ML20062H798

Forwards 800819 Fr Notice Re Amends to Emergency Planning Regulations

ML20062H798
Person / Time
Site:	Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png
Issue date:	09/02/1980
From:	Sohinki S NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
To:	Copeland J, Hinderstein C, Newman J AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED, BAKER & BOTTS, LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS, AXELRAD & TOLL
References
NUDOCS 8009040297
Download: ML20062H798 (14)

Text

l

1. "4g

+ f, UNITED STATES 8, ' ,a NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ,

• WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 p i

'+,..... September 2, 1980 To: Attached Mailing List In the Matter of Houston Lighting & Power Company (Allens Creek- Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1)

Docket No. 50-466

Dear Parties:

Enclosed for your information are the amendments to the regulations regarding emergency planning which were recently promulgated by the Commission.

Sincerely, Steph M. Schinki Counsel for NRC Staff Enclosure As Stated cc w/ encl: Sheldon J. Wolfe, Esq. , Chainnan Dr. E. Leonard Cheatum Mr. Gustave A. Linenberger U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region IV .

Hon. Jerry Sliva Hon. John R. Mikeska Hon. Ron Waters Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel Docketing and Service Section THIS DOCUMEilT CONTAINS P10 QUAUTY PAGES 8000040 g m

r 1

PAlll4G LIST ' '

J. Gregory Copeland, Esq. Texas Public Interest I Baker & Botts Research Group, Inc. - -

, One Shell Plaza c/o James Scott, Jr. , Esq.

Houston, Texas 77002 13935 Ivymount

• Sugarland, Texas 77478  :

Jack Newman, Esq.

Lowenstein, Reis, flewman & Axelrad Brenda A. McCorkle 1025 Connecticut Avenue, fl.W. 6140 Darnell Washington, DC 20037 Houston, Texas 77074 Carro Hinderstein Mr. Wayne Rentfro 8739 Link Terrace P.O. Box 1335 Houston, Texas 77025 I- Rosenberg, Texas 77471 Richard Lowerre, Esq. Rosemary N. Lenmer Asst. Attorney General for the 11423 Dak Spring State of Texas Houston, Texas 77043 P.O. Box 12548 Capitol Station Leotis Johnston Austin, Texas 78711 1407 Scenic Ridge Houston, Texas 77043 Mr. John F. Doherty -

4327 Alconbury Street' Mr. William J. Schuessler Houston, Texas 77021 5810 Darnell Houston, Texas 77074 Margaret Bishop 11418 Oak Spring Houston, Texas 77043 Mr. F. H. Potthoff III 1814 Pine Village J. Morgan Bishop Hous ton, Texas 77080 11418 Oak Spring Houston, Texas 77043 D. Marrack 420 Mulberry Lane Stephen A. Doggett, Esq.

Bellaire, Texas 77401 Pollan, Nicholson & Doggett P.O. Box 592 Robin Griffith Rosenberg, Texas 77471 1035 Sally Ann - -

Rosenberg, Texas 77471 Bryan L. Baker 1923 Hawthorne Elinore P. Cuamings Houston, Texas 77098 926 Horace Mann Rusenberg, Texas 77471 Carolina Conn 1414 Scenic Ridge Mr. William Perrenod Houston, Texas 77043 4070 Merrick Houston, Texas .77025

6 g

• - g 53102 rederal Re;;1 ster / Vol. 45, No.162 / Tuesday, Au;ast 19,1930 / Rules afid Rc;;alations _ _ _

N

\

The final regulation contains the comments / suggestions in connection ,

NUC5 EAR REGULATORY with the propo:cd amendments within 1, following i I nnents:

• COMMISSION 1. In order to continue operations or to 00 days af'er p'ublication in the Federal s receive an operating license an Rc;ister. During thir comment period (in 10 CFR Parts 50 and 70 applicard/ licensee will be required to January 1980) the Commission K submit its emergency plans, as well as conducted four regional workshops wit,h '

Emergency Planning ,

State and local gosernmental emergency State and local officials, utility -

n sponse plans, to NRC.ne NRC will represenlatives, and the public to \

i AGENCY; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory then make a findmg as to whetner the discuss the feasibility of the varicus s Commission. state of onsite and offsite emergency ACTION: Final rule.

portions their impact, of and the tpro $ nosed amendments.

e procedures preparedness provides reasonable assurance that adeq ate protective proposed for complying with their ,

y

SUMMARY

The Nuclear Regulatory provisions.The NRC used the 6 Commission is upgrading its emergency measures can and will Le taken in the event of a radiological emergency.The information from these workshops along planning regulations in order to assure NRC wili base its finding on a review of with the public comment letters to that ade ate protective measures can '

the Federal Emergency hianagement develop the final rule (more than 200 ,

end will e taken in the es ent of a Agency (FEhiA) findings and comment letters and the points made m -

radiological emergency. Nuclear power two petitions for rulemaking were also t determinations as to whether State and plants and certain other licensed facdities are required to submit their I cal emergency plans are adequate and , considered).

in addition to

, g capable of being implemented and,on , 1980. the Comm,the s.,,

emergency plans, together with the the NRC assessmes.t as to whether the ission wasabove, briefed by on June 25,(.

emtrgency response plans of State and three panels of pubhc cominenters on ' -

hcensee's/ applicant,s emergene,y plans

- local gos ernments, to the Commission. are adequate and capsble of bemg the rule, one each comprised of He Commission and the Federal Energy impicmented.ncse issues may be , , representatives rom f theindustry State ,

j

( hianagement Agency will review the and local governments, and pubhc raise ,,

plans for adequacy.nc amendment hean,d nss,in butNRC operating a FEhiA findmg wilicense,ll, interest groups. Each panel raised also extends cracrgency plann!:s important concerns regarding the final considerations to " Emergency Planmng constitutg a rebuttable presumption on die queshon of adequacy, rule. On July 3,1930, the Commission Znnes", and makes additional 2. Emergency planning considerations .was briefed by its staff in response to cla.-ifications' EFFECTIVE DATE: November 3,1980.

will,be extended to " Emergency planning Zones,"

these panels. Including several modifications to the proposed final

'\ \

Note.-The Nuclear ReguleM 3. Detailed emergency plan rules. Finally, on July 23,1980, at the Commission has submitted this rule to the implementing proceudres of licensees / final Commission consideration of these ,

Comptroller General for review of the applicants will be required to be rules, the Commission was briefed by y reporting requirements in the rule, pursuant submitted to NRC for review, and the General Counsel on the substance of 5 y to the rcJeral Reports Act. as amended (44 4. Requirements in 10 CFR Part 50. conversctions with Congressional staff Appendix E are clarified and upgraded. members who were involved with ,

requ e s of the le ! c e ct passage of the NRC Authonzahon Act ?I includes a 45-day period. which the statute Background for fiscal year 1980, Pub. L No. 9Fi-295. '~ g{ g c!!ow s for Comptro!!er General resicw (44 \\

In June 1979, the Nuclear Regulatory He General Counsel advised the U.S C. 351:(c)(21).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACTt mc ns erah.

onbegan ne mk a formal of Commission that the NRC final rules were consistent with that Act.ne i

\}

htr. htichael T. Jamgochian. Office of planning in ensuring themued cont, emergency Commission ha,s relied on all of the .

Standards Development. U.S. Nuclear pmtection of the public health and above informahon in its consideration of ,  ?

I Regulatory Commission Washington, '" " " "" t these final rules. In addition, the 's l D.C. 70555 (telephone: 301-443-5906). facilities."The Comm.d nuclear powerission ' CommissionbeEan directs this that the transcripts ^ '

SUPPLEMENTARY lhFORMATION:On reconsideration in recognition of the ~ of these meetings shall be part of the n , <

September 19.1979 and on December 19 need for more effective emergency edministrative record in this rulemaking. %' ' !

1979, the Commission published for planning and in response to the ThU liowever, the transcripts has e not been v public comment (44 FR 54303 and 44 FR accident and to reports issued by reviewed for accuracy and, therefore, l , are only an informal record of the

. 75167) proposed amendments to its responsible offices of government and _

emergency planning regulahons for the NRC's Congressional oversight matters discussed.

production and utilization facilities. committees. After evaluating all public comment '

Este' ;ive comments were received, all On December 19,1979, the Nuclear letters received end all the information of which were evaluated and considered Regulatory Commission published in the obtained during the workshops as well i

in developing the final rule.Re Federal Register (44 FR 75167) proposed as additional reports such as the comments received and the staff'* amendments to 10 CFR Part 50 and Presidential Commission and the NRC evaluation is contained in NUREG-0584- Appendix E to Part 50 ofits regulations. SpecialInquiry Group Reports, the in adilition, the NRC conducted four Publication of these final rule changes in Commission has decided to publish the s Regional Workshops to solicit the Feder I Register is not only related final rule changes described below.

comments; these comments are available in NUREG/CP-0011 (April to the December 19,1979 proposed rule changes but aho incorporates the Destnph.on of Final Rule Changes 3

,j proposed changes to 10 CFR Parts 50 The Commission has decided to adopt p\

1930).' a version of the proposed rules similar' 4i and 70 (44 FR 54303) published on September 19.1979. Interested persons to alternative A described in Sections

'Cories of NL' REC documents are as a:latete at 50.47 and 50.54 in the Federal Register the CommWon's Put, tic Document RoomSp il were invited to submit written Notice dated December 19,1979 (44 FR rnm n r ns5ff,";

rtr. forme.on i from the 75167). as modified in light of comments, on current prices may be obia:nrd by Wash nr*on. D C. :nns. Attentiort lutMons m htmg the L: 5. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Sales Manager. Rese rules are Consistent with the s .

