os-way refusals, complaints from nearby property owners, legal problems, etc. has had a significant impact on the schedule.
The siren locations were chosen using the following criteria:
- To site sirens at the highest elevation in the immediate area to reduce range losses from natural barriers.
- To site sirens near, existing distribution poles which do not have existing transformers, to minimize modification to the distribution system for providing the siren with service.
l l
8207160051 820528 PDR FOIA WATKINS82-216 PDR
January 29, 1982 Page 2
- To maximimize the distance from siren sites and adjacent homes as much as possible.
- To site sirens on public lands (schools, fire departments, municipal properties, etc.) where possible.
The siren locations, which were originally chosen, met the above criteria.
However, relocation has been necessary in several instances which has resulted in added delays.
Any relocation involves a re-evaluation of an alternate siren location, draw-ing revisions, additional right-of-way permit requirements, and physical relocation by construction, which has resulted in unexpected delays.
~
3.
Duquesne Light Company, a utility franchised to operate 1n the state of Pennsylvania has found it legally impossible to obtain property rights along state / municipal roadways in Ohio and West Virginia.
In Hancock County, WV, and Columbiana County, OH, the local fire departments have been helpful in granting approval for siren locations at their fire stations.
However, for the majority of the siren locations, we have had to seek private property authorization.
The sirens that are to be installed in Ohio and West Virginia will not be within our service area.
Service agreements for power supply requirements had to be arranged through other util-ities which include:
- Monongahela Power Co. (W. Va) 4.
The terrain of the Beaver Valley Power Station emergency planning zone is largely characterized as tree-covered hills with deep valleys and pockets of population along the river valleys.
Be-cause of this terrain, siting siren locations has been more difficult and additional sirens have been necessary to adequately cover the EPZ.
Duquesne Light performed field testing to verify calculated ranges over this difficult terrain.
5.
Large portions of the Beaver Valley Power Station emergency plan-ning zone have population densities too sparse to justify notifi-cation by fixed sirens.
In order to provide a supplementary system that would be effective, reliable and under the control of the utility, Duquesne Light has developed a residential electric meter box-mounted mini-siren system that would be activated by the county via digitally encoded signals transmitted on a power line carrier.
Since there are only minimal precedences (and none directly related to sirens) for such a system, the engineering effort has been, of necessity, extensive.
However, once installed,
January 29, 1982 Page 3 there will be a greater assurance that these devices will be in place and operable during an emergency than there exists for the other suggested supplementary systems.
In our letter of December 23, 1981, Duquesne Light summarized the status of the installation efforts of the Emergency Public Warning System.
As of the date of this letter seventy-eight (78) of the eighty (80) pole-mounted siren units are mounted and in-place within the applicable Beaver County EPZ area (see attached map).
The two siren locations that remain are #43 (location designated at the Beaver County Courthouse) and #34 (location designated at the Center Volunteer Fire Department).
Both locations are on private property.
Negotiations for obtaining approval has been on-going, and authorization for installation is expected very shortly.
In the applicable portions of Ohio and West Virginia, the completion of the system will depend on satisfactory negotiations with private / govern-mental agencies, construction installation and testing of the siren system.
In Hancock County, West Virginia, seven (7) of the eleven (11) pole-mounted siren units are mounted and in place within the applicable EPZ area.
In Columbiana County, Ohio, five (5) of the thirteen (13) pole-mounted siren units are mounted and in-place.
Duquesne Light has been actively pursuing the installation of the siren warning system as evidenced by the Attachment I-System Chronology.
Although we have been working to resolve the difficulties encountered with this project, it will not be possible to have the complete system installed and operational by February 1, 1982.
In addition to the pole-mounted siren units, a supplemental system is still being engineered, which will cover the sparsely populated areas and fill in the " dead spots" not covered by the large sirens.
Large portions l
of the Beaver Valley Power Station emergency planning zone have population densities too sparse to justify utilizing large pole-mounted sirens.
In order to provide a supplementary system that would be effective and re-liable, Duquesne Light has developed a residential electric meter box-mounted mini-siren system that would be activated by the county via digit-ally encoded signals transmitted on a power line carrier.
The control hardware (computer equipment) for this supplemental system will not be available until May, 1982, and the software is now scheduled for August, 1982.
Duquesne Light Company respectfully requests relief from the February 1, 1982 compliance date.
The attachments to this letter describe the system chronology, a projected schedule, and the interim, compensatory measures for each respective county within the Beaver Valley Power Station EPZ.
If you have any questions, please call my office.
Very truly yours, J. J. Carey
January 29, 1982 Page 4 Enclosures cc: Mr D. A. Beckman, Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Beaver Valley Power Station Shippingport, PA 15077 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission c/o Document Management Branch Washington, DC 20555 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Inspection and Enforcement Attn:
R. C. Haynes, Regional Director Region 1 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Mr.BrianGrimes[
U. S. NRC Washington, D. C.
20555 Mr. S. A. Varga
/
U. S. NRC
(
Washington, D. C.
20555 l
l l
l l
l l
l l
t Attachment I BEAVER VALLEY FOWER STATION Emerggncy Pla==ing Zona
, Emergency Public Warning System SYSTEM CHRONOLOGY 1.
In December 1979, Duquesne Light contracted the A.M. Voorhees and Associates, Inc. to perform a mass notification and evacuatica study of the Beaver Valley Power Station emergency pla=ning z=ne.
Although the primary pu= pose of this study was to provide the
)
evacuation time estimates required to be submitted to he USNRC in January 1980, the study sc=pe i=cluded an assessment of alter =ative macheds to provide area-vide mass notifica:icn and to identify a mached or combina:ica of machods for the 3eaver Valley Fewer Station emergency planning zene. The final report was presented to Duquesne l
Light at a meeting en March 27, 1980.
2.
The Voorhees report was given a prelisi=ary review, and a Cons==uctica Order was issued on April 18, 1980.
yelicwing seme N :ial g:=undwork, an initial design concept was approved by the Duquesne Ligh: Corporate Committee on April 30, 1980, and was issued May 1,1980.
, Engineering activities for the 3eaver County portion of the emergency 3.
planning zona commenced.
Di'scussions were held with siren vendors in early May 1980 and with Westinghcuse Electric (misi-sirens) in early June.
