ML20195F122
| ML20195F122 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 11/15/1988 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Carr, Robert, Zech NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20195F131 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-#189-8179 2.206, NUDOCS 8811210016 | |
| Download: ML20195F122 (318) | |
Text
- - - _ _. - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _. - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
M-
/i i'g UNITED STATES NUCLE AR REGUL ATORY COMMISSION
',' I j
.}
wASHINGt N, D. C. 20555
\\,,,,, #
November 15, 1988 MEMORANDUM FOR: Chaiman Zech Comissioner Roberts Comissioner Carr Comissioner Rogers Comissioner Curtiss FR0M:
Victor 5tello, Jr., Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
PILGRIM STATUS UPDATE At the October 14,19EE, Comission Meeting to discuss the Pilgrim L'uclear Power Station, the staff comitted to continue to assess progress, particu-larly in the area of emergency preparedness.
Subsequent to the meettng, the Comission has received statements from various officials that the staff wts not accurate regarding its factual representa-tions en the status of emergency preparedness and that the staff had not met with local officials to obtain their emergency preparedness concerr.s. Enclo-sures 1 and ? respond to these statements. Enclosure 1 is the October 14, 1988, meetirs transcri;)t pages78-104 annotated with the clarifying remarks I provided to the Comissien on October 21, 1988 and footnotes to provide the basis for factual inferration, not alresdy supported. Enclosure 2 idertifies meetings where the staff and state, local officials, and/or members of the
,,ublic were present ano at which er'ergency preparedness issues were raised.
Meeting participants and the subjects discussed are also identified.
In order to continue to assess progress and further ensure that the factual basis on which the staff relied in making its recercendation was accurate, the staff met with each of the EPZ comunity Civil Defense Directors and again toured the local beaches this tire with the responsible local official. sumart:es the staff's findings and ettaches each meeting sumary.
i Each official has verified the t;uracy of the staff's respective reeting sumary. The Comonwealth was notified regarding these meetings and had an observer present at several of the meetings. The Comerwealth did not desire a one-to-one technical meeting with the staff.
The staff is not aware of any rew information related to emergency preparedness which would change its reccerendation regarding Comission approval of a centrolled and phased startup of the Pilgrim Nuclear Powsr Pant over the rext 4-6 months. The staff has evaluated progress for each of the il210 Q pf, lh 1
I 7
deficient areas ident1#ied by FEFA in their self-initiatea review and concludes that substar.tial and significant progress has been made and is continuing.
As of November 7,1988, all restart open items are resolved and the plant is physically ready for restart with one exception related to recently identified loose anchor bolts for containment penetration pipe supports. The licensee is continuing its evaluation of this problem and has indicated that they would not restart until it is satisfactorily resolved. NRC Region I staff will indecen-dently review this issue prior to Regional Administrator release from the first NRC holdpoint (rod withdrawal for criticality) in the power ascension program subject to Comission authorization to restart.
The staff's review of the Barry Report is being transmitted concurrently. Our review of the report has not identified anything that would change the recom-mencation.
/
c, f
~
r (Stello, J/.'
Executive Direqto for Operations
Enclosures:
As stated t
ec: SECY OGC l
l i
EtiCLOSURE 1 Contents 1.
Transcript pages76-104 2.
Transcript References l
3.
Letter, Lando W. Zech, Jr. to Peter W. Agnes, Jr., dated October 27, 1988, I
transmitting the October 14, 1988 Comission Meeting transcript and additional clarifications.
i
I 78 1
the off-site plans. and the NRC staff has observed the 2
demonstration of some key elements cf the plans.
We'll discuss 3
those details in a moment.
Boston Edison, as you heard, has 4
spent $10 million already on improviments to the plans and 5
facilities in the local communities.
They intend'to spend 6
about $5 million more.
7 Nonetheless, we recognize that there is more work 8
that needs to be done before we can receive a FEMA finding of 9
adequacy.
In some cases, Massachusetts'vants to go beyond NRC 10 re quiremento.
We don't object to that, of course, but it does 11 delay the state in finalizing the plans.
The next steps are 12 that the state will have to submit final plans to TEMA.
TEMA 13 must review them and approve them and schadule an exercise.
14 The state and the licensee and TEMA and the NRC then 15 zust conduct the exercise.
If there are any deficiencies, they 16 aust be corrected.
Finally, we would get a formal report from 17 FEMA to the NRC of the finding of adequacy. We estimate that it 18 would take about six months after Massachusetts submits the 19 final plans before we could receive such a formal FEHA finding.
20 In the meantime, the staff believes that we have 21 sufficient information to come to our own conclusions 22 concerning the significance of the outstanding issues, pending 23 completion of the formal TEMA process.
The last full exercise, 24 as I mentioned, was in 1985.
We have issued an exemption to 25 the regulation requiring a full participation exercise every
19 1
two years.
2 of course, we cannot schedule an exercise until the 3
Commonwealth of Massachusetts submits revised plans to FEKA.
4 Ron Bellany will now summarize the improvements that have been 5
unde in the plans and the NRC observations of theap 6
improvements.
7 CRAIRMAN ZECH:
Thank you very much.
You may 8
proceed.
9 MR. BELLAKY:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am the 10 regional branch chief with the responsibility for the review of 11 emergency preparedness issues.
Next month will complete six 12 years that I have been charged with that responsibility.
If 13 you'll turn to the next slide, the next slide will discuss the 14 status of emergency preparedness.
15
[ Slide.)
i 16 MR. BELLAMY:
Although emergency preparedness was not 17 an issue of the Pilgrim plant shutdown in April, 1986, the NRC l
)
18 staff has continuously monitored the status of emergency 19 preparedness. [The Federal Energency Management Agency began 20 their self-initiated review in September of 1986, due to a lack cA 1
of progress toward resolution of document, concerns.3 The TEMA 21 i
22 self-initiated review was issued in August 1987, and identified 23 six specific issues: (the lack of evacuation plans for certain 24 public and private schools and daycare centerst the lac: of a l
25 reception center for people evacuating to the North; the lack l
80 1
of identifiable shelters for the beach populations inadequate 2
planning for the evacuation of the special needs population; 3
inadequate planning for the evacuation of the transportation 4
dependent population and an overall lack of progress and 2
5 planning and apparent diminution in emergency preparedness.3 6
(This report was immediately transmitted to the Boston 7
Edison company by ti;g staff]and aiwritten plan for resolution 4
var received by the statf cn September 17, 1987.]4(Based on 9
these TEMA identified deficiencies, T MA in its report, 10 withdrew its interin finding of adequacy for off-site energency 11 preparedness and concluded that there vas no longer adequate 5
12 assurance that public health and safety could be pr3tected.3 13 (This previous finding of adequacy was based on plans and la procedures being in place, and demonstration of the implementation during full-scale exercises.]0 15 16 (In order to assess progress, the NRC staff has 17 reviewed local plans and proceduras, discussed the issues with 18 TEMA Region I staff, Connonwealth offic'ials, local town 19 emergency planning officials, *acal residents, and Boston 20 Edison representatives.] (We have attended numerous public 21 meetings in the area and have toured the area, with special 22 emphasis on the beaches and the local amargency operating 23 centers.)
24 (Considerable progress toward resolution of the issues 25 pertaining to the schools and daycare centers, the special
81 1
needs population and the transportation dependent population is 2
evidenced by the. drafts of plans and implementing procedures 3
that have been prepared.
Draft plans for all five communities 4
within the ten-mile emergency planning zone, as well as plans 5
for the two reception communities have been sent to the 6
Commonwealth and from the commonwealth to FEMA for a technit. A l
7 review.
8 Implementing procedures for three of the EPZ communities and the two reception communities have also been 10 forwarded to the Commonwealth and of these, the procedures for 11 one of the EPZ communities and the two reception communities 1
\\
12 have been forwarded to TEMA for a technical review.
The 13 Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency Area II Plan, which covers 14 the area around pilgrim, has been sent to TLMA for technical 15 review and work is progressing e.1 the commonwealth statewide plansandprocedures[
16 17 (It is noted that the statewide plans and procedures J
c 18 were demonstrated at full-scale exercise at Yankee Row in 19 April, 1988, and at Vermont Yankee in August, 1988.3bhe 20 progress in generating revised plans and procedures is due to 21 the e'fforts of local ' officials, including selectmen, town 22 managers, civil defense directors, police chiefs, fire chiefs, i
pWe weeb 23 department cf em w officials, school administrators, j
24 nursing home administrators, hospital administrators, day care l
j 25 center administretors, harbor masters, owners of private
k,e. v.A rg[$ esvieo hW l***l oWeiels, c4 % 3( f 2 U0 rwavdeJ i
p e u,J e re s os we ll c.s oil N p roe <Jms (, Na 82 1
buildings identified for use as shelters and members of the 2
general public working in concert with licensee employees.
3 As such, these individuals are thoroughly familiar 4
with the contents of these documents and could implement these 5
plans and procedures if necessary. [There are five procedures bbon 6
for two EPZ communities for Plymouth and % ;h:b:;ry that, althoughprepared,fhavenotyetbeenapprovedbythelocal 7
8 officials for forvarding to the Commonwetalth for technical 9
review S
- I"' # ') M" *
10
[Although in draft, the revised plans and procedures 11 are in sufficiently final form that a training program, 12 approved by the commonwealth, is being conducted.]hhe NRC 13 staff has audited this training program, including the 14 individual lesson plans and staff from both Region I and NRR 15 have observed the training of bus and ambulance drivers from 16 companies providing transportation for school and daycare 17 centers, the special needs population, and the transportation-18 dependent persons.
19 This training includes use of route maps and travel 20 on the actual routes to be used in an energency.
The staff has 21 audited six different training sessions and witnessed 22 implementation of the training for approximately 50 23 transportation providers, which is 25 percent of that training that has already been conducted 2" These limited demonstrations 24 25 provide the staf f with the basis to conclude titat significant l
l 1
83 1
progress has been made in improving the emergency plans and 2
procedures for schools and daycare centers and for the special 3
needs and transportation-dependent populations in the energency 4
planning zone.
