ML20128K445

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Response to Suppl II to New York Pirg 841213 Petition Re Emergency Planning for Protection of School Children.Response May Not Reflect All Changes Contained in County Emergency Plans
ML20128K445
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 05/28/1985
From: Krimm R
Federal Emergency Management Agency
To: Jordan E
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
Shared Package
ML20128K450 List:
References
NUDOCS 8505310154
Download: ML20128K445 (2)


Text

- ,

% Federal Emergency Management Agency g # Washington, D.C. 20472 MAY 2 81995 MEMORANDUM FOR: Edward L. Jordan Director, Division of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering Response Of fice of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclea ory Commission

_ s FROM: K f'imm ' - ~ " ~

Assistant Associate Director Office of Natural and Technological Hazards Programs

SUBJECT:

Supplement II to New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG) Petition Concerning the Indian Point Nuclear Power Station This is in response to your memorandum of March 1,1985 requesting the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to review and respond to Supplement II to the NYPIRG petition dated December 13, 1984, concerning Indian Point Nuclear Power Station, New York. NYPIRG remains concerned that emergency planning for the protection of school children continues to be inadequate in the 10-mile emergency planning zone around the reactor site.

The FEMA Region II staff has analyzed the petition and their report is attached. It is divided into sections corresponding to the three sections of the NYPIRG petition, i.e.,

I. Current Status of School Preparedness II. The November 28, 1984 Exercise III. Response to FEMA Evaluation of Issues Raised in Petition After careful analysis of the petition, responses have been provided to the first two areas of concern. With respect to the third area, NYPIRG

-has revisited concerns raised in their earlier petitions and provided a rejoinder to some of FEMA's earlier responses. We believe that adequate responses have already been provided to these issues raised from NYPIRG's previous petition and supplement. These would include FEMA's previous responses to NYPIRG petitions and FEMA's testimony in the Indian Point Atomic Safety and Licensing Board hearings. However, we have provided additional infonnation on alert and notification testing at Indian Point and on public education efforts in the Indian Point area.

&h F

f

/

{

2 We would also-like' to note that the FEMA Region II office is currently

~

reviewing County plan changes for Westchester, Putnam and Orange Counties.

Rockland County is in the process of revising its plan to reflect information from'the November ~28, 1984, and the April 10, 1985, remedial exercises.-

Since the review is not complete, FEMA's response to NYPIRG's petition may not reflect all- changes now contained in these plans.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or Robert S.

Wilkerson,-Chief Technological Hazards Division at 646-2861.

Attachment.

As Stated x

F i..