1 t

\

\. b

o

\ Federal Reglster / Vol. 45. No.102 / Tuesday, August 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations 55103

~ ~ - - - - - - - - ' " " * " ' " ' ~ ~ ~

___.a..-- ^~- -- - - - - - - - - -

' cpproach cat!ined by TEhtA a,d NRC in applicant / licensee will be required to . 6. Requirement for specia!ized training i e Stimorandarn of Understariging (45 FR submit its emer;ency plans, as wc!! as (Section IV F) fM. Jar.ury 24.1980). No new State and local governmental emergency 7. Prosisiens for up.tc.date plan i

\ speratina license will be granted unless response plans, to NRC. The NRC will mainte nance (Section IV.G) the NRC can make a favorable finding then make a fir. ding as to whether the Applicants for a construction permit A that the inte; ration of ons!!e ar.d oNite state of onsite and offsite emergency would be required to submit more ,

' cmergency plannihg provid>s' ' ,peparedness provides reasonable information as required in the new _

reasonab$ assurance that adequates assurance that adequate protective Section !! of Appendix E.

protectlye measures can and will be ' measures can and will be taken in the Rational for the Final Rules tskan in the event of a radio'qicg ment of a radichgical emergency.

emerg.nry. In the case of ac ope @,rg - T he NRC wi'l base its finding on a .s h1 a m reartor,11it s dc resiew of the FatA findings and based on the significance of adequate d that there ara d n

, such dd:!encio;yrmmethat a fascr..t!e NRC% determinations as to whether {me State andand prypa I njng ,

9 f4 ding is not warrantcd andaf the giocal emergg:y ;>1ans are adequate and deficiencies are not corrected within 4 capable o(beleg implemented and on y6!ic health gg and safety.

g7 g y It is clear, months of that determination,& the NRC assess:"ent as to whether the described in the prooosed rules (44 FR Commission wdl determine ^ l apphcant s/lgensee s emergency plans 75163) and fhe pubY. record compiled in capeditiously whether th- r racto \ are adequate a ns capable of being implemeated. h any NRC hcensmg h W shou!d be shut down or wicher sem

ate.

emerg. nn ph'.dat rednessons:te as v.e!! and as offsite cther enforcement act!6n + proceeding. a TEAT A findmg wdl proper siting and enginected design pursuant to procedures r m consitate a rebuttable presumption on features are needed to protect the health 10 CFR 2.200-2.206. In a.s., . wrme the questica of adequacy. Specifically- gg gggggg the Cornmission believes that the p.rt h,e s.- At operanng license wdl not be Commissicn reacted to the accident at health, safety, or interest s'orequirs s. the r,ssued unless e. favorable NRC overall Three Mile Island, it became clear that plant will be required to sht.t de en ( . finding can be made. the protection provided by siting and immtdiately (10 CFR 2.202[l), s' e 5 b. After April 1,1981, an operating engineered design features must be U S.C. SX(cl). plant may be required to shut down ifit bolstered by the ability to take The atandards that the NRC will use is determined @t there are deficiencies protective measures Jering the course of in mc.kirg its determinations under these such that a fm ora >!e NRC finding an accident.Th- accident also showed rules are set forth in the final regu! alien. cannot be Ingb or is no !cnger clearly that ensite conditions and E hereser possible, these standuds may warranted ad the deficiencies are riot actions, even lf they do not cause b!cnd with other emergency planning corrected within 4 months of that s!pifinant offsite radiological procedures for nonnucicar emergencies determmatmn. i consequences. will affect the way the presently in existcace ""he standards 2. Emergency planp.ng coreiderations various Sate end local entities react to

are a restatement of basic NRC and now must be extended to 0 Emergency protact th'e public frern any dangers joint NRC-FEhtA guidance to licensecs Planning Zonw" and L asscc.iated with the accident. !n order to and to State and local gaseinments. See ' , 3. Deta!!ca qergere.y plann.mg dischee e'f cthek hs statutory t Nt' REG-C65 4 I EMA-REP-1, " Criteria irnp!cmenting7recedures of both

~

respensibititaes fAe Commission must fo- Preparation and Evaluation of ' i licensees and applicanis for opetAng knew that pt,per means and procedares

. Radiciog(al Emergency Response Plans liqcnses must be submitted to NRC for' w 11 be in pfsce to assess the course of and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear review. .

J an accident and Ps potential severity.

Pow er Plants for Interim Use and In addition, the Coc"nission is that NRC and other appropriate Comment." (Janu ary 1930). In deciding revising 10 CFR Part 5'). Appendix E, authorities and the public will be whether to permit reactor operatMn in " Emergency Plans fpr Production and notified prompCy, and that adequate the face of cone deficiencies, the Utilization Facilities," in order to clarify, ' protective actions in response to actua!

y' Commission sill examine among other expand, and ypgrade the Commission's or anticipated enditions can and will factors whether the deficleples, are emergency planning regulations. be taken.

significant fdr the reactor in question, Sections of Appendix E that are , The Commission's organic statutes whether adequate interim compensatory expanded include: provide it with a unique degree of cctions have been or will be taken 1. Specification of" Emergency Action discretion in the execution of agency promptly, or whether other compelling 1.evels" (Sections IV.B and C) functions. Siegelv. AEC,400 F.2d 778, reasons exist for reactor operation. In 2. Djssemination to the public of basic 763 (D C. Cir.1968), see 11*estirshouse dete minin the sufficiency of" adequate emergency planting information Electric Corp. v. NRC. 598 F.2d 759,771 interim con;pensatery actions" under (Section IV.D) ' & n.47 (3d Cir.1979). "Both the Atomic this rule,TmCornrnission will examine 3. Prosisions for the State and local Energy Act of1954 and the Errrgy State p!n,s, local plans, and licensee governmental authorities to have a Reorgani7ation Act of 1974 confer broad plans to determine whether features of cambility for rapid notification of the reg:.latory functions on the Commission ene plan can compensate for public during a serlons reactor ( and specifically authorize it to deficiencic:: In another plan so that the emergoney, with a design objective of prc:nutgate rules and regulations it

- Irrel of protection for the public health completing the initial notification within deens necessary to fulfdlits cnd safety is adequate.This y M minutes after notification by the nsponsibilities under the Acts,42 U.S.C.

interpretation is ronsistent with the 'Ifcensee (Section IV D) i 2201(pl." Public Service Co. ofNew protisions cf the NRC Authorization Act 4. A licensee onsite technical support IIc rpshire v. NRC, 582 F.2d 77,82 (1st for fiscal ycar 1930. Pub. L. 9G-295. center and a licensee near she Cir.). Cert. denied. 439 U.S.1040 (1978).

The regulation contains the follawing en.crgency operatiens facility (Section See 42 U.S C. 2133(a). As the Supreme

• three maler changes from past practices: IV.E) ' Court stated almost 20 years agc. the

3 1. In o-der to continue operations er to 5. Provisions for redmdant Atomic Energy Act " clearly reciese En operating license, an communications systems (Section IV.E) contemplates that the Commission shall 1

' l

,( . t, 3

,y =

i

a

" , Z 101 Federal !?c;;ister / Vol. 65 No.102 / Tursday. A .;ast 19.1N3 / Rules and Rega!ations by regulation set forth what the public proposed rule changes. ne fotfowieg Con.missien's disposition to grant such

, saf4 ty requirements are as a prerequisite major issues bas e been raised in the exerr ptions.

. to the issuance of any license or permit cornments receis ed. 5. The Commission. in des elop!ng this under the Act."PowerReactor aspect of the proposed rule.must g .

consider 11: own history.There was time Da c! pment Co. v. Inte.mtiona/ Union I.ssue A: NBC Rcriew and Cc. currence of ElectricalRadio Machine 1t'orf cts, in State and1.ocoj Radiologn.iPlans uhen regulation was characterlzed by l

b 3G7 U.S. 390,403 (1901). Finally, it is also 1. lutA is best suited to assess the the Icaders of the agency by simple and clear that " Congress, when it enacted adequacy of State and local radiological very appropriate expressions.RE

[42 U.S.C. 2236] . . must have emergency planning and preparedness process was to be " effective and envisioned that licensing standards, and report any adverse findings to NRC cfficient." Re applicaticn of regulatory c.cpecially in the areas of health and for assessment of the licens!ng authority was to be " firm, but fair."

safety regulation, would vary over time consequences of those findings. Regardless of the outcome of the

[ as more was learned about the hazards 2.The proposed ruft fails to provide " concurrence" issue, the Commission -

of generating nuclear er,ergy. Insofar as objective standards for NRC must appreciate that alternative D is not

[ concurre nce, reconcurrence, and

, those standards became more fair. It is not effective regulation.

demanding. Congress surely would has e withdrawal c,f concurrence.

wanted the new standards,1f the 3. In the absence of additional Issue MuMic Educolion Commission deemed it appropriate,io' statutory authority, the proposed rule Only information req'uired to inform apply to those nuclear facilities already frustrates Congressional intent to the public about what to do in the event licensed." Et. I'icree Utilities A uthority preempt State and local government of a radiological emergency need be

v. UnitedStores. 60G F.2d 98G 99G (D C. veto power over nuclear power plant disseminated.There should be

{ l Cir.1979). operation, flexibility. in any particular case, as to In response to and guided by ,the 4. Procedures and standards for who will be ultimately responsible for

, various reports and public comments, as adjudication of emergency planning disseminating such information.

I w ell as its own determination on the disputes are not adequately specified in f,,y, g. Icgo/ Authority J c

?A{ significance the Commission of emergencykreparedness, has therc e concluded the proposed rule. 1. A few co nmenters felt that NRC IssueB:EmergqncyPlanninSZones that adequate emergency preparedness had no authority to promulgate a rule as is an essential a@cct in the pretection (U81 the one proposed. -

of the public health and safety.The 1. Regulatory basis for imposition of 2. Other comments were the nature l Commission recognizes there is a the Emergency Planning Zone concept that NRC has statutory authori;y only j possibility that the operation of sorne should be exprtssly stated in the inside the limits of the plant site.

i rea: tors may be affected by this rule regulation. 3. Some commenters suggested that '

through inaction of State and local 2. Provisions reganling the plume NRC and FEhfA should seek additional

, gos einments or an inability to comply esposure pathway EPZ should provide a legislation te compel State and local with these rules.The Corhmission maximum planning distance of to miles. governments to have emergency plans,if believes that the potential restriction of 3. References to NUREG-0390 should that is what is necessary.

plant operation by State and local be deleted.to avoid disputes over its

, y,3y, 7,. Schedule for In plementation officials is not significantly different in meanirig in hcensing proceedings.