5
[Regarding lack of a reception center for' people 6
evacuating to the nortn, the Commonwealth has tentatively 7
designated a state-run facility in We11sley as a northern 8
reception center and has conducted a fe,asibility study that 9
indicates the facility is feasible for und as a reception centerh[BostonEdisonhasperformedananalysiswhich 10 11 concludes that the two reception centers that are presently in 12 existence at Taunton and Bridgewater, with appropriate 13 renovations and additional equipment, have the capability to 14 support an evacuation from the erergency planning zone, yet 15 they are supporting the r.otential for a third center.]
16 The Bridgewater State College facility is capable et 17 serving as a location for evacuees from the energency planning W
18 mone to assemble and lacks improvements and hardware for 19 monitoring of radioac*.ive unterial to be able to monitor the 20 l
20 percent of those arriving at the reception center within 12 l
l 21 hours2.430556e-4 days <br />0.00583 hours <br />3.472222e-5 weeks <br />7.9905e-6 months <br />.
These modifications could be completed in a short 22 timeframe, and by a short timeframe I mean approximately one 23 month after approval by the Conzonwealth.
~
24 The reception center at the Taunton State Hospital is i
25 an existing structure that needs modifications including i
I
84 monitoring equipment that would take three to four months to 1
2 complete after approval by the commonwealth. (The Taunton Civil Defense Director has documented his belief that he would use 3
portions of the facility in an energency, even if the 4
renovations were not complete and he also stated th'at there are 5
no outstanding program issues that woJ1d interfere with 6
implementation of workable plans and procedures.]
7 (Regarding a lack of identifiable beach shelters for 8
the beach population, Nston Edisor completed a shelter survey 3" f
9 10 and [ developed a shelter implem9ntation program, including shelter identification, letters of agreement with the providers 11 andshelterproceduras.] HEMA'sposition,whichtheNRCstaff 12 13 supports, is that a range of protectivr. actions are required 14 and that she):ering is only one protective action to be 15 considered and is not, in and of itself, a requirement.
Therefore, TEMA has removed this issue as a concern.]19 16 (Nonetheless, a shelter progras for the beach population is 17 le continuing.32khe deficiency regarding an overall lack of progress and suppors in emergency preparedness is being 19 resolved by the progress being made in correcting the other 20 21 specific TEMA-identitled issues, including the development of 22 revised state plans.
I'd like to quickly summarize the information already 23 provided for the TEMA self-initiated deficiencies and the sub-24 25 issues.
The next slide.
85 1
(Slide.)
2 MR. 'BELIAMY:
The next slide shows the status for 3
resolution of a school children concern and the third reception 4
center, and I have hard copies of this slide if you'd like to 5
see them.
6 CMJctRAAN ZECH:
Yes.
You'd better give us copies of 7
to explain it.
Do you have that passed out for the audience or 8
not?
9 KR. RUSSELLt Mr. Chairman, this is an abbreviated 10 form of the materials that were available in the room when 11 people came in.
It was in the memorandum that the staff has 12 forwarded to you.
13 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Well, explain it first.
14 MR. BELLAMY This first slide shows the status for 15 resolution of the school children concern and the third 16 reception center.
It is evident that the required information 17 has been included in the draft plans and procedures and that 18 approval by the Commonwealth is still required for other 19 issues.
20 Now by complete on this slide, I mean that if the 21 information was supposed to be included in the plans and 22 procedures, it is nov in those draft plans and procedures.
23 (Slide.)
24 MR. BELLAMY:
The next slide shows the status of 25 resolution for the beach shelterirl issue and the concerns with
86 1
the mobility impaired.
The shelter program is ongoing, even 2
though sheltering is not specifically required.
The 3
information has, again, been provided in the draft plans and 4
procedures.
I 5
(slide.)
6 MR. BELLAMY:
The next slide shows the status for the 7
concerns for the transportation-dependent population and the a
overall lack of progress.
Once again, information has been 9
included in the draft plans and procedures with, again, certain 10 issues needing approval by the commonwealth.
11 In conclusion, the NRC review of the status of 12 emergency preparedness of Pilgrim indicates that while all 13 tasks have not been completed, progress is being made toward 14 resolving the issues identified by TEMA in their August 1987 15 report.
In particular, significant progress has been made in 16 improving the emergency plans and procedures for schools and 17 daycare centers and for the special needs and transportation-18 dependent populations in the emergency planning zone.
I 19 The development of these plans and procedures, in 20 conjunction with the training program directed toward the i
21 transportation providers responsible for evacuating school 22 children and the special needs and transportation-dependent l
23 populations, indicates that the off-sito responsa plans itclude
{
24 measures to protect these groups.
25 The NRC staff will continue to assess the progress j
--r_ _,. _ -.. -
87 being made for fully resolving the FEMA-identified issues in 1
eff-site emergency preparedness.
2 l
CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Thank you very much.
3 Our findings then on emergency MR. NURI.EY:
4 First,, based on preparedness at Pilgrim are the following.
5 several previous successful exercises at Pilgrim over the ye 6
where FEMA has found the plans to be adequate, the 7
infrastructure to handle energency preparedness is still 8
Most of the local individuals who would l
9 largely in place.
part in energency actions, that is civil defense authoritie, 10 police authorities, school authorities, have been working 11 closely with Boston Edison in developing the revised plans,l 12 Dr. Bellany described.
13 i
Therefore, it is logical to conclude that those 14 individuals can and would implement the revised plans, eve, 15 though the plans are still in draft and even though there 16 of been a full scale exercise with the revised plans.
17 ne
[
si, major deficiencies identified by TEMA, the NRC staff
).,
i 18 l
reviewed improvements in the plans and observed some I
{C demonstrations of these improvements and we have conclud 19 l
fI 20 adegu, ate progress has been made on the deficiencies.
21 Based on successful exercises at Yankee Rowe an; i
t 22 Vermont Yankee within the past year, the Commonwealth o 23 Massachusetts has demonstrated capability to manage an 24 Based on the findings abo';
energency at the state level.
l 25 t
88 1
then, we believe there is reasonable assurance that even with 2
the lack of a recent exercise adequate protective actions can 3
and will be taken in the event of an smergency at the Pilgrim 4
Plant.
5 rurthermore, we expect that the status or emergency j
l 6
preparedness will continue to improve in the coming weeks as 1
7 Massachusetts and local officials continue to finalize the 8
plans in preparation for a full scale exercise.
In summary 9
then, our overall conclusions with regard to Pilgrim are that 10 the staff believes the Pilgrim Plant is substantially safer 11 today than at the time of the shutdown in April of 1986.
12 There are more licensed operators and they are better 13 trained, a greater depth of management experience.
There are 14 improved emergency operating procedures in place.
There are 15 improved safety attitudes among the plant workers.
There are 16 irproved conditions of plant equipment and there have been 17 safety enhancement improvements made.
We further believe that 18 energency preparedness is in better shape today than it was in 19 April 1986.
20 We believe that the Pilgrin Plant is ready to restart 21 and can and will be operated safely.
We also believe, however, 22 that there must be continued progress in finalising the 23 resolution of outstanding emergency preparedness issues.
In a
24 light of the extended shutdown of-the-plant, we vill closely 25 observe the plant and the operating staf f performance as well l
6
89 1
as the expected continuing progress in emergency planning to 2
assure ourselv'es that our findings remain valid.
3 MR. STELLO:
We are through, Mr. Chairman.
4 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
All right, thank you very much.
1 5
Questions from my fellow Commissioners?
Ccamissioner Roberts?
6 C0KMISSICHER K0BERTS:
Two quick ones.
The increased 7
NRC oversight, if I've got the numbers the right, an average a
plan would be 2,500 to 3,000 up to 11,000, where is that coning 9
from, out of Region I or from Washington?
10 KR. RUSSELLt It has principally thus far come from 11 Region I, although we have had substantial support from NRR and 12 also we have had commitments from NRR to provide additional 13 support from both NRR and/or ths other regions to support the j
14 augmented inspection activities during power ascension.
15 COMMISSICHER ROBERTS:
Second question.
Is Pilgrim l
16 the only Mark I BWR to af fect the torus venting?
17 MR. RUSSELL:
No, cir.
There are other facilities 18 which have that capability, but not hardened.
That has been in 19 existence since Revision 2 of the Energency Operating 20 Procedures for General Electrie and the change in this instance al is piping systems which are designed to handle the elevated 22 pressure rather than using installed duct work associated with 23 standby gas treatment systems, which would likely fail under 24 the incretSed pressures.
Nine Mile Point 1, for example, hcs a 25 hardened vent that is similar.
Peach Bottom has a venting
90 1
capability.
Some vent paths are capable of handling the higher 2
pressures.
3 This is one that is designed specifically for that 4
purpose. lit does include a rupture disk in the design.
So 5
oven though it is a vent, it would not be used unti'l you got to 6
elevated pressure so that there is not a potential for an 7
inadvertent release through that path.
8 COMMISSICKER ROBERTS:
Thank you.
That's all I have.
9 MR. STELlot I might add, Cor.missioner Roberts, that 10 that's the best one ve've seen.
11 CHAIRMAN IECH:
Mr. Carr?
12 COMMISSIONER CARRt (Yes.
I would like to ask about 1
13 the Area 2 state plan.
You said it was submitted to TEMA for a 14 technical review.
My understanding is it was just going down 15 there for information and comment rather than for any of ficial 16 review.
Is that right?
1 L
17 MR. BELLAMY:
Sir, I think that's a torn that we've I
18 used a great ocal over the last couple of months in our 19 discussions with both FEMA and the commonwealth of i
20 Massachusetts.
I 21 COMMISSIONER CARRt It wasn't down there for 22 approval, I guess, is what I'm told.
23 KR. BELLAMY:
The plans and procedures and the 24 Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency Area 2 plan have been 25 forwarded with documentation from Massachusetts Civil Defense e
i 91 1
Agency to FEMA for what they ters a technical review.
It ooes 2
not imply that the Commonwealth has approved those plans and thatcaveatisineachtransmittalletter,b 3
4 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Commissioner Rogers.