Out of these efforts came proposed siren locations, siren specifications, siren control systems design and a siren field test procedure.
4.
A field test of sirens f cm two =anufacturers was c=nducted on September 18, 1980, to determine the effective rings under cenditicas typical to the Beaver Valley Pever Scarica emergency planning zene.
5.
The pr posed Beaver Cou=cy system was presented to the Director, Beaver County Emergency Management Agency and the Director of the Beaver County Ccamunicatiens Center at two meetings held in October 1980.
6.
On November'14, 1980, a purchase order was issued to Westi=ghouse Electric for equipment and engineering related to the mini-siren system.
7.
On November 31, 1980, a purchase c dar was issued to ACA for 16-125 db sad 30-112 db sirens.
Delivery was received June 19, 1981.
8.
A series of meeti=gs were held with fire depar: man: officials in Heaver Coun:7 9.
Prelimi=ary engineering activities cemmenced f=r the siren sys: ems in Hancock County, West Virgisia, and for Columbiana Cous:y, Ohio.
l
10.
During the week of Janusr7 19,1981, five days of mini-siren testing was conducted.
Similar testing was conducted again during the weeks of February 10, 1981, and March 2, 1981.
11.
On January 30, 1981, a request for bid for the radio / encoding equip-ment for siren control was issued.
A proposal was received on March 25, and a purchase order issued on April 27.
Delivery of the system was projected to be late October.
An interim manual system which will be rented to Duquesne Light was received June 19, 1981.
12.
On February 20, 1981, representatives of Duquesne Light met with fire department and emergency services personnel in Hancock County to acquaint these personnel with plans for siren installation in Hancock County and to solicit their input and cooperation. A similar meeting was held in Columbiana County, Ohio, on March 12, 1981, with local, county and state officials.
13.
In late February,1981, letters were sent to the mayors, the local fire departments and local emergency management agency directors in Beaver County identifying the proposed locations in their respective juris-dications, outlining the Duquesne Light offer to incorporate fire signals and discussing other pertinent aspects of the proposed system.
Similar letters were sent to Hancock County, West Virginia, and Columbiana County, Ohio, in March 1981.
14.
On April 16, 1981, the purchase order to ACA was revised to provide for 40-125 db and 6-112 db additional sirens.
Delivery was projected for late August.
The Westinghouse purchase order was also revised.
l 15.
In early June, acceptance tests for the initial siren order were held.
Delivery of the initial order of sirens was received June 19, 1981.
16.
Right-of-way authorizations are presently being obtained from state, municipal and private parties for installation purposes.
17.
Late August, 1981, received partial order of siren equipment from ACA.
Only 15 complete siren units were received out of the 2nd order of 43 sirens.
Shortage of parts identified by manufacturer.
i 18.
End of November, 1981, received complete order of 43 siren units with parts coming piece-meal during this period.
19.
November 24, 1981, Westinghouse identifies supplemental alerting system computer equipment to be available for installation by April, 1982.
20.
Final order of 15 siren units (total 104) delivered January 9,1982.
l 21.
January 13, 1982, initiated individual siren testing in Beaver County.
Testing to continue for the next few weeks until all have been complete-I ly tested and verified by local county agency representatives.
J Attachment II BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION Emergency Planning Zone Emergency Public Warning System PROJECTED SCHEDULE NOTE:
All projections in this attachment are pending no unforeseen delays such as property right-of-way or power supply (Hancock/
Columbiana Counties) difficulties, and upon satisfactory testing i
of equipment.
Milestone Projected Date o Beaver County Pole-mounted Siren System, February 28, 1982 Installation and Testing o Hancock County Pole-mounted Siren System, March 31, 1982 Installation and Testing o Columbiana County Pole-mounted Siren System, March 31, 1982 Installation and Testing NOTE:
As sirens are installed, they will be made operational on the j
interim control system.
o Permanent Control System Installed July, 1982 o Supplemental Mini-siren System, Installed and August, 1982 Tested.
l l
l L
l.
s DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY Beaver Valley Power Station Letter dated January 29, 1982 Attachment III Prompt Notifications and Instructions to the Public in the event of an Emergency (Compensatory measures)
~
l Beaver County, PA f
i The Director of the Beaver County Emergency Management Agency (BCEMA) has indicated the following actions would be taken until the permanently installed public notification system is in service, and as back-up measures should the installed system fail.
Upon notification that protective actions are required offsite, BCEMA will mobilize municipal police and fire vehicles to alert the public in affected areas.
The public address systems and/or sirens on these vehicles and/or hand-held bullhorns will serve as the signal-ling devices.
Once alerted, persons residing in the affected areas would turn to the Emergency Broadcasting Stations on radio and television, as they would when the fixed sirens are available.
These activities supplement the-l original civil defense strens and the sirens already installed as part of the current upgrade.
I Each of the 27 municipalities in the affected area has devised alert-1 ing route maps for the fire and police vehicles under their jurisdiction.
Mobilization scheme used for normal police / fire supression activities would be used to mobilize the necessary vehicles.
In each municipality, these arrangements are documented in the municipality's response plan.
The Director, BCEHA, has indicated that with the -interim warning system l
(less new sirens) approximately 80% of the population within 5 miles of the site would receive the initial warning within 15 minues and the remaining persons would receive the warning in the next 15 minutes.
In the 5-10 mile zone, approximately 50% of the population would receive the warning in 15 minutes, 90% in 45 minutes, and 100% expected following one hour.
As part of the Beaver County public information program, Duquesne Light Company has completed the preparation of the BCEMA brochure, which is present-l ly in publication.
The brochure will be distributed by mail in February.
Duquesne Light Company has also completed the prepartion of full page ads for insertion in area newspapers during the first week in February. The inform-ation in these ads parallel that information contained in the brochures. A copy of the counties brochure and a copy of the full page newspaper ad is attached for your information.
l
1 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY Beaver Valley Power Station Letter dated January 29, 1982 Attachment III Prompt Notifications and Instructions to the Public in the event of an Emergency (Compensatory measures)
Hancock County, WV A
The Director of the Hancock County of Emergency Services (HCOES) has indicated the following actions would be taken until the permanently in-stalled public notification system is in service, and as back-up measures l
should the installed system fail.