Lind or cffect from the means already issue C: Alternative A and B(in 50.47

Y' E available under existing law to prohibit proposed rule was considered to be reactor operation. such as zos.Ing and - and 50.5ff unrealistic and in so:ne cases in conflict land use laws. certification of public 1. Neither alternative is necessary with various State schedules aircady in convenience and necessity, State because the Commission has sufficient ex!stence. A sampling of the comments fmancial and rate un.siderations (g authority to order a plant shut down for on the implementation schedule follows:

CFR 50.33(f)). and Federal safety reasons and should be prepared 1. The 180 da3 s in the schedule is an'

emironmentallaws.he Commission to exercise that authority only on a insufficient amount of time to notes, however, that such considerations case-by. case basis and when a accomplish tasks of this magnitude: the generally relate to a one. time decision particular situation warrants such Federal government does not work with on siting whereas this rule requires a ac' ion. . ' such speed. States are bureaucracies I periodic renewal of State and local No case has been ma'de by the also; there is no reason to assume they a commitmen s to emergency Commission for the need for automatic can work faster.It took years of working prrparedness. Relative to applying this shutdown. as would be required in with States to get the plans that are

, rule in actual practice, however, the alternatite B. and certainly no other presently concurred in. It is just

> Commission need not shut down a NRC regulations exist that would insufficient time for new concurrences g fac'ity until all factors have been require such action based on a concept and review. Also, to get a job done thorough! ' examined. The Commission as amorphous as ** concurrence in State within that time frame means a hurried

! belies es, ased on the record created by and local emergency plans." job. rather than an acceptable and I '

the pubnc workshops, that State and 3.The idea that the Commission mi 8 ht meaningful plan.

[r local officials as partners in this grant an exemption to the rules that 2. The time provided is inadequate for undertaking will endeavo to provide would permit continued operation States to acquire the hardware needed.

. fully for public protection. (under alternative B) has little States must go out for competitive bids s gnificance, primarily because 10 CFR iust as the Federal government does.

f. Summary of Comments on Major Issues Part 5012(a) already permits the Between proce: sing and accepting a bid The Commission appreciates the granting of exemptions. and actual delivery of equipment,it may

) estensive publ! cornments on this 4. The process and procedares for take a year to get the hardware.ne important rule. In addition to the record obtaining wth exemptions are not State budgets years ahead; therefore. if

[ of the workshops the NRC has received defined, nor is there any policy a State or local government needs more over 200 comment letters on the indication that would indicate the money,it may have to go to the

. m

Tederal Register / Vol. 45. No.102 / Tuesday August 19, 1980 / Rules and Regulations 55103 legislature. This is a time-consuming difficulties associated with such a 5. The basia fer effectis e offsite public process that may not fit the requirement. response capabihties is a seund Fsderal schedu!c. emergency preparedness program.

1. 88" *#'7" ## #. #

3. NRC and FDfA could not review 70 Federal support (funding and technical e,r more plans and provide concurrence Applicants. In cooperation with State assistance) for the deselopment of State by January 1.1981. The Federal and local gas ernmental authorities, and local offsite capabihties should be .

gosernment moves slowly. Commenters should be permitted the necessary incorporated into FD!A's preparedness did not think that NRC and FD!A can flexibility to develop emergency action program for all emergencies.

raview all the plans within the time level criteria appropriate for the facility frame scheduled.If the Federal in question, subject to NRC approval. . f,### y, g,,#N7 Sovernment cannot meet its schedule. Inflexible NRC emergency action !cre! The States support Federal overstght why or how should the Str.tes? standards are not necessary. and guidam.e in the deve!opment of

4. Funding could not be appropriated .. offsite response capab!!ities. Ifowes cr.

by State and loc.d gmernments before Issue / Tminw8 many States feel the confusion and the deadline. It was sug<;ested that the 1. Afandatory provision for training uncertainty in planning requirements Commission use II. Rept. 89G413 local service personnel and local news fo!!owing Three h!de Island is not a  :

" Emergency Planning U.S. Nuc! car media persons is outside of NRC's proper environment in which to develop Power Plants: Nuclear Regulatory jurisdiction and is not necessary to effectis e capabilities nor does it sers e Commission Os ersight." for the time protect the public health and safety, the best interests of their citizens.The frame rather than that in the proposed 2. Public participation in drills or des clopment of effective nuclear facility rule or use a s!! ding-scale time frame critiques thereof should not be required. Incident response capabilities will -

since States are at various stages of 3.'Ihe provision regarding formal require close coordination and completing their emergency plans. critiques should be clarified to mean the cooperation among responsible Federal Issue Cr Impact o/PmposedRule licensee is responsible for developing agencies. State government, and the and conducting such critiques. nuclear industry. An orderly and 1.The proposed regulations were 4. Definitive performance criteria for comprehensive approach to this effort considered by some commenters as evaluation of drills should be developed makes it necessary that onsite unfair to utihties because it was felt by the licensee, subject to NRC responsibilities be clearly associated they place the utilities in the political approval. with NRC and the nuclear industry and financial role that FEAfA should be while deferring ffsite resp nsibilities to assuming. NRC is seen as in effect issue K: Implementing Pmcedures State government with appropriate giving State and local governments veto NRC review of implementing FENfA oversight and assistance.

over the operation of nuclear plants. It procedures is only necessary to apprise In adJition to these comments, two was questioned whether this was an  :

the NRC staff of the details of the plans petitions for rulemaking w ere filed ir.

intent of the rule. In addition,it was felt for use by the NRC during the course of reference to the proposed rule.These that utilities. their customers, and their an actual emergency.  ;

' were treated as pablic comaents rather .

shareholders should not be penalized by than petitions and were considered in e shutdown.(with a resulting financial issue I.t Fundin8 desetoping the final rule.

burden) because of alle;;cd deficienc~es 1. Nuclear facilities, although located The Commissien has placed the er lack of cooperation by State and local in one governmental tax jurisdiction and planning objectives from NUREG-0654; .

officials. taxed by that jurisdiction affect other FEN!A-REP-1. " Criteria for Preparation

. 2. It was su:;gested that NRC's Office jurisdictions that must bear immediate and Evaluation of Radiological of Inspection and Enforcement conduct and long-term planning costs without Emergency Response Plans and the reviews of the State and local having access to taxes from the facility. Preparedness in Support of Nuclear governmental emergency response plans 2. As the radius of planning Pow er Plants for Interim Use and in order to ensure prompt, effective, and requirements becomes greater, few Comment." Jam:ary 1980, into the final consistent implementation of the facilities are the concern of a single regulations. Co aments received h.

. proposed regulations. county.The planning radius often concerning NUREG-0654 were available

3. One commenter noted that the encompasses county lines. State lines, in developing the final regulation.The public should be made aware of the and in some Instances, international Commission notes that the planning issue of intermediate and long-term boundaries. objectives in NUREG-0654 were largely impacts of plant shutdowns. 3. As new regulations are generated to drawn from NUREG-75/111. " Guide and Specifically, people should be Informed oversee the nuclear industry and old Checklist for Development and of the possibility of " brownouts." cost ones expanded, there is an immediate Evaluation of State and Local increases to the consumer due to need to address fixed nuclear facility Government R adiological Emergency securing alternative energy sources, and planning at all les els of government. Response Plans in Support of Fixed the health and safety factors associated beginning at the lowest and going to the highest. Allles els of government need Nuc! car Facilities." (December 1.1974) with those alternative sourcu. and Supplement 1 thereto dated March access to immediate additional funds to 15.1977. which have been in use for issue 11: Public Notificotton upgrade their response capability.

,a eame time.

1. Ultimate responsibility for public 4. It is well understood that the The approximately 60 puolic comment notification of a radiological emerge icy consumer ultimately must pay the price must be placed on State and local letters received on NUREG-0654 were for planning, regardless of the levelin not critical of the proposed planning gm ernment. government at which costs are incurred. objectives. The Commission also notes

2. The " fifteen minute" public It becomes a matter of how the that at the Afay 1.1980 ACRS meeting, notification rule is without scientific consumcr will be taxed, who will justification fails to differentiate the Atomic Industrial Forum administer the tax receipts, and what is representative encouraged the use of the betw een areas close in and further away the most effective manner in which to planning objectives from NUREG-0051 from the site, and ignores the technical l address the problem. in the final regulations in order'to l 8

i

- - , e '

5~>!06 Federal Ecgisler / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday. August 19. 2950 / Rules and Regulations ~ . ~ .

re !ute ernbiguity and proside specificity capability of I rpfementation of State and longer times to release significant to il.e final regulation. and local plans. amounts of activity in many scenarios).

!!ased on the above, the Commission 4.To make decisions with regard to Cuidance regarding the radionuclides to has decided to modify the proposed rule the overall state of emergency be considered in planning is set forth in thanges in the areas discussed in preparedness (ie., integration of the NUREC-0390: EPA 520/1-78-016 -

licensee's emergency preparedness as " Planning Basis for the Development of paragraphs I through X below, determined by the NRC and of the State and Local Covernment -

I. FD1A/NRC Relab.onship State / local governments as determined Radiological Emergency Response Plans .

• In issulng this rule, NRC recognizes '

by FEMA and reviewed by NRC) and in Support of Light Water Nuc! car '

issuance of operating licenses or Power Plants," December 1978.

the significant responsibilitics assigned shutdown of operating reactors.