5 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Well, I've heard a' number of 6
presentations here today, people from Massachusetts and people j
7 from the staff and we've been asked to censider them all very i
s carefully and to weigh them in making a decision.
I'm trying s
to sort out in my own mind whether I'm hearing the ss.ne things 10 from everybody.
11 I heard that there are no plans for dealing with an 12 emergency at Pilgrim in place and that none of the local 13 agencies are ready to deal with any of this.
I first wonder 14 whether Hassachusetts seems to be in that happy circumstance 15 that it never has any natural disasters or it can anticipate no 16 natural disasters and if it does face the reality of those, how 17 does it do it if there are no plano in place.
18
[I wonder, Dr. Bellamy, if y,u could just say a few l
19 words to try to put into some context your views and statementa 20 with respect to the cooperation of local officials and their 21 ability to deal with an emergency plan with the statements that t
22 we heard from other folks from Massachusetts oarlier b2 fore the i
23 NRC and licensee presentations.
24 MR. BELIAMY:
Yes, Mr. Commissioner, I'd be glad to.
25 I think the caveat that you heard earlier today a number of l
l
92 1
times that there are no plans and procedures in place 2
specifically implies or specifically states that the 3
commonvaalth has not officially approved those plans and 4
procedures and sent them to FEMA with that approval and until 5
the commonwealth gives those plants and procedures'that 6
official approval, they will continue to state that there are 7
no plans and procedures in place.]
8 I have been intimately involved in this review for 9
six years.
As I've indicated, the last three years have been -
10
- a lot of time spent on Pilgrim.
I have personally met with 11 some of the local planning officials in the Plymouth area.
I 2a bv<g 12 have toured the Duxbury beachts. [I have visited the,3 ocal 1
emergency operating cente nd those facilities are there and 23 14 they are ready to be used in an emergency.3 15
[ The people that are generating the procedures and the 16 people that have generated the plans are the specific 17 individ-
, the local emargency planning officials, the select la men, the mayors, fire chiefs, the civil defense directors who 19 would be charged to use those plans and procedures in the event 20 of an emergoney.
21 so, they are aware of the information in those 22 procedures and would be prepared to use them if necessary.]
23 COMMISSIONER CARRt Do they have copies of them?
24 MR. BELIAMY:
The individuale who have been preparing 25 procedures at the administration level -- yes, sir.
They do.
4 a
93 1
COMMISSIONER ROGERS: [Just with respect to another 2
statement that was made, I gutas by Senator Kennedy, Dr.
3 Murley, I wonder if you could comment on his statement that you 4
had made a commitment that anergency preparation plans 5
including a demonstration exercise of such plans would be held 6
before restart.
7 MR. MURLEY:
Yes.
That was -- what he was referring a
to was in my testimony in Plymouth in J.anuary of this year.
9 What I said was that we would expect to see progress in 10 improving the plans and thtt we would expect to have -- to 11 observe a limited demonstration of those improvements.
12 What Dr. Bellamy described -- what his staff and r.y 13 staff have done over the last I believe month or two have been 14 in fact the demonstrations that we mentioned.
The school bus 15 drivers and that sort of activity.
16 C0KMISSIONER ROGERS: 'In other words, you feel you 17 have --
J 18 MR. MVRLEY:
We did not say -- we never had an
)
19 intention that there would,be an exercise or a limited l
i 20 exercise.
Of course, that can only happen once the state 21 submits plans to FEKi and t'at gets scheduled.
We did have in h
22 mind and we have completed our observation to our satisfaction 23 that the key elements necessary to implement this plan, that 24 is, bus drivers and routes and ambulance drivers have taken i
25 place and we have observed that, t
94 1
COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Is that in lact what fou were 2
talking about when you made that statement?
3 MR. MURLEY:
Absolutely, yes.]
4 MR. RUSSELLt Mr. Commissioner, if I could exptwt on 5
that because I had a meeting in Region I with vario's u
6 representatives from the Commonwealth including the Governor's 7
office, the legislature, the Attorney General and others and I s
described quite clearly at that meeting.that there are a range 9
of ways that the stcff can evaluate deficiencies.
It can be 10 from a tabletop exercise.
It can be from a review of the 11 plans.
It can be from a limited demonstration with staff 12 members riding buses with bus drivers.
13 So, we made it quite clear in each case that the 14 standard we would use for judging le that which is necessary 15 for the staff to get the information it needs to reach its 16 conclusion.
In each case, the commonwealth has taken the 17 position that they, the Commonwealth, would only be satisfied 18 with a full-scale exercise.
19 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
I think I heard something that i
20 I'd like you to repeat just once again, Dr. Murley, if you l
l 21 could.'
Did I hear you say correctly, emergency procedures are l
22 in better shape now than they were in 19867 23 MR. MURLEY:
That is our conclusion.
Yes.
24 CKAIRMAN ZECH:
Dr. Bellany, it sounds to se like 25 from what you're telling us is that you've received a fair l
9
95 1
amount of cooperation from the state and local officials; is 2
that correct? '
3 (MR. BELLAMY:
Mr. Chairman, the cooperation that I 4
have received is in the lines of making sure that I'm aware of 5
the status of the information and the cooperation in making 6
sure that I know exactly who has done what, what plans and 7
procedures have been written, where they stand in the review 8
and the fact that they are going to FEMA now for a technical 9
review without the --
10 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
But you've had a fair amount of 11 interface with the local officials.
12 MR. BELIAMY:
Yes, sir.
13 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
And they seem to be conversing with
.(
1 14 you and working with yout is that correct?
I l
15 MR. BELLAY't Pretty much so.
I have a number of the i
)
16 public that call me quite regularly, that are here today and we 4
17 converse probably on a daily basis.
Yes, sir.
l 18 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Do you have any difficulty as far as 1
19 the local officials are concerned with articulating the federal
]
responsibilities as they might be in working with the state and 20 j
21 local, responsibilities?
22 MR. BELIAMY:
No, sir.
There's been no problem in 23 that area.
We have held a number of public meetings up in that 24 area and I have in any number of occasions been up in front of 25 a large number of members of the public and elected officials 1
l
96 1
to make sure that they understand the responsibilities of the 2
federal community, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the S
commonwealth and the local officials.
Some of thess meetings havedraggedontill130inthemorning, sit.b 4
5 CHAIMAN ZECH:
Could you talk to re a li'ttle bit 6
about the training and perhaps when do you think that the 7
training night be completed and could you talk a little bit 8
about any other plans and procedures that should be exercised 9
at least to the 4xtent that you might have satisfaction that in l
l 10 a real emergency, the public health and safety would be 6 4,43 e4 l
t ocal p %
..) / ro<*us by N v..terd % re.w.hs b wrw. N o ia cle-m % )
Pl ad 11 protected.
f.y<
P N
..A 4
.t h*n b., %
1 12 MR. BELIAMY:
Yes, sir.
There are approximately 300 j
asaroundnumberofrequiredimplementingproceduresandasIj 13 indicated, there are five of those procedures tk have yet 4e-14 tseew 15
-be sent to the Commonwealth with any type of approval from the M
16 local officials.
These procedures deal specifically with the l
3 l
17 schoolchildren and some of the special needs populations in 18 Plymouth which is the town that the Pilgrim station is in and 19 in Duxbury which is also in the Energency Planning Zone.
20 The -- to use the ters, training is complete, I think 21 is midileading.
You will never complete the training for 22 energency preparedness.
Energency preparedness is a living 23 area and you always will be training new people and you always have new people becoming involved in the process.
24 25 I would think that by the and of the year, there vill
97 1
he the overwhelming majority of the 6,000 people trained that 2
have been specified in the Commonwealth-approved training 3
program.
i 4
CRAIRMAN ZECH:
How about some of these areas that 5
are difficult to evacuate in the area.
Could you discuss that 6
a little bit?
7 MR. BELLAMYt Yes, sir.
I think the two. specific 8
concerns that como up -- one is for the schoolchildren and I'd 9
like to comment on that first.
The draft plans and 10 implementing procedures now indicate that at the alert stage of 1
11 a nuclear emergency, they will begin to assemble the necessary 12 transportation for evacuation of the schoolchildren and at the 13 site area emergency stage, they would implement that 14 evacuation.
15 That's a ssary and needed and far-reaching improvement over what's been seen in the past whereas you could 16 17 vait until that general emergency stage to actually consider 18 that evacuation.
The schoolchildren will be moved out long 19 before that stage.
20 (The beach population area -- I have toured that beach l
[
population -- it is required to get on and of f that beach with 21 22 a four-wheel drive vehicle.
You could not take your car on it.
I
(
23 So, there is some limited access.
There are a fair number of l
permits that are issued to those four-wheel drive vehicles.
24 The number is in the several thousands and they have 25 l
4
98 1
made sure that the plans and procedures indicate that those 2
beaches vill be closed at an early stage so that you would not 3
put more people on those beaches if there is any type of event 4
at the Pilgrim Station.)
5 COMMISSIONER CARR Do they overnight on ' nose t
6 beaches?
7 MR. BELIANY:
No, sir.
They do not.
8 COMMISSIONER CARRt So they must clear out between 9
high tides.
10 MR. BELIAMY
[The high tide issue is for a very small 11 section of that beach and there are approximately 2,000 to 12 4,000 people at the most that would be there during a bright, 13 sunny, summer weekend.
14 COMMISSIONER CARRt No, but I mean if they can't stay 15 overnight, it's only twelve hours between low tides.
They must 16 come off in 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />.
hi \\
3 17 MR. BELIAMY The & tide issue is not for every 18 tide.
That is only for flood tide type conditions, so, if you 19 got the perception from some of our earlier speakers that every 20 twelve hours that beach is isolated, I think that's a 21 misconception.
22 COMMISSIONER CARRt Well, even if it is shorter than 23 that, that would be the longest if they have to clear out by 24 dark.
g 25 MR. BELLAMY Yes, sir, and those beaches are 7 only I
99 1
approximately four hours a month.]
2 MR. MURL2Y:
Mr. Chairman, there is one thing that I 3
would like to add that might help to clarify.
