ML20126F398

Ack Receipt of Re Evacuation Planning.Fr Excerpt & App E Encl

ML20126F398
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	02/24/1981
From:	Stello V NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To:	Doughty J AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
NUDOCS 8103130012
Download: ML20126F398 (15)

Text

. . , - . -

g A ,

jo UNITED STATES 8([ "e g o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION h* ,/, $ WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 i *, 8 [

,% ' O ,d*

• S trjt / , .

1 FE8 3 41981 e g ,

e rfo(w Ms. Jane Doughty /

53 wibird Street ' ?, , ,

Portsmouth, N.H. 03301 9 -p.,} j

Dear Ms. Doughty:

Your letter of November 24', 1980 expressed your concern about evacuation-

, planning for the environs of the Seabrook Nuclear Plant. I understand that' John Sears of the NRC staff subsequently discussed with you by telephone the emergency planning required'by an applicant prior to ,

issuance of an operating license by NRC for a nuclear plant. These ,

requirements are specified in NRC regulation 10 CFR 50,(including Appendix E) dated August 19, 1980, a copy of which is enclosed.

If you have further comments or questions on emergency planning, please do not hesitate to call. '-

Sincerely,

/MC.DOC M g

, , Victor Stello, Director Office of Inspection & Enforcement Emergency Planning Rule F

THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS .

P00R QUALITY PAGES 8108130012

O l Part Vill Nuclear Regulatory ,

Commission Emergency Planning; Final Regulations

\

l O

4 w r www -re,n +wam-,4-a--,--nm-,..e,---n,~,,,e ---,ae-----ee- ,-e--wa,w,.-a.. .ww+, , , -m-..w.m,m-m-a.--w, a-v~ ~.swamm,s-,_,.e-.,,.,--e -r -- --o-nd

. .s

$5402 Ftdint Regist:r / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday, August 19,1980 / Rules and Regulations NUCLEAR HEGui.AYORy The final regulation contains the comments / suggestions in connection COMMISS;ON following elements: with the proposed amendments within

1. In order to continue operations or to 60 days after publication in the Federal 10 CFR Parts 50 and 70 receive an operating license an Register. During this comment period (in applicant / licensee will be required to January 1980) the Commission Emergency Planning submit its emergency plans, as well a6 conducted four regional workshops with State and local governmental emergency State and local officials, utility AoENCv: U.S. Nucleat Regulatory resp nse plans, to NRC. The NRC will representatives, and the public to Commission. then make a finding as to whether the discuss the feasibility of the various ACTION: Final rule, state of onsite and offsite emergency portions of the proposed amendments.

preparedness provides reasonable their impact, and the procedures

SUMMARY

The Nuclear Regulatory assurance that adequate protective proposed for complying with their Commission is upgrading its emergency measures can and will be taken in the provisions. The NRC used the planning regult tions in order to assure event of a radiological emergency.The information from thesa workshops along that adequate protective measures can NRC will base its finding on a review of with the public comment letters to und will be taken in the event of a the Federal Emergency Management develop the final rule (more than 200 radiological emergency. Nuclear power Agency (FEMA) findings and comment letters and the points made in plants and certain other licensed determinations as to whether State and two petitions for rulemaking were also facilities are reqtaired to submit their local emergency plans are adequate and considered).

emergency plans, together with the capable of being implemented and on In addition to the above, on June 25, emergency response plans of State and the NRC assessment as to whether the 1980. the Commission was briefed by local governments, to the Commission. licensee s/ applicant's emergency plans three punels of public commenters on The Commission and the Federal Energy are adequate and capable of being the rule, one each comprised of Management Agency will review the implemented. These issues may be representatives from the industry, State plans for adequacy.The amendment raised in NRC operating !! cense and local governments, and public also extends emergency planning hearings, but a FEMA N ding will interest groups. Each panel raised considerations to " Emergency Planning constitute a rebuttable presumption on important concerns regarding the final Zones, and makes additional the question of adequacy, rule. On July 3.1980, the Commission clanfications* 2. Emergency planning considerations was briefed by its staffin response to EFFEcTtva OATS: November 3,1980. will be extended to " Emergency these panels, including several Planning Zones," modifications to the proposed final Nota.-The Nuclear Regulatory 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 reportmg requirements in the rule, pursuant submitted to NRC for review. and the General Counsel on the substance of U. .35 . e date onNc5he ep r ng 4. Requirements in 10 CFR Part 50, conversations with Congressional staff requaements of the rule becon.e effective Appendix E are clarified and upgraded, members who were invo!ved with inch. des a 45 day period. which the statute Background assage of the NRC Authorization Act allows for Comptroller General review (44 for fiscal year 1980, Pub. L No.96-295.

U S C. 35t:(c)(2)). In June 1979, the Nuclear Regulatory The General Counsel advised the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

• Mr. Michael T. Jamgochian. Office of reconsideration of the role of emergency were consistent with that Act.The planning in ensuring the continued Commission has relied on all of the Standards Development. U.S. Nuclear protection of the public health and above information in its consideration of Regulatory Commission, Washington.

D.C. 20555 (telephone: 301-443-5966).

safety in areas around nuclear power these final rules. In addition, the facil ties. The Commission began this Commission directs that the transcripts SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On reconsideration in recognition of the September 19,1979 and on December 19.

of these meetings shall be part of the need for more effective emergency administrative record in this rulemaking.

1979. the Commission published for planning and in response to the TMI However, the transcripts have not been public comment (44 FR 54308 and 44 FR accident and to reports Nued by reviewed for accuracy and, therefore.

75167) proposed amendments to its responsible offices of government and are only an informal record of the emergency planning regulations for the NRC's Congressional oversight matters discussed.

production and utilization facilities. committees. After evaluating all ublic comment Extensive comments were received, all On December 19,1979, the Nuclear letters received and att the information of which were evaluated and censidered Regulatory Commission published in the obtained during the workshops as well m developing the final rule. The Federal Register (44 FR 75167] proposed as additional reports such as the comments received and the staff s amendments to to CFR Part 50 and Presidential Commission and the NRC evaluation Le contained in NUREG-0084. Appendix E to Part 50 of its regulatim. SpecialInquiry Groep Reports, the In addition. the NRC conducted four Publication of these final rule changa in Commission has decided to publish the Regional Workshops to solicit the Federal Register is not only related final rule changes described below, comments: these comments are to the December 19,1979 proposed rule available in NUREG/CP-4011(April Description of Final Rule Changes changes but also incorporates the 1980).' proposed changes to 10 CFR Parts 50 The Commission has decided to adopt and 70 (44 FR 54308) published on a version of the proposed rules similar

'Cooms of Nt; REC documents are evad.ble at September 19.1979. Interested persons to alternative A described in Sections the Comemnon e Pubhc Document Room.1717 H sw Nw . wasnington. D.C. 20555 Copies may be were inkLted to submit written 50.47 and 50.54 in the Federal Register pectased from the Govemment Prm%t OfLce Notice dated December 19,1979 (44 FR t .!<manon on current prices may be otetsined by Washms'on D C 20555. At'entaun Pubhcat: ens 75167), as modified in light of romments.

wr.tng me l' S hear Regulatory Co-m.ssmn. S. des Meer These rules are consistent with the

Federal Register /'Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday, August 19. 1900 / Rules and Regulations 55403 s:proach out!!ned by FEMA and NRC in applicant / licensee will be required to 6. Requirement for specialized trainityt a Memorandum of Understanding (45 FR submit its emergency plans, as well as

!$E January 24.1980). No new . State and local governmental emergency (Section 7. Provisions IV F) for up.to-date plan operating license will be granted unless response plans, to NRC. The NRC will maintenance (Section IV.C) the NRC can make a favorable finding then make a finding as to whether the Applicants for a construction permit that the integration of onsite and offette state of onsite and offsite emergency would be required to submit more emergency planning provides preparedness provides reasonable information as required in the new reasonable assurance that adequate assurance that adequate protective Section II of Appendix E.