~

to FENTA. by Executive Order 12148 on IV. Rationale for Alternatives Chosen July 15,1979 to coordinate the In addition. FEMA has prepared a proposed rule regarding " Review and in a few areas of the proposed ru le, r emer;ency p!anning functions of the Commission identified two executive agencies. In slew of I EMA's Approval of State Radiological Emergency Plans and Preparedness"(44 altctnatives that it was considering.

new role, NHC og:ced on September 11 Ef any public comments were received 59, that IT.MA s,hould henceforth chair FR 42342, dated June 24,19S0). on these alternatives; based on due the FederalInteragency Central According to the proposed FEMA rule, FEMA will approve State and local consideration of all comments received Coordinating Committee for emergency plans and preparedness, as wc!! as the discussions presen,ted f Radiological Emt rgency Response during the workshops, the Commission Planning and Preparedness WICCC). On where appropriate, based upon its has determined which of each pair of Denmber 7.1979, the President lasued a findings and determina!jons with respect to the adequacy of State and alternatises to retain in the final rule.

l directive assigning FEMA lead in Sections 50.47 and 50.54 (s) and (t).

sesponsibility for offsite emergency local plans and the capabilities of State and local governments to effectively the alternatives dealth with conditioning preparedness around nuc! car facilities, the issuance of an operating license or implement these plans and The NRC and FEMA Immedi.4-ly continued operation of a nucicar power initiated negotiations for a s preparedness measures.These findings and determinations will be provided to plant on the existence of State and local Memorandum of t'nderstanding (MOU) the NRC for use in l's licensing process.- government emergency response plans that lays out the agencies' roles and c neumd in h NRC, h bask prusIdes for a smooth transfer of II. Emergency Planning Zone Concept difference between alternatives A and B responsibilities. It is recognized that the The Commiss. ion notes that the in these sections was that. under MOU, which became effectis c January a!!ernative A, the proposed rule would 14.1930, supersedes some aspects of regulatory basis f,cr adoption of the Emergency Planmng Zone (EPZ) r:oncept require a determination by NRC on previous agreements. Specifically, the is the Commission s decision to have a issuing a license or permitting continued MOU identifies FEMA responsibilities c nservative emergency planning policy operation of plants in those cases where with respect to emergency preparedness in addition to the conservatism inherent relevant State enn local emergency

, as they reIate toNRC as the following- in the defense-in-depth philoso;,hy.This response plans had not received NRC policy was endorsed by the Commission concurrence. Denial of a license or de mi at on as o whc her State and in a policy statement published on shutdown of a reactor would not follow

! local emergency pfans are adequate. October 23,1979 (44 FR 61123). At that automatically in every case. Under

) - 2. To verify that State and local time the Commission stated that two alteinative B, shutdown of the reactor emergency plans are capable of be.ing Emergency Planning Zones (EPZs) would be required automatically if the implemented (e g., adequacy and should be established around each light- appropriate State and local emergency mamtenance of pro:edures, training, water nucicar power plant. The EPZ for response plans had not received NRC j, resotroes, staffing les els and airborne exposure has a radius of about concurrence within the prescribed time quahfication, and equipment). 10 miles; the EPZ for contaminated food . periods unless an exemption is granted.

3.To assume responsibility for and water has a radius of about 50 After consideration of the public  !

] ,

emergency preparedness tram [ng of miles. Predetermined protective action record and on the recommendation of its i

t State and local officials. plans are needed for the EPZs. The staff, the Comm'ssion has chosen a text 4.To develop and issue an updated exact size and shape of each EPZ will be for Sections 50.47 and 50.54 (s) and (t) series of interagency assignments that decided by emergency planning officials that is similar to, but less restrictive JAineate respectise agency ca;' abilities after they consider the specific than, alternative A in the preposed rule.

and responsibilities and define conditions at each site. These distances Rather than providing for the shutdown procedures for coordination and are considered large enough to provide a of the reactor as the only enforcement

, direction for emergency planmng and response base that would support action and prescribing specific I response, activity outside the planning zone' preconditions for the shutdown remedy.

SpeciCcally, the NRC respansibilities should this ever be needed. , the final rule makes clear that for

e en > ;teparedness identified 1 . Position on Planning hsis for Small emergency planning rules like all other ,

' rules, reactor shutdown as outlined in

1. To assess licensee emergency plans l.i.cht Water Reactors and Ft St.Vrain the ru!c is but one of a number of for adequacy. The Commission has cencluded that possib!r enforcement actions and many 2.To s crify that licensee emergency the operators of smalllight-water-cooled factors should be considered in {

plans are adequately imp!cmented (e g., power reactors (less than 250 MWt) and determining whether it is an appropriate

• f' adequacy and maintenance of the Ft. St. Vrain gas-cooted reactor may action in a given case. This Commission -

procedures. training. resources, staffing establish smaller planning zones which choice is consistent with most of the lesc!s and quahfications, and willbe evaluated on e case-by case comments received from State and local equipment)- basis.This conclusion is based on the

3. To review the FEMA findings and lower potential harard from these

• see sauen V for a discussion concernins determination, on the adequacy and facilities (lower radionuclide inventory concereo w.-

o

Federal Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday, August 19. 1980 / Rules and Regil.itions 55107

~

gasernments and is consistent with the the licensee ernergency response plans. basis for choice of notification provisions of Section 109 of the NRC After these two determinations hase capability requirements for offsite fiscal year 19S0 Authorization Ac been made. NRC will make a findin;in authorities and for the public.

Alternative P was scen by some of the the licensing process as to the oserall Emergency plans must be developed commenters as potentially causfrg and integrated state of preparedness. that will have the flexibility to ensure unnecessarify harsh economic and It was pointed out to the Commiss!an response to a wide spectrum of social consequences to State and local at the workshops and in public comment accidents.This wide spectrum of -

governments, utilitics, and the public, letters that the term " concurrence" was potential accidents alsi. reflects on the State and local governrnents that are confusing and ambiguous. Also, ther' appropriate use of the offsite directly involved in impicmenting was a great deal of misunderstandinS notification capability.The use of this planning objectives of the rule strongly with the use of the term because,in the notifica tiori capability will range from Inwr alternative A since it provides for past, the obtaining of NRC immediate notification of the public a cooperative effort with State and local "concurrer:ce"in State emergency gasernments to reflect their concerns res;3or se plans was voluntary on behalf (within 15 minutes) to listen to and desires in these rules. This choice is predesignated radio and television of the States and not a regulatory stations, to the more likely events where responstre to that effort. In additicn. the requirement in the licensing process.

industry strongly supported alternative Prestously too." concurrence' was there is substantial time availab!c for A as being the more workable of the two statewide rather than site. specific. the State and local gas ernmental officials to make a jud;nent whether or In pp ndix E. Sections II.C and !!!. VI. Fifteen.5finute Notification not to activate the public notification alternative A would require an The requirement for the capability for system.

applicant / licensee to outline ". . . notification of the public within 15 Any accident involving severe fue!

correctis e measures to prevent damage minutes after the State / local authorities degradation or core melt that results in to onsite and offsite property," as wc!! have been notified by the licensee has significant inventories of fission as protective measures for the public. been expanded and clarified. It also has products in the containment would Alternative D addresses only pro'.ective been removed as a footnote and placed warrant immediate public notification measures for the public health a:1d in the body of Appendix E.The and cons!deration, based on the safety.The Comm!<s!on has chasen implementat!on schedu!e for this particular circumstances, of appropriate clternative B because public health and requirement has been extended to July 1, protective action because of the safety should take clear precedence ,1981.This extension of time has been potential forleakage of the containment over actions to protect property. adopted because most State and local building. In addition, the warning time hieasures to protect prc,perty can be governments identified to the available for the public to take action taken on an ad hoc basis as resources Commission the difficulty in procurin8 may be substantially less than the total become available after an accident. hardware, contracting for installation. time between the originalinitiating in Appendix E. under Training, and developing procedures for operatin8 event and the time at which significant citernatise A would provide for a joint the systems used to implement this licensee. Federal. State, and local requirement. radioactive releases take p' lace.

government exercise every 3 years. The Commission is aware that various Specification of particular times as design objectis es for notification of whereas alternatis e D would provide for commenters. largely from the industry, these exercises to be perfurmed every 5 offsite authorities and the public are a ha,ve objected to the nature of the 15-years at each site. 'Ibe Commission has mmute notification requ rement. means of ensuring that a aystem will be chosen alternative D because the indicating that it may be both arbitrary in Pl ace with the capability to notify the Commission is satisfied that the and un.vorkable. Public to seek further information by provision that these exercires be Among the possible alternatives to listening to predesignated radio or perforrr.ed every 5 years fo: each site this requirement are a' longer telev,sion i stations.The Commission will allow for an adequate level of notification time, a notification time that recognizes that not every individual ,

preparedness among Federal emergency varies with distance from the facility, or w uld nece g.trily be reached by the  ;

responte agencies. In addition, ur. der no specified time. In determining what actual opgration of such a system under these regulations each licensee is that criterion should be, a line must be all conditions of system use. Ilowever, required to exercise annually with local drawn somewhere. and the Commission the Commission believes that provision gh ernmental authorities. Furthermore, believes that providing as much time as of a general alerting system will Federal emergency response agencies Practicable for the taking of protective significantly improve the capability for may have difficulty supporting exercises action is in the interest of public health taking protective actions in the event of every 3 years for all of the nuclear and safety. The Commission recognizes an emergency.The reduction of facilities that would be required to that this requirement may present a notification times from the several hours comply with these ru!c changes, significant finarcial impact and that the required for street-by-stree' notification

\. Definit. ion ofI.lan Approval Process technical basis for this requirement is to minutes will significantly increase the not without dispute. E' mover, there options available as protective actions The term " concurrence

• has been may never be an accic c it requiring under severe accident conditions.These deleted from the prpposed regulations using the 15-minute no.fication actions could include staying indoors in and replaced with reference to the capability. Ilowever, the essential the case of a release that has already actual procedure and standards that , rationale behind emergency planning is occurred or a precautionary evacuation NRC and FEh!A have agreed upon and to provide additional assurance for the in the case of a potential release thought cre implementing. According to the public protection even during such an to be a few hours away. Accidents that agreed upon procedure. f rMA will unexpected event.The 15-minute do not result in core melt may also make a finding and determination as to notification capability requirement is cause relatively quick releases for which the adequacy of State and local who!!y consistent with that rationale. protective actions, at least for the public government emergency response plans. The Commission recognizes that no in the immediate plant vicinity, are

'lhe NRC will determine the adequacy of sing!c accident scenario should form the desirable. ,

i

?

DICS ' Tr detal Redster / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tur sday. August 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations f6:no con rm nts receivej on the reasons exist for reactor creration. seeking an operating license from NRC propt wd rule advocated the use of a Finally, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202[f), the that base not had an ewrcise insching st.med notification system with quick Commission may, in appropriate the State plan at that facility site.

rmtMr otion required only near the plant, circumstances, make the order The Commission has determined The Commission belieses that the immediately effective, which could under the criteria in to CFR Part 51 that ci.p ibihty for quick nJii. cation within result in immediate plant shutdown an environmentalimpact statement for the entue plume esposure emergency subject to a later hearing. the amendments to 10 CFR Part 50 and.

planning zone 6hould be provided but Appendix E thcreofis not required. This i recogniics that some pbnners may wish I U undm.g

. determination is based on 4 to have the option of selectively In view of the requirements in these " Environmental Assessment for Final t actuating part of the system during an rule changes regarding the actions to be Changes to 10 CFR Part 50 and actual response. Planners should taken in the event State and local Appendix E of 10 CFR Part 50, cart fully consider the impac.t of the government planning and preparedness Emergency Planning Requirements for .

added dec.isluns that offsite authorities are or become inadequate, a utility may Nuclear Power Pl ants" (NUREC-0G85, would nt ed to male and the desirability have an incenthe, based on its own self June 1980). Comments on the " Draft of establishing an efficial interest as wc!! as its responsibility to Neptive Dec!uration: Finding of No

]

communication link to all residents in provide power, to assist in providing Significant Impact"(45 FR 3913. january the plume exposure emergency planning manpower. items of equipment, or other 21,1980) were considered in the zone w hen deternuning whether to plan resources that the State and local preparation of NUREC-OG85.

for a staged notification capability, governments may need but are Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of

. themselves unable to provide. The 1954, as amended, the Energy

\.11. Effectis e Date of Rules and Other Guidance Commission belieses that in view of the Reorganization Act of1974.as amended.