The deficiencies 4
that were found by FEMA were planning type deficiencies, not
~
execution deficiencies.
Gene. ally, as I said, thage have been 6
many exercises up there, both full and partial.
I mentioned 7
that I personally observed one.
8 The authorities know how to do their job.
Bus 9
drivers know how to drive buses.
Ambulance drivers know how to 10 drive ar.bulances.
The problems have been that not all the 11 places were accounted for in the plans that they had to go to 12 and so forth.
That is what we have been focusing on, to make 13 sure that those plans are in draft form have been updated.
All 'ight.
To --
14 CKAIRMAN ZECH:
f t
15 A Vo1CE:
Mr. Chairman.
16 CHAIRMAN ZECHr Dr. Be11any.
17 A VOICE:
Mr. Chairman.
18 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Dr. Be11any.-
19 A VOICE:
I wish to challenge that this presentation 10 has b'een made, and it's full of half-truths.
I'm not going to I
21 stand here and listan.to this, Mr. Chairman.
22 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
You don't have to stand here.
23 Dr. Be11any, you have told us that you believe they 24 have made considerable progress and there has been a fair
)
25 amount of interface, at least I would consider a lot of good l
i l
100 1
working relationship between you and the people that are doing 2
the job in that areal is that correct?
3 MR. BELLAMY:
Yes, sir; it is.
4 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
On the othat hand, how long would it 5
take you do you think or how much time would we need to make 6
the progress that perhaps would be necessary for a little more 7
cor.fidence that all of the emergency planning procedures could 8
be satisfied and in your interfaces, can you give us any 9
estimate of how long it would be before the state, for example, 10 would be satisfied that their procedures are in place to the 11 point where they could submit them to FEMA and we would have 12 what I would tern a closure on this?
Can you give any estimate 13 at all?
14 MR. STELLO:
Mr. Chairman, we talked about the issue 15 of the amount of time, the schedule it will take to complete 16 it.
In my opening comments I said we talked about whether we 17 could make that estimate.
Wo can't.
We don't have that 18 schedule.
Dr. Murley has indicated that once the plans have 19 been submitted to TEMA, our estimate, with no extra effort, in 20 order to get the plans reviewed, the exercise planned for and 21 conducted, would be about six months.
Nov long it will be 22 before the Commonwealth will submit the plans, Dr. Murley has 23 indicated in our conversations when I have asked the question 24 that he has been unable to get that schedule.
We vill continue 25 to try to get it.
The candid answers, we don't know.
l
101 1
COMMISSIONER CARRt Six months after submission of 2
the plans by the state before the exercise could be scheduled?
3 MR. STELLO:
Without doing anything unusual.
I think 4
jf we tried, we could do better.
5 COMMISSIONER CARRt Normal.
6 MR. RUSSELLt I might point out, Mr. Chairman, that 7
issue has been requested several times in correspondence from 8
TEMA to the Commonwealth requesting the schedule and the 9
Commonwealth has net responded to that.' We specifically 10 requested that of the Commonwealth on the October 5th meeting 11 ard they would not give us a schedule at that time as to when 12 they would be willing to commit to submitting plans.
13 CHAIRMAM ZECH:
Are you telling us, is it the staff's 14 conclusion that in your considered opinion that the Pilgrim 15 plant is ready to re-start in view of what we have heard 16 regarding energency planning and all other issues?
17 MR. STELLO:
Yes, sir.
}
l 18 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Any other comments from my fellov i
l 19 Commissioners?
f I
20 (No response.)
i 1
21 CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Let me just say first that I would 22 like to thank the Boston Edison Company for their participation 23 here today and for their addressing these issues over the past 24 months and years.
It looks like progress has been made, 25 significant efforts have gone into it, management efforts as l
J
102 1
well as equipment laprovements.
I'd also like to commend the 2
staf! for their very close and extensive work in this area on 3
the Pilgria plant.
I know an awful lot of effort has gone into 4
it, in Region I as well as Headquarters.
5 I believe that the earlity presentations'we heard i
6 today are important for us to consider, too.
Certainly it 7
would appear from what we have heard I believe that protection 8
of the public health and safety at the Pilgria plant has been 9
substantially enhanced by the corrective actions that have been 10 taken since the plant was shut down.
11 I'd also like to commend the continuing ef forts of 12 the state and local officials for their work especially in the 13 area of emergency plans for the Pilgrim facility.
The states' 14 ability to participate in and execute energency planning 15 responsibilities has been demonstrated repeatedly at varicus 16 nuclear facilities within and bordering the State of 17 Massachusetts.
l 18 I would encourage continued efforts of the state end 19 local governments in order to complete the work on the proposed j
20 improvements to the Massachusetts' portion of the program 21 energency plans.
22 I would like to thank Senator Kennedy, Senator Kerry 23 for his ef forts to be here today also, Lieutenant Governor i
24 Murphy for coming to appear before us today as well as 25 Representative Studds.
103 1
Frankly, from what I've heard today and given the 2
information we'have heard, I would propose to my fellow 3
commissioners that we not make a re-start vote today but I 4
would ask my fellow Commissioners to carefully consider all' 5
that has been said towards reaching a conclusion considering l
6 re-start of the Pilgrim facility.
I hope we can cosa to a 7
timely conclusion.
8 On the other hand, I do believe we need time to 9
reflect on what we have heard today and perhaps a little more
.I l
10 time to make more progress to nnance what we have done already 11 towards emergency planning.
12 The commission does indeed have to have the 13 confidenca that emergency plans could be executed if necessary.
14 I'd ask my fellow Commissioners if they would agree 15 with me that we not hold a vote today.
Any opposed to that?
16 (Commissioners nodding in agreement.)
17 CHAIRMAN ZECH I see none opposed.
The decision is 18 that we not have a re-start vote today.
I would ask Boston j
19 Edison, the state and local officials with the involvement of f
20 the NRC staff and TEMA as necessary, I would encourage you and I
21 commend you to continue working together on this emergency l
planning issue at the Pilgrim site so that the Commission can 22 i
23 be confident that we will be making a proper decision.
We need l
24 time to reflect on this.
That is the decision of the i
25 Commission today.
I would ask those who are involved in this r
l
104 1
very important matter to continue their efforts and in the 2
meantime the co'amission vill reflect on this issue and we will 3
expect to be hearing from the staff as progress continues in 4
the future.
5 Anything else to come before us?
6 (No response.)
l 7
CHAIRMAN EECH:
If not, we stand adjourned.
Thank 8
you very much.
9 (Whereupon, the resting was adjourned.)
10 11 12 13 14 i
15 i
16 17 18 19 20
~
21 22 23 f
24 25 i
i
t CERTIFICATE OF TRANSCRIBER This is to certify that the attached events of a meeting of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co: mission entitled l
TITLE OF MEETING: DISCUSSION /POSSI3tE 90TE ON PILGRIM RESTART PLACE OF MEETING:
Washington, D.C.
DATE OF MEETING:
TRIDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1988 i
were transcribed by me.
I further certify that said transcription is accurate and complete, to the best of my ability, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing events.
h y
s I
i Ann Riley 6 Associates, Ltd.
4 e
w
References in Support of Statem&nts Made During the October 14, 1988 Comission Meeting (Copietofreferencesareattached) 1.
Transcript (hereinaf ter Tr.) at 79. Line (hereinafter 11) 19-21.
Menorandum to Frank J. Congel. Director, Division of Radiation Protection and Emergency Preparedness, NRC, from Richard W. Krim, Assistant Associate Director, Office of Natural and Technological Hazards Programs, dated August 6, 1987,
Subject:
Offsite Emergency Planning at Pilgrim, Attachment at 2-8, 2.
Tr. at 79,11 23-25 and Tr. at 80, 11 1-5.
Id at 1.
3.
Tr. at 80,11 6-7.
Letter to Ralph G. Bird, Senior Vice President -
Nuclear, Boston Edison, from Steven A. Varea, Director, Division of Peactor Projects, NP.C. dated August 18,1987,
Subject:
FEMA Report en Offsite Emergency Planning for Pilgrim.
4 Tr. at 80,11 7-8.
Letter to NRC from Ralph G. Bird. Senior Vice President - Nuclear, Boston Edison, dated September 17, 1987,
Subject:
Sche:!ule for Providing Assistance in Addressing FEMA Issues.
5.
Tr. at 60, 11 8-12. Richard W. Krimm, Supra at 1.
6.
Tr. at 80, 11 13-15.
Id. at 1. Attachrent at 2-0.
7.
Tr. at 80,11 16-20. Memorandum to James M. Taylor, Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations, NRC, from Willian T. Russell, Regional Administr6 tor, P.egion I, dated October 19, 1988
Subject:
Pilgrim huclear Power Staticn: Energency Preparedness Public Coments; and Herorandur to Villiam J. Lazarus, Chief. Emergency Prepar6dness Section, Region I, from Craig J. Conklin, Senior Emergency Preparedness Specialist, Region I, dated hovember 1, 1988,
Subject:
Pilgrir Nuclear Power Staticr. Feetings Regarding Erergency Preparedness.
8.
Tr. at 80, 11 20-23.
Id.
9.
Tr. at 80,11 24-25 and Pl 11 1-10. Numerous letters to Massachusetti Civil Defense Agency from EPZ towns forwarding planning documents includina Town of bu:xbury, dated March 9, 1988
Subject:
Emergency Plan review; Town of Carver, dated January 12, 1988
Subject:
Emergency Plan reviev; Town of Plymouth, dated January 8,1988
Subject:
Emergency Plan review; City of Taunton, dated January 4, 1988.
Subject:
Energency Plan review; Town of Kingston, doted Ctcember 30, 1987,
Subject:
Emergency Plan revies;
i
-2 Town of Marshfield, dated August 12, 1988
Subject:
Emergency Plan, Irplerenting Procedures, Shelter Implerentation Program Sumary, and Cress Reference Table review; City of Taunton, dated August 15, 1988,
Subject:
Emergency Plan, Implementing Procedures and Cross Reference Table for review; Town of Bridgewater, 'iated September 21, 1988,
Subject:
Eu r9ency Plan, Irplementing Procedures, Corrective Action Response, and Cross Reference Table for review; Town of Kingston, dated October 5,1988.