Upon notification that protective actions l
are required offsite, HCOES will mobilize the Hancock County United Fire-fighters to alert the public in affected areas.
The fire vehicles will attract the attention of the public by passing over pre-designated routes in the risk portion of the county with sirens and public address systems in operation.
Once alerted, persons residing in the affected areas would turn to radio and television as they would when the sirens are available.
The fire fighters are activated by a County controlled Plextron alerting system.
Although these departments are volunteer forces, experience in previous fire supression emergencies indicate the ability to activate the firefighters in a timely period.
The Director, HCOES, has indicated that with the interim warning system (less new sirens) approximately 100% of the population within 5 miles of the site would receive the initial warning within 15 minutes.
In the 5-10 mile zone, approximately 45% of the population would receive the warning in 15 minutes, the remainder in the next 30 minutes.
The notification arrangements are documented in the HCOES "Seaver Valley Site Emergency Response Plan" as Attachment I to Annex P.
As part of the Hancock County public information program, Duquense Light Company has completed the preparation and publication of the public information brochures.
The county has distributed the flyers in their respective areas.
Duquesne Light Company has also completed the prepar-ation of full page ads for insertion in area newspapers during the first week in February.
The information in these ads parallel that information contained in the~ brochures. A copy of the counties brochure and a copy of the full page newspaper ad is attached for you information.
8 DUQUESNE LICHT COMPANY Beaver Valley Power Station Letter dated January 29, 1982 Attachment III Prompt Notifications and Instructions to the Public in the event of an Emergency (Compensatory measures)
Columbiana County, Ohio The Director of the Columbiana County Disaster Services Agency (CCDSA) has indicated the following actions would be taken until the permanently installed public notification system is in service,- and as back-up measures should the installed system fail.
Upon notification that protective actions are required offsite, CCDSA will mobilize fire departments in the risk portion of the County.
Fire department vehicles will alert the public using public address systems.
When alerted,, the public is expected to turn on radio and ' television for further instructions.
The Director, CCDSA, has indicated that with the interim warning system (less new sirens) approximately 50%~of the population within 5 miles of the site would receive the initial warning within 15 minutes with the remainder
(
receiving notlfication in the next 30 minutes.,In the 5-10 mile zone, ap-(
proximately 30% of the population. would receive the warning in 15 minutes, 70% in the next 30 minutes, with the notification complete within one hour.
The notification arrangements are documented in the CCDSA " Beaver Valley Site Emergency Response Plan" as a Standard Operating Procedure.
As part of the Columbiana County public information program, Duquesne Light Company has completed the preparation and publication of the public 3
s information brochurts.
The county has distributed the flyers in their re-spective areas.
Duquesne Light has also cospleted the preparation of full page ads ~ foe insertion in area newspapers during the first week in February.
l The information in these ads parallel that information contained in the
~
b rochu res.
A copy of the counties brochure ^asd a copy of the full page news-l.
paper ad is attached for your information. -
4-i I
~
5 f-
CCMMONWEALTHOFPENNSYLVANIA)
SS:
COUNTY OF BEAVER O
this 8 / M day of
/988 _, before me,t /
dJ 7/7..d/dX7M1.>, a NotargPublic in(e/id for said Commonwealth andE6unty, personally appeared J. J. Carey, who bMng duly sworn, deposed, and said that (1) he is Vice President of Duquesne Light, (2) he is duly authorized to execute and file the foregoing Submittal on behalf of said Company, and (3) the statements set forth in the Submittal are true and correct to the best of his kncwledge, information and belief.
h A.
A.b'LR 1 f_./
/
mtu n.ratum. aman resuc
$NtPfle6POM 9000. MATER COUNTY NT CesaltsS40s EEPtats stM.14.1985 tsauber.Pennsylvase Assensties of totenes
/}-/G
'rj d J J MUCISGT GPU Nuclear 8 * '8 Middletown. Pennsylvania 17057 717 944 7621 Wnter's Direct Dial Number 717-948-8139 February 1, 1982 Mr. N. J. Palladino, Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Mr. Palladino:
Subject:
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Docket No. 50-219 Early Warning Public Notification System With regard to the prompt notification requirement of 10 CFR 50 Appendix E, GPU Nuclear has determined that installation of the siren system cesigned t) provide that capability at Oyster Creek cannot be completed until after February 1, 1982. Since this delay is beyond the control of GPU Nuclear and will not endanger life or property or the common defanse &c security, an i
exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50 Appendix E concerning completion of installation of the system by February 1, 1982, is requested pursuant to 10 CFR 550.12(a).
This request confirms our initial request for an exemption contained in our letter of December 31, 1981, to the Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
A review of the actions taken by GPU Nuclear demonstrates that the licensee has diligently pursued all actions within its control necessary to fulfill the prompt notification requirement. An outline identifying the major steps in designing, procuring and installing a prompt notification system at Oyster Creek is set forth in Attachment A.
Moreover, CPU Nuclear has kept the Commission informed of the steps it was taking, the problems being encountered and the timetables on which it expects the system to be fully operational.
On October 23, 1981, GPU Nuclear responded to a Notice of Violation contained in Mr. Victor Stello's letter of September 22, 1981.
In that response we indicated that all actions within the control of the company were being taken to meet the required installation date, but that legal requirements involved in obtaining rights-of-way might preclude our merting the February 1, 1982 completion date.
In this regard, all necessary equipment for the installa-tion has been received; installation perscnnel are currently pre-assembling as much of the equipment as possible prior to actual erection at the site; a blanket exemption from the Municipal Zoning Ordinances was filed with the
/h ly }fk Q;GO J
u s
GPU Nuclear is a part of the General Public Utilities System
Mr. N. J. Palladino Page 2 Board of Public Utilities and approved on December 17, 1981; the attainment of individual rignts-of-way for each installation site are being actively pur-sued; and sirens are currently being installed at sites where rights-of-way have been obtained.
To date, 35 of the 46 required rights-of-way have been obtained; however, we anticipate that for some of the remaining sites we will encounter objections which will significantly delay completion of system installation.
While we are continuing to actively pursue the attainment of the remaining rights-of-way, it is expected (based on previous experience in resolving rights-of-way problems) that completion of the siren alerting system installation may be delayed to July 1, 1982.
