ML20072G767
| ML20072G767 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 02/07/1983 |
| From: | Markey E HOUSE OF REP., INTERIOR & INSULAR AFFAIRS |
| To: | Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20072G706 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8303290116 | |
| Download: ML20072G767 (2) | |
Text
~
...~
~~ *-
^'
l COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WASHINGTON, D.C. 205t5 February 7, 1983 g
Mr. Nunzio Palladino Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H. Street, NW Washington, DC.20555
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am writing to formally communicate my dismay and displeasure over the~recent 3 to 2_ Commission decision regarding emergency preparedness, or lack thereof, at and around the Indian Point nuclear site-in New York.
As I wrote to you in my December 21, 1982 letter, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's failure to enforce its own emergency planning deadlines and regulations has led me to conclude that this important " lesson learned" from the Three Mile Island accident has already been forgotten.
The Commission has failed to act in a manner consistent with j
its own regulations and with the sense of importance this issue deserves.
On the one hand, the NRC continues to assuage public concern by stating that it has regulations which require j
adequate emergency preparedness.
However, no utility has l
been subject to disciplinary action that I am aware of for.
violaticn of emergency planning requirements, even though there have been numerous violations.
(I am aware that a utility has been fined for misrepresenting to the NRC the true status of its notification system.)
On a more objectionable level, the NRC staff charged with the responsibility for making judgments about the adequacy of emergency preparedness and implementing enforcement action has apparently, behind the scenes, adopted a policy of not enforcing its own regulations.
I refer specifi-cally to a memorandum from William Dircks, Executive Director for Operations, to the Commissioners (SECY-81-216) dated April 2, 1981.
This memorandum was written one day after NRC regulations required that emergency preparedness measures be implemented at or around all reactor sites.
Numerous utilities had not even submitted theiriplans to the NRC by the specified deadline.
i Moreover, the memerfddum, which is not available in the NRC's-public documents room, states the NRC staff view that emergency 8303290116 830308 PDR COMMS NRCC j-CORRESPOt0ENCE PDR
,.,,,.c,.
,..,~,v-.n
,,,,n.n
_,...,-n,----,----
---+-,-..n..-,,,w-,,,n-.---,-.--_-r---,-n,
. ~ ~ - -.
~ '
~
~
~ ~ ~ -
i.
Chairman Nunzio Palladino February 7, 1983 j
Page Two planning is not of sufficient importance to shut a plant ~
~
down or prevent one from operating as is provided for.in 10-CFR 50.54. This regulation establishes the requirement that if, after April 1, 1981, emergency planning is not found to be adequate and if the identified deficiencies are not corrected within thirty days, then a determination to shut.a plant down can'be made.
Contrary to the_ Commission's own 1
regulations, the internal staff memo.to which I am referring t
states:
"the staff believes that the establishment of limiting conditions for operation- (LCO) regarding emergency preparedness measures is not appropriate."
The appearance of this is that the Commission is telling the public'one thing, but is secretly agreeing to another.
This i
tends to be reinforced by the NRC's laissez faire attitude toward the Indian Point site when the utility failed to obtain a favorable review of its emergency plans after being 1
granted two 120-day pericds in which to do-so.
I would like to know whether there is aut explicit policy of never issuing an LCO for emergency planning deficiencies 4
and, if such a policy exists, where is it written and how was it approved.
If there is no such policy, what deficiencies would trigger limiting conditions?
f' Additionally, I would like to know the exact history of compliance with each of NRC's emergency planning deadlines specified in 10 CFR Part 50.
Specifically, concerning each of the deadlines, I would like to know which utilities were in compliance and which were not and what, if any, enforcement action has been taken to ensure compliance and penalize violators.
l I will be writing to you again about this subject to inform you of my plans to hold a series of field hearings to investigate t
the status of off-site emergency preparedness.
In advance, thank you for your attention to this matter and for your consideration of my views.
Sincerely, MW v
EDWARD J. MARKEY Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations EJM:rau 4
..-,v-
< w r
,e,,y.,,-
,,,--v-.r--
w-w,,,-ww.-
yw-=--%--r-y..
.. -,,re----w-+-- - -
+-,+~
me----r--r----%-+-*-=+mn--ve~w---+-er=--*ev---
rw i
-<sm----n-r----