Subject:
Inplementing Procedures, Corrective Action Response, and Cross Reference Table for review; and Town of Carver, dated October 4,1988,
Subject:
Emergency Plan, Implerenting Procedures. Sheltering Implementation Progran and Cross Reference Table for review.
Letters to FEMA Region I from Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency (MCOA) forwarding plarning documents including:
l MCDA te FEFA Region I, dated February 4,1965.
Subject:
for the towns of Plymouth, Carver, Kingston and the city of Taunton for i
review; PCDA to FEFA Region I, dated September 6,1988,
Subject:
Emergency Plan, Implementing Procedures, Shelter Irplerer.tation Program and Cross Peference Table for the Town of Marshfield and Erergency Plan, f
3 Irplerertation Procedures and Crcss Reference Table for the City of
}
4 Taunton for review; 1
1 MCDA to FEPA Regien I, dated September 23, 1988
Subject:
Area !!
l 1
Emergency Plan for review; and l
MCDA to FEPA Region I, dated September 30, 1988,
Subject:
Irplercenting Procedures and Cross Reference Table for review.
~
- 10. Tr. at 81,11 17-19. NRC Inspection Report 50-29/88-08, Yankee Ateric
)
Power Company, dated June 7,1998; and NRC Inspection Report 50-271/88-13 j
J Verr.ont Yar.kee Nuclear N 1r Corporatien, dated October C, 1988. Although i
j FEMA reports er these two exercises teve not yet been issued, the f.RC, by its participation in the Regional Assistance Comittee (P/C) process, was aware at the tine of the October 14, 1988 Comission Meeting that deficiencies identified in the statewide plan had been corrected.
l l
i 1
- 11. Tr. at 82, 11 5-9.
Letter to NRC from Ralph G. Bird, Senior Vice i
President-Nuclear, Boston Edison, dated October 7, 19E8
Subject:
j l
Boston Edison Corpany Coments on Draft of "A Report on Progress Made in Emergency Planning for Pesponse to an Accident at Pilgrim l
Nuclear Pewer Station" Attachrent at 49 and 58.
t i
- 12. Tr. at EC, 11 10-12. Letter from Michael S. Dukakis, Governer Comonwealth of Messachusetts, to Lando Zech, Chairman, NRC, dateo October 11, 1968,
Subject:
Forwarcing of "A Report on Progress Made in Emergency Planning l
fer Response to an Accident at Pilgrim huclear Pcwer Station" Attachrent
[
j at 38 and 39.
l l
l 1
4 l
3
- 15. Tr. a t 82,11 12-14. Memorandum to William Rassell, Pegional Administrator, Pegion I, trom William Lazarus, Chief Energency Preparedness Section.
Region I, dated Septerber 9, 1988,
Subject:
Status of Offsite Emergency Preparedness at Pilgrim; and Memo to William Lazarus, Chief Emergency Preparedness Section, Region I from Craig Conklin, Senior Emergency Preparedness Specialist, Region I, dated October 20, 1988
Subject:
Hands On Training for Transportatien Providers for the Pilgrim EPZ.
- 14. Tr. at 83, 11 5-10. Dukakis, Su ra at Attachment 32; and Letter to Charles V. Barry, Secretary, Executive ce of Public Safety, Comonwealth of Massachusetts, from John t.. Lovering. Deputy Director, Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency and Office of Erergency Preparedness, dated October 11, 19E2,
Subject:
Feasibility Study Involving the Suitability of the State Depart-rent of Publiu Korks Garage located in Uellesley, Ma, as a Potential Peception/ Processing Center for Evacuees in the Event of an Accident at the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Plyrcuth, MA, at Attachment at ?-8.
- 15. Tr. at 83,11 10-15. Letter to Peter Agnes, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Public Safety, Cerronwealth of Massachusetts from Penald A. Varley, Staff Assistant to Ser.ior Vice President - Nuclear, dated December 23, 1987
Subject:
P.eception Cer.ter Feasibility Analysis, At Attachrent at 1-3,
- 16. Tr. at 84,11 2-7 Letter to Peter Agres, Jr., Assistart Secretary of Public Safety Comonwealth of Massachusetts from Robert C. Spearin, Director Departrent of Civil Defense, City of launton, dated October 5, 1985,
Subject:
corrents on the draft "A Report on Progress Made in Energency Planning for Response to an Accident at Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station".
- 17. Tr. at 84, 11 8-9.
Letter to Peter Agnes, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Public Safety, Coronvcalth of Massachusetts from Ralph G. E>ird, Senter Vice President - Nuclear, dated October 26, 1907,
Subject:
Pilgrin EPZ Public Beach Population Aralysis; Letter to Peter Agnes, Jr., l.ssistant Secretary of Public Safety, Cemonwealth of Massachusetts from Ralph G.
Bird, Senior Vice President - Nuclear, dated June 30, 1987,
Subject:
inforration to resolve concerns in FEMA Self-Initiated Review; Letter I
to Edward A. Thomas, Cheirran Regional Assistance Comittee, FEMA Pegion I from Ronald R. Fellamy, Chief Emergency Preparedness and Radio-logical Protection Branch, Region I, dated June 12, 1987,
Subject:
I l
"Evacuation Time Estincte and Beach Population Steltering", "Mobility l
Irpaired", and "Special Facilities", ard Pilgrir ! ition Evacuation Time Estimates and Traffic Management Plan Update, datec August 25, 1988.
18, Tr. at fa, 11 10-12 Parshfield Shelter Implerentatier. Program, subs.Itted for reviev Augu't 12, 19EE.
Dukakis, Supra at Attachtert at (1-64 The f4rshfield prograr is representative of programs for each of the other EFZ l
ccrrunities that the staff was aware were in various stages of preparatfor I
at the tire of the Octcber 14,19EE Comission Meeting.
l
i:
i i '
- 19. Tr. at 84, 11 12-16 Letter to to Charles Y. Barry, Secretary, Executive Office of Public Safety Comonwealth of Massachusetts, fron llenry G.
Vickers Regional Director FEMA, Region I, dated August 22, 1988, j
Subject:
Pesponse to Comonwealth concerns on Emergency Preparedness issues.
- 20. Tr. at 84, 11 17-18. Supra at Item 18.
1 21.
Tr. at 90, 11 12 25 and Tr. at 91, 11 1-3.
Amon referenced in Item 9. See letter free Robert J. g the numerous letters Boulay Director Civil Defense Agency and Office of Emergency Preparedness, Correnwealth of Massachusetts, to Edward A. Thomas, Chaiman Regional Assistance
{
Comittee, FEMA, Pegion I, dated Septettber 23, 1988.
l
[
- 22. ir. et 91, 11 10 25 and Tr. at 92, 11 1-7 humerous letters previously l
cited in Iten 9.
('
23.
Tr. at 92, 11 12-14. This statement referred to a specific visit made to I
the Durbury EOC on October 6,1968 (see Enclosure 2. Attachr4nt 4), and was not r.eant to imply all the EOCs had been toured prior to October 14,
)
1988. Since that tire, the staff has toured each of the seven local EOCs 4 r the Pilgrim Station (see Enclosure 3).
l' 2*,
Tr. at 92,11 15-22. Dukakis, Supra at Attachment at 11.
l
- 25. Tr. at 93, 11 1 25 and Te, at 94, 11 1-3.
Testimony Before the Senate I
i Labor and Ituran Resources Conriittee Regarding The Pilgrim Nuclear Power Statier, by Dr. Thoras Murley, Director, Office of huelear Peactor j
Regulation, hFC, dated January 7,1998, at page 8 of prepared statement.
i 40.
Tr. at 95, 11 3 20 and Tr. at 96, 11 1-4 Frior to the Octeber 14,
(
1989 retting, the staff had interacted prirarily with the Cors.onwealth l
i on technical issues related to emergency planning. The staff tes aware j
j of local off tetals' concerns regarding eurgency preparedr'ess through t
J attendance at the meeting held by the staf' anc others at which emergency preparedness issues were raised Csee enclosure 2). After the October 14, 1988 reeting, the staff ret with all seven Civil Defense Directors, two I
Selectren and others (see enclosure 3).
l
- 27. Tr. at 97, 11 20-25 and Tr. at 98, 11 1 a.
See information provided ir.
]
Items 7, 9 and 17.
]
2E. Tr. at 90,11 10-25 and Tr. at 99,11 1.
See inferration provided in 17 and 11. Letter to Ronald Eellamy, NPC from Mary C. Ott and Donald P.
a Muirhead Jr., M.D., Co-Chairr,cr., Citizens Urging Responsible Energy, dated 6
September 3C,198S. St.bject: Report on the Preblems of Evacuation a4 i
l Steltering of Eeach/Trttsient Populations Due to the Proximity of Pilgrir i station.
}
I I
i I
l l
,E.p* H %',
UNITED ST ATEs
{ g,.,
's, NUC6E AR REGULATCRY COMMC'_ ION f
s, nAamwof ow. o.c. sease i,
/
October 27, 1968 CMAlmuaN Fr. Peter M. Agnes Jr.
Assistant Secretary i
Executive Office of Public Safety The Cerrenwealth of Passachusetts one Ashburton Place s oster. Massachusetts 02108 tear Pr. Agnes:
i in resconse to your recuest of Octeter 17. 1978. I am enclosing a cecy cf the transcript of the Octeter 12 1988 Cornission reettrg en the Pilgrie Nuclear Power Stat,1cn.
The NRC staff has identifiec statements rade at the meeting that they believe rey reec clarification.
A copy of their suggested clarifi-cations is also enclosed.
Sincerely.
D K A% W.
A' Lande W. Z h
Jr Encicsures:
(a)
Ccerission Petting Trar. script (t)
Staff fropesed Clarificatiens.
cc:
The Honorable Evelyn Murphy i
Originated: NRR:Wessman l
l i
i ge+tetcrb/46 (f.
