ML20138A637
| ML20138A637 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/20/1997 |
| From: | Paperiello C NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Giardina P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138A641 | List: |
| References | |
| SSD, NUDOCS 9704280135 | |
| Download: ML20138A637 (2) | |
Text
_
\\,
e
[f***Go 4
7t UNITED STATES j '
Z j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, P.C. 20555-0001
\\.....p'f April 20,1997 Mr. Paul A. Giardina, Chief Radiation & Indoor Air Branch U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 2 290 Broadway,28th Floor New Yod. NY 10007-1866 L
Dear Mr. Giardina:
1 I am respoading to your letter dated March 12,1997, concerning our response to Mr. Joseph J. Natale of NIMCO Shredding Co. You letter indicates the need for further discussion and siudy, between our agencies on a number of issues conceming the Federal t
Radiological Emergency Response Plan (FRERP) and each agency's response to incidents i
that may, or may not, apply to the provisions of this plan. M vou may know, Mr. Michael
)
Mobley, from the State of Tennessee, raised similar is: ves to the Nuclear Regulatory 1
l Commission in a letter dated July 9,1996. Mr. Mobley : ;ener was in reaction to what the State felt was an inadequate Federal response to an incident in the State of Arkansas, where Federal assistance was requested under the provisions of the FRERP. A copy of this letter had previously been provided to Mr. Richard Wilson of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
Office of Air and Radiation, Washington, DC, in a letter dated October 16,1996. Copies of Mr.
Mobley's letter and the NRC's reply are enclosed for your information.
We, in close coordination with the Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data, are in i
the process of pursuing the issues raised in your letter, Mr. Mobley's letter, and other issues we have identified concerning the FRERP, and the response of Federal agencies to requests for assistance with radiological incidents, and plan to request a meeting with the EPA Headquarters office to discuss these issues further. These issues include the level of Federal assistance under the FRERP for events which are not radiological emergencies and a; eing on Federal roles for various radiological events. We suspect that these issues are not hmited to 4
a particular EPA regional office, and should be raised at the EPA Headquarters office level to ensure consistency across all regional offices (NRC and EPA) and to ensure all EPA regional offices are made aware of the issues. We will relay your interest in participating in these discussions to the EPA Headquarters office when a meeting date and location is arranged.
The issue raised in Mr. Mobley's letter was discussed by NRC, EPA, and Federal Emergency Management Agency presenters at an Agreement State meeting held September 17-19,1996.
g In addition, P. C's response to Mr. Mobley indicated that this and other related issues would be
//
discussed witn the Federal Radiological Preparednacs Coordinating Committee (FRPCC) at h
their next meeting. However, to date, this committee has not reconvened. Therefore, it may be more appropriate to discuss these types of issues between our respective agencies to determine if additional guidance or clarification is necessary. These discussions should '
in a better understanding of the issues and potential resolutions. We will brief FRPCC on the FRERP implementation issues we have experienced and request their involvement, should it become necessary. In addition, it is our understanding that a FRERP workshop will be held in June of this year. This could provide another opportunity to discuss these various issues, and potentially povide a consensus position at the workshop.
9704280135 970420 PDR RC SSD PDR f
h
~~~~"
- O e
Mr. Paul A. Giardina 2
april 20, 1997 We appreciate you bringing to our attention the issues raised in your letter. We look forward to discussing these issues further with EPA. If you itave any additional questions or concerns on this matter, please call me at (301) 415-7800, or Mr. Douglas Broaddus at (301) 415-5847, Sincerely, (0RIGINALSIGNEDBY)
Carl J. Paperiello, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
Richard Wilson, EPA Craig Conklin, EPA Distribution: IMNS Ticket #5740 SSSS r/f NE02-Sr D-5 s
AMohseni, AEOD RHogr.n, AEOD EWeinstein, AEOD ADWbte, RI ARBlough, RI H.; Miller, RI LAReyes, Rll ABBeach, Rlli EWMershoff, RIV NMSS r/f IMNS C/F HThompson DOCUMENT NAME: EPA._R2.RES CP/ PROOF ED/ APRIL 18,1997 Ta receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box:
'C' = Copy without attachment / enclosure
'E" = Copy with attachment / enclosure
'N" = No copy OFFICE IMAB lC IMAB lC IMNS lC AEOD lE NN)S8/'/J NAME DABroaddus/ spell check LWCamper DACool FJCongel CJFa;/eriello DATE 4/16/97 4/17/97 4/18/97 4/16/97 4/Y197 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 1
I l
~
9 l
P. Giardina !
We appreciate you bringing to our attention the issues raised in your letter. We look forward to discussing these issues further with EPA. If you have any additional questions or concerns on this matter, please call me at (301) 415-7800, or Mr. Douglas Broaddus at (301) 415-5847.
Sincerely,
/
./
/
Carl J. Paperiello, Director Office of Nuclear, Material Safety and Safeguards i
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
Richard Wilson, EPA Craig Conklin, EPA
/
J i
Distribution:
SSSS r/f NE02-SSD-5 AMohseni, AEOD RHogan, AEOD EWeinstein, AEOD CPoland ADWhite, RI ARBlough, RI r
HJMiller, RI' LAReyes, Ril l
ABBeach, Rlll EWMershoff, RIV NMSS r#
IMNS CF HThornpson IMNS Ticket #5740
/
DOCUMENT NAME: EPA R2.RES To receive a copy of this document, Edicate in the box: 'C" = Copy w6typut attachment /eqcl e
- E" = Copy with attachment / enclosure
- N" = No copy OFFICE IMAg C iM3 /f IfAM i,)
NAME DABrog8tnfs/ spell check L @ per QAQM [
FJCongel // CJPaperiello t
DATE 4//4/97 4/lT97 4%)7 \\F 4///J97 JL-'4/ /97 6
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
derg STATE oF TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION olVIS:oN OF RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH 3Ro floor. L & C ANNEX 401 CHURCH STREET NASHVILLE. TN 37243-1532 6154324360 WTERNET: MMOBLEYgMAILSTATE.TN.US July 9,1996 Shirley Jackson, Chairman U.S. Nuclear Renulatory Commission Document Control Desk P1-37 Washington, D.C. 20555 1
Dear Chairman Jackson:
A recent event in Arkarms involving radicar.iive material imported from the Netherlands creates great doubt in my mind regtrding this Country's current position regarding unintended importation cf radioactive material in scrap and/or products.