At present, 21 of the sirens have been installed; we anticipah installing the remaining 14 sirens for which we currently hold rights-of-way within 14 working days.
By letter of December 31, 1981 to Director NRR we presented the then current status of our efforts and requested an exemption from the February 1,1982 date.
In the interim, between February 1,1982 and completion of system installation and testing, notification of the public in the event of an emergency at Oyster Creek will be accomplished as provided for in the New Jersey State / Ocean County Oyster Creek Radiological Emergency Response Plan.
The Ocean County Office of Emergency Management is responsible for notifying the affected muncipalities in the event notification is required. Until the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Prompt Notification System is fully operational, Ocean County will rely upon the existing route alerting procedure described in the excerpt provided in Attachment B.
Based on prior experience, the Ocean County Office of Emergency Management estimates that notification of the public can be effected within a 5 mile radius of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station within 1 to 1-1/2 hours under normal conditions.
It is also estimated that notification within the entire 10 mile emergency planning zone can be accomplished within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> under normal conditions. Under conditions other than normal, it is expected that notification within the 10 mile EPZ can be accomplished within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />. The effectiveness of this notification system, and of local emergency management officials to promptly evacuate the affected population, was demonstrated in August 1976 in response to the projected threat of Hurricane Belle on Long Beach Island during peak seasonal population conditions. One hundred and seventy thousand people were notified within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> that evacuation was required and 130,000 people were subsequently evacuated.
In continuing consultations with representatives of the State of New Jersey and the Ocean County Office of Emergency Management, they have expressed confidence that the existing procedures provide an effec-tive means of notifying the public.
Since every effort has been made to complete the installation by the required date, and the delay is due to circumstances beyond our control, an extension of the completion date is justified.
We have been and will continue to proceed with the installation of this system as expeditiously as possible.
Mr. N. J. Palladino Page 3 This matter was reviewed in detail with members of your staff on January 28, 1982. They identified to us the need for this letter.
A copy of this request is being sent to the Office of Inspection and Enforce-ment in acccrdance with our commitment to provide system status update inform-ation and the projected completion dates.
As per 10 CFR 170.22, we have determined that this is a Class III request and a check for $4,000.00 will follow under separate cover.
If you should have any questions, please contact Mr. Michael Laggart at (609) 693-6932.
Very truly yours, R. C. Arhold President cc: Director
[.
Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Mr. Ronald C. Haynes, Administrator Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 NRC Resident Inspector Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, NJ 08731 Mr. Brian K. Grimes, Director Division of Emergency Preparedness Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission Washington,'D.C.
20555 Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
ATTACHW.NT A C WONOLOGY OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION PROW T ALERTING SYSTS4 I.
SYSTEM DESIGN A.
Initial Engineering Design - November 19, 1980 by Federal Signal Corporation 8.
Independent System Redesign - April 16, 1981 by A. Dresdner Associates /L. Goodfriend Associates C.
System Design Verification - September 1,1981 by Acoustic Technology, Inc.
II. EQUIPMENT PROCUREMENT A.
Vendor Selection - May,1981 B.
Procurement Initiated - May 15, 1981 C.
Negotiations Completed - June 30, 1981 D.
All Equipment on Hand - November 1,1981 III. SYSTEM INSTALLATION A.
Negotiations for County Ownership:
Negotiations Began - 14trch 20,1981 Formal Agreement to County - June,1981 Approval of Form of Agreement - JJ1y 1,1981 County Declined Ownership - September 10, 1981 B.
Pursuit before the NJ8PU of Blanket Variance from Zoning Requirements:
Granted December 17, 1981 Special Proviso for Pinelanos Area Approved January 8, 1982 C.
Equipment Installation Initiated December 12, 1981 21 Sirens Installed as of January 28, 1982
ATTACWENT B EXTRACT OF THE OCEAN COUNTY RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN 0.
PUBLIC ALERTING AND NOTIFICATION The Ocean County OEM (Office of Emergency Management) is responsible for notifying the municipalities of the emergency a OCNGS (Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station) which requires an emergency response.
The County OEM will also supply the alerting information to be relayed to the public and will keep the municipalities informed of all developments.
The municipalities are responsible for alerting the general public within their jurisdiction of any emergency situation at OCNGS.
The Utility is committed to provide and install a prompt notification system for public alerting consisting of fixed sirens to complement the existing alerting system.
Until such system becomes operational public alerting and notification shall be accortplished by means of route alerting with mobile P.A. systems.
Municipal Fire and Police Departments will provide the necessary personnel and equipment.
The Emergency Broadcast System (EBS) will be used to broadcast preplanned messages, announcements, alerts, advisories, and other public information in the event of an emergency at OCNGS. The State OEM and, in some
/
cases, the County Emergency Management Coordinator are authorized direct contact with the EBS network.
In order to assure that transients will be notified in the event of an emergency requiring implementation of Protective Actions for the public, the State of New Jersey has established methods for augmenting the alerting systems.
The agencies in charge of parks and recreation, the State Police, Marine Law Enforcement Bureau, Department of Fish, Game, and Wildlife, and Department of Parks and Forestry will assist in the notification of transients within their jurisdiction.
The alerting and notification of transient.s may call for the utilization of motor vehicles, aircraft, boats or road blocks.
Agency personnel assigned to these alerting duties may use powered megaphones or direct communication in advising the transient population. Provisions will be made to dispatch helicopters equipped with PA systems into remote areas in order to augment the notification of transients.
i
(
UrJITED STATES r.
o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COfi, MISSION-
[# t/2?[$
g
! Y
'(
e
,',g nE w AsMiscT:N,0. C. 20555 f
j 6
February 3,1982
[6d SM o,,4/
e
(
dd
.ket Nos. 50-213/245/335 L505-82-02-028
~
Mr. W. G. Counsil. Vice President Nuclear Engineering and Operations Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company
& Northeast Nuclear Energy Company Post Office Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101
Dear Mr. Counsil:
This is'in response to your October 20, 1981 letter commenting on the proposed rule change to change the deadline for implementation of a prompt notification system and your January 18, 1982 letter requesting that the deadline for implementation of your prompt notification system be extended from February 1,1982 to August 1,1982.
. The Commission appreciates your comments. The information you prov'ided us, along with other comments received, was taken into consideration in the Commission's decision for' the issuance of the final rule.