A g i Federal Emergency Management Agency g/
'3-%'
Washinpon, D.C. 20472 AUG 6 1967 MDCMCf.H TCR Frank J. Cornel, Director Division of hdiation Protection and Emer,pency Prepredness office of Nxlear hea: tor A*7alation U.
xlea 1
ry Ccmissien FEM:
shra w
Assist. ant Asm>ciate Director office of Natural and Technological Maurds Prcgres s'.T: JECT:
offsite Derpency Plannin; at Pilgrian In my nrcraMr to ycu on July 13, 1907, I stated the Federal Dergeny wape ent A;en:y (FD%) wculd deliver to the Nxlear Re7alatory Car.ission (NM) a firdin; cn the adepacy of the of fsite erergency preparedness plans for the Pilgria Nxlear P:wer Stati:n on or abmt Anast 15, 1987. This is an u;date of cur prwicus intsrim findirg Wie was transrsitted to the NM cn N:Nercer 2,1983, alern with a ecpy of the exercise re;crt evaluatirg the initial yoint State ard lo:a1 of fsite radiolo;1 cal rergency prepredness eie reise. 7hese re;crta were provided to the h% pursuant to the NE/tD%
wera.d.rt of Understardirg of tbweer 1980, ard in response to the NN's ropest ior assistance con:ernirg erwegen:y prepar,1wss issues at Pilgrim dated Septe-cer 6,1983. In additico, in a rurcraniss to NM on Mar $ 31, 1987, FD% irdt:ated that the res;cnse to the related 2.206 petition wxid
- e cocsolidatet with the rmdts cd FWA's self-initiated review of the everall sute of of fsite e orgency pre;.arviness an$ other relevant informtion.
F&A's re:crt, entitled 'Self-Initiated kvies and Interi:t Findirq for tAe Fal;ri.- Na:1 ear P:wer Sutton' dated Amst 4,1917, is atta:ned. In:la$ed i
as atta:.ents to the report are 'FD% Carvnts cr. the k;cr1, to tAe Cow.-cr l
on CNr;en;y ?reparv1wss for an A:cident at the P11gri-Nx1 car Pcwer Station'
<1stoj July 29,1967 (lecated at Tab 1 in the attated bin $er), ard FWNs
'Ar.alysts of kergenc, Prepare 1 ness Issses at Pilgrim Ns: lear P:ver Sutton Aaised in a Fetitten to the NE dated July 15, 1966'. FD%'s analysis of tAe issses raised in the 2.206 ptition is d.sted July 29,1987, and is 1ccated at Tac 2 of the atta: nod birder.
l 5sset cn the Self-Initiate $ Mview an$ Interir Firdirg, FD% has concluded tAat Kusa:husetts of fsite radiolcgical rergency plavirg ard prepareiness are traiow. ate to protect the public health and safety in the went of an a::ident at the Pil;rtm Na:1 ear P:wer Station. Be:.sase of the chan;ed cir-o -stan:es dis ;sse2 in the re;crt, the finfin; of aje;4:y ccntaired in FD%'s previxs interi. findin; rc 1coger applies a d that interis firdin; is herety s;;erseded.
If yx ra.e ag 4,esticcs, plesso conta:t N 4tl646-28U.
'l At ta *.~e
- tS As StatM 1
1 n o un n
,,U /# UWMO t
1.
SUMMARY
on September 5. 1986, the Federal Energency Management Agency (FIKA) informed the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that it was undertaking a
review of its September 29 1982 Interim Finding for the Pilgria Nuclear Power Station because of concerns raised during meetings in the Spring of 1986 and information received subsequent to those meetings from local officials, the ccamenwealth, and other interested parties.
TEMA identified six issues during the course of that review:
Lack of eva' Jation plans for public and private schools and daycare centers.
Lack of a reception center for people evacuating to the ncrth.
Lack of identifiable public shelters for the beach populatten.
Inadequate planning for the evacuation of the special needs population.
Inadegwate planning for the evacuation of the transport dependent population.
Overall lack of progress in planning and apparent diminution in emergency preparedness.
TEMA has analyzed these issues pertaining to the radiological energency response plan and has reviewed the plan and exercise reports in conformance with applicable standards.
FEMA concludes that the plan and preparedness for the state 1
and local governments within the plume exposure pathuay for the Pilgria Nuclear Power Station are not adequate to protee*,
the health and safety of the public in the event of an accident at
- he Pilgria Nuclear Power Station. This Interia Finding supercedes the Interia Pinding of September
- 29. 1982.
BACECROUND on June it.
- 1981, the Director of the Massachusetts Civil Defense tgency and office of Energency Preparedness (McCA) sutaitted te the Federal Energency Management Agency (TEMA).
on tehalf cf the Ocvernor, the state Comprehensive Energency Respense Flan.
tcgether with its Annexes, for Massachusetts and the local consunities within the Plume Exposure
.taergenct Flanning :one (EP:n for the Pilgria Nuclear Power
. ation located in Plymouth.
Massachusetts. In his letter cf sransmittal which acceepanied this plan he
- stated, as required by Federal Regulation (Etg.
44 CFR 350.7),
that "this plan is.
in the opinion of the Massachusetts Cistl Oefense
- Agency, adequate to protect the public health and safety of the cosacnwealth's citiae,s within the destinated teersency planning ranes of the P11gris Statien and provides 2
for appropriate protective sensures to be taken by the State and local governments in the event of a
radiological I
i energency at the Pilgris Station".
l l
FEh!4 and the Regional Assistence Committee (FACI reviewed
(
[
this plan and issued a report of its review in Cetober, 1981.
As a consequence of this report the Cossonwealth resised the i
plan.
feria and the RAC reviewed this revision and issued a i
i second report containing an analysis of areas 6here the plan was weak in September, 1982.
FIriA has received no response from the Ccasonseslth regarding further revision of its l
plan.
In the anteria. TEMA sponsored a public meeting. held on June
[
3.
1910, to discuss the Commenwealth's Radtelegical Emergency l
Respranse plan for the pilgria Nuclear Fewer Station.
The
[
t follcwang issues were raised by the public at the meeting:
The ability to evacuate consunities within the
(
j l
10-sale Ep The ability to evacuate Cape Coo beyond the 10-mile EF:.
j Reliability and effectiveness of the strens.
Training and education of
- teachers, school bus j
drisers, and hospital personnel.
Information brochures for the
- public, including j
l i
)
1 l
l
-J
-~
l Policy on the use of radioprotective druss.
i Protection of the elderly and o'hers with special r.e e d s. i i
The Comennwealth responded to all these concerns, statins that the plan.' provide (s) adequately for safe and orderly i
evaeustion of communities within the 10-sile EP:"8 and f
pledstna to work toward further taprovement of the plan.
l FEh!A then issued an Interia Tinding for the Pilgria Nuclear Power Station on September 29 1982.
It found that although l
there were probless with the plan. "the state plan and local plans together are adequate to protect the health and safety of the public."8
)
Exercises testing this plan were conducted on March 3.
1982.
June 29, 1983, and September 5. 1985, a Resedial Exercise was conducted en october 29, 1985; and TEMA observed a Drill on I
August 15.
1984.
"Deficiencies",
"areas requiring corrective action",
and "areas recossended for taprovement"
- To11cw-up to the June 3. 1982 Fublic Meeting. TIMA.
p.
1 f
I lbid..
p.
1 8 Interiz Tindings Joint State and Local Radiologict1 taergency Response Capabilities for the Pilgria. Nuclear Fewer Station
}
plyrouth. Massachusetts. FEMA. September 27. 1982.
p.
5.
l i
4 i
i i
were identified.
As FEMA now uses the ters.
- defletencies' are problems identified in plan implementation which preclude a
finding that a plan is adequate to protect the health and safety of the public.
"Areas requiring corrective action" are defined as inadequacies in State and local gosernment performance observed during an exercise; although their 1
correctiun as
- required, they are not considered, by thesselsvs.
to so adversely impact public health and i
- safety, as to preclude a
finding that the plans and preparedness are adequate to protect public health and safety.
- Areas reccamended for improvement" are defined as probles areas observed during an exercise that are not considered to adversely impact public health and safety.
No defactenetes resann outstanding frca FIKt's esaluation of these vsercises. Many "areas requiring ccrrective action" and "are.s reconeended for taprovement",
- howeser, have nts been i
l addressed to date.
l I
By
- March, 1985, status of off-site radiological emergency response planning for the Pilgria Nuclear Fower Station was:
11) aany planning problems remained unresolved fros the Octcher.
1981 KAC Review; 121 the Consonwealth had not respended to the September.
198: T.AC Review; and (3) it i
had not provided FEMA with schedules of corrective i
actions for the problems identified in the 1982 and 1983 l
l 5
i
i v.sercises, which (as required by FIMA guidancel had been due within 30 days following the issuance of the exer'cise reports.
On March 6, 1985 FIKA.
therefore, informed the Ccanonwealth by letter that, because of unresolved energency planning issues.
It was suspending processing of the Massachusetts request for formal energency plan approval ande pursuant to 44 CFR 350.
On June 20.
1985 the Cossonwealth P
sent F U14 4 schedule, both of actions it had taken and specific measures it was planning to take.
to correct the prealens identified in the 1983 exercise; plus general steps i
taken to correct probless identified in the 1980 exercise.
[
l
- Hewever, the plan improvements the State promised have not i
>et been delivered to FIKA.
i i
In 2ts esalvatacn of the Septee.ber !.
1985 P11sram Exeresse FEMA fewnd that maar of the previously identified probless f
had been corrected, but it identified new probless and four f
l "deficiencies".
The Consonwealth corrected the "deficien-I cies", as evidenced in an Cetober 29. 1985 Resedial Exercise.
(
It has not
- yet, however.
provided FIKA a
schedule of I
t correctise actions for the 1985 exercise.
FIKt guidance j
requires the submittal of a schedule of corrective act!cas within 30 days of the issuance of the exercise report.
j i
f l
6 l
l
i I
on Octcher 30.
1985. FEMA again informed the Commonwealth by letter that the processing of the
" 350" request was not progressing because of the many, unresolved issues identifi in the 1981 and 1982 RAC
- Review, and observed Jurang t*
estreises.