protective measures can and will be measures can and will be takenin the Rationale for the Floal Rules taken in the event of a radiological event of a radiological emersency, emergency.In the case of an operating The NRC will base its finding on a The Cornmission's final rules are reactor if it is determined that there are review of the FEMA findings and based on the significance of adequate such deficiencies that a favorable NRC determinations as to whether State and emergency planning and preparedness finding is not warranted and if the local emergency plans are adequate and to ensure adequate protection of the deficiencies are not corrected within 4 capable of being implemented and on public health and safety. It is clear, months of that determination, the the NRC assessment as to whether the based on the various official reports Commission will determine applicant's/ licensee's emergency plans described in the proposed rules (44 FR expeditiously whether the reactor are adequate and capable of being 75189) and the public record compiled in should be shut down or whether some implemented. In any NRC licensing this rulemaking, that onsite and offsite other enforcement action is appropriate, proceeding, a FEMA finding will emergency p eparedness as well as pursuant to procedures provided for in consitute a rebuttable presumption on proper siting and engineered design 10 CFR 2.200-2.206. In any case where the question of adequacy. Specifically: features are needed to protect the health the Commission believes that the public a. An o rating license will not be and safety of the public. As the health, safety, or interest so requires, the issued un es a favorable NRC overall Commission reacted to the accident at  ;

plant will be required to shut down finding can be made. Three Mile Island, it became clear that immediately (10 CFR 2.202(f). see 5 b. After April 1.1981, an operating the protection provided by siting and i U.S.C. 558(c)). plant may be required to shut down ifit ("[,',', y 8hk'ify$'t,"kest be The standards that the NRC will use is determined that there are deficiencies protective measures during the course of in making its determinations under these such that a favorable NRC finding .

rules are set forth in the final regulation, cannot be made or is no longer an accident. The accident also showed cleurly that onsite conditions and Wherever possible, these standards may warranted and the deficiencies are not actions, even if they do not cause bicnd with other emergency planning corrected within 4 months of that significant offsita radiological procedures for nonnuclear emergencies determination.

presently in existence. The standards consequences, will affect the way thc

2. Emergency planning considerations various State and local entities react to oro a restatement of basic NRC and now must be extended to " Emergency protect the public from any dangers joint NRC-FEMA guidance to licensees Planning Zonse." and and to State and local governments. See asenclatea with the accident. in order to

3. Detailed emergency plannias discharge effectively its statutcry NUREC-0054; FEMA-REP-1 " Criteria implementing procedures of both responsibilities, the Commission must for Preparution and Evaluation of licensees and applicants for operating know that proper means and procedures Radiological Emergency Response Plans licenses must be submitted to NRC for will be in place to assess the course of and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear review. en accident and its potential severity.

Power Plants for Interim Use and In addition. the Commission is that NRC and other appropriate Comment." Uanuary 1980). In deciding revising to CFR Part 50. Appendix E. authontjes and the public will be whether to permit reactor operation in " Emergency Plans for Production and notified promptly, and that adequate the face of some deficiencies, the Utilization Facilities."in order to clarify. protective actions in response to actual Commission will examine among other expand and upgrade the Commission's or anticipated conditions can and will factors whether the deficiencies, are emergency planning regulations. be taken.

significant for 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 actions have been or will be taken 1. Specification of " Emergency Action discretion in the executien 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. Dissemination to the public of basic 783 (D.C. Cir.1968), see Westinghouse determming the sufficiency of" adequate emergency planning information Electric Corp. v. NRC 598 F.2d 759. 771 intenm compensatory actions" under (Section IV.D) . & n.47 (3d C!r.1979). "Both the Atomic

, this rule, the Commission will examine 3. Provisions for the State and local Energy Act of1954 and the Energy i

State plans. local plans, and licensee governmental authorities to have a Reorgantution Act of 1974 confer broad plans to determine whether features of capability for rapid notification of the regulatry functions on the Commission one plan can compensate foi public during a serious reactor and spreifically authorize it to ,

deficiencies in another plan so that the emergency, with a design objective of promulgate rules and regulations it level of protection for the public health completing the initial notification within deems necessary to fulfillits c.nd safety is adequate. This 15 minutes after notification by the responsibilities under the Acts. 42 U S C.

Interpretation is consistent with the licensee (Section IV.D) i 2201(p)." Public Service Co. o/New provisions of the NRC Authorization Act 4. A licensee onsite technical support Hampshire v. NRC 582 F.2d 77. 82 list for fiscal year 1980, Pub. L 96-295. center and a licenses neat site Cir.). cert. denied. 439 U.S.1048 (1978). .

The regulation contains the following emergency operations facility (Section See 42 U.S.C. 2133(a). As the Septeme three major changes from past practices: IV.El Court stated almost 20 years ago. the

1. In order to continue operations of to 5. Provisions for redundant Atomic Energy Act " clearly recieve an operating license, an communications systems (Section IV.El contemp!ates that the Commimon .hd

---..m.ww-..e---,-,..,.-.e., ,,,-c,n--. -,,m ,,,w-,,.,,wwy,,,,,yv. c.,er-- p -,,,--mgy, ,e,.-. -9,-,-w.,e-- ----,-.y.m.,,-.,,,-er -

g

55404 Federal Register / Vol. 45, No.182 / Tussday August 19, 1980 / Rul:s end R:gulitions by regulation set forth what the public proposed rule changes.The following Commission's disposition to grant such safety requirements are as a prerequisite major issues have been raised in the exemptions.

to the issuam.a of any license or permit comments received. 5. The Commission, in developing this under the Act." Power Reactor aspect of the proposed rule, must Development Co. v. Internationa/ Union y,,,,3;ggg g,y;,,,,g co.ngu,,,,,, consider its own history. There was time on State and LocalRadiological Plans when tegulation was characterized by of ElectricalRadio Machine Workers, 367 U.S. 396. 404 (1961). Finally. it is also 1. FEMA is best suited to essess the the leaders of the agency by simple and clear that " Congress, when it enacted adequacy of State and local radiological very appropriate expressions. The

[42 U.S.C. 2236) . . ., 'nust have emergency planning and preparedness process was to be " effective and envisioned that licensing standards, and report any adverse findings to NRC efficient." The application of regulatory especially in the areas of health and for assessment of the li::ensing authority was to be " firm, but fair."

bafety 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 rule fails to provide " concurrence" issue, the Commission of generating nuclear energy. Insofar as objective standards for NRC must appreciate that alternative B is not those standards became more concurrence, reconcurrence, and fair. It is not effective regulation.

demanding. Congress surely would hua withdrawal of concurrence. Issue De Public Education wanted the new standards,if the 3. In the absence of additional Commission deemed it appropriate, to statutory authcdy, the proposed rule Only information required la bform apply to those nuclear facilities already frustrates Congrmionalintent to the public about what to doin the event licensed." Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority preempt State and local government of a radiological emergency need be

v. United States. 600 F.2d 986. 996 (D.C. veto powei over nuclear power plant disseminated. There should be 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.

well as its own determination on the disputes are not adequately specified in Issue E LegalAuthority significance of emergency preparedness, the proposed rule.

the Commission has therefore concluded issueB EmergencyPlanningZones .

1. A few commenters felt that NRC that adequate emeraency preparedness had no authority to promulgate a rule as is an essential aspect in the protection (EPZsf the one proposed.

of the public health and safety. The 1. Regulatory basis for imposition of 2. Other comments were the nature Commission recognizes there is a the Emergency Planning Zore concept that NRC has statutory authority only l possibility that the operation of some should be expressly stated in the inside the limits of the plant site. ,

reactors may be affected by this rule regulation. 3. Some commenters suggested that l through inaction of State and local 2. Provisions regarding the plume NRC and FEMA should seek additional governments or an inability to comply exposure pathway EPZ should provide a legislation to compel State and local with these rules. The Commission maximum planning distance of to miles. governments to have emergency plans, if believes that the potential restriction of 3. References to NUREG-0396 should that is what is necessary.

l plant operation by State and local be deleted to avoid disputes over its Issue F: Schedule for Implementation '

officials is not significantly different in meaning in licensing proceedings.

kind or effect from the means already

^ # N M.A 8"d8 No N The schedule for implementing the )

available under existing law to prohibit h##j# proposed rule was considered to be n j unrealistic and in some cases in conflict reactor operation, such as zoning and land.use laws, certification of public 1. Neither alternative is necessary with various State schedules already in convenience and necessity, State, because the Commission has sufficient existence. A sampling of the comments authority to order a plant shut down for on the implementation schedule follows:

financial and rate considerations (to CFR 50.33(I)), and Federal . safety reasons and should be prepared 1.The 180 days in the schedule is an 1 l

environmental laws. The 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 sitmg. whereas this rule requires a action. such speed. States are bureaucracies periodic renewal of State and local 2. No case has been made by the also; there is no reason to assume they commitments to emergency Commission for the need for automatic can work faster.It took years of working preparedness. Relative to applying this shutdown, as would be required in with States to get the plans that are rule in actual practice, however, the alternative 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 facility until all factors have been require such action based on a concept and review. Also, to get a job done i thoroughly examined. The Commission as amorphous as " concurrence in State within that time frame means a hurried l believes, bued on cuecord created by and local emergency plans." job. rather than an acceptable and I the public workshops, that State and 3.The idea that the Commission might meaningful plan. l local officials as partners in this grant an exemption tn the rules that 2. The time provided is inadequate for undertaking will endeavor to provide would permit contim;ed operation States to acquire the hardware needed.

fully for public protection. (under alternative B) has little States must go out for competitive bids l significance, primarily because to CFR just as the Federal government does.

