ML20059J088

Responds to to I Selin,Expressing Concern About Delay in Response to 10CFR2.206 Petition Re Allegations of Deficiencies in Dauphin County,Pa Radiological Emergency Response Plan

ML20059J088
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	11/03/1993
From:	Murley T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Gary R PENNSYLVANIA INSTITUTE FOR CLEAN AIR
Shared Package
ML20059J092	List: ML20059J088 ML20059J095 ML20059J535
References
2.206, NUDOCS 9311120021
Download: ML20059J088 (5)

Text

- - .

w l- ,

• M cg

.,5 UNITED STATES Z/[%j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ,

l

'*-N

, I C WASHINGTON. D.C. 20556-0001 Novenber 3, 1993 SM .... .V '

I Mr. Robert Gary .

Pennsylvania Institute for Clean Air 2211 Washington Avenue (No. 301)

Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 j

Dear Mr. Gary:

I am responding to your letter of October 7,1993, to Ivan Selin, Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). In your letter, you stated concern about the delay in response to your 10 CFR 2.206 petition, in which a you had alleged deficiencies in the Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, Radiological Emergency Respon:,e Plan (RERP). Dauphin County is one of five counties included in the emergency planning zone associated with the Three Mile' Island Nuclear Generating Station (TMI).

As pointed out in my letter to you on August 9, 1993, and as discussed during a telephone call between you and Mr. Ronald Hernan, the NRC Project Manager  ;

for TMI, on October 7,1993, the NRC requested the assistance of the Federal -

Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to review the issues you raised because they all involve offsita radiological emergency response plans. As you know, this action was in accordance with the Code of Federal Reculations (10 CFR 7 50.47(a)(2)), as well as the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the NRC and FEMA, as updated on June 17, 1993. FEMA is the Federal agency responsible ~

for offsite emergency planning for nuclear power plants. As stated in the MOV:

FEMA coordinates all Federal planning for the offsite impact of radiological emergencies and takes the lead for assessing offsite radiological emergency response plans and preparedness, makes findings' ,

and determinations as to the adequacy and capability of implementing offsite plans, and communicates those findings and determinations i to the NRC. The NRC reviews those' FEMA findings and determinations in conjunction with the NRC onsite findings for the purpose of making

• determinations on the overall state of emergency preparedness.

We have been informed that FEMA's report will be issued in the very near future. As I have stated in previous letters to you, my decision in response to your petition will be made as soon as practicable following receipt of FEMA's report.

In your letter, you expressed an opinion that the 10-mile emergency planning -

zone (EPZ) described in the NRC regulations should be expanded to includc all of Harrisburg, the implication being that those Dauphin County residents living in Harrisburg but outside the 10-mile EPZ radius would not be provided '

for in the Dauphin County RERP in the event of an evacuation. The size of the  ;

EPZs.for nuclear power plants is established by NRC regulations. -The choice-  !

of the size of the EPZs (about 10 miles in radius for the plume exposure i ,

I '

9311120021 931103 DR-ADDCK0500g9' gg

Mr. Robert Gary November 3, 1993 pathway and about 50 miles in radius for the ingestion pathway) represents a judgment on the extent of detailed planning that must be performed to-ensure ,

an adequate response to postulated accidents. The NRC believes that the  !

detailed planning within the established EPZs provides a substantial base for expansion of response efforts in the event that this may be required.

In your letter you also expressed dissatisfaction with the procedure for handling petitions under 10 CFR 2.206. The NRC has initiated a review of its regulations and practice governing petitions under 10 CFR 2.206 (see Federal i Reaister at 58 FR 34726). The purpose of this review is to ensure that the -

2.206 process is an effective, equitable, and credible mechanism for the -

public to prompt Commission investigation of potential health and safety i problems. A workshop was held on July 28, 1993, in Bethesda, MD, to discuss issues related to the 2.206 process. The staff is now considering the workshop comments and written comments submitted on the staff background paper on the 2.206 process-that was cited in the Federal Reaister notice. Upon  !

completion of this effort, the staff will provide its recommendations to the [

Commission. A copy of the staff background paper on the 2.206 process is l enclosed for your information.

Finally, your letter asserts that rules providing for FEMA review of offsite emergency plans are unreasonable and that NRC procedures, for a variety of reasons, do not ensure adequate emergency preparedness. These are matters .

that cannot be examined by means of the 10 CFR 2.206 process. Rather, the appropriate avenue to initiate an examination of such matters would be a +

petition for rulemaking, as provided for by 10 CFR 2.802.

Sincerely, Original signed by  !