President's Statement of December 7, Prior to the publication of these and Sections 552 and 553 of Title 5 of the / -

1979, giving FEhtA the lead role in United States Code, notice is hereby /

amendments, two guldance documents offsite planning and preparedness. the given that the following amendments to were published for public comerrt and question of whether the NRC should or Title 10, Chapter I. Code of Federal -

interim use.These are NUREG4<.to, could require a utility to contribute to Regulations, Parts 50 and 70, are

" Draft Emergency Action Level the expenses incurred by State and local published as a document subject to Guidelir.cs for Nuclear Power Plants ** governments in upgrading and codification.

(Se;4tember 1979) and NUREC-0054/ maintaining their emergency planning FEhl A-REP-1. " Criteria for Preparation and preparedness (and if it is to be Part 50-Domestic Licensing of and Euluation of Radiological required, the mechanics for doing so) is Production and Uti!!zation Facilities Emerscncy Response Plans and beyond the scope of the present rule Preparedness m Support of Nuclear change. It should be noted. howes er, 1. Paragraph (g) of Section 50.33 is Power Plants for Interim Use and that any direct funding of State er local re sed to nad as fo11ow n Comment." (January 1980). It is expected governments solely for emergency $ 50.33 Contents of cppticctions; general that sersions of these documents, preparedness purposes by the rederal information.

revised on the basis of public comments government would come through FEhtA. * * * *

• recei ed. will be issued to assist in (g)If the application is for an derim)ng acceptable les els of X. Exercises operating license for a nuc! car power preparedness to meet this final On an annual basis, all commercial reactor, the applicant shall submit regulation. In the interim, these nuclear power facilities will be required radiological emergency response plans documents should continue to be used by NRC to exercise their plans; these of State and local gas ernmental entities as guidance. exercises should involve exercising the in the United States that are w holly or Vllt. IIcaring Procedures Used in "PP' N" C8 E **f"**"I P 3"5I In Partially within the plume exposure Imp!cmentation of These Regulations supp t hese a ili les.The Sta e pathway Emergency Planning Zone may choose to limit its participation in (EPZ)', as well as the plans of State -

Should the NRC believe that the exercisr at facilitic; other than the os erall state of emergency preparedness facility (site) chosen for the annual governments wholly or partially within I di and around a licensed facility Is such the ingestion pathway EPZ.8 Generally, j' exercise (s) of the State plan. the plume exposure pathway EPZ for that there is some question whether a Each State and appropriate local

- facility should be permitted to continue nuclear power reactors shall consist of I government shall annually conduct an to operate. the Commission may issue exercise jointly with a commercial an area about 10 miles (10 km)in radius an ordu to the licensee to show cause, and the ingestion pathway EPZ shall nuclear power facility. llowever. States pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, why the plant with more than one facility (site) shall consist of an area absat 50 miles (80 km) in radius. The exact sice and shoald not be shut down. This issue may schedule exercises such that each arise. for example, if NRC finds a configuration of the ErZs surrounding a individual facility (site) is exercised in particular nuc! car pow er reactor shall I signitcant defickncy in a licensee plan conjunction with the State and '

or in the os crall state of emergency be determined in relation to the local appropriate local gasernment plar s not emergency response needs and preparedness. less than once es ery 3 } cars for sites if the NRC decides to issue an order to with the plume exposure pathway EPZ 'E.n eno r::..zi-gwqrt s) .re d+cuned show cause,it will provide the licensee partially or who!!y within the State. and la Nt'REGM EPA 53's *646. *rMnirs Basis i the oppo:tunity to demonstrate to the not less than once escry 5 years fer sites '" *' D"'Wat *f S*' '"h*1 Ca *=at  !

n Commission's satisfaction, for example, that the alleged deficiencies are not with the ingestion exposure pathway EpZ partially or whcIly within the State. is as

$r"kN.'d E , e, p f ,

5

}

i Qignificant for the reactor in question. The State shall choose, on a rotational 'If the sia e and tx.!emeynn.re, pen.e plans '

whether adequate interim compensating basis. the site (s) at which the required has e bun prnic4 rwide de sse for actions 1 ave been or will be taken promptly, or w hether other compelling annual exercise (s)is to be conducted; priority shall be given to new facihties N "$'[,$,'hi'f,',I$'j,rtja ((,d d

repremenc ,

1 L - - - - -

..._ e -

if z 1

Federal Reghter / Vol. 45. No 162 / TurLy. Augnt 10.19M / Rules and Rephtions -.5.3103

~

capabilities n they are affected by such (3) An., g. r. es far rw.vi. g ci! estab!!shed fer cmerpecy w crkcts.The conditions as dcmegraphy. topegraphy, cf.h:id;. e ~-2 avie.r.e rescum s ene ms far centro!!.ng rad.ak(cal 1:nd char.nteristics. access to tes and have t,.ca r. 4. arra ;~r.ts ta esposures shall mc!ude evr re furisdictional boundaries.The size of the accem.shts State and local staff at guide:ines consistent v.ith EPA EPZs also rnay be determined on a case. the hcensee's near site E nergency Emergency Worker and Lifesasing by case basis for gas.coofed reactors Ope ticns Fac.hty base been made. Activity Protective Action Guides.

end for reactors with an authorized and other organizations capable of (12) Arrangments are made for power levelless than 250 htW therreal. au;mentir; the plant'ed response hu e medical services for contaminated The plans for the ingestion pathway been identified. , injured individuals.

shall focus on such actions as are (4) A standard cmcrgency (13) General plans for recovery and cppropriate to protect the food ingestion class:fication and action !ctel scheme. reentry are developed.

pathway, the bases of which include facility (14) Periodic exercises are (will be)

2. A new I 50 4 is adhd. system and efnuent parameters is in conducted to evaluate major portiens of use by the nuclear facilitylicensee, and energency response capabilities.

I 50.47 Emeri;ency plans. State and local response plans call for periodic drills are (will be) conducted to (a)(1) No operating li.:ense for a reliance on information provided by develop and maintain key skills, and nuclear power reactor wi!! be issued facility licensees for determinations of deficiencies identified as a result of unless a finding is made by NRC that the minimum initial offsite response exercises or drills are (will bel state of nnsite and offsite emergency measures. corrected.

preparedness prosides reasonable (5) Procedures have been established (15) Radiological emergency responsa assurance that adequate protective for notification, by the licensee, of State training is provided to those who may ,

measures can and w!!! be taken in the and local response organizations and for be called on to assist in an emergency.

svent of a radiological emergency. notification of emergency personnel by (16) Responsibilities for plan (2) The NEC will base its finding on a all organizations; the content ofinitial development and review and for review of the Federal Emergency and followup messages to re::ponse distribution of emergency plans are htanagement Agency (FEhtA) findings organizations and the public has been established, and planners are properly established; and means to provide early trained.

and determinations as to whether State and local crorgency plans are adequate n tification,and clear instruction to the (c)(1) Failure to meet the standards set and capable of being implemented, and populace within the plume exposure forth in paragraph (b) of this subsection en the NRC assessment as to whether pathway Emergency Planning Zone have may result in the Commission declining the applicant's onsite emergency plans bee hd t issue an OperatingIJcense:howeser, are adequate and capable of being (6 v {ons st for prompt the appheant wiH have an opportunity communications among principal implemented. In any NRC licensing to dem nstrate to the satisfaction of the

' response organizations to emergency proceeding a FI.AIA find:ng will personnel and to the public. Commission that deficiencies in the ,

constitete a rebuttable presumption on a plans are not signif; cant for the plant in question of adequacy. (7)Information is made available to question, that adequateInterim the public on a periodic basis on how (b) The onsite and offsite emergency they will be notified and what their compensating actions have been or will response plans for nuc! car power initial actions should be in an be taken proinptly. or that there are reactors must meet the fo!!owing emergency (e.g.. listening to a local other compe!!ing reasons to permit plant standards: ' broadcast station and remaining operation.

(1) Primary responsibilities for indoors), the principal points of contract (2) Genera!!y. the plume expomre emergency response by the nucicar with the news media for dissemination pathway EPZ for nuclear power plants facility licensee and by State and local ofinformation during an emergency shall consist of an area about to reites erganizations within the Emergency ' (including the physicallocation or (16 km)in radius and the ingestion Planning Zones have been assigned, the locations) are established in advance, Pathway EPZ shall consist of an area a

smergency responsibilities of the and procedures for coordinated about 50 m.les (60 km)in radius. The various supporting organizations have dissemination of information to the exact size and configuration of the EPZs been specifically established. and each public are established. surrounding a particular nudcar powcr f principal response organization has staff (8) Adequate emergency facilities and reactor shall be determined in reision to respond and to augment its initial equipment to support the emergency to local emergency response needs and response on a continuous baslS. response are provided and maintained. capabilitics as they are affee'ed by such -

(2) On. shift facility licensee (9) Adequate methods, systems, and conditions as demography, topography.

responsibilities for emergency response equipment for assessing and monitoring land characteristics. access routes, and are unambiguously defined, adequate actual or potential offsite consequences jurisdictionalboundaries.The size of the staffing to provide initial facility of a radiological emergency condition EPZs also may be determined on a case-cecident response in key functional are in use. by-case basis for gas cooled nuc! car areas is maintained at all times, timely (10) A range of protective actions reactors and for reactors with an '

cugmentation of response capabilities is have been developed for the plume authorized powcr levelIcss than 250 cvailable nnd the Interfaces among exposure pathway EPZ for emergency htW thermal.The p!ans for the ingestion various onsite response activities and workers'and the public. Guidelines for pathway shall focus on such actions as effsite support and response actisitics the choice of protective actions during are appropriate to protect the food cre speclhed. en emer;ency consistent with Federal ingestion pathway.

guidance, are developed and in place. 3. Section 50.51 is amended by adding

• These stan,lirds are a 1. tress /J by spceme and protective actions for the ingestion five new paragraphs (q). (r). (s). (t), and cracria in Nt>srn-ms4. mtA R&- entaieJ exposure pathway EPZ appropriate to

-crocria for Prrra + ten anJ Esaluaan cf (u)" 5 Radinlog cal Fmegency Revenne Nas and the locale have been developed-Prvpm da.,s in Sag port of Lc'est Powcr Nate~ (11) hieans for controHing radiological 1 50.54 Conditions of licenses. j For trAran t%e and Coniment" January 1980. exposures, in an emergency, are .