Summary of Comments on Major Issues Part 50.12(a) already permits the Between processing and accepting a bid The Commission appreciates the granting of exemptions. and actual delivery of equipment. it may extensive public comments on this 4. The process and procedures for take a year to get the hardware. The important rule. In addition to the record obtaining such 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

- - - - - - -, yy- - w,s

Faderal Register / Vol. 45 No.182 / Tuesday August 19, 1080 / Rules and Regulations 55405 legislature. This ir a time-consuming difficulties associated with such a 5. The basis for effective offsite public process thot may not fit the requirement. response capabilities is a sound Federal schedule. emepcy preparedness program.

Issue I: Emergency Action Levels F&al support (funding and technical

3. NRC and FEMA could not review 70 or more plans and provide concurrence Applicants, in cooperation with State as wistnce) for the development of State by January 1.1981. The Federal and local governmental authorities, anonocal offsite capabilities should be governrnent moves slowly. Commenters should be permitted the necessary incorporated into FEMA's preparedness did not think that NRC and FEMA can flexibility to develop emergency action program for all emergencies.

review all the plans within the time

• level criteria in question. suabpropriate for the facility##8"' M# C#"8#8I ject to NRC approval.

frame scheduled. If the Federal government cannot meet its schedule, Inflexible NRC emergency action level The States support Federal oversight why or how should the States? standards are not necessary, and guidance in the development of

4. Funding could not be appropriated offsite response capabilities. However, by State and local governments before I88887# D". .""8 many States feel the confusion and the deadline. It was suggested that the 1. Mandatory provision for training uncertainty In planning requirements Commission use H. Rept. #96-4m local service personnel and local news following Three Mile Island is not a

" Emergency Planning U.S. Nuclear media persons is outside of NRC's proper environment in which to develop Power Plants: Nuclear Regulatory Jurisdiction and is not necessary to effective capabilities nor does it serve Commission Oversight." 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 development of effective nuclear facility rule or use a sliding-scale time frame critiques thereof should not be required. incident response capabilities will since States are at various stages of 3.The provision regarding furmal require close coordination and completirg their emergency plans, critiques should be clarified to mean the cooperation among responsible Federal licensee is responsible for developing agencies. State government. and the Issue C Impoct ofProposedRule 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 utilities 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 FEMA should be while deferring offsite responsibilities to Issue K Implementing Procedures State government with appropriate assummg. NRC is seen as in effect giving State and local governments veto NRC review of implementing FEMA oversight and assistance.

over the operation of nuclear plants. It p ocedures is only necessary to apprise In addition to these comments. two was questioned whether this was an the NRC staff of the details of the plans petitions for rulemaking were filed in 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 public comments rather -

shareholders should not be penalized by than petitions and were considered in a shutdown (with a resulting financial ###"# I'# F""#i"8 developing the final rule.

burden) because of alleged deficiencies 1. Nuclear facilities. although located The Commission has placed the or lack of cooperation by State and local in one governmental tax jurisdiction and planning ob!ectives from NUREG-0654:

officials. taxed by that jurisdiction, affect other FEMA-REP-1," Criteria for Preparation

2. It was suggested that NRC's Office jurisdictions that must bear immediate 6nd Evaluation of Radiologmal of Inspection and Enforcement conduct and long. term planning costs without Emergancy 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 Power Plants for Interim Use and m order to ensure prompt. effective, and requirements becomes greater, few Comment." January 1980. into the final consistent implementation of the facilities are the concern of a single regulations. Comments received 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 ofintermediate 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 ESaluation of State and 1.ocal increases to the consumer due to need to address fixed nuclear facility Government Radiological Emergency securing alternative energy sources, and planning at alllevels of government. Response Plans in Support of Fixed the health and safety factors associated beginning at the lowest and going to the Nuclear Facilities." (December 1.1974) with those alternative sources. highest. Alllevels of government need and Supplement 1 thereto dated March access to immediate additional funds to 15.1977, which have been in use for Issue H Public Notification upgrade their response capability. some time.

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

2. The " fifteen minute" public it becomes a matter of how the that at the May 1.1980 ACRS meetmg.

notification rule is without scientific consumer will be taxed, who will the Atomic industrial Forum justification. fails to differentiate administer the tax receipts. and what is representative encouraged the use of the between areas close in and further away the most effective manner in which to planning objectives from NUREG-0654 from the site. and ignores the technical address the problem. in the final regulations in order to a

55406 Fedoesi Regleter / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesd:y, August 19, 1900 / Rules and Regulattns reduce ambiguity and provide specificity capability ofimplementation of State and longer times to release significant to the final regulation. and local plans. amounts of activity in many scenarios).

Based on the above, the Commission 4. To make decisions with regard to Guidance regarding the radionuclides to has decided to modify the proposed nile the overall state of emergency bc considered in planning is set forth in changes in the areas discussed in preparedness (i.e., integration of the NUREG 0306: EPA 520/1-76-018, paragraphs I through X below. licensee's emergency prepersdness as " Planning Basis for the Development of determined by the NRC and of the State and local Govemment L TEMA/NRC Relationship State / local governments as determined Radiological Emergency Response Plans in issuing this rule NRC recognizes by FEMA and reviewed by NRC) and in Support of 1.ight. Water Nuclear the significant tesponsibilities anigned issuance of operating licenses or Power Plants," December 1978.

to FEMA, by Executive Order 12148 on shutdown of operating reactors.

July 15.1979. to coordinate the In addition. FEMA has prepared a - IV. Rationals for Alternatives Chomo emergency planning functions of proposed rule regarding " Review and In a few areas of the proposed rule, executive agencies. In view of FEMA's Approval of State Radiological the Commission identified two new role, NRC agreed on September 11, Emergency Plans and Preparedness"(44 alternatives that it was considering.

1979, that FEMA should henceforth chair FR 42342, dated June 24.1980). Many public comments were received the FederalInteragency Central According to the proposed FEMA rule, on these alternatives; based on due Coordinating Committee for FEMA will approve State and local consideration of all comments received Radiological Emergency Response emergency plans and preparedness, as well as the discussions presented Planning and Preparedness (FICCC). On where appropriate, based upon its during the workshops, the Commission December 7,1979, the President issued a findings and determinations with has determined which of each pair of directive assigning FEMA lead respect to the adequacy of State and alternatives to retain in the final rule.

responsibility for offsite emergency local plans and the capabilities of State in Sections 50.47 and 50.54 (s) and (t),

preparedness around nuclear facilities. and local governments to effectively the alternatives dealth with conditioning The NRC and FEMA immediately Ireptement these plar,s and the issuance of an operating license or initiated negotiations for a preparedness measures. These findings continued operation of a nuclear power Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and determinations will be provided to plant on the existence of State and local that laye out the agencies' roles and the NRC for use in its licensing process. government emergency respons,e plans provides for a smooth transfer of II. Emergency Planning Zone Concept

• """# "D **

responsibilities. It is recognized that the difference between alternatives A and B MOU. which became effective January The Comm!ssion notes that the in these sectioqs was that, under 14.1980, supersedes some aspects of regulatory basis for adoption of the alternative A, tne proposed rule would previous agreements. Specifically, the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) concept require a determination by NRC on MOU identifies FEMA responsibilities is the Commission a decision to have a lasuing a license or permitting continued with respect to emergency preparedness conservative emergency planning policy operation of plants m those cases where as they reIate to NRC as the fallowing: in addition to the conservatism inherent relevant State and local emergency in the defense.in.de policy was endorsef th Commisalon by the philosophy.concurrence.