I am concerned that this problem has presented itself several times with minimal I
rcsponse and/or consideration at the national level. The only real action taken was the purported equipping of some ports of entry with radiation detection equipment. At the tim 3, it seemed a ludicrous exercise and has certainly proven a futile one.
Tha second issue involved in the Arkansas instance was the lack of an adequate fad::ral response to the repeated request of a state radiation control agency for cssistance. This was a situation that was predir.ted in comments on the draft FRERP wh:re multiple federal agencies may have jurisdiction depending on the pedigree of the source. In this case, the agency (EPA) with the federal lead, failed to respond. This l
l 1 ft the other federal agencies in a quandary. They could provide assistance to the g
?
stat:s and step on the lead agencies toes, or jur* ignore the state pleas for assistance.
Just as occurred in the Juarez incident, it was the state agencies that were forced to QL deal with the situation because of inaction on the part of federal agencies.
The combination of these two circumstances creates a significant concern for me (and l
other state radiation control persnnnel, I am sure). Unlike domestic situations, we have i
9/2[2 '
-96071-60295-960709 CRLJRNUMilcc,,,
l
1 Chairman Jackson i
July 9,1996 2
l little ability to effect the retum of imported scrap and with no dependable federal assistance, the situation could be grim.
I b:lieve the NRC should investigate this situation and provide for a better mechanism j
than currently exists to handle these problems. In the case of the materialin Arkansas, it could have easily been (and still may be) components of a nuclear device from the old Soviet Republic.
l In this specific incident in Arkansas, Tennessee, worki'-
cvith one of its licensed r dioactive material processors, was able to provide assistance to Arkansas; but that m y not always be possible. There needs to be a better mechanism to assure this mnterial is not imported and if the federal agencies are going to tout their emergency response capabilities, they are going to have to produce results when a request for l
assistance is needed.
Sincerely,
/'J['/'
cds Michael H. Mobley Director MHM:sk jackson /mhm96s2 i
l l
I
[, 8 atog\\
UNITED STATES j
.j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-4001
/g g
October 16, 1996 Mr. Michael H. Mobley, Director Division of Radiological Health Department of Environment and Conservation State of Tennessee 3rd Floor, L&C Annex 401 Church Street Nashville, TN 37243-1532
Dear Mr. Mobley:
In your July 9, 1996, letter to Chairman Jackson, you expressed concern abwut this Country's current position regarding unintended importation of radioactive material in scrap and/or products.
I can appreciate the burdens which are imposed on a State when a local company finds that it has inadvertently received radioactive material in scrap or other products which it has imported from a foreign country, whether or not a radiological emergency has been created.
In such cases, we can agree that it is usually best if the shipment can be returned to the foreign supplier.
To this end, companies which import scrap and other susceptible products may need to require take-back provisions in their purchase contracts.
This approach is considered more appropriate than to request governmental assistance for non-i emergency situations, especially in an era of declining budgets. However, because the NRC does not have a primary role in this area, I have forwarded your letter to the U. S. Customs Service and the Environmental Protection Agency for their consideration.
Both of these agencies have been working to t
resolve the unintended importation of radioactive materials issue you raise.
You also raise a second concern regarding the adequacy of Federal response to a request by a State ru iation control agency for assistance.
As you know, the Federal Radiological Emergency Response Plan (FRERP) provides a foundation for Federal response for those incidents that pose an actual, potential, or perceived threat of radiological consequences.
However, the definition of those incidents is purposefully broad, as discussed in the response to Comment 73 regarding the draft FRERP. The May 8,1996 Federal Reaister contains the responses to all the comments on the draft.
This broad and general definition allows flexibility for the State and Federal governments to jointly develop the appropriate level of response for the specific incident being addressed.
In the Arkansas incident to which you refer, th:: Arkansas State radiation control and emergency management office and EPA Region VI agreed t, hat the incident did not ccr.stitute a radiological emergency.
Nevertheless, EPA and DOE provided the State of Arkansas non-emergency assistance in the form of the names of companies that could assist NUCOR Steel in disposing of the contaminated steel.
We believe that the Federal response to the NUCOR event in Arkansas was j
appropriate and that the State correctly called the EPA.
Likewise, any Federal agency contacted for assistance should be able to refer the caller to Oh hk
M. H. Mobley.
l i
the correct agency.
Should similar future requests for assistance be made to the NRC Operations Center, we will refer the caller to the appropriate Federal agency for assistance and information.
We felt that the topic of defining appropriate levels of Federal and State 2
response to a radiological incident was important and added it to the agenda of the recent Agreement State meeting on Saptember 17-19, 1996.
This discussion forum, which included representatives from FEMA and the EPA, provided an opportunity to exchange views on the issue of Federal / State
)
response.
We plan to broach this topic with the Federal Radiological i
Preparedness Coordinating Committee to determine if further guidance is l
required to more clearly define Federal and State responsibilities, particularly-in situations that do not represent radiological emergencies.
4 Sincerely, Q
r %-
g g
- 4. L, 1
James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations l
1 l
)
l l
4 i
4 l
amm en~-
e w
--