C As :to your request for extension, when the Commission chose the February 1
~
1982 deadline; they were aware that some licensees were estimating that they might not be able to complete installation of their systems by that date.
Even with this knowledge, the Commission decided that the February 1, 1982 date was reasonable, and that all licensees should have been able to meet this deadline by having applied sufficient resources to the task without delay.
This is particularly true since the licensees have known of the requirement since August 19, 1980, when the final rule changing 10 CFR 50 Appendix E was published in the Fedet al Register (45 FR 54402). In view.
of the above, and the requirements of the final rule on the prompt public notification system, your request is denied.
However, in the course of the decision to delay the impipmentation date to February 1,1982, the Commission was aware that a licensees' inability to meet the' July 1,1981 date could be attributed to causes beyond his control.
The1 Commission will take into consideration any mitigating circumstances in determining the degree o.f enforcement action.
Dr ff l
Q
'e
(
lb t
i 2-February 3, 1982
.Mr. V. G. Counsil I.
In this regard, your attention is directed to Paragraph 3 of Part II of the N
Supplementary Information Section of the Final Rule published in the Federal Reaister on December 30,1981 (FR Vol. 46, No. 250, Pages 63031 - 63033 copy attached).
~~
Sincerely, arre G.Sisent rector Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Attachment:
As stated cc w/ attachment:
See next page e
e e
a 4
9 9
/
(
1 i
l
(
(
Mr. W. G. Counsil Febr>
y 3,1982 cc William H. Cuddy, Esquire State ci connecticut
~
Day, Berry & Howard Office of Policy Management Counselors at Law ATH: Under Secretary Energy One Constitution Plaza Division Hartford, Connecticut 06103 80 Washington Street Hartford, Connecticut 06115 i
Board of Selectmen Town Hall Resident Inspector Haddam, Connecticut 06103 Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Station c/o U. S. NRC Northeast Nuclear Energy Company East Haddam Post Office ATTN: Superintendent East Haddam, Connecticut 06423 Millstone Plant P. O. Box 128 U. S. Environmental Protection Waterford, Connecticut 06385
' Agency Region I Office Natural Resources Defense Council ATTH:
Regional Radiation Representative 917 15th Street, N. W.
JFK Federal Building Washington, D. C.
20005 Boston, Massachusetts 02203 Resident Inspector
{
c/o U. S. NRC Superintendent P."0. Box Drawer KK Haddam Neck Plant Niantic, Connecticut 06357-RFD #1 Post Office Box 127E Waterford Public Library East Hampton, Connecticut 06424 Rope Ferry Road, Route 156 Waterford, Connecticut 06385 Ronald C. Haynes, Regional Administrator Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region I First Selectman of the Town Office of Inspection and Enforcement of Waterford 631 Park Avenue Hall of Records King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 200 Boston Post Acad Waterford, Connecticut 06385 John F. Opeka Systems Superintendent Northeast Utilities Service Company P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101 Mr. Richard T. Laudenat Manager, Generation Facilities Licensing Northeast Utilities Service Company P. O. Box 270
. Hartford, Connecticut 06101
(
O g
a
.e 9
?
l. >et wt= -
Y Rufes and Reguddons va n. No. :s.
.wanesday. nem=be, x This section of the FEDERAL REGtsTER On Aupstli 2sEL the Cc=tnission
%!: decisicsis based k~
discussed possible actions because.
recepition that emerger, contams reguratory documents hawn9 gentral a;p!gabasty and legal ettect most licensees faded to en= ply with the July preparedness have sign!)
L 1981 requirement contained in 10 CFR improved within thelast Ne Code $ Fe7e al Re ato n whi is 50.47(b)[5) and 10'CFR 50. Appendix E, around every nudear po pesshea under 50 tues pursuant to 44 Section IV.D.3. De licens ees* isilure to his sipI5 cant!= prove:
The Cue of Federa! Reputations is sbid meet the July L 1911 date was attributed confirmed by NRC teamt U.S.C. 1510.
to t= foreseen difDeulties and
- visited a number of plan by the Superintendent of Documents.
~
Pnces of new books are Ested in the uncertahtles surmundbg the design.
evaluate thelicensees'c first FEDERAL REGISTER iesue of sadt pro =trement and bstaBati6n of the the upgraded emergency enem pro =pt not!5 cation systems.
regulations of August 2sl At the August 22.2931 meetbg. the the FederalMsergenep
?~
Co= Ission sporoved publication of a Agency (FEMA) and the monitored n=semns nu; NUCLEAR REGULATORY proposed rule cbange which would exercises invah'ag State provide an extension of the July Lisa1 gove=ments and the !!c; COMM!SSION date to February 2.1982. (See 45 FR -
asain have witnessed a a Dr. M, 45.W 10 CFR Part 50 46557).That Teden! Resister notice requested public c:==ent dEing a 30 i=provement en casite a emergency preparednes Ernergency.Plannittg and day period ending October zi.19st The decision to delay To date. cn==ents have been d
t 0
received from four NRC licensees. Sve imple=entstion data is i individuals er crganizations in the the recopition that ther AczN n Nuclear Regulatory nuclear bdustry, one from the general.
custo=ary war =ing sys Commission.
public, threq from enviro = mental.
radio., telephone)which ruficiently effective b:
Action: Final rule.
c.gan!:stions, cne imm a mass trans!
accident sce=arios.In v1
' system directer, and one from a $ tate the ComWesics Snds 11 v
7 9
suuurRY.The Com=Ission Is making governor.%e comments rec'eived from scHicient. reason to beh two changes to its emergency planning the generalpublic and from the d
~"
apprepnate protective s regulations.Le change to 20 CFR Part environmental organi:stions were and willbe taken for thl 50c Appendix E delays the date by which against delaying the i=;3ementation the health and safety of
-),
1
.&3
' prompt public notification systems must date to February 1982. He le:ters from event of a raJolegical r oe operatienal around all dudear power the other commenters generally agree
~"8
'M' plants.The change to i 50.54 clarifies with extending the implementation date / the extntded smeyeric the language of the rule to conform with
. comphace.
the Com=ission's intent at thq time of along with additional suggestions.