This response Denblplans had not of a license or received NRC de rminat ons as o whether State and in a policy statement published on local emergency plans are adequate. shutdown of a reactor would not follow

.. To venfy that State and local October 23.1979 (44 FE 81123). At that automatically in every case. Under time the Commission stated that two alternative B, shutdown of the reactor emergency plans are capable of bems Emergency Planning Zones (EPZs) irrplemented (e.g., adequacy and would be required automatically if the should be established around each light- appropriate State and local emergency maintenance of procedures, training, water nuclear power plant. The EPZ for resources, staffing levels and response plans had not received NRC airborne exposure has a radius of about concurrence within the prescribed time qualification. 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 training of miles. Predetermined protective action State and local officials. record and on the recommendation of its plans are needed for the EPZs. The staff, the Commission 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 ofinteragency assignments that decided by emergency planning officials that is similar to, but less restrictive delineate respective agency capabilities after they consider the specific and responsibilities and define than, alternative A in the proposed rule.

conditions at each site. These distances Rather than providing for the Autdown procedures for coordination and are considered large enough to provide a of the reactor as the only enformnent direction for emergency planning and response base that would support action and prescribing specific response. activity outside the planning zone preconditions for the shutdown remed.

Specifically, the NRC responsibilities should this ever be needed. the final rule makes clear that for rm ency preparedness identified emergency planning rules like all other III. Position on Planning Basis for Small

1. To assess licenses emergency plans 1.lght Water Reactors and Ft. St. Vrain as t ed m for adequacy.

{(eac o s utdo g The Commission has concluded that possible enforcement actions and many

2. To venfy that licensee emergency the operators of smalllight water-cooled factors should be considered in plans are adequately implemented (e.g., . power reactors (less than 250 MWt] and determining whether it is an appropriate adequacy and mamtenance of the Ft. St. Vrain gas cooled 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 levels and qualifications, and will be evaluated on a case-by-case equipment). comments received from State and local basis. This conclusion is based on the

3. To reuew the FEMA findings and lower potential hazard from these . s,e seccon v for a discussion concernes determmations on the adequacy and facilities (lower radionuclide inventory eencumnce -

Feder:1 Regist:r / Vol. 45. No.182 / Tuesday. August 19, 1980 / Rults end Regulations 55407 governments and is consistent with the the licensee emergency response plans. basis for choice of notification provisions of Section 109 of the NRC After these two determinations have capability requirements for offsite fiscal year 1980 Authorization Act. been made. NRC will make a finding in authorities and for the public.

Alternative B was seen by some of the the licensing process as to the overall Emergency plans must be developed commenters as potentially causing and integrated state of preparedness. that will have the flexibility to ensure unnecessarily harsh economic and It was pointed out to the Commission 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, utilities, and the public. letters that the term " concurrence" was potential accidents also reflects on the State and local governments that are confusing and ambiguous. Also, there appropriate use of the offsite directly involved in implementing was a great deal of misunderstanding notification capability.The use of this l planning objectives of the rule strongly with the use of the term because,in the notification capability will range from favor alternative A since it provides for past, the obtal,ning of NRC immediate notification of the public a cooperative effort with State and local concurrence in State emergency response plans was voluntary on behalf (within 15 minutes) to listen to governments to reflect their concerns predesignated radio and television and desires in these rules. This choice is of the States and not a regulatory stations, to the more likely events where responsive to that effort. In addition the requirement in the licensing process, there is substantial time available for industry strongly supported alternative Previously too. concurrence was a e an oca go A as being the more workable of the two statewide rather than site-specific. d w VI. Fifteen-Minute Notification not to activate the public notification in Appendix E. Sections II.C and III.

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 fuel corrective measures to prevent damage minutes after the State / local authorities degradation or core melt that results in to onsite and offsite property." as well 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 B addresses only protective been removed as a footnote and placed warrant immediate public notification meusures for the public health and in the body of Appendix E.The and consideration based on the safety. The Commission has chosen implementation schedule for this particular circumstances, of appropnate alternative 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 for leakage of the containment oser actions to protect property. adopted because most State and local building. In addition. the warning time Measures to protect property 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 procuring 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 operating event and the time at which sigmficant alternative A would provide for a joint the systems used to implement this radioactive releases take place.

licensee. Federal. State, and local requirement. Specification of particular times as gos ernment exercise every 3 years. The Commission is aware that various design objectives for notification of whereas alternative B would provide for commenters. largely from the industry offsite authorities and the public are a these exercises to be performed every 5 have objected to the nature of the 15. '

means of ensuring that a system will be years at each site. The Commission has minute notification requirement.

an[{it apabi y o noti y the chosen alternative B because the indicating that it may be both arbitrary and unworkable, p ,

Commission is satisfied that the listening to predesignated radio or provision that these exercises be Among the possible alternatives to this requirement are a longer television stations. The Commission performed every 5 years for each site will allow for an adequate level of notification time, a notification time that recognizes that not every individual would necessarily be reached by the preparedness among Federal emergency vartes with distance from the facility, or actual operation of such a system under response agencies. In addition, under no specified time. In determining what that entenon should be, a line must be all conditions of system use. However, these regulations, each licensee is the Commission believes that provision required to exercise annually with local drawn somewhere, and the Commission believes that providing as much time as of a general alerting system will governmental authonties. Furthermore, pruticable for the taking of protective significantly improve the capability for

( Federal emergency response agencies may have difficulty supporting exercisei; 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 notificatien times from the several hours comply with these rule changes. significant financial impact and that the required for strecQy-street notification ,

technical basis for this requirement is to minutes will significantly increase the V. Definition of Plan Approval Procesa not without dispute. Moreover, there options available as protective actions The term concurrence" has been may never be an accident requiring under severe accident conditions. These deleted from the proposed regulations using the 15-minute notification actions could include staying indoors in and replaced with reference to the capability. However, the essential the case of a release that has already j actual procedure and standards that rationale behind emergency planning is occurred or a precautionary evacuation

! NRC and FEMA have agreed upon and to provide additional assurance for the in the case of a potential release thought

! are implementing. According to the public protection even during such an to be a few hours away. Accidents that agreed upon procedure. FEMA will unexpected event. The 15-minute do not result in core melt may also l

make a finding and determination as to notification capability requirement is cause relatively quick releases for which i the adequacy of State and local wholly 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 The NRC svill determine the adequacy of single accident scenario should form the desirable.

l

I 55408 Federal Register / Vol. 45 No.182 / Tuesday, August 19, 1980 / Rules and Regulations Some comments received on the reasons exist for reactor operation. seeking sn operating !! cense from NRC 1 proposed rule advocated the use of a Finally, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(f), the that have not had an exercise involvmg 1 staged notification system with quick Commission may,in appropnate the State plan at that facility atte. j notification required only nest the plant, circumstances, make the order The Commission has deter'nined l The Commission believes that the immediately effective, which could under the enteria in to CFR Pari 51 that i capability for quick notification within result in immediate plant shutdown an environmentalimpact staterr.ent for l the entire plume exposure emergency subject to a later hearmg. the amendments to 10 CFR Psti 50 and j planning zone should be provided but Appendix E thereof is not required. This i recognizes that some planners may wish IX.Fundh8 determination is based on j to have the option of selectively in view of the requirements in these " Environmental Assessment for Final rule changes regarding the actions to be J actuating part of the system during an Changes to 10 CFR Part 50 and  ;

actual response. Planners should taken in the event State and local Appendix E of 10 CFR Part do, carefully consider the impact of the government planning and preparedness Emergency Planning Requirements for added decisions that offsite authorities are or become inadequate, a utility may Nuclear Power Plants" (NUREG-0685.

would need to make and the desirability have an incentive, based on its own self June 1980). Comments on the " Draft of establishing an official interest as well as its responsibility to Negative Declaration: 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 when determining whether to plan resources that the State and local preparation of NUREG-0685.

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 VII. Effective Date of Rules and Other Commission believes that in view of the Reorsanization Act of1974, as amended.

Guidance President's Statement of December 7, and Sections $52 and $53 of Title 5 of the

~

Pnor to the publication of these 1979, giving FEMA the lead role in United States Code, notice is hereby -

amendments, two guidance documents offsite planning and preparedness, the given that the following amendments to were published for public comment and question of whether the NRC should or Title 10. Chapter I, Code of Federal intenen use. These are NUREG-4810, 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 Guidelines for Nuclear Power Plants," governments in upgrading and codification.

