ML20133G836

Advises That States of Sc & Nc Local Emergency Plans & Preparedness Adequate to Protect Health & Safety of Public Pending Verification of Alert & Notification Sys

ML20133G836
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	10/08/1985
From:	Speck S, Specks S Federal Emergency Management Agency
To:	Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
References
NUDOCS 8510160145
Download: ML20133G836 (3)

Text

,

g Federal Emergency Management Agency Washington, D.C. 20472 Mr. Willian J. Dircks 8 Executive Director for Operations U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

Dear Mr. Dircks:

In accordance with the Federal Energency Management Agency (FEMA) rule 44 CFR 350, the State of South Carolina submitted its State and local plans for radiological energencies related to the Catawba Nuclear Station to the Regional Director of FD1A Region IV for FEMA's review and approval on Septenber 5,1984; and the State of North Carolina submitted its State and local plans for radiological energencies related to the Catawba Nuclear Station to the Regional Director of FDiA Region IV for FEMA's review and approval on August 31, 1984. The Regional Director forwarded his evaluation of the State and local plans to ne on November 20, 1934, in accordance with section 350.11 of the rule. His sutuission included an evaluation of the full participation exercise conducted on February 15-16, 1984, and a report of the public treeting held on February 17, 1984, which explained the site-specific aspects of the State and local plans.

The alert and notification system (ANS) for the Catawba Nuclear Station is under review. An ergineerirg chsign review has been coupleted and the telephone survey of the public was conducted immediately following the alert and notification systen dertonstration on May 7,1985. The results of the denonstration are currently being evaluated. FEMA is still awaiting submittal of acceptable siren systen cperability results in accordance with section E.6.2.1 of FEMA-43 I will advise you of tna adequacy of this ANS once the review is canplete.

Based on an cuerall evaluation, I find and oetecnine that, subject to the condition stated below, the South Carolina and North Carolina State and local plans and preparedness for the Catawba Nuclear Station are adequate to protect the health and safety of the public in that there is reasonable assurance that the apprcpriate protective measures can be taken in the event of a radiological emergency. However, while there is an alerting and notification (ANS) systen in place and q>2 rational, this approval is conditional on FEMA's verification of the ANS in accordance with the criteria in NUREG-0654/PEMA REP-1, Rev.1, Appendix 3 and in FEMA--43, " Standard Guide for the Evaluation of Alert and Notification Systems for Nuclear Power Plants."

)

Sincerely,

< _ _ D 40.% A

- _- __ _ =

Sanuel W. Speck '

0 13 Associate Director 0510th1450CW DR State and Iocal Prograns P

p ard Support

)

• 4.1 M a i.,g%

gf % Federal Emergency Management Agency

> Ill Washington, D.C. 20472 uy Ibnorable Richard W. Riley DCT 8 1985 Governor of South Carolina P.O. Box 11450 Colunbia, South Carolina 29211

Dear Governor Riley:

I am pleased to advise you that the South Carolina Operational Radiological Energency Response Plan in Support of Fixed Nuclear Facilities site-specific to the Catawba Nuclear Station has been approved by the Federal Energency &nagement Agency (FEMA).

The alert and notification syste (ANS) which is installed and operational at the Catawba Nuclear Station is currently under review by FEMA. An ergineering design review of the systen and a telephone survey of the public have been conducted. However, FEMA is still awaitirg submittal by the utility of acceptable siren systen cper-ability results in accordance with section E.6.2.1 of FENA-43, the

" Standard Guide for the Evaluation of Alert and Notification Systens for Nuclear Power Plants." Therefore, this approval of the offsite plans is corditional on FEMA's verification of the ANS systen in accordance with the joint Nuclear Regulatory Cunmission (NRC)/ FEMA criteria in NUREG-0654/ FEMA REP-1, Rev.1, Appendix 3, and in FEMA-43.

This represents the fourth approval by FENA of offsite radiological emergency preparedness plannirg around a ruclear power station in South Carolina. I know that you will agree that this i's an important achievement on the part of your State and local cf ficials, and the Duke Power Conpany in their efforts to protect the health and safety of the public in the vicinity of the Catawba Nuclear Station. I have enclosed a copy of our letter to the NRC indicating FENA's approval of State and local plans and preparedness.

I wish to comend you and all the individuals who participated in this acconplistment and to thank you for the excellent cooperation FEMA has received.

Sin rely, H. rris ing Director Enclosure '

n.g.: s jp } Federal Emergency Management Agency j* C Washington, D.C. 20472

+

c o Honorable James Martin DCT 8 1985 Governor of North Carolina State Capitol Raleigh, North Carolina 27611

Dear Governor Martin:

I a pleased to advise you that the North Carolina Energency Response Plan in Support of the Catawba Nuclear Station has been approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FD4A).

'Ihe alert and notification systm (ANS) which is installed and operational at the Catwba Nuclear Station is currently under review by FEMA. An engineering design review of the systs and a telephone survey of the public have been conducted. However, FEMA is still awaiting submittal by the utility of acceptable siren syst s oper-ability results in accordance with section E.6.2.1 of FEMA-43, the

" Standard Guide for the Evaluation cf Alert and Notification Systens for Nuclear Power Plants." 'Iherefore, this approval of the of fsite plans is conditional on FEMA's verification of the ANS systs in accordance with the joint Nuclear Regulatory Canmission (NRC)/ FEMA criteria in NUREU-0654/ FEMA REP-1, Rev.1, AppeMix 3, and in FEMA-43.

'Ihis represents the third approval by FEMA of offsite radiological emergency preparedness planning around a ruclear pwer station in North Carolina. I know that you will agree that this is an important achievement on the part of your State and local of ficials, and the Duke Power Ccmpany in their efforts to protect the health and safety of the public in the vicinity of the Cataba Nuclear Station. I have enclosed a copy of our letter to the NRC indicating FEMA's approval of State ard local plans and preparedness.

I wish to comend you and all the individuals who participated in this acconplishnent and to thank you for the excellent cooperation FEMA has received.

Sincerely, k eeA -

rt H. Mr Actirg Direct Enclosure ,

- . ._ _