ML20071M047
| ML20071M047 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 05/25/1983 |
| From: | Cuomo M NEW YORK, STATE OF |
| To: | Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20071M029 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8305310070 | |
| Download: ML20071M047 (3) | |
Text
-
surE bi-NEW VoWR tktcVTivt CHAMeta
% 6 iA.E:uogo 6.ab a fiay 25.1953
+
behi thalFin&h Pa11&dino:
i fihv6 feyiewed skrefully the circumstances surrounding your most pecint oFdeF affecting the future operation of the Indian Point reactors and concur th&t additional acti6ns.must be undertaken to satisfy the mandate p1&ced upon you by'10 CFR Section 50.54(s)(1).
I do not believe, however, that.these mandstes can in fact be Psalistically niet on a pennanent basis With6ut intbgrated participation of the federal government, the state, the 16eal governments, and utility.
The utilitiss have committed thbmselves to making available their Feibbeces to the st&te and local government to address the deficiencies identified by FD%.
Westchester county is proceeding expeditiously to remedy the cited difficulties for the > evacuation by bus drivers.
Rockland County is e6ntihulng its good faith bfforts to complete its revised plan and to have it hval1able for FE!M review by the end of the year.
I am pr6pered te work with the utilities at Indian Point and to offer assistance through the State D1saster Preparedness Commission during an interim period While Rockland County completes its process and while the Federal Government begins to address its own responsibility for disaster pFeparedness.
6uf dIlbbsti:ns With re~pressntatives of FEMA have led thim to cohciudd that the state personnel origini11y designated to compensate for R6ckland Cbunty's non-pirticipation Would be sufficient to address the co. mand and control responsibilities for effective implementation of the plan... The the resource comitment, and the legal authortty are all thehtiichl adequacy,ithin the plan currently under discussion with FEMA.
to b6 encompassed w
/
a i
Rc'c CE O
7 U
,PDR
0 Q
Th6 byenti sh indish h6 Inh hihAbiy demonstrate the inadequacies and
([ijkplis of curreht Fhgulat6Ff Fetp6nsib.(11 ties.. Federal responsibility for the d6vei6 Peht thd irnplementatich of id6quatt off-sits preparedness plans at huelear reactbeki hot.only in.H6W_ York _Stath but throughout the country, The 6thhbt be limited sblely to its r&gulatory auth6Fity 6ver the licensee.-
istidents Of thh.kreti surroundi6g nuclear p6wer plants should not be the her th6uld th6 licensees be the hostages of the 16ftav6s 6f the licentski the pub 116 pF6bital.y str5hg. belief.thit it is unreasonsbl6 to seek to a je6alitist$
It i t ficP6kt&d.by hue 16&F #69se 11 ants, Which ife licensed b)(ciukively by f666Fa1 huth6tities Withbut t1e full pseticipation of that fedsbal gov 6tnnsht.
Y6 inhube that the >F6!66tI6hh.ppovided by goveFnment are indeed h F6pellt4 1 would urge you to j6th int ih seeking a clearer delineation of p
5 ti6 6x6teit6,6f our respectiv6 F6sp6ntibilitist.
I would ask that you lhtburage tehgress ahd the Executive Agencibh t6 6cnsider the following' nt 6f & 'piah fob Meaci: fh56Fe1 participation ind
'h Yh6 dhvsiebn the isplementati6h of emergency plan 61ng pro
~
~~
inV61Yisen I believ6 thht a d6dicated cadre of trained personnel is the best insth6d 6f Ahturihg 6ffective implententation of any evacuation lan.
L ths deVeiopmeht of kgionally ' based, speciilly trEin6d radiological response tems t6 hr6 Vide command and control support t6 the states in Fespo6 ding tb radiological emergencies.
These teams ihould includ61.ndividuals With knowledge and expeHence in maki30 decisi6ns f6r protective actions.
- h. N6 is)1ementahlon.6f Shi recommendatichs contained ~1n NRC's 1979 ripbrta "Beyond Defense In Dbpth" for the development of a federal fund -- the Radiological Emergenef Response plan and Preparedness Fuhd; te provide the necissary resources to state and local goversmbnts to provide their oWn dedicated forces.
These tstources should be provided out of a federal distribution of funds so that the indirect tax of utility rate increases required by new federal policiei d6es not Adversely impact or disadvantage ens localitys
- k. ths pistage 6f iehisihi:16n t6 i$dFaks the anomilies created by the kithdPiWa16f cht loc &lity fr6m part'tipstion in the required pli.t6ning and prepspednats Activitist.
To fail to do so is to 1save in place an unclene fed 6ral policy and to contribute to the anxi6 ties of the Fasidents and to the uncertainties of the industry.
Y a
U W
4 i
~
i u I k6cW thit you thare with me i concern for the effectiveness of any The iroblern is a national one and demands a lebriency planning rotess.
I would thk tnat you join Wtth me in seeking a M&tiohal solution.
66mprehe6AiVe hatf 6nA1 rasolution.to the complexities snd uncertainties 66nfronted by states, the localities and utilities.
Senator Alan Simpson, i
06ngrkitnien.Morfit Udall and Rich &Pd Ottinger and the Secretary of Energy, have h1Peady acknowledged the urgency of addressing this
. 06ha1d H6de) i hhd I knov they would welcome your support as well.
Mht16n&1 issu i
sh affittaallon of the need of the federal 66VsEn66ht'ie6kiosiFd t6es eettenhion of itt Fesponsibility b regu1& toff pF6 cess, Si
- rely, CAA) t a 10 M. Cuomo Governor l Nuniled.>&11edihe Chaim6n Nucleat Reguiat6r9 Coriidieif on Matomic.Buildihg. N.
1717 H StFeeti.N.
Washington, b.c; 20555 l
9 e
to e 0 ene.....
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee e
- e e, e e... e e s s e e e e e e s s-
- e s e
- e e n e s e e e e e e a s e s s e s e e e e e e e r a reer e s ee ses se s s e ee ee e ee e eee e ee eeeens l
e e
l
- _.