Tb!A also requested copie of the 1985 version o.
the 3ccal plans.
which were provided in June 1986.
The Commonwe01th replied to FEMA's letter on June 6
'1986.
at which t.'an it outlined the initiatives it was taking in order to resolse the outstanding
- issues, and indicated the areas in which improvements had been made in the state plan and procedures.
This reply did not, however.
constitute a schedule of <:orrective actions because it did not provide a i
date by which plan improsesents were to be c spleted. In sus, the Self inatanted Review was based on the 1982 Massachusetts Kadeclosteal
!=ersency Response plan ar.d the 198! version of the local plans.
TEMA first became aware cf potentially sernous prebless with l
the Ccanonwealth's plan during a series of seetings with the f
f Consensealth and local consunities in the Spring of 198(.
{
- ssues raised at these meetings, and information received f
subsequent 1r.
Indicated that FEMA should review its Interna i
Finding concerning the energency respense plan for the I
Filgria N'welear Fcher Station.
Based on the inforzation it i
7
received.
FEMA decided to conduct a review of the emergency response plan and preparedness for the Dilgria Nuclear Power Station and so informed the Commonwealth in a letter to MCDA d
on September 5, 1986.
On December 22, 1986, the Secretary of Public Safety, Charles
- Barry, forwarded to FEMA a copy of the "Report to the Governor on Emergency Preparedness for an Accident at the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station" (hereinafter called the Barry Report). This report stated that the Massachusetts plen and its preparedness are inadequate to protect the health and safety of the public in the event of an accident at the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station.
FEMA was subsequently informed that the Governord and the Director of the Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency: had endorsed the Barry Report.
In the course of its self-initiated review, FEMA has treated this report as the authoritative and current position of the Commonwealth.
i Letter from Charles Barry, Secretary of Public Safety to 4
Edward A.
Thomas, December 22, 1986.
s Letter from Robert J. Boulay, Director MCDA. to Edward A Thomas.
April 10, 1987.
8
HVo ly 'w/ 07:45 P02 1
' esq9 e ce a4 6
to.003 ecs i
% 4%
V8#TED ITATEs NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
viAmmeoroa. p. c. soses
\\*....
August 18,. 1987 i
Docket No.
50-203 Mr. Ralph G. Bird Senior Vice President Nuclear 800 Boylston Street Boston, Massachusetts 02199
$UNECT:
FEMA REPORT ON OFFSITE ENERGENCY PLANNING FOR PIL
Dear Mr. Bird:
Enclosed is the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) report ti
'Self. Initiated Review and Interim Finding for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power
$tation." which was transmitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Comission (
rarcrandurr dated August 6.1987 offsite a:nergency prepartdness for Pilgrim. FEMA has concluded that Massachusetts offsite radiological erwegency planning and preparedness are inadequate to protect the public health and safety in the event of an accident at the Pilgrio Nuclear Power $tation.
previous interir. finding of adequacy regarding offsite eatrgency prep for Pilgrir.
FEMA has identified six issues during the course of its review:
1.
Lack of evacuation plans for public and private schools and daycare canters.
2.
Lack of a reception center for people evacuating to the north.
3.
Lack of identifiable public shelters for the beach population.
4 Inadequate planning for the evacuation of the special needs population.
5.
Inadequate planning for the evacuation of the transportation dependent population.
6.
Overall lack of progress in planning and apparent diminution in erergency prepa rednes s,
i g
b'
.wv
~
C D0 y,) '
NO.003 003 ___
- ? -'
.t.
planning identified in William P. Golden's July 15The FEM FEM found that while these areas of plan weakness,were not sufficient to1 sustain the contentions raised in the Petition, resolution of these weaknesse would enhance the state's ability to prvtect the public.
We view the emergency planning 1: sues identified by FEM to be a mtter serious concern.
in part, consideration of the FCMA identified emergency pli are aware that you are providing assistance and information to the Coenonw We of Massachusetts Mrtaining to several of these issues.
respond to us with an action plan and schedule for assisting the State andWe req local govern:pents in addressing the FEMA identified emergency plannin I
for Pilgrim.
Please contact the Project Manager if you have questions.
Sincerely, e.
'a r tor Division of React rejects - I/I!
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated e
e-- - - -
~re--,--a
,n.,_n----
,,,,,w-_--,-,v----o-
.ma-w
9 c
.cnnwas.
Eseevtr.e off,ces Soo Syston street Boston, Massachusetts 02199 Ralph G. Bird Senior v ce bewe91 - Nscles' September 2 7,1987 BECo Ltr.#87-148 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Document Control Desk Mashington, D.C.
20555 Docket 50-293 License No. DPR-35
SUBJECT:
Boston Edison Ccepany Action Plan and Schedule for Providing Assistance in Addressing FEHA Issues
Dear Sir:
As requested by Mr. Varga's letter of August 18, 1987, transmitting a copy of the FEMA report entitled "Self Initiated Review and Interia Finding of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station", we are enclosing an action plan and schedule for assisting the Comonwealth of Hassachusetts and local governments in addressing the FEWA identified emergency planning issues for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station.
The Comonwealth has reviewed and concurs with our assessments as presented in the action plan and schedule.
The enclosed action plan and schedule identifies various "subissues" derived from the FEMA report and sets forth the current status, the planned assistance to be provided by Boston Edison to the Comonwealth and local governments, the target schedules for resolutior, and as necessary, an explanatory com.ent. As explained more fully in the introduction, the action plan and schedule is part of a comprehensive program of assistance by Boston Edison to the Comonwealth and local governments in upgrading the offsite emergency response prc, grams relating to the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station.
b
- A n m.., _.. __
n U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
,e
/
Page 2 Please do not hesitate to contact either myself or Mr. Een Varley at (617) 747-8544 if any additional information is required.
Ralph G. Bird RGB/div Enclosure cc: Mr. Steven A. Yarga, Director Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D.C.
20555 Mr. R. H. Nessman, Project Manager Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7920 Norfolk Avenue Bethesda, MD 20814 Hr. Richard Krim., Assistant Associate Director FEHA 500 C Street - Federal Plaza Washington, D.C.
20472 Mr. Edward Thomas TEK'. - Region 1 J. h. McCormaet Post Office and Court House Boston, KA 02109 Mr. Peter Agnes, Jr.
Co.onwealth of RA Assistant Secretary of Public Safety 1 Ashburton Place - Room 2133 Boston, KA 0210B U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Cox.ission Region 1 - 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Senior NRC Resident Inspector Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Rocky Hill Road Plymouth, MA 02360 Henry Vickers, Regional Director FEMA - Region 1 J.W. McCormack Post Office and Court House Boston, MA 02109 l
D
- f %,\\
tNTED 8 TAT 1e g,
3 wucu"=====**a 00T 191988 en 4PS ALLS 80ALI 20AD uma cw emuss4A. PesmeywAmA tessa MEMOMNDUM FOR: James M. Taylor, Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations FROM:
William T. Russell Regional Administrator, Region I StifuECT:
PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PUBLIC COPNENTS The attached tables identify speakers, their affiliation and the general Energ-ency Preparedness subject area discussed during meetings between NRC officials and the public and local and state officials. This is a partial list of meet-ings based upon a best ef fort over the last few days.
A listing of those meetings considered is noted below:
h 1.
August le, 1987
- FEM Region I, Boston, M 2.
October 8, 1987
- Cceonwealth of M Meeting, Region I 3.
January 7, 1988
- Senator Kennedy Field Hearing, Plymouth, M 4.
February 9,1988
- Comonwealth of M Meeting, Boston, MA 5.
February 18, 1988 - Public Meeting, Plynowth, M 6.
May 11,1988
- Public Meeting, Plymouth, M 7.
August 15, 1988
- Plymouth Board of Selectmen Meeting, Plymouth, M 8.
August 22, 1988
- Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Fraatngham, M 9.
August 25, 1988
- SALP Management Meeting, Plymouth, M
- 10. August 26, 1988
- ACRS Subcoenittet Meeting, Pl>3outh, M
- 11. September 8, 1983 - ACRS Full Cosmittee Meeting, Bethesda, K) 12.
Septteber 29, 1988 - Public Meeting, Plyzeuth, M
- 13. October 4,1988
- Plymouth Board of Selectmen Meeting, Plymouth, M
- 14. October 5,1988
- NRC Meeting with BEco and the Commonwealth of M.
Rockville, M0 This listing does not reflect all settings or visits in which EP issues were discussed but rather provides for reference to those meetings during which transcripts were taken or meeting notes were available.
The staff is continuing to develop a complete list of all meetings during which toergency preparedness (EP) issues were discussed.
This review will be corpleted by November 1, 1988.
/
William T. Russell Regional Administrator f
h
)h
\\
Memorandum for James M. Taylor 2
00T 191988 Attachments:
As stated l
cc w/ Attachments-T. Nrley, NRA bec w/ Attachments:
W. Kane, DRP
$. Collins, DRP i: si R @
L. Doerflein, DRP
- 5. Ebneter, OR$$
R. Bellamy, DRSS i
ATTAC M EWT 1 Meeting
Title:
FEM Self-Initiated Review Ofscussion Location:
FEM Region I, Boston, Massachusetts Date:
August 14, 1987 Speaker Position / Title EP Issue / Reference Peter W. Agnes, Jr. Assistant Secretary of Facts /judgesents in FEM keport Public Safety, Consonwealth of Review process, 44 CFR 350 Massachusetts Ability of Coesomrealth to respond to questions on the issues Cosmonwealth planned response to issues Need for an exercise Expanding the Pilgrim EPZ
,._.,,-,,,-.n-
1 l
ATTACHMENT 2 Meeting
Title:
Coenonwealth of Massachusetts Meeting Location:
Region I Date:
October 8, 1987 Speaker Position / Title EP Issue / Reference John Judge Governor's Office Request hearing on EP' lawrence Alexander State House EP should be approved by Governor Representative and local Selectmen Peter W. Agnes, Jr. Assistant Secretary Working in good faith to gather of Public Safety information with BEco. Don't know yet if adequate plans are possible William Russell Regional Administrator FEKA EP deficiencies would be ad-dressed prior to restart Meeting Sumary dated De: ember 4,1987 4
e
ATTACHMENT 3 Meeting
Title:
Senator Kennedy Field Hearing Location:
Plymouth, Massachusetts Date:
January 7,1988 Speaker Positten/ Title EP Issue / Reference Senator Kennedy U.S. Senator NRC considering restart despite FEM and Massachusetts provides that EP fs not adequate Concerned Re:
> 10 miles (Cape Code,etc.)