(September 1979) and NUREG-0654/ maintaining their emergency planning FEMA-REP-1," Criteria for Preparation and preparedness (and if it is to be Part 50--Domestic Ucenalng of and Evaluation of Radiological required, the mechanics for doing so)in Production and Utilization Facilities Emergency Response Plans and beyond the scope of the present rule

1. Paragraph (g) of Section 50.33 is Preparedness in Support of Nuclear change. It should be noted. however, revised to read as follows:

Power Plants for Interim Use and that any direct funding of State or local Comment." (January 1980). It is expected governments solely for emergency I 50.33 Contents of appucations; general that versions of these documents, preparedness purposes by the Federal informauon.

revised en the basis of public comments government would come through FEMA. * * * *

• received. will be issued to assist in (g)!f the application is for an defining acceptable levels of X* ExeMus operating license for a nuclear 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 governmental entities as guidance. exercises should involve exercising the in the United States that are wholly or appr priate local government plans in partially within the plume exposure VI!!. Heah 8Procedurn Und in support of these facilities.The State Implementation of nese Regulations 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 exercises at facilities other than the governments wholly or partially within overall state of emergency preparedness facility (site) chosen for the annual the ingestion pathway EPZ.8 Generally, at and around a licensed 5.cility is such exercise [ ) of the State plan. the plume exposure pathway EPZ for i that there is sorne quemon whether a Each State and appropriate local nuclear power reactors shall consist of '

facility should be pt :mitted to continue government shall annually conduct en  !

an area about 10 miles (16 Malin radius to operate, the Conmission may issue eurcise jointl3 with a commercial and the ingestion pathway LPZ shall an order to the licer.see to show cause, mdear power iscility. However States consist of an area about 50 miles (80 km) pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, why the plant with more than one facility (site) shall in radius. The exact size and should not be shut down. This issue may schedule exercises such that each configuration of the EPZs surrounding a arise, for example. if NRC finds a individual facility (site) is exercised in particular nuclear power reactor shall sigmficant deficiency in a licensee plan conjunction with the State and be determined in relation to the local or in the overall state of emergency appropnate local government plans not emergency response needs and preparedness. less than once every 3 years for sites If the NRC decides to issue an order to with the plume exposure pathway EPZ

• r.mergency Plannins Zones [EPZa) are discussed show cause, it will provide the licensee partially or wholly within the State, and in NLl REG-c396. EPA 520/1-?s-016. "Plannms Basm the opportunity to demonstrate to the D not less than once every 5 years for sites g'"l[L,'l,'lg'"',"lll

, , , ,Si'l'p*"$'[cIs*M'

,n r' Commission's satisfaction. for example, with the ingestion exposure pathway or t. swi. water Nucaear Power Plants " December that the alleged deficiencies are not EPZ partially or wholly within the State. ises.

significant for the reactor in question. The State shall choose. on a rotational 'If the staie and local emersency resoonse pians whether adequate intenm compensatmg actions have been or will be taken basis, the site (s) at which the required annual exercise (s)is to be conducted; hlyj',"l"yllly'lljd [l"' $'n,g ,,,

oniy pmne, in. .ppropn.i. refer,nc, to m,,, m, promptly, or whether other compelling pnonty shall be given to new facilities reqanment.

' ~ ' '

. . _, , . - - , . - - - - - - - r ,

Fed:ral Register / Vol. 45. No.182 / Tursday. August 19. 1980 / Rules and Regulations 55409 capabilities as they are affected by such (3) Arrangements for requesting and establishrd for emergency workers. The conditions as demography, topography, effectively usms assistance resources means for contro:!!ng radiological land charactenstics. access routes, and have been made, arrangements to exposures shaC P.clude exposure iunsdicnonal boundaries. The size of the accommodate State and local staff at guidelines consistent with EPA EPZs also may be detennmed on a case- the licensee's near site Emergency Emergency Worker and l.ifesavmg by case basis for gas. cooled reactors Operations Facility have been made. Activity Protective Action Guides.

and for reactors with an authorized and other organizations capable of (12) Arrangments are made for pnwer levelless than 250 MW thermal, augmenting the planned response have medical services for contammated The plans for the ingestion pathway been identified. injured individuals.

shall focus on such actions as are (4) A standard emergency (13) General plans for recovery and appropnate to protect the food ingestion classification and action level scheme. reentry are developed.

pathway the bases of which include facility (14) penodic exercises are (wt!! bel

2. A new i 50 4r is added. system and effluent parameters. is in conducted to evaluate major portions of use by the nuclear facility licensee, and energency response capabilities, f 50 47 Emergency plana. State and local response plans call for periodic drills are (will be) conducted to (a)(1) No operat:ng license for a reliance on information providec; by develop and maintain key skills, and nu-lear power reactor will be issued facility licensees for determinations of deficiencies identified as a result of unless a findmg is made by NRC that 'he minimum initial offsite response exercises or drius are (will be) state of onsite and offsite e nergency measures. corrected.

preparedness provides reasonable (5) Procedures have been established (15) Radiological emergency response assurance that adequate protective fut notification. by the licensee, of State .trainmg is provided to those who may measures can and will be taken m the and local response orgamzations and for be called on to assist in an emergency.

event of a radio!cgical emergency, notification of emergency personnel by (to) Responsibilities for plan (2) The NRC will base its finding on a all organizations; the content of initial development and review and for review of the Federal Emergency and followup messages to response distnbution of emergency plans are Management Agency (FEMA) fir: dings organizations and the public has been established, and planners are properly and determinations as to whether State established; and means to provide early trained, and local emergency plans are adequate notification and clear instruction to the populace within the plume exposure (c)(1) Failure to meet the standards set and capable of being implemented. and forth in paragraph (b) of this subsection on the NRC assessment as to whether a ncy Planning Zone have may result in the Commission declining the applicant's onsite emergency plans {th to issue an Operating lacense: however, are adequate and capable of being Pm a r e P the applicant will have an opportunity implemented. In any NRC licensing am g princip I response organizadons to emergency to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the proceeding, a FEMA finding will Commission that deficiencies in the personnel and to the public.

enstitute a rebuttable presumption on a plans are not significant for the plant in question of adequacy. (7)Information is made available to question that adequate intenm the public on a periodic basis on how (b) The onsite and offsite emergency they will be notified and what thett compensatmg actions have been or wn!

response plans for nuclear power initial actions should be in an be taken promptly, or that there are reactors must meet the following emergency (e.g., listening to a local other ccmpelling reasons to permit plant standards: broadcast station and remaining cperation.

(1) Pnmary responsibilities for indoors), the pnnc; pal points of contract (2) Generally, the plume exposure emergency response by the nuclear with the news media for dissemination pathway EPZ for nuclear power plants facdity licensee and by State and local of ir Srmation during an emergency shall consist of an area about 10 miles organizations within the Emergency (inc. ading the physicallocation ot. (to km)in radius and the ingestion Planning Zones have been aasigned. the locations) are established in advance, pathway EPZ shall consist of an area emergency responsibilities of the and procedures for coor6nated about 50 miles (80 km) in radius. The

$ arious suoporting 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 nuclear power principal response organization has staff (8) Adequate emergency facilities and reactor shall be determined m relation to respond and to augment its initial equipment to support the emergency to local emergency response needs and response on a continuous basis- response are provided and maintained. capabilities as they are affected by such

[2} On shift facility licensee (9) Adequate methods, systems, and conditions as demography, topography, j responsibilities for emergency response equipment for assessing and monitonng land charactenstics. access routes. and ere unambiguously defined, adequate actual or potential offsite consequences jurisdictional boundanes. The size of the l staffing to praide initial facility EPZs also may be determined on a case.

of a radiological emergency condition

.CCident responhe m hey funCMnal are in use. by-Case basis for gas cooled nuC! ear areas is meintamed at all times nmely (IDI A range of protective actions reactors and for reactors with an augmentation of respcnse capabilities is have been developed for the plume authonzed powerlevelless than 250 available and the mterfaces among exposure pathway EPZ for emergency MW thermal. The plans for the mgestrn Various on5118 response activities and Workers and the public. Cuidelines for pathway shall focus on such aC! ions as offsite support and respcnse activities the enoice of protective actions during are appropnate to protect the food are specif . ed an emergency, consistent with Federal mgestion pathway.

guidance. are developed and in place. 3. Section 50 54 is emerded by adina

'T>e.e omtaroe m acessed by spearc and protective actions for the ingestion five new paragraphs (q). (rl. ;si.'i'J. ana croene m Nt' REG =e4 FT.MA-aEP.1 em'ed exposure pathway EPZ appropnate to (u)'

a.$c[c c eke'ney"a', eNI[.Nd the locale have been developed. ,

P vomenen m honorr of %c. ear Po. e F*.a. (11) Means for controlling radictogical l 50.54 Cone tions of i6 censes.

