ML20132G379

Discusses NRC 850620 Request That FEMA Conduct Emergency Preparedness Exercise at Facility.No Useful Purpose Served by Exercise That Fails to Include Full & Active Participation of State & Local Govts

ML20132G379
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	08/05/1985
From:	Downey T, Markey E, Mrazek R HOUSE OF REP., HOUSE OF REP., ENERGY & COMMERCE
To:	Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20132G251	List: ML20132G246 ML20132G274 ML20132G326 ML20132G360 ML20132G379 ML20132G389 ML20132G417 ML20132G435 ML20132G455 ML20132G475 ML20132G488 ML20132G524 ML20132G530 ML20132G540 ML20132G569 ML20132G601 ML20132G614 ML20132G625
References
NUDOCS 8510010536
Download: ML20132G379 (3)

Text

4 Congress of tf)c Unitch fptates

%)ouse of Erpresentatibes Niasfjington, D.C. 20315 August 5, 1985 The Honorable Nunzio J. Palladino Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Chairman:

We are very troubled by the Commission's June 20, 1985 request that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) conduct an exercise of the Long Island Lighting Company's (LILCO) emergency plan for the Shoreham nuclear power plant.

We believe that no useful purpose could be served by a test that fails to include the full and active participation of the state and local government. Indeed, the only goal that the Commission has been able to cite is to identify the extent of deficiencies inherent in a utility plan that does not include the participation of the governmental agencies having legal authority and rescurces to carry out an emergency plan.

In a December 19, 1984 memorandum to FEMA, the Commission's technical staff specifically stated that it would not request an exercise of the LILCO emergency plan because of unresolved inadequacies including the legal authority issue. Any doubt about LILCO's legal authority to carry out such a plan has been resolved by a New York court which ruled that LILCO has no such legal authority. As you know, William J. Dircks, the NRC Executive

' Director for Operations, recently questioned the advisability of the Commission's consideration of overruling the NRC Staff decision not to hold an exercise, given the numerous unresolved issues involved. Consequently, we are at a loss to understand the reason for the Commission's change of position.

8510010536 850916 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR

4

. The Honorable Nunzio J. Palladino August 5, 1985 Page 2 .

We are troubled further by information communicated to the Staff of the Subcommittee on Energy Conservation and Power by Edward L. Jordan, who authored NRC's June 20. 1985 memorandum to FEMA and who is the Director of NRC's Division of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering Response. Mr. Jordan has indicated that the exercise that NRC has requested PEMA to undertake will not provide a sufficient basis to make a determination of whether the LILCO emergency plan complies with federal safety regulations.

Mr. Jordan has stated that any such exercise would necessarily have to be supplemented by an additional exercise involving the state and local government or some other entity possessing the police powers required to implement an emergency response plan.

Hence, it would appear that a partial test is unnecessary and a waste of federal funds.

Similarly, Mr. Jordan has stated that while the exercise will not involve any actual use of police powers, it will seek to demonstrate the following: (1) LILCO's ability to calculate the possible radioactive dose to the public; (2) LILCO's ability to alert the public living and working near the plant; and (3)

. LILCO's ability to make protective action recommendations to the public in response to any accident at Shoreham, including evacuation, sheltering or relocation.

While we understand that utilities are often tested on their ability to make recommendations to state and local governments regarding these functions, we are very concerned about the legal and policy questions raised by conferring what are normally governmental responsibilties to a private utility company. In essence, . it appears that NRC could be institutionalizing a conflict of interest by which the fox would be placed in charge of guarding the chicken coop.

1 Finally, even if it could be argued that such an exercise would serve some limited purpose and not violate the law, we wish to express our concern that holding it would serve to undermine the integrity of the NRC's licensing process. The public's i complete trust and confidence in the regulatory process'is essential if nuclear energy is to be a viable energy source in the years ahead. The Commission's proposed course of action is likely to' create public distrust.

I i

f

.~ _

_.. _ . . _ . - . , _ y . _ -_ ,. _. _ _-, _ , _ _ _ - _ , _ _ _ . . _ - - . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

, The Honorable Nunzio J. Palladino August 5, 1985 Page 3 We ask that you explain to us the basis of your change in position, specifically what you intend to accomplish by such an exercise and how much it will cost the taxpayers. Your prompt response is requested.

Sincerely, r ek homas J D ney Member of Congress Member of Congress l

Edward J. Markey Chairman Subcommittee on Energy Conservation and Power

_ _ - .