': hor:as L Mariey Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ,

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/ enclosure: See next page  ;

• See previous concurrence l orncE LA:PD-4 PM:PD-4 D:PD-4 Tech Editor AD:DRPE NAME SNorris* RHernan:cn* JStc,iz* DGable* JCab o*  !

DATE 10/27/93 10/27/93 10/27/93 10/27/93 10/27/93 l 0FFICE BC:PEPB D:DRPE D:DRSS ADP DAT,V WAME [2rickson* SVarga* FCongel* JPartlow* TN urley oArE 10/28/93 10 /29 /93 10 /29/93 11 /1 /93 0/h/93 l

OFflCIAL RECORD COPY -

Documeni. Name: G:\HERNAN\ GARY 70CT.LTR ,

Mr. Robert Gary November 3, 1993 pathway and about 50 miles in radius for the ingestion pathway) represents a -;

judgment on the extent of' detailed planning that must be performed to ensure an adequate response to postulated accidents. The NRC believes that the detailed planning within the established EPZs provides a substantial base for expansion of response efforts in the event that this may be required.

In your letter you also expressed dissatisfaction with the procedure for <

handling petitions under 10 CFR 2.206. The NRC has initiated a review of its regulations and practice governing _ petitions under 10 CFR 2.206 (see Federal Reaister at 58 FR 34726). The puroose of this review is to ensure that the 2.206 process is an effective, equitable, and credible mechanism for the public to prompt Commission investigation of potential health and safety problems. A workshop was held on July 28, 1993, in Bethesda, MD, to discuss issues related to the 2.206 process. The staff is now considering the workshop comments and written comments submitted on the staff background paper on the 2.206 process that was cited in the Federal Reaister notice. Upon completion of this effort, the staff will provide its recommendations to the Commission. A copy of the staff background paper on the 2.206 process is enclosed for your information.

Finally, your letter asserts that rules providing for FEMA review of offsite emergency plans are unreasonable and that NRC procedures, for a variety of reasons, do not ensure adequate emergency preparedness. These are matters that cannot be examined by means of the 10 CFR 2.206 process. Rather, the appropriate avenue to initiate an examination of such matters would ba a petition for rulemaking, as provided for by 10 CFR 2.802.

Sincerely,

~

{ .

Thomas E. Murley, Directo '

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

As stated ,

cc w/ enclosure: See next page L

. I

Mr. Robert Gary Michael Ross Michele G. Evans -

O&M Director, TMI-I Senior Resident Inspector (TMI-1)

GPU Nuclear Corporation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 480 Post Office Box 311' Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 _Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 Michael Laggart Regional Administrator, Region I Manager, Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission GPU Nuclear Corporation 475 Allendale Road 100 Interpace Parkway King of Prussia, Pennsylvania-19406

, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 Robert B. Ber. sum Robert E. Rogan _

B&W Nuclear Technologies TMI Licensing Director Suite 525 GPU Nuclear Corporation 1700 Rockville Pike Post Office Box 480 Rockville, Maryland 20852 Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 Ernest L. Blake, Jr., Esquire William Dornsife, Acting Director Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Bureau of Radiation Protection 2300 N Street, NW. Pennsylvania Department of Washington, DC 20037 Environmental Resources ,

Post Office Box 2063 ^

Chairman Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Board of County Commissioners of Dauphin County Mr. T. Gary Broughton, Vice President Dauphin County Courthouse and Director - TMI-l Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 GPU Nuclear _ Corporation Post Office Box 480 Chairman Middletown,. Pennsylvania 17057 Board of Supervisors of Londonderry, Township R.D. #1, Geyers Church Road Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 Mr. Craig S. Wingo Federal Emergency Management Agency 500 C Street, SW Washington, DC 20472 Mr. Paul P. Giardano, Director Region III Federal Emergency Management Agency Liberty Square Building 105 South Seventh Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106-3316 Mi . Joseph LaFluer, Director Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency Transportation & Safety Building, Rm.'B151 Forster & Commonwealth Avenues Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120

-- q

.; a.- ,

t w

Distribution:

Docket' File 50-289'(w/ incoming 110tt'er)

-NRC/ Local: PDRs '(w/ incoming letter)-

EDO GT #7906

-TMurley/FHiraglia JPartlow/ADP Secy.

SVarga/CNorsworthy FCongelL JCalvo/LMitchell ~

' JStolz -

SNorris-RHernan OPA OCA SECY:(CRC-93-0898)

NRR Mailroom (EDO #0007906 w/ incoming) (12/G/18)

PD I-4 Green Ticket File w/ incoming OGC

.JGoldberg, 0GC JLongo, 0GC JRogge, RI FKantor RErickson WRussell

DCrutchfield FGillespie JTaylor JSniezek HThompson JBlaha TMartin, RI JScinto JLieberman i1