One suggested modification to the IL The Amendmect to t promulgation-proposed rule chenge. which has been A
1.enaDy.10 trracTavr orTc December 30.198L accepted and beluded in these final cunen y nquires t.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATto,( CONTACE amendments.is not to eliminate the Micha el T. Jamgochian. Human Factors four. month period for conecdon of any vor operating power nec Branch. Office of Nuclear Regulatorv de5ciencies identined during the faltia!
siete. andlocal emeqcar:
Research.U.S. Nuclear Regulatory "
testing of the prompt notifiestion as provided in Sectica lVJ shan be implemented by /
Commission. Washington. D.C. 20555 system.The Commission now believes df this part.If after Aprill
[ telephone 301-443-5942)..
that the elimination of this four month Ends that the state of est SUPP1.EMcNTARY INFoRuAT105C period would be inconsistent with the preparedness does not pre need toperic=n a reasonable test of the assurance that adequie r L The Ameedment to 10 CFR Part 50 system and make any needed changes can and win be taken in s' Appendix E as indicated by the test resulta.The.
radiological emergency n On August 19.198O. the NR" enclosed effective regulation are not corrected within is published a revised emergency planning incorporates this concept.ne nading. the Cec =niuion.
regulation which became effective on installation date, however, remains.
whuher the reactor shau l November 3.1980.The rule required February L1952 and any licansee not.
such deSciencies an rem, licensees to demonstrate, arsong other completing the installation by that date cther enforcement eenen.
things. by July L 1981t '
would be subject to, enforcement aedon.
that adr.inistrative and physical means After evaluating all public comment 11 hes cc=e to the Cr
[
have been established for alerting and letters received the Co=missics has attentien that because previoing prompt instructions to the public decided to publish. as i= mediately.
regulation was wntien effective. a final rule change to 10 CR paragraph. It can be I.m ebieet$e's'han5to ha e Ne part 50. Appendix L which will delay the that the four. month per P
d capsbil:ty to essentially complete the thitial implementation'dat'e for the prompt -
correction of emergene notification of the public within the. plume public netincstion systems from July L dciiciencies does not a esposure pathway EPZ withirtabout is 1981 to Februaq 1.19a?
IV.D.3 of Appendis F.'
~
minutes."
EEf?J Tt==nrin ~ v f
( D A :$m!:aIntrhors,.
(
This is.c cisinterps:atics cf the Regulatory FicxibiUty Act State =est p.mg g g, fee ata Medhility
- 3. Aliunsee sh Uhan de capahq d
'Cc==fssien's ! stent. which wcs tha! the Act of1980. Pub. L 95-354. the NRC has^#T "*?***M* II'" *~
- I four menth period is to apply to any dete !aei(1)*aatthe delaying of the gove== ental a;endes si a is zr.!nu-
- -ficiencies identified in the e=ergency d d icT th' sher dulating as c=c:gery.%: lice:
cs.The Cc==Issica is therefore
.idifying i 50.54[s)(2) to more cIeatly I
c n tis:stics systems wiH cethave shtIl de== strate that the State /lo c!?idals have the ca;ab!!!ry *to = ale resect that ir: tent.The four.c2 catha sign! Scant escac=leimpact on a netification dedsics prc=;t.y on beh iced la i 53.54(s)(2), willmot substantialn==ber of s=aD entities, 1:fer=ed by the lice:see of an e=s.-p period prov.
apply to any U:ansee for the lastdUstien pursuant to the Regulatory Mexibil!!y ec:dten.By yebre.ary1.19c eachE(
and initial test of the pubbe notiScatics Act of 1980, section C5(b) and (2) that powe rea:terlicensee sh R de==sy system by Februa.y L 1982.If a licensee the rule che:ge to i 53.5t(s)(2)is cot stratn end phsical =eans ha a
is =ct in ec=pliance with this sdbject to the provisicas of the established for aJe::iss a:dy:wiE:g, g,j, da6:y MdlH!y Act ofI9M.
'**"##"***O'F"U'n'#*u'M tequirement for I:stallation and iesibg e fee =c:
3, ause the Co --ktienhas dete:=Ined upesun pathwayIF7.
.by Februe.ry 2.1952 the Codsian
$riod b 20 CTR 50.
ce of will censider taking appropritte pursuant ta 5 U.S.C..,.53 that a non.
c=erges:y plas den:ie:ies shan t acticns prc=pdy at M1 proposed rde=aki:: for { 50.54 (s)(2) apply to the initialinsta!!atica of th9.
need not be issued a:d that the rde =ay notiS:stics syste= that is req =fied bi e ere 8-EFNP esfcreement aetion to in!!iate, the,
be prc=ulgatedin 5:alfc:m and Febury 1.29c De /w.==ndpd Com=!ssion w D take into accous! -
becme eHecdve on Dece _ber U981.
cyply to corre: lan of defidender nmccg other factors. the de= castrated PaperworkReducti.cs Act Statement dr.:ri. g deIdric/last:Ilotica cattee;
' de pic=pt public accfic=tlen syste=
diEgenee of the 11cessee in atiempti=g to Pursuant to the provisions of the..
welles deze defidendes diz:ennd fulEll the p:c=pt public notiScaticct capability requirement.The
'n~ -Aeten Paperwork Reductics Act of 1930 (Pub.
d'"#I^ D' d"I " *M"** *I '
c 3
will consider whether the licensee hasL 95-512). the NRC has =ade a kept the NRCI: formed of the steps that deter =! nation that this Enal rule does $,$p*ab ty te e
hiSa!neScation of the pubIlewiid
!! has taken,when those steps were not i= pose new reccidkeep!=8-ple=e exposun pathway EFIwisir takes and any signi5 cant problems Infe:=atics ceDectic. crrepc: ting 15 :=hutes,ne use ofils motiS:ath Pu:suant to the Atc=icEnergy Act of. capab!!itywilln g encon=te:rd, and the updated timetable requirements.
nos:stien of the pub!I:(wiiints:
which the lictasee expects will be :=et 1954. as amended. the E:e:gy cithe ti=e that State a=dlocale is a'chieving fdl compliance with the Reorgan!:stio= Act of 574 as a= ended.
ceded dat a simati:= crists ng:q prompt publienctificatics capabiHtT and section 553 of title 5 of the Unitedurgent scies) to the==r:11ely eve,
[ requirements.The four.m:sth pe:iod States Code. the fotewing amendme ts will. however. apply to cc:rection of
~
.!cEciencies identiSed d::ing the faltial to 10 CFRPr.rt 53 are published as cake a judgmest wheder er n ta 1
test of the p::mpt pubbe noti 5caten documents subject to codincatic=
the 'uMi:nos:atie: syste=.whzi s
a de:isies to a:tivate the metin:a systems as well as those ce5ce:cies PART 50-DOMESTIC UCENSING OF the siste and )::ai cS:ials wiD de dis:cvered thereafter.