L o

', ' . 53810 I'ederal Register / Vol S. No.102 / Tuesday. August 19,1930 /_ Rules nnd Rc;;ulations I (q) A licensee authorized to possess within 60 days of the effecth e date of significant for the plant in question or and/or operate a nuc! car power reactor this amendment the radiohgical that adequate intnim compensating i shall follow and maintain in effect emergency response plans of State and actions have been or will be taken 6

{ emergency p!ans which meet the local gasernmental entities in the United promptly, or that there are other j  ; standards in i 50.47(b) and the States that are who!!y or p artially within compelling reasons for continued

i requirements in Appendix E of this Part. a plume exposure pathway EPZ, as well operation.

A licensee authorized to possess and/or as the plans of State governments (3) The NRC will base its finding on a I operate a research reactor or a fuel wholly or partially within an ingestion review of the FEh!A findings and l pathway EPZ." Ten (10) ceples of the determinations as to whether State and facility shall follow and maintain in

( effect emergency plans which meet the above plans shall be forwarded to the local emergency plans are adequate and y ,

aquirements in Appendix E of this Part. Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation capabie of being impicmented, and on

, The nuclear power reactor licensee may wi+ 1 copies to the Director of the the NRC asacssment as to whether the i make changts to these plans without apropriate NRC regional office.

~

licensee's emerg;ency plans are adequate -

. j Commission approval only if such Generally, the plume exposure pathway and capable of being implemented.

t , thanges do not deucase the EPZ for nucicar power reactors shall Nothing in this paragraph shall be i ,

effectiveness of the plans and the plans, consist of an area about to miles (to km) construed as lirniting the authority of the

; as changed, continue to meet the in radius and the ingestion pathway EPZ Commission to take action under any standards of i 50.47(b) and the shall consl>t of en area about 50 miles other regulation or authority of the requirements of Appendix E of this Part. (00 km)in radius. The exact size and Commission or at any time other than ne research reactor licensee and/or the configuration of the EPZs for a that specified in this paragraph.

fuel facility licensee may make changes articular nuclear power reactor shall (t) A nuclear power reactorlicensee fi }

to these plans without Commission approval only if such changes do not e deterrn!ned in relation to local emergency response needs and -

shall provide for the development.

revision, implementation, and

[;  ; decrease the effectiveness of the plans capabilities as they are affected by such maintenance ofits emergency and the plans, as changed, continue to conditions as demography, topography. preparedness prograin.To this end, the M. meet the requirements of 4pendix E of land characteristics, access routes, and licensee shall provide for a review ofits 6

A this Part. Proposed chanps that jurisdictional boundaries.nc size of the emergency preparedness program at I

decrease the effectiseness of the EPZs also may be determined on a case- least every 12 months by persons who i approved emergency plans shall not be by. case basis for gas-cooled nuclear have no direct responsibility for implemented without application to and reactors and for reactors with an implementation of the emergency 1 8 approval by the Commission.The authorized power levelless than 250 preparedness program. ne review shall

! licensee shall furnish 3 copies of each htW thermal.The plans for the ingestion ' include an evaluation for adequacy of proposed charge for approval; and/or if pathway EPZ shall focus on such interfaces with State and local g a actions as are appropriate to protect the governments and oflicensee drills.

=

a change is made without prior I approval,3 copics shall be submitted food ingestion pathway. exercises, capabilitics, and procedures.

' within 30 days after the char.ge is made (2) For operating power reactors, the ne resu!ts of the review, along with

, or proposed to the D: rector of the licensee, State, and local emergency recommendations for improvements, appropriate NRC regional office response plans shall be imp?cmented by shall be documented, reported to the i~

specified in Appendix D,10 CFR Part 20 Aprill.1981. except as provided in licensee's corporate and plant I 1 - with to copies to the Director of Nuclear Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E of this management, and retained for a period Part. If after April 1,1981, the NRC finds Reactor Regulation, or,if appropriate. of five years.The part of the review I? the Director of Nuc! car hiaterial Safety that the state of emergency involving the evaluation for adequacy of I and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory preparedness does not provide interface with State und local reasonable assurance that appropriate

} l!' Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555.

protective measures can and will be governments shall be available to the appropriate State and local (r) Each licensee who is authorized to taken in the event of a rad u.ogical

}, possess and/or operate a research or governments.

emergency and if the deficiencies are (u) Within 60 days after the effective test reactor facility with an authorized n t corrected within four months of that date of this amendment, each nuclear l.1 ower lesel greater than or equal to 500 1i kW thermal, under a license of the typefindmg. the Commission will determine power reactor licensee shall submit to whether the reactor shall be shut down l ;l specified in i 50.21(c), shall submit until such deficiencies are remedied or the NRC plans for coping with emergencies that meet standards in

!: emergency plans complying with 10 CFR *

!" Part 50. Appendix E, to the Director of ".o *n Ienfd reement acdon is i 50.47(b) and the requirements of

.2 Nuclear Reactor Regulation for approval *u 'EP P" I" I 8 hh Appendix E of this Part.

O*' '"I 'C'* ""'

• CU " I'

• I "" * * ' * * '

within one year from the effective date 8ppropriate,'the Commission shall take lt .

of this rule. Each licensee who is authorized to possess and/or operate a 4.10 CFR Part 50. Appendix E,is t eker1 helic nsee can on detrate to i research reactor facility with an Appendix E-Emergency Planning and the Commission's satisfaction that the

, authorized power levelless than 500 kW deficiencies in the plan are not Preparedness for Production and Utilization thermal, under a license of the type racilities' f'[,

specified in i 50.21(c), shall submit s Erne e ncy riannins zones tErzel are discussed Tob/c ofContents cmergency plansE,complying with of to CFRforintheNrsrc-c.4 era s:olt s-ms, h4 sasis, I. Introduction .

j. }

Part 50. Appendix to the Director Nuclear Reactor Regulation for approval Deselorrneni ef state and te st cannmsn E*d*1"8**' E"Senc) R"Pme r"m in sar; ort 8'er Nuclear "" M*MS ecen r NR

• tan ** n s 'e twa nvulat ry suid 1 within two years from the effective date 1fr(sM 2_s, *Eme sency Nnnir's for Researd Reactors.,c=

l

, e of this amendment. sif the siaie and locat emersen y response ptana and 3 42.* Emergency Nnning in Furt C)cle 5

has e bern rrnicusty Prosided to 1.e NRC for racilities and Plants !b nord tir.Jrr to CFR Parts

{

(s)(1) Each licensee who is authorized "'" 'h* cihty docket. the applicant need 50 and ro." and a joint NRCAT.MA rrport. NPREG-I to possess and/or oEerate a nuclear

'"'I"'i

t. )+ on!) proside the appropriate referent.c to meet this ofM FDIA-REP-1.Cnter;a far rirporation and i power reactor shall summit to NRC requirernent. - Footnotes continurd on next page

e a

• f I

h I

b_ -

- .n _ _n,--

o '

c L y,: /_. w.J c, A .g. < l ___

p. m / Rutes and Rc;dations 53111

____ __--TcdcrA Ref 5r / W.-..

-- - ~ . ..

. . __ = --

II The Preb.< ,r) Saf :') A-4 Cs Eq-t ce - W e .,e,.:* ..a.. e .-- .- ? . g -

egre -n cf t e c st! cc-et;t cf Ilt The ima Safety A. afps Peprt p .' e a i e * . m t. - ! . . . . - ! !v A o n e . t' e s';a't d. ictsbe the cuen6?

IV. Content t.f Errugancy Plans 3.,- , j m.,! t, e

• m f. r t e$.T rl. in the e een s of a unce ; tan :ng t'at hne hun V.!mplement;rg Proced rei c m cfr J irp e rr..A rsa* we?!ase cer'? *at j and he pWs'c-, t%t hase ban sn .ns by w'.ich the stserde ef i 50 ribj era,*e to cape with erreren:y sit;;4t2ces.D.e

1. Intrud actica w,11 Le es !. p!a-s s':4?!in;crpra*e mNrmation about the Esch apphcant for a construction pern It is As a minh.um. the fouewing iten:, s'12:1be emerrecy reynr ro!e s of supporting ~ ,

reqalred by I 50 34a) to include in the described. orpaizations and of's.te agencies. That pre!!minsry safety analysis report a A. Onsite and offsite org sefzations fer infor: nation sha!! be sdoent to provide discussion of preliminary plans for coping copir g with emergencies and the means fer assurance of coordina!!on among the notif:catiert. In the event of an emergency, of supporting gruers and with the licensee.

with emergencies. Each applicant for an 'Ihe plans submitted must include a eperatira license is required by i 50Kb) to persons assigned to the emergency include in the final safety analysis report organizations. descrfption of the efements set out in Section plans for copi g with emergencies. B. Contacts and arrargements made and IV for the Emerency Planning Zones (EPZal '

This appeada esta%Fes miniTu a documente d with local. State, and Federal to an extent suffici>at to demonstrate that the requirements for e nergency plans far use in gosernmentsl agencies with responsibility for plans proside reasonab:e assurance that cttaining an acceptab!c state of er ergency coping with emergencies. Including appropriate measures can and will be taica preparedness. These plans shall be desenbed identification of the principal agencies. in the event of an emergncy.

generally in the preliminary safety analysis C. Protective sneasures to be taken within IV. Content of Er"ergency Plans report and sabmitted as a part of the final the site boundary and within each EPZ to The applicant,s emergency plans shall sifety enefysis re port. protect hea!th and safety in the esent of an contain. but not necrssarity be limited to.