For imenm t;w and commeer lamar> ueo exposures, m an emergency, are 4

55410 Fed:r:1 Register / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tursday, August 19, 1980 / Ruhs and Rigul:tions (q) A licensee authorized to possess within 60 days of the effective date of significant for the plant in question, or and/or operate a nuclear power reactor this amendment the radiological that adequate interim compensating shall follow and maintain in effect emergency response plans of State and actions have been or will be taken emergency plans which meet the local governmental entitles in the United promptly, or that there are other States that are wholly or partially within compelling reasons for continued standards in i 50.4?(b) and the requirements in Appendix E of this Part. a plume exposure pathway EPZ. as well operation.

A licensee authonzed to possess and/or as the plans of State governments (3) The NRC will base its finding on a wholly or partially within an ingestion review of the FEMA findings and operate a research reactor or a fuel facility shall follow and maintain in pathway EPZ. 2 Ten (10) copies of the determinations as to whether State and effect emergency plans which meet the above plans shall be forwarded to the local emergency plans are adequate and Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation capable of being implemented, and on requirements in Appendix E of this Part.

The nuclear power reactor licensee may with 3 copies to the Director of the the NRC assessment as to whether the appropriate NRC regional office. licensee's emergency plans are adequate make changes to these plans without Generally, the plume exposure pathway and capable of being implemented.

Commission approval only if such EPZ for nuclear power reactors shall Nothing in this paragraph shall be changes do not decrease the effectneness of the plans and the plans, consist of an area about to miles (16 km) construed as limiting the authority of the as changed. continue to meet the in radius and the ingestion pathway EPZ Commission to take action under any shall consist of an area about 50 miles other regulation or authority of the standards of i 50A7(b) and the Ccmmission or at any time other than requirements of Appendix E of this Part. (80 km) in radius. The exact size and The research reactor licensee and/or the configuration of the EPZs for a that specified in this paragraph.

particular nuclear power reactor shall (t) A nuclear power reactor licensee fuel facility licensee may make changes shall provide for the development, to these plans without Commission be determined in relation to local emergency response needs and revision. implementation and approval only if such changes do not maintenance of its emergency decrease the effectiveness of the plans capabilities as they are affected by such conditions as demography, topography, preparedness program.To this end. the and the plans. as changed continue to land characteristics access routes, and licensee shall provide for a review ofits meet the requirements of Appendix E of this Part. Proposed changes that jurisdictional boundaries.The size of the emergency preparedness program at EPZs also may be determined on a case. least every 12 months by persons who decrease the effectiveness of the have no direct responsibility for dpproVed emergency plans shall not be by-case basis for gas-cooled nuclear reactors and for reactors with an implementation of the emergency implemented without application to and preparedness program. The review shall authorized power levelless than 250 approval by the Commission. The MW thermal The plans for the ingestion include an evaluation for adequacy of licensee shall furnish 3 copies of each interfaces with State and local pathway EPZ shall focus on such proposed change for approval; and/or if governments and oflicensee dri!!s, actions as are appropriate to prntert the a change is made without prior exercises, capabilities, and procedures.

food ingestion pathway.

approval 3 copies shall be submitted (2) For operating power reactors, the The results of the review. along with within 30 days after the change is made licensee, State and local emergency recommendations for improvements, or proposed to the Director of the shall be documented, reported to the response plans shall be implemented by appropriate NRC regional office Aprill,1981, except as provided in licensee's corporate and plant specified in Appendix D,10 CFR Part 20, Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E of this management, and retained for a period with 10 copies to the Director of Nuclear Part. lf after Aprill,1981. the NRC finds of five years. The part of the review Reactor Regulation, or. if appropriate. that the state of emergency involving the evaluation for adequacy of the Director of Nuclear Material Safety interface with State and local preparedness does not provide and Safeguards. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory reasonable assurance that appropriate governments shall be available to the Commission. Washington. D.C. 20555. protective measures can and will be appropriate State and local (r) Each licensee who is authorized to taken m the event of a radiological governments.

possess and/or operate a research or emergency and if the deficiencies are (u) Within 60 days after the effective test reactor facility with an authorized n t c rrected within four months of that date of this amendment, each nuclear power level greater than or equal to 500 g, mission wW kermine power reactorlicensee shall submit to kW thermal, under a license of the type whether the reactor shall be shut down the NRC plans for coping with specified in i 50.21(c), shall submit until such deficiencies are remedied or emergencies that meet standards in emergency plans complying with 10 CFR whether other enforcement action is i 50.4?(b) and the requirements of Part 50. Appendix E, to the Director of appropriate. In determining whether a Appendix E of this Part.

Nuclear Reactor Regulation for approval su wn er en reement acuon is . . . . .

within one year from the effective date appropriate, the Commission shall take 4.10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, is of this rule. Each licensee who is mt a unt among other factors- amended as follows:

authorized to possess and/or operate a whether the licensee can demonstrate to Appendix E-Dnergency Planning and research reactor facility with an the Commission's satisfaction that the Pnparmine for Production and UtiLzation authorized power levelless than 500 kW deficiencies in the plan are not thermal, under a license of the type Facilities' specified m i 50.21(c), shall submit ' Emuency Plannmg Zones (EPZal are discuned Table of Contents emergency plans complying with 10 CFR in NtJREG-om EPA s20/1 rs-016,"Plannms Basis L introduction for the Development of state and Local caernment Part 50. Appendix E, to the Director of Radiolognal Emugency Ruponu P!w m Suppen Nuclear Reactor ReEulation for aEEroval of Lght Water Nuclear Power Plants." Decemtber I NRC staff has developed two eegulatory guides:

with:n two years from the effective date ig s. 1s. "Ernerency Plannmg for Research Feectors."

'll the State and local emersency re sponse plans and 3 41"Z:nergency Plannmg m Fuel Cycte of this amendicent. Facilitin and Plants Ucensed Under to CFR Parts hm bun predy pmvided to the NRC for ISM 1) Eac"1 licensee who is authorized mcbsion in the facMy docaet. the apphcant need so and 70;" and a romt NRC. FEMA report. NtVEC-

,o ;Cssess and/or operate a nuclear ony pravide the appropnate reference to meet this cru FEMA-REP-1. "Cnteria for Preparation end Footnotes continued on next pue power reactor shall summit to NRC rewrement.

~

-p , - --

m - , - - - , -

Fed:rst Register / Vol. 45, No.162 / Tuesday August 19, 1980 / Rules and R:gulati:ns 55411 II. The Preliminary Safety Anz!ysis Report considerations as access routes, surrounding exprenion of the overall conapt of

!!I. De Final Safey Analysis Report pooulation distributions, land use. and local operation: they shall describe the essential IV. Content of Emergency Pians jurisdictional boundaries for the EPZa in the elements of advance planning that have been V. Implementmg Procedures case of nuclear power reactors as well as the considered and the provisione that have been means by which the standards of l 60.47(b) made to cope with emergency situations.The L Introducda will be met. plans shallincorporate infortnation about the Each applicant for a construction permit is As a minimum, the following items shall be emergency response roles of supportmg required by i 50.34(s) to include in the described: organizations and offsite agencies. That preliminary safety analysis report a A. Onsite and offsite organizations for information shall be sufficient to provida discussion of preliminary plans for coping coping with em'rgencies and the means for assurance of coordinauon among the with emergencies. Each applicant for an notification. in the event of an emergency, of supporting groups and with the licensee.

operating hcense is required by i 50.34(b) to persons assigned to the emergency ne plana submitted must include a include in the final safety analysis report organizations. description of the elements set out in Section plans for copmg with emergencies, B. Contacts and arrangements made and IV for the Emergency Planning Zones (EPZs) :

This appendix establishes minimum documented with local. State. and Federal to an extent sufficient to demonstrate that the requirements for emergency plan., for use in governmental agencies with responsibility for plans provide reasonable assurance that attaining an acceptable state of errorgency coping with emergenctes, including appropnote measures can and will be taken preparedness. These plans shall be Cesertbed identification of the principal agencies. in the event of an emergency.

generally in the prehminary safety an. lysis C. Pmtecuve measures to be taken within report and submitted as a part of the fin 1 IV. Content of Emergency Plans the site boundary and within each EPZ to safety analysis report. protect health and safety in the event of an The applicant's emergency plans shall The potential radiological hazards to the accident: procedures by which these contain, but not necessarily be limited to, public associated with the operation of measures are to be carried out (e.g.,in the informati n needed to demonstrate research and test reactors and fuel facilldes can of an evacuation, who authorizes the comphance widt the elments ut forth licensed under 10 CFR Parts 50 and 70 evacuation, how the public is to be notified below i.e. o sanization for coptng with ,

involve considerations different than those u lad n mersmin, assusmet acuen.

and instructed how the evacuation is to be associated with nuclear power reactors. carried out); and the expected response of organizauon.