PRODUCTION AND UTIUZ.ATION whether to sedvate de entin ne Se: use the zme:dment to FACIUTIES csyste= simultaneously crin a g a i 50.54(s){:)is interpretative and of a
.c
.s
.M staged canner.ne nsponsWy
=inor nature, simply resolving *an
- CU"ti:3 8":h." Publi:"*tiU**
L~-
8
- * ** I#"####
shan n==! we de app = paste ambiguity in the rules to the Cem=issien's inie=ded me'aning at the AuSe4 se=s.:c2m 2n. 2 :. sas, sa gennmal auMn.
.:ne of prc=ul;ation.the C===issien Stat Ess. s37. mn m. sss. sE as finds 3ood cause to di*Pcase with
== ended (c U1C. n 3. 034. 2. C. :.:n advance motice and opportunity for
=23. :.=9h se:s. =1. :m. :os. ES Stat.1:C.
.,1 SWs)p) is ren.seg M 45 (a USC.5641.ssu. 5s45). c=lessfoUD*8:
puhhc ce==ent thereen as unnecessa.ry.
otherwise meted. se:: inn 50:s also Iseued 1:44.::
For this reason. this che.nge shaU be under see.1=. e.s Stat.s s (c UIC 35:).
I Sc.54 conditions etlicenses.
effective as a final:ule on December 30.Sectaes sa. 5-sc.E2 also issued under sec.
- 1931..
n4. M Stat. s54. as amezded (c UAC =34p
- {s) * *
- in e us set 8.
Ukewisc. the Commission is ns a
EublishinE the finalamendments to 10 68 Stat. s:s (c UAC. =25).For the pu: poses g;)y"#*P'#8 M. ** *
- of set.=2.ss stat.sst. as amended (c L.censee. State and loca) e=eq CFR Part 50. Appendix E (extending the I
implementation date for the installatien Uit =73). I so.utt)imed under se:.:ct.
I 8 Sh*U',
P.9
- 8P"*" P "
ca stat. s4s (c Usc :=ttilh !! 50J0. 50J1.
AprilL ISEL except as prend of a prompt public noti 5 cation system) and $3.78 inued under see.uto. cs' Stat. Esc.. Secien W.D.3 cf Appen as effective immediately upon as amended (c USC:mt(ol). and the lys l
publication. pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
nferred to is Appeedicas.
part.
M etAp
.M 51. 6e 553(d][1). since the rule is expected to relieve,the obligstion of certain Appendix E TAmende:f) thatthe state of emerge:cy pre-licensees with respect to the present I* b'. gen N.D.3 cf Appendix E to does not provide reasenaMeeq July L 1951 deadline fer operational Part 50 is rensed to read as fcDows:
that adequate prete=ive mear
^^d *II! be taken in the ev=t ;
public n tiScatics syste=s. In that Appendix E Trner:emy riannin; and radiolep. cal emegem D..:k regard the Cc==:ssion notes that the r+cpared.neu for Productio= =ed utitizar,on.
findmps based on requi::=::
- final rule, when effective. will be Taci5 tins
- AFPecdI2 E SeCIIC3 IV U appUed to ongoing li:ensing proceedings
=
now pending and to issues or.
e,w,,mg in 6e raer.a res.i.'
ccnte=ticas therein. Uni:n of Conce:ned
.m p,g, %.p,.%,.,,,,,,
Sep:mber 2.19et.,
Scientisis v. A.EC. 409 F. :d soG9 (D.C.
trat shows charites tram 6e proposed rWe Cir.1974).
e o
o
Date:i et cetheda,uup,d
(
'iDece=her.152 applies to the eppUcatien
- dyYi$encies(in:JudinglflucickEcs ttecrdkeeping. a=d teparting *
's Tor the Nudeat Re
.. bnedon requi:cmentsofAppe.ndLtL requirements contained in NRC wtTa:=}.Dirclu...
SecticsIE.D.3) are nit corrected within four months cf tha' findhg.the regulations.
On October 30. Inn. the NRC L r.d=:ver &crorfarOpeind t
.ommission will.determins whether theebtabed Ohm reappmvalfor the po,. m orsa m W eactor shallbe shut down untilsuch Efsrms tion collec: ion requirements
.r.3,e coac - :
k deficiencies are remedied orwhether containedin10 CFR Put 53.This ether enforcement action'!s appropriata.
amendment adds a new i 50.8 to Part 50 b deter =ining whethe a shutdown or setting out the OhG approva! number.
DEPARTMENT OF ENER other enforcement action is appmpriate, the expiratie.n date of the current to CFR Part 503 the Cc= mission shall take into account, appreval. and a list of sections within e= cog other facters.whether the Part 50 that contain an appmved Net No. ERA-B-81-06) licensce cr.n demonstrate to the Efor=a tien n Uection requirement.This Co--Mtsion's satisfaction that the amend. ment also removes the note '
PowerplantandIndustria de5clencles in the plan are not cence=hg the expired GAO clearance
,g 3,y, a! Rules
~
. sig=1ficant for the plant b question, or that follows i 50.120.
that adequate intenm compensating Because this is a nonsubstantive.
Cornatine actions have been or wiU be taken amendment deali:ig with a minor.
6 FR Doc.82-.sc7D app promptly, or that that there are other
, procedural matter. good cause ex2sts for j ',I* g g g g,w,cem compelling reunns for continued Snding that the notice and co= ment
,,,cg,,
j operation.
pmcedures of the Ar Wetrative 8
ACII
)"
(1)In i 503.S(c)(2). th
,jg* -
' Dated at Washbgted D.C.this :3rd day of. I"#'"""'#'***U ""dI.or W b wereinadvertently cmitts.!
December.1981..
amendment efective December 30. 2982.equation on pagem For the Nuclear Regulatory N--4m,on.