The potential radio!ofcal haards to the accident; p ocedures by which these public associated with the operation of measures are to be carried out (e g,in the I"I '*ation ngeded to demonstrate -

c mph.ance with the elements set forth research and test reactors and fuel facilities case of an evacuation, who authorizes the licensed under to CFR Parts 50 ar.d 70 evacuation. how the public is to be notified 9 . MenI2a n re#8WM radiation emergencies, assessment action.

involve considerations different than those and instructed how the evacuation is to be cssociated with nuclear ower reactors.

"# " ** "8'"#I '8'"'*"

carried out): and the expected response of n tif cation procedures, emergency fa'cilities Consequently. the size o Emergency offs te agencies in the event of an emergency.

Plinning Zones '[EPZsl for facilities other *" 'S " " ' #' 8' * " " 8 *

(DJ Features of the facility to be provided """*" "'"'T " '

than power reactors and the degree to which for onsite eme*gency first aid and **"8",'I #E' addition the emergncy rnponse plans compliance with the requirements of this decontam: nation and for emergency

" ' " "*"#'" "*

• c s a contain n c ssar

-,ii b det r n'e on a c e by- treatment facilities. .' *ff.c r pc at information needed to emonstrate  ;

E. ProMons to be made fcr emergency C88' compt.ance with the standards described in II.The Preliminary Safety Ana?pis Report treatment at offsite facilities ofindisiduals Section $n r(b).* and they will be evaluated ' t injured as a rest.lt of hcensed activities. assinst those standards.The nuclear powa The Pr.hminary Safety Anaf 3sis Report r n5 I r 8 trainin8 prog *am for reactor operating license applicant shall also 7

sha!! contain s Acient information to ensure emPf oyees of the licensee, including those proside an analysis of the time required to ,

the cornpatibit t) of proposed emergency wh are assigned specific authority and evacuate and for tding other rotectise ,

plans for both onsite areas and the EPZs. resPonsibiUty in the event of an emergency. actions for sarious sectors en distances .

with facility design features. site layout, and and for du pmons who are not employees within the plume exposure pathway EPZ for site location with respect to such of the licensee but whose assistance may be transient and p'ermanent popu!anons.

needed in the esent of a radiological Footnotes continued from last page emergency.

A Gyonize.an .

Evaluanen of Ra&otogicalImerben} Response C. A preliminary analysis that projects the The organization for coping with

' ~

time and means to be employed in the radiolggical emergencies shaf t be described.

a r P1 a a or Inter se an o erst.f including definition of authorities.

Dnuary 1980, to proside guidance In developirg notification of State and local governments plsns for coping with emerg-ncies Cepies of these and the pt.blic la the event of an emergency. responsibilities, and duties ofindisiduals documems are available at the Commission's Public A nuclear power plant Applicant shall assigncd to the licensee's emergency Document Room.1717 il Street. NW Washirgton. perform a preliminary analysis of the time organization and the means for notification of D C. 20551 Copies of these documents may be required to evacuate various sectors and such indiM als in the event of an >

purchased from 'he Cosernment Printing O'fice. distances within the plume exposure emergency 3pecifica!!y. the fo!! awing sha!!

Information on current prices may be obtaincJ by pathway EPZ for trans!cnt and perinanent be Included: r

" 1. A description of the norma! plant 7g n C 2 55 At i P at rs' Populatior.s. noting major impediments to the oPerh.ing organization.

Sa?cs Manager evacuation or taking of protectise actions.

' H. A Pre:iminary anal) sis reflecting the 2. A description of the onsite emergency,

'EPZs for power reactors are d:scussca in need to include facihties, systems, and responsy orgsnization with a detailed WRIG-onti EPA sm/s-Mio. ".Plann.ng Das:s discussron of; for the Des etermert of State and I oc al Cmernrrent methods for idantif)ing the degree of

a. Authorities, responsibilities and dutics Radio!"g4 at Emergency Re=ponse Plans in Support serloasness and potential scope of af Light Water Nadear Power Plets." Decerr.t.cr of the individud!(s) who w.Il take charge radiological consequences of emergency we lhe sire of the EPZs for a nuclear power plant durmg an emergency:

e tuations within and outside the site b. Plant staff emergency assignments:

shat) be determmed in relation to local emerg-ncy traponse reeJe anJ capabiht.c as they a-e akted boundary, btluing capabihties for d.ose

. c. Authorities, responsibihties. and dutics projecti n i;sbg real. time meteorological on an onsite ernerg-ncy coordinator who by sath conditions as demegop S

y. terrap y.

ta,J d aractenster s. access routes, a,J informaticn and f ar depatch of radiological shall be in charge of the eschange of lurisJhtton41 boundaries. The sire of the l'PZs also tuonitonrg teams w(thin the EPZs; and a information with offsite authorities may be determincJ on a cae bpcase bas;n for gas. pre!!m! nary ana!ysis reflecting the role of the cootcJ rue! car reactors and for reactors with an onsite technical support center and of the 82 "' bt' I ' ' 'di"i"8 ""d "

imp fementing oITsite emergency measures.

cuth tred ower P leset less than 250 MW thermal pear-site emergency operations facihty in " '

. Generally, the plurne esposure pathwey EPZ for Cucteer power plants with an authonzed power assessing Info.rtnation, recommendin8 to be performed, of licensee.a les el prawr th an no MW thrm41 shatt c.m.ist of Protectige action, and disseminating information to the pubhc. *These objectives are ad3ressed by specific cn area about to miles (to kmlin'raJras and the to:estLa pathway Fr?. shall consist of an area Ill. The nnal Safety Anal)sls Report criteria in WREG-oc54. FEMSREP-1 entitled about to miles (to km)in radius. " Criteria for Preparataca and Evaluation of Certatory Cuide 2 6 wi!! be used as guldince The n.na  ! Safety Ana!>;s.isReport shall Radiotegical Emergency Response Plans and for the ace ptatihty of research and test reactor contain the plans for coping with Preparedness to Support of Nudear Power Plants emergencies.The plans shall be an for interim Use and Comment" January 19aJ.

emsrycrey response plans.

e

. - 1

. - . . _ _- - - _ . _ _ _ - _ - _ ._ ~- .= - . - . =

" Zl)2 Trderal Register / Vol. 45, No.162 / Tuesday Aq;ast 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations headprirrs prr$onn(1 wto willlee sent to noted for such agencies. The cre gency 2. Equipment for determining the n ignitude .

J the glant site to augment the onsite classes de fined shall include. (t) notication of and for continuously assessing the impact

, emere nt) organization. of unusual es erts. (2) alert. (3) ste area of the release of rad oactise materials to the 4 Ida nt& cation.by position and function emergency, and (4) general emerge ney. These environment:

to be performed of persons within the classes are further discussed in NUELG-0654; 3. Facilities and supplies at the site for l censee organization who will be responsible FEMA-REP-1. decontamination of onsite indniduals; .

I for maing offsite dese projections, and a 4. F.cilities and rnt dical supplies at the site

, description of how these projections will be a A'o$catw.n Ncedaes for appropriate emergency first aid treatment:

made and the results transmitted to State and 1. Administrative and physical means for 5. Arrangements for the services of local authorities. NRC, and other appropriate notifying local. State, and Federal offic!als physicians and other medical personnel ges ernmental e ntities, and agencies and agreements reached with c,ualified to handle radiation emergencies on-5 IdentScation, by position and function these officials and agencies for the prompt site: .

to I e profuimed of other employees of the notfication of the public and for public 6. Arrangements for transportation of lunste with special quahtcations for coping <vacuation or other protective meeures, contaminated fr:jured individuals from the site to specifically idenSfied treatment

• with a mugency conditions that muy arise. should they become necessary. shall be Other pt rsons with spedal quahfict.tions, described nis description shallinclude facilities outside the site boundary:

such as consultants, who are not employees identittatica of the appropriate officia!s.by 7. Arrangements for treatment of a;f the licenu e and who may be en!!cd upon title and agency. of the State and local Individuals injured in support oflicensed j for assistance for emergencies shall also be gosernment agencies within the LPZs. activities on the site at treatment facilities 4 bientMed. He spetlal quahfications of these 2. Provisions shall be described for } early outside the site boundary:

persons shall be described, dissemination to the public within the plume 8. A licensee onsite technical support ,

6. A description of the local offsite services esposure pathway EPZ of basic emergency center and a licenst e near-site emergency g ta be prosided in support of thelicensee's ph.nning information, such as the methods operations faci % from which effective emergncy orpnization. and times required for public notacation and direction can be gh en and effective control

7. Identification of, and assistance the protec.tise actions planned if an accident can be exercised daring an emergency; espected from. appropriate State, local. and occurs generalinformation as to the nature 9. At ! cast one onsite and one offsite Federal agencies with icopensibilities for and effects of radiation, and a listing of local communications s> stem; each system shall with emergencies. broadcast stations that will be used for have a backup pow er source. '

copinfentification 8I of the State and[b local dissemination of information during an All communication plans shall have remclals responsible for p!anning for, emergency. Signs or other measures shall arrangements for emergeacies, including udering. and controlhng r.ppropriate also be used to disseminate to any transient titles and alternates for those in charge at ,

protectn e actions. incluang evacuations population within the plumTexposure both ends of the communication 1;nks and the 1 i w ben necessary. pathwcy EPZ appropriate information that primary and backup means of ,

would be helpfa!if an accident occurs. communication. Where consistent with the ,

B Assessment Actw.ns 3. A licensee shall have the capability to function of the goscr; mental agency these

The means to be used for determining the notify responsi'u!e State and local arrangements willinclude

mqnitude of and for continually assessing gosernmental agencies within 15 minutes a. Provision for communications with

{

the impact of the release of radioactis e after declaring an emergency. ne het nsee contiguous State / local gos ernments within tr.Merials shall be described. including shall demonstrate that the State / local the plume esposure pathw ay EPZ. Such i emergency action toch that are to be used omcials hase the capabihty to mde a public communications shat! be tested monthly.

as cnteria for determining the need for notincation decision promptly on being b. Prosislon for communications with l notScation and participation oflocal and ir. formed by the licensee of an emergency Federal emergency response organizations.