Consequently, the size of Ernergency achad n tificati n of emegs. emergency facilities n proce offsite agencies in the event of an emergency, Planning Zanes 81EPZs) for facilities other an equ$ men , tra ng. ma tams (D) Features of the facility to be provided mergMW pmpandnm. and mcomy b than power reactors and the degree to which for onsite emergency first aid and compliance with the requirements of this addluon. the emergency response plans decontamination and for emergency * ""'

Secuon and Sections !!. III. IV, and V as transportation of onsite individuals to offsite ""' ' ' " '

necessary will be determined on a case-by* * * "8 ' " " ' * " *

• treatment facilities- information needed to demonstrate case basis.a E. Provisions to be made for emergency compliance with the standards descnbed in IL The Prelim'aary Safety Analysis Report treatment at offsite facilities of individuals Section 50.47(b).* and they will be evaluated injured as a result of liensed activities. against those standards. no nuclear power The Preliminary Safety Analysis Report Photons for a tmWng program for rnetor operating license applicant shall also shall contain sufficient informauon to ensure employees of the licensee, including those provide an analysis of the time required to the compaubthty of proposed emergency who are assigned specific authority and evacuate and for taking other protective plans for both with facility designonsite areas features, site and rup ns the EPZs"and layout. an mersucy, sedons for various sectors and distances site location with respect to such and f r other persons who are not employees within the plume exposure pathway EPZ for of the licensee but whose assistance may be transient and permanent populations.

needed in the event of a radiological Footnotes continued from last page emergency. A. Cryonization Evaluanon of Raaiological Er...gency nesponu G. A preliminary analysis that projects the The organization for coping with w r Plan a or en se an o .

time and means to be employed in the radiological emergencies shall be desenbed, lanuary 10eo. to provide swdence in developing notification of State and local governments including definition of authonnes.

plans for coping with emergencies. Copies of these and the public in the event of an emergency. responsibilities, and duties of individuals documents are evallable at the Commission's Public A nuclear power plant applicant shall assigned to the licensee's emergency Document Room.1717 H Street. NW. W ashington, perform a preliminary analysis of the time organization and the means for not fication of D C. 20555 Copies of these documents may be required to evacuate various sectors and such individuals in the event of an purchased from the Government Pnntmg Office. distances within the plume exposure emergency. Specifically. the fobowing shall informanon on current pnces,may be obtained by pathway EPZ for transient and permanent be included:

populations, noting mafor impediments to the 1. A desenption of the normal plant a:Nns 2 At e$u'o bIcacO operstma orgamzation.

S=ies Manager evacuation or taking of protective setions.

'EPZs for power reactors are discuued in H. A preliminary analysis reflecting the 2. A desenption of the onsite emergency Ntl REG-0396. EPA 52o!14H1a. "Plannmg Basis need to includo facilities. systems, and response orgaruzabon with a detailed for the Development of State and Local Government methods for identifying the degrae of discussion of:

Radiciosical Emersency Response Plans in Support seriousness and potential scope of a. Authorttles. responsibilities and dunes of tasht Water Nucisar Power Plants." December radiological consequences of emergency of the individual (s) who wtil tak e cnarge 19's. The size of the EPZa for a nuclear power plant situations within and outside the site dunng an emergency:

shall be dmnnined m relation to local emergency b. plant staff emergency assignments.

response needs and capabilstles as they are affected boundary. including capabilities for dose projection usinI real time meteorological Au nun Hponsidh Ed MH by such condinons as demography, topugs sphy. on an onsite emergency coordtrstor who land caeractenstics. access routes, and informanen and for dispatch of radiological shall be in charge of the exchenlie of sunsdicnonal boundanes. The size of the EPZa also monitoring teams withm the EPZs: and a may be determmed on a case-by case basis for gas. preliminary analysis reflecting the role of the informanon with offstte authorines responsible for coordinaury and cooled nuclest reactors and for reactors with an onsite technical support center and of the authonged power levelless than 25o MW thermal. implementing offsite emergency measures near site emergency operations facility in Generauy, the plume exposure pathway EPZ for nuclear power plants with an aathonsed power assessing information, recommending t b* 3. E*'f A desenpuon'f

""'d. o the li'#by' posinon and fetcuan

.evel greater than 25o MW thermal shall cons:st of protective action, and disseminating an area about to mnes (16 km) m radius and the information to the public,

• These ooiecthes are eodres.co os specdc m4esuon pathway EPZ shall consist of an area III. The Final Safety Analysis Report entana m NLREG-)654. FEMA-REP-1 entit.ed sDout So mdes 80 km)in radius.

The Final Safety Analysis Report shall "Creens for Prepraton orat Eva.ed.u Jf 9eeWatory Gmde 2.6 will be used as guidance pseio,og:c,: gm,,,ncy gopon., p .no .n3

'or Te acceptaothri of research and test reactor contain the plans for coping with Prepareenns m soport of Eclear Paer ?Les emergeng *esponse plans. emergencies. The plans shall be an for inten ~ t:se and comment ' f aman

• 55412 Fediral R: gist:r / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesday. August 19. 1980 / Rules and R:gulations i headquarters personnel who will be sent to noted for such agencies. The emergency 2. Equipment for determining the magnitude the plant site to augment the onsite classes defined shall include: (1) notification of and for continuously assessmg the impact emergency organization, of unusual events. (2) alert. (3) site area of the release of radioactive materials to the

4. Identification, by position and function emergency, and (4) general emergency. These environment to be performed. of persons within the classes are further discussed in NUREG-0654: 3. Facdities and supplies at the site for hcensee orgamzation who will be responsible FEMA-REP-1. decontamination of onsite individuals:

for making offsite dose projections, and a 4. Facilities and medical supplies at the site descnption of how these projections will be D. Notification Procedure # 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 authonties. NRC, and other appropriate notifying local. State and Federal officials physicians and other medical personnel governmental entities. and agencies and agreements reached with quahfied to handle radiation emergencies on.

i identification. by position and function these officials and agencies for the prompt site; to be performed. of other employees of the notification of the public and for public 6. Arrangemente for transportation of licensee with special qualifications for coping evacuation or other protective measures, contaminated injured individuals frorn the with emergency conditions that may arise. should they become necessary, shall be site to specifically identified treatment Other persons with special qualifications, descnbed.This description shallinclude facilities outside the site boundary; such as consultants, who are not employees identification of the appropriate officials, by 7. Arrangements for treatment of of the licensee and who may be called upon title and agency, of the State and local individuals injured in support oflicensed Mr assistance for emergencies shall also be government agencies within the EPZs.8 activities on the site at treatment facilities

' lentified. The special quahfications of these 2. Provisions shall be desenbed for yearly outside the site boundary:

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

6. A description of the local offsite services exposure pathway EPZ of basic emergency center and a hcensee near. site emergency

t. be provided in support of the licensee's planning information. such as the methods operations facility from which effective e mergency organization. and times required for public nonfication and direction can be given and effective control t Identification of, and assistance the protective actions planned if an accident can be exercised dunng an emergency:

o pected from. appropnate State. local. and occurs, general information as to the nature 9. At least one onsite and one offsite Federal agencies with responsibilities for and effects of radiation, and a listing of local communications system: each system shall mpmg with emergencies. , broadcast stations that will be used for have a backup power source.

8. Identification of the State and/or locaf dissemination of information during an All communication plans shall have i 4icials responsible for planning for. emergency. Signa or other measures shall arrangements for emergencies. including

. rdenng and controlling appropnate also be used to disseminate to any transient titles and alternates for those in charge at pmrective actions includmg evacuations population within the plume exposure both ends of the commumcation links and the Men necessary. pathway EPZ appropnate information that pnmary and backup means of would be helpful if an accident occurs communicahon. Where consistent with the N Assessment Actions 3. A licensee shall have the capability to function of the governmental agency, these The means to be used for determining the notify responsible State and local arrangements willinclude:

magnitude of and for contmually assessmg governmental agencies within 15 minutes a. Provision for communications with 5e impact of the release of radioactive after declaring an emergency.The licensee contiguous State / local governments within matenals shall be descnbed. including shall demonstrate that the State / local the plume exposure pathway EPZ. Such

. mersency action levels that are to be used officials have the capability to make a public communications shall be tested monthly, as cntena for determining the need for notification decision promptly on bemg b. Provision for communications with nonficauon and participanon of local and mformed by the licensee of an emergency Federal emergency response orgamzations.

blate agenCles, the Commission, and other condition. By July 1.1981, the nuclearyower Such commumcanons systems shall be tested i ederal agencies. and the emergency action reactor bcensee shall demonstraje_that annually.