Under the Ato=!c Energy Act of 25t54.
EQ4 DELTA = COST as amended, the Energy Reorganhation (ALERETEFCOST(C Samue!I. Chuk.
Act of1974. as amended, and 5 U.S.C. -. COST (ALERNA Sec etc.rc/fAe Commirsion-55: and 553 the foDowing amend = ents are deter==nedby:
/
p o=.mme. rw imee au==1 to 10 CFR Part 50 :e published as a (2)h i 5033S[ah parsg s-:.uwc come rsso *8
- document subject to codification.The Inconestly designated as authcrity citation for this doc =nentis:
on page 59914. frat coluq T-'--
' 10 CFR Part 50 Reparting, Recordkeeping, and PART 50--DOMESTlc UCENSING OF
.!!ne.-(b) For powerplant!
have read'(5),For powe:l
' App!! cation Requirements; Approva'!PRODUCTION ANO UT1UZATION suuso coot ms-ew FAC!UTIES e,
AcENcn Nudeat Regulat'.,'ry..
=
Authori:3. Sec. 2et. Pub. L enc 3. cs S'.at.-
FEDERAL HOME 1.0AM
.Cc=ndssics.
M8 [c U.S.C.sc:n) g -
acTaox: Final :.:le.
. Section 50J is added to read as
$ CFR Py hE suMuranThe Nuclear Regulatory g
ws:
(No.st-apol.
Commis'slon is amending its regulations Report!ns. recerneeping. and en the domestic licensing of production -
IsoJ l
and uti!!:stien facilities to indicate appncation requirements:ous approva*.
Payment of Utigatlan Federal Home Loan Sa-(a) the Nucler.: Regulatory Directors,and O!! ice of hianagement and Budget Cc==Ission has sch=i:ted the approval of the information ceDection hformatien collection requirements Dated:Dece=ber 27.ss -
l requirements containedin the regulatiens.This action is required bY contained in this part of the Omce of I
hianage=ent and Budget (OhG) for acExcnFederalHe:ne i
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 2980.
appmval as iequired by the Paperwo::k Board.
l e
o c
ACT1oN:Finalrnle.
trm.uvc O ATc Dece=ber 30.1951, FOn ruRTHEn INFoR32ATION CONTACTt suuuannThe Federal Steve Scott. Chief. Document requirements on Octobe: 30. 2981.
Boardis amending the(
htanagement Branch. Division of (1) The OhG approval nu=beris -
thefedera!Homelos:
4 echnicallnformation and Domusent
- ggg,
(:) OhG approval expires April 30.
liberaline the tc. on l may pay exp ses of e suret.rattwTAny 2NFonuaTiox:Tx
- (b)The approved information and employees invoird Te!
ne 192 Paperwork Reduction Act of 2900 iPub.
coUection requirements indude the arising out of their Ban.
ameedment win aDow L 90-5n: 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) applicatien. recordkeeping, and Ican Banks to establin reporting requirements contained in i ! 5D.50, 50.33. 50.33a. 53 *A(b). (c). (d).
pelicies regar.'.ing litigq transferred the responsibility for approving the information ccDection (f). 50.34 a. 50.35(b). 50.35. 50.3Ba. 50.48.
y requirements imposed by the Nucle.tr 50.54(f). [p). (q). (r). (s). [t). (u). 50.55(e).
gmg7wg ex;g p
/
g, g,
Regulatory Commission (NRC) ca the 50.554,50.59(b). (c). 53J1(a). (b). (c). (d).
James g_ gtewart b public from the Cencral Accounting (e). 50J:[a) (b). 50.80,50.s 50.90, and
, hianagement and Dudget (OhG).The Appehdices A. B. C. I' C. H. J.K. and R. f,Cm '
Office (CAO) to the Office of-y Bo C
Washingten.D.C.
- .*"4 Act requires that each existing
! 50.110 (Amendedi sum.rutxTAny w.
informotion collection requirement be 2.The not'e foUdwing i 50.no is Federal Homelean reopproved by"OhG as existing CAO; gemoved.
-hm* man
s
~
b"
[
g kMpq UNITED STATES
.? *i
~'
'n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
$ I' WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 g4 $ }
7 k
I February 9,1982 Dockets Nos. 50-277 and 50-278 Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.
Vice President and General Counsel Philadelphia Electric Company 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101
Dear Mr. Bauer:
This is in response to your January 27, 1981 letter requesting an exemption in the implementation of your prompt notification system beyond the February 1,1982 date required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix E,Section IV.D.3.
The revised emergency planning regulation, which became effective November 3,1980, required that, by July 1,1981, licensees demon-strate that administrative and physical means were established for alerting and providing promnt instructions to the public within the plume exposure pathway Emer;=ncy Planning Zone. Many licensees did i,
not meet this requirement by July 1,1981; the failure was attributed to unforeseen difficulties and uncertainties surrounding the design, procurtment and installation of the prompt notification systems. As a consequence, the Comission proposed the extension of the July 1, 1981 date to February 1 1982, but detennined that if the systems were not installed and operaaie by February 1,1982, the licensees would be subject to enforcement at. tion. On Decenter 30, 1981, a final rule change, which was immediately effective, delayed this implementation date for prompt cublic notification systems from July 1,1981 to February 1,1982 (46 FR 63031). When the Commission chose the February 1,1982 deadline, they were aware that some licensees were stating that they might not be able to complete installation of their systems by that date. Even with this knowledge, the Comission decided that the February 1,1982 date was reasonable, given the fact that all licensees should have been able to meet this deadline by having applied sufficient resources to the task without delay.
In view of the above, and the requirements of the final rule on the prompt public notification sysam, your request for a delay cannot be granted.
However, in the course of the decision to delay the implementation date to February 1,1982, the Comission was aware as discussed above, that a licensees' inability to meet the July 1,1981 date could be attributed to causes beyond his control. The Comission will take into consideration any mitigating circumstances in detennining the degree of enforcement parl" V -
I Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.
- action.
In this regard, your attention is directed to Paragraph 3 of Part II of the Supplementary Information Section of the Final Rule published in the Federal Register on Decenber 30, 1981.
Sincerely,
/
\\
isenhu, Director Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc:
See next page e-1
~...
I e
e i
9
- ---