State agencies the Commission, and other con & tion. By July 1.1981, the nucicar power Such communications systems shall be tested l

i F.deral agencies, and the emergency action reactor licensee shall demonstrate that annually.

i lacis that are to be used for determining administrative and ph 3sical means have been c. Provision for communications among the j when and what type of protectise measures established for alerting and providing prompt nuclear power reactor control room. the

should be considered within and outside the instructions to the public within the plume onsite technical support center, and the near-i site boundary to protect health and safety. exposure pathway EPZ.ne design objective site emergency eperations facility; and The emergency action Inc!s shall be based shall be to have the capability to essentially among the nuc! car facility, the principal State en in plant con &tions and instrumentation in complete the initial notMeation of the pubbc and local emergency operations cente s. and

!, adation to ensite and offsite monitoring. within the plume exposure pathway EPZ the field assessment teams. Such i nese emer> ency action levels shall be within about 15 minutes.ne use of this communications systems shall be tested ascussed and agreed on by the applicant and notification capability will range from annually.

State and local sc. err. mental authorities and immediate notification of the public (within d. Provisions for communications by the arprard b) NRC.ney shall also be 15 minutes of the time that State and local licensee with NRC lleadquarters and the {

, ersiewed with the State and local officials are notified that a situation esists appropriate NRC Regional Ofnce Operations Center from the nuclear power reactor i gus errmental authorities on an annual basis. requ' ring urgent action) to the more hkely events where there is substar.tial time control room. the onsite technical support C Acth w.n of fmcqency Oq na.ch.on available for the State and local center and the near. site emergency Tbi i ntire spectrum of er.ergency gas ernmental ofncials to make a judgment operations facility. Such communications mnditions it.at ins ohe the alerting or whether or not to activate the public shall be tested rnenthly.

l Mtnatirg of progressisel) Iarger segments of notafication system. Where there is a decision ..

the total ernergency organization shall be R ##8 to activate the notification s} stem. the State dc>uibt d The com .unication steps to be and local officials will determine whe ther to The program to provide for (1) the training llen to ate rt or activate emergency activate the entire notification s) stem of employees and esercising.b} periodic i personnel under each class of emergency simultaneously or in a graduated or staged drills. of radiation emergency plans to ensure

' shall be described. Emergency action !crels manner.He responsibility for actis ating that ceplo3 ces of the licensee are familiar 1 (b.ased not only on ensite and of4ite such a public notification system shall remain with their specific emer:;cncy response duties r=&ation monitoring informatien but also on with the appropriate gosernment authorities. and (:) the participation in the trairiing and <

readings fwm a number of sensors that .

drills by other persons whose ess! stance may inacate a potential emergency, such as the E. Emegency facilin.cs and Equipment be needed in the esent of a radiation pressure in containment and the response of Adequate provisions shall be made and emergency shall be described. This shall the Emergency Core Cooling S3 stem) for described for emergency facilities and inc!L de a descrirtion of specialized initial notincatwn or offsite agencies shall be equipment. including- training and periodic retraining programs to

' described ne esistence,but not the details. 1. Equipment at the site for personnel be provided to each of the fo!!owing of a mesvge authentication scheme shall be monitoring; categories of cmcrgency personnel:

i I

" e "^%---

~=*:d ~ _

s- _. . . a.r.J -

g

_ Iederd I:c;.Y.: / W 4, *

,, 1., j i.. '

A. . e t o 1;u / % r.1 br.'a< i SD!1 4-

e. Directors a co, m. . ,,; , ,, e f..-sh the D rear 6.! N A e ES :

, piant enwrgenc> crg rar ,c r ... ,,.t. .. , J , .,,.,,. ,j , , , g,, $3 3 3 gg ..L. U S N.. A ir

b. Persant.e! rer ench'e for acc@.-- S c. N . g.: s ; . , c.p m.,; * * *)

cssesuent. induing connalier. d .h g; /

Rr- tor) Comnduion. Wadingtan.

D C. 20333 with a copy to the ad$oteg cal man!!o ing ,,,,,,

i p.h[(rf .  ! s in t

. appropriate NRC Regional Office specified m, Appendis D. Part 20 of tha, d Fire control teams identity wed a cas that need corrections.

o. Repair and damage (fire contros teryde,1 teams. Ar y weaknesse s that are identified sha!! be Chapter. each change within six months

f. First aid and rescue teams; corrected after the change is made. Proposed g Afed. cal support personne!; changes that decrease the effectiveness h Licensee s headquarters support C. Maintain /r** Emerpacy Prepamdhess of the approved emergency plan shall psrsonnel. Provisions to be employed to ensure that I. Security personnel.

not be implemented without prior the err.ergency pan its implementing application to and prior approval by the in additiori. a radiofor, cal or,entation

procedures ar emergency equipment and training program sha!! be made aui!able to supplies are rr.1:ntained up to date shall be Comnu*s s*on.

i local smices personnel. e g . loca! Civd described.

Defense. local law enforcement personne!. (Sec.161b i.. and o.. Pub. L aM03. 68 Stat.

local news media persons. #C"Cff 948 (42 U.S C. 2:011. Sec. 201. as amended.

Tha plan sha!! describe provisions for the Criteria to be used to determine when Pub. L 93-438,88 Stat.1242. Pub. L 9M9. 89 conduct of emergency preparedness fo!!owing aa a: ! dent, reentry of the fac lity Stat. 413 (42 U.S C. 5341]) .

currcises Esercises sha!! test the adequacy would be apprepriate or when operation Dated at Washin6 ton. D C. this 11th day of cf tirriag and content ofimp'ementirg could be resur ed shall be described August 19L0 procedures and methods, test emergency F. Implementir; Procedures For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. .

equipment and cornmunication networks. test tha public notification system, and ensure No less than 180 days prior to schedu!ed SamueI J. Chilk< , ,

that smergency organization personnel are issuance of an cperating license for a nuclear Secretary ofthe Comnu,ssion.

f:miliar with their duties. Each licensee shat! power reactor or a license to possess nuclear gra ooc amrsx raed s-tur a es ami cxercise at least annua!!y the emergency plan material. 3 copies o,Ieach of the applicant's stumo coes isso-ci-u for each site at which it has one or more detailed implementing procedures for its power reactors licensed for c;eration Both emergency plan sha!! be submitted to the full sca!e and small sra'e eserc!ses shall be Director of the appropriate NRC Regional 10 CFR Part 50 conducted and sha!! include participation by Office with to crpies to the Director of cppropriate State and local gos ernment Nuc!cir Resctcr Regulation or. if appropriate.

the Director of Nac! ear Af aterial Safety and Emergency Planning: Negative egencies as follows:

1. A full-scate esercise which tests as much Safeguards. In cases where a decision on an Declaration; Finding of no Significant cf the licensee. State. and local emergency operating licer.se is schedu!ed less than one impact for Effective Rufe Changes plans as is reasonably achievab!e without year after the efectis e date of this rule, such implementing procedures shall be submitted AGENCY:U.S. Nuclear Regulatory mand ator) pub!ic partic!pation shall be conducted. as soon as pratfcable but before full power Commission' '

, L

a. For each site at which one or more operation Is audorized. Prior to hfarch 1. ACTION:Fm, al negat.:ve dechnation: .

power reactors are located and licensed for 19at. licensees who are authorized to operate finding of no significant irnpact.

cperation, at least once every Th e years and a nuclear power facility shall submit 3 copies ct a frequency which will enab!e each State each of the licensee's emergency plan

SUMMARY

The Muclear Regulatory cnd local p ernment within the plume implementing procedures to the Director of Commission s regulations require that esposure pathway FPZ to participate in at the appropriate NRC Regional Office with to the environmentalimpact of certain least one full-scale e sercise per year and copies to the Director of Nuclear Reactor regulatory actions, including substantive which will enable each State within the Regulation.Three copies each of any changes amendments to 10 CFR Part 50, be ingestion pathway to participate in at least to maintain these Implementing procedures evaluated to determine if an one full scale eurcise every three 3 ears. up to date sha!! be submitted to the same environmental impact statement should

b. For each site at which a power reactor is fiRC Regional Office with to copies to the located for which the first operating license Director of Nuc! ear Reactor Regulation or. if be prepared. I,f it is determined an appropriate, the Director of Nuclear hfaterial environment 4. enpact statement need ( i, for that site is issued after the effective date c,f this amendment within one 3 car before Safety and Safepards within 30 days of such not be prepared, a negative declaration the issuance of the operating license for full changes. ,

will be issued.The NRC has evaluated power. which will enable each State and the environmentalimpact of the local smernment uIthin the plume esposure PART 70-DOMESTIC LICENSING OF proposed changes to Part 50 dealing EPZ and each State within the ingastion SPECIAL NUCLE AR MATERIAL with emergency plann!ng requirements pathway FPZ to participate. .

for nuclear power plants (published 2 The plan shall also describe prosistons 2. Section 70 32,si amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as follows: elsewhere in this issue), and has for insohing Federal emergency response determined that the rule changes will p ed ess e Ise fo ea h s e at which 2 Conens o%nses. M haw a % cant knpact on b cne or more pow er reactors are located and e man emonmmt. Therefore, an '

licensed for operation at least orme eser) 5 (i) Licensees required to submit environmental tmpact statement will not years; emergency plans in accordance with be pr,cpared, and a negative declaration 3 A small scate esercise which tests the i 70.22(i) shah fo!!ow and maintain in is being issued.

adequacy of communication links. effect emergency plans approved by the DATES:The rule changes for emergency establishes that response agencies .

Commission.The licensee may make planning will become effective understand the emergency action les els. and changes to the approved plans without November 3.1980.

• dical off te nItor c; o o f' site Commission approval only if such ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final ,

emergency response plan for licensee. State, ch nges do not decrease the Environmental Assessment.NUREG-cnd local emergency plans for jurisdications effectiveness cf the plans and the plaes. 0685, and the comments received by the within the plume esposure pathway EPZ as changed, continue to meet the Commission ma'y be examined in the .

shall be condacted at each site at which one requirements cf Appendix E.Section IV. Commission's Public Document Room at gr more power reactois are located and 10 CFR Part 50. The licensee shall 1717 11 Street NW Washington, D.C.

.