Mels that are to be used for determmmg admmistrative anTyhysicaTmeans hive been c. Provision for communications among the 4 hen and what type of protective measures established for alertdF and providing prompt nuclear power reactor control room. the would be considered within and outside the instructions to e pu lic within the plume onsite technical support center, and the near.

qe boundary to protect health and safety, exposure pathway EPZ.The design objective site emergency operations facility; and the emergency action levels shall be based shall be to have the capability to essentially among the nuclear facihty, the pnncipal State an m-plant condmons and instrumentauon in complete the initial noufication of the public and local emergency operations centers, and addition to unsite and offsite monitonng. withm the plurm exposure pathway EPZ the field assessment teams. Such these emergency action levels shall be within about it minutes. The use of this commumcations systems shall be tested

.hscussed and agreed on by the applicant and notificatica capability will range from annually.

mate and local governmental authonties and immediate noufication of the public (withm d. Provisions for communications by the 4pproved by NRC. They shall also be 15 minutes of the time that State and local licensee with NRC Headquarters and the wewed with the State and local officials are noufied that a situation exists appropnate NRC Regional Office Operations

<m ernmental authonties on an annual basis. requirica urgent action) to the more likely Center from the nuclear power reactor C Acuratwn o/Emesency Omanizanon events where there is substantial time control room. the onsite techmcal support ava lable for the State and local center, and the near site emergency The ento e spectrum of emergency governmental officials to make a judgment operations facility. Such commumcations

. unditwr.s that involve the alertmg or whether or not to activate the public shall be tested monthly.

1. avating of progressively larger segments of notification system. Where there is a decision ihe total emergency organizanon shall be to activate the notification system. the State F. Troining descnbed. The communication steps to be and local officials wdl determine whether to The program to provide for (1) the trainmg wen to alert or acuvate emergency activate the entire noufication system of employees and exercismg. by periodic personnel under each class of emergency simultaneously or in a graduated or staged dnlis of radiation emergency plans to ensure

%il be descnbed. Emergency action levels manner.The responsibthty for activatmg that employees of the licensee are familiar Nsed not only on onsite and offsite such a public notification system shall remain with their specific emergency response dunes Ndiation monitonng mformation but also on with the appropnate government authonties, and (2) the participation in the trainmg and readmgs from a number of sensors that dnlls by other persons whose assistance may

.ndicate a pctential emergency, such as the E. Emegency foc/ lines and Equioment be needed in the event of a radiation pressure m contamment and the response of Adequate provisions shall be nade and emergency shall be described. This shall me Emergency Core Coolmg S> stem) for desenbed for emergency facilities and include a dencnpuon of speciahzed imual aut2fication cf offs:te agencies shall be equipment. including: trammg and penodic retrainmg programs to descnbed The eustence but not the details. 1. Equipment at the site for personnel be provided to each of the fallowmg af a message acentication scheme sha'l be momtonng: categones of emergency personnei e

Federal Registir / Vol. 45. No.162 / Tuesdiy. August 19. 1980 / Ruhs cnd Regultti:ns 55413 e Directors and/or coordinators of the licensed for operation each year a full. scale ' furnish the Director of Nuclear Material plant ernergency organization: exercise is not conducted which involves the Safety and Safeguards. U.S. Nuclear

b. Personnel responsible for accident State (s) within the plume exposure pathway Regulatory Commission. Washington, assessment. including control room shift EPZ. D.C. 20555. with a copy to the personnel: All trainug including exercises. shall appropriate NRC Regional Office j

c. Radiological monitoring teams: provide for formal critiques in order to

d. Fire control teams (fire brigades); identify weak areas that need corrections. specified in Appendix D. Part 20 of this q e Repair and damage control teams: Any weaknesses that are identified shall be Chapter, each change within six months l f First aid and rescue teams; corrected. after the change is made. Proposed a Medical suppoM personneh changes that decrease the effectiveness G Maintaining Emergency Preparedness of the approved emergency plan shall h 1.icensee's headquarters support personnel: Provisions to be employed to ensure that not be implemented without prior i Security personnel. the emergency plan. Its implementing application to and prior approval by the In addition. a radiological orientation procedures. and emergency equipment and Commission, training program shall be made available to supplies are maintained up to date shall be * * * *

• locai services personnel. e g.. local Civil described.

Defense. local law enforcement personnel. (Sec.161b. l.. and o Pub. L 8M03,68 Stat. -

local newe media persons.

M A8 # 'ff 948 (42 U.S.C. 2201):Sec. 201, as amended.

The plan shall describe provisions for the Criteria to be used to determine when. Pub. L 93-438. 88 Stat.1242. Pub. L 9449. 89 conduct of emergency preparedness following an accident reentry of the facility Stat. 413 (42 U.S.C. 5341))

esercises. Exercises shall test the adequacy would be appropriate or when operation Dated at Washington. D.C. this tith day of of timing and content of implementing could be resumed shall be described. August 1980.

procedures and methods, test emergency V. Implementing Procedures For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, equipment and communication networks. test S**"'ll Chilk.

No less than 180 days prior to scheduled ,

the public notification system. and ensure issuance of an operating license for a nuclear Secretary of the Commission.

that emergency organization personnel are power reactor or a heense to possess nuclear fra poe so-asm ra.o sas.ee s es ami famihar with their duties. Each licensee shall exercise at least annuauy the emergency plan material. 3 copies of each of the appucant's eumo caos re eys detailed implementing procedures for its for each site at which it has one or more power reactors licensed for operation. Both emergency plan shall be submitted to the Director of the appropriate NRC Regional fell. scale and small-scale exercises shall be Office with to copies to the Director of conducted and shall include participation by Nuclear Reactor Regulation or,if appropriate, appropriate State and local government the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and agencies as follows:

S*feguards. in cases where a decision on an

1. A full-scale exercise which tests as much of the licensee. State, and local emergency operating hcense is scheduled less than one year after the effective date of this rule. such plans as is reasonably achievable without mandatory public participation shall be implementing procedures shall be submitted conducted; as soon as practicable but before full power operation is authorized. Prior to March 1.

a For each site at which one or more 1981. Ilcensees who are authorized to operate power reactors are located and licensed for operation, at least once every fhe years and a nuclear power facility shall submit 3 copies at a frequency which will enable each State each of the licensee's emergency plan and local government within the plume implementing procedures to the Director of exposure pathway EPZ to participate in at the appropriate NRC Regional Office with to isast one full-scale exercise per year and copies to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.Three copies each of any changes which will enable each State withh the ingestion pathway to participate in at least to maintain these implementing procedures one full scale exercise every three years. up to date sha'l be submitted to the same

b. For each site at which a power reactor is NRC Regional Office with to copies to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation or, if located for which the first operating license appropriate, the Director of Nuclear Material for that site is issued after the effective date of this amendment, withm one year before Safety and Safeguards within 30 days of such the issuance of the operating license for full changes.

power, which will enable each State and local government within the plume exposure PART 70-DOMESTIC LICENSING OF EPZ and each State within the ingestion SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL

2. Section 70.32 is amended by adding ep ~ tal Is cribe provisions paragraph (i) to read as follow::

for involving Federal emergency response agencies in a full scale emergency I 70.32 Conditions of licenses, preparedness exercise for each site at which , , , , ,

one or more power reactors are located and hcensed for operation at least once every 5 (1) Licensees required to submit years: emergency plans in accordance with 3, A small scale exercise which tests the i 70.22(i) shall follow and maintain in adequacy of communication links. effect emergency plans approved by the estabbahes that response agencies Commission. The licensee may make understand the emergency action levels, and changes to the approved plans without tests at least one other component (e.g.. Commission approval only if such medical or offsite monitoring) of the offsite emergency response plan for licensee. State. chanIes do not decrease the and local emergency plans for jurisdications effectiveness of the plans and the plans.

wi:hin the plume exposure pathway EPZ as changed continue to meet the shall be conducted at each site at which one requirements of Appendix E.Section IV.

or more power reactors are located and 10 CFR Part 50. The licensee shall

= ..

y UNITE D ST ATES F ]

.< ca Aa ac cut ATOa v couw,$$ ion pogy nog ano a g gg paio W ASHINGTON. O. C. 20555 V5 NUCLE Am nEGuba TOR Y Of f 4Cl AL SUSI N E SS CouwessioN U

• E N ALTV FOR PRIV ATE USE $300 L J w

P

+

=

- ,-m -

w e, - - .