William Abbott President, Plymouth Of fsite radiation monitoring is Co. Nuclear Connittee unsatisf actory Ann Waitkus-Arnold Chairperson, Disabled Has seen little real efforts by Persons Advisory Board responsible agencies to ensure on Nuclear Evacuation health and safety of special needs for State Office on population Handicappec Affairs inadequate special needs survey
- by BEco Dr. Grace Healy Chairperson, Plymouth Committee Report in 3/87 finds Nuclear Matters offsite EP unsatisfactory and Conei t tee makes specific recoerendation in-ciuding revised plan and full exercise before restart Offsite monitoring unsatisfactory David Malaguti Chairmen, Plymouth Board Plant should not restart until of Selectmen revised town response plan in place Evacuation difficult Rachel $himshak MA$$PIRC Citi2 ens not inforted on emergency response procedures No plans for private schools Delay restart for workable plans and irplementation 2
Speaker Position / Title EP Issue / Reference Senator Golden State Senator EP for Pilgria extremely difficult Lt. Governor Murphy Acting Governor Absurd that NRC can over rule FEMA Comenwealth of Massachusetts William Shannon Attorney General State is supposed to be heavily Comonwealth of involved in decision of EP adequacy Massachusetts Peter v. Agres, Jr. Assistant Secretary Existing plans not adequate of /ublic Safety Comonwealth of NRC unclear on EP restart criteria Massachusetts Some EP progress long way to go - lots of inade-quacies Don't know if adequate EP is pos-Sible Dr. Prethre.-Stith Secretary of Public Massachusetts would lite to estab-Health, Corrnonwealth lish better of f-site radiation of Massachusetts (real-time)sonitoring Richard Krire Assistant Director, FEM Made statements and answered a variety of EP questions for Senator Kennedy with respect to FE)tA's role Dr. Thomas Marley NRC:NRR Director Made statements and answered Williar Russell NRC:RI Regional various cuestions from Ac-in i s t ra to r Senator Kennedy WTE:
The following NRC representatives spoke and answered questions Dr. Thomas Murley William Russell MTE:
The following individuals spoke at the Kennedy hearing but did not directly raise EP issues:
Neil Johnson, Chaiman, Duxbury Comittee on Nuclear Matters Mary Ott, Co-Chairperson, Citizens Urging Responsible Energy (CURE)
Feter Fornan, State Representative Lawrence Alexander, State Representative House Chairnan of Joint Legislature Comittee on Energy Sharon Pollard, Secretary of Energy, Comonwealth of Massachusetts
ATTAC M ENT 4 Meeting
Title:
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Meeting Location:
Boston, Massachusetts Date:
February 9,1988 Speaker Position / Title EP Issue /Refereny Samuel J. Collins Deputy Director Meeting was conducted at the Division of Reactor request of the Commonwealth to Projects, RI explain the NRC process being con-ducted for the Februa ry 18, 1988 Public Meeting to obtain consents on the Pilgris Nuclear Power Sta-tion Restart Plan Comonwealth of Massachusetts was Although the serting was not to represented by Local Officials / Elected discuss EP, many individuals Of ficials and staf f/ CURE /MLDA and the expressed concerns and raised EP Office of Public Safety issues.
Consitments were made to provide EP 10 CFR references and to conduct a EP process conference call with Mr. Agnes 4
1 i
j ATTACHMENT S Meeting
Title:
Public Meeting Location:
Plymouth, Massachusetts Date:
February 18, 1988 l
Speaker Position / Title EP Issue / Reference Ms. Houghton Citizen Wants to see evacuation tested prior to restart l
l Ms. Petrocelli Citizen Evacuation plans should be tested prior to restart Alba Thompson Chairman, Plymouth Board No effective energency plan; draf t of Selectmen plan under review, implementing I
procedures nowhere near draf t form Evacuation routes at, ;ften over-leaded under normal conditions l
l i
Shelters for transient population not identified.
l Senator Kirby State Senator Restart should not be allowed un-til adequate energency response plans are in place i
Ms. Treenkle Citizen A
workable approved evacuation plan must be coa.pleted prior to restart Kathy Anderson Aide to Senator Kennedy Wants FEMA approved evacuation plan prior to restart Mr. Quaid Citizen Insufficient sheltering Dr beach population High tide makes evacuation of Ovibury beach impossible Roads are inadequate for evacua-tion of area 2
Cpeaker Position / Title EP issue /Referemr*
Mr. Sangster/
Citizen Will NRC allow is..
. nout Dr. Muirhead Co-Chairperson, CURE being satisfied that evacuation facilities are adequate for any accident?
Does the emergency planning spec-trum of accidents include a breach of containment?
Ms. Fehtow citizen Emergency plan needs to be revised and tested prior to restart Mr. McClusky Citizen Evacuation of any kind would not be effectively handled due to human element Mr. Peter Forman State Representative Presented for the record, a copy of the State Legislature's Report by the Special Committee on Pilgria Recommendation VI deals with EP (copy provided)
Mr. Veracca Citizen Sirens and speakers are unintel-ligible during tests Ms. Cook Citizen Evacuation plan is terrible Roads are inadequate Hospitals not capable of treating radiation victims Mr. Jerry Hayes Carver Civil Cefense Emergency planning is inadequate Agency OPS Officer for restart; in particular, evac-and Chief Planner uation time estimates and shelter survays are in error
Attachment S 3
Speaker Position / Title Ep Issue / Reference John Barrows Citizen People on Cape Cod should be (Written 2/18/88) given respirators to give them to evacuate to safe location John MacMahon Selectaen, Town of Oppo>ed to restart until all local Marshfield emergency preparedness measures are (Written 12/18/87) in place, fully tested and ready for implementation Kathy McKenna Citizen Opposed to restart without a work-(Written 10/28/87) able evacuation plan Susan Littlefield Citizen Opposed to restart for:
(Written 2/12/88) 1.
Lack of evacuation plan 2.
Lack of shelters 3.
Inadequate roads to ev cuate Cape Cod and Duxbury 1 tach Donald Leach Citizen Inadequate road system for evacua-(Mailed 2/18/88) tion Francis J. Kane Selectrin, Town of Cities improvements; however, feels Carver auch still to be done in areas of (Written 2/17/88) evacuation and training of local civil defense personnel Deanna Gregory Citizen
$1rens and speakers unintelligible (Mailed) during tests Genevieve Osborn Citizen There can be no safe evacuation (Mailed 3/4/88) plan because of gridlock on roads In addition te the coment/ questions noted above on Ep there were 11 other individuals who specifically included resolution of EP issues in their request for an adjudicatery hearieg.
ATTACHMENT 6 N eting
Title:
Public Meeting location:
Plymoutt, Massachusetts Date:
N y 11, 1988 Speaker Position / Title EP Issue / Reference Peter Forsan State Representatin NRC appears comfortable in not going along with a state or local determination on the adequacy of the emergency plan Alba Thompson Chairman, Plymouth Board FEMA technical review is of drafts, of Selectmen not approved at state or local levels.
Plymouth only has 2 of 80 implementing procedures Senator Kirby State Senator Prior to restart, there should be full emergency rasponse plans in place David Q; aid Citizen Discusses FEM report and RAI Re:
beach evacuation James Petros Citizen Evacuation of people with special needs Training of emergency personnel Ron Bellamy Chief Facilities Committed to assuring scoe deson-Radiological 5afety stration that the mobility impaired and Safeguards and special needs population could Branch, NRC:RI be adequately protected prior te restart Ann Arnold Chairperson, Disabled Any plans for special needs around Persons Advisory Board the Rowe area are a joke for Nuclear Evacuation for State Office on Responsibility of EP re FEM and Handicapped Af fairs who makes final decision on ade-i quacy Do any plants have EP plans with final approval?
(Answer Connecticut) 2 e
Speaker Position / Title EP !ssue/ Reference Steve Coeley President, We the People Appropriateness of sheltering and administration of potassium iodine David Vogler Selectmen, Town of Duxbury has not approved any draf t Duxbury emergency response plan Two of five communities did not submit any plans for review Exchange followed with Dr. Be11any on who submitted plans, what's draf t "approved" etc.
Gerald Hayes Carver EP Coordinator Discussion on EP plan development and review - BEco intteidation and control of process Selectmen never approved any plans for sub-mittal to FD4A Mary Ott Chairpersons, CURE No evacuation plans Dr. Muirhead 1.
Ability te evacuate based on plume speed 2.
Status of shelters
1 i
I ATTACHMENT 7 Meeting
Title:
Plymouth Board of Selectmen Location:
Plymouth, Massachusetts Date:
August 15, 1988 Speaker Position / Title EP Issue / Reference Saftuel J. Collins Deputy Director Meeting was conducted to brief the Division of Reactor Board of Selectmen on the Inte-Projects, NRC:RI grated Assessment Teae Inspection process and subsequent meeting schedule Alba Thompson Chairsan, Plymouth Board Expressed general EP concerns on of Selectmen behalf of town i
e
ATTACHMENT 8 Meeting
Title:
Ccamonwealth of Massachusetts Meeting Location:
Framingham, Massachusetts Date:
August 22, 1988 Speaker Position /Ti tle EP 1ssue/ Reference P. Agt es, Jr.
Assistant Secretary of Need to rewrite plans and planning Public Safety process following the "Barry Commonwealth of Report" FEMA sheltering policy.
Massachusetts third reception
- center, beach sheltering Public Information brochures Appreval of RERP Plans J. Hausner Massachusetts Civil Draf t implementing procedures for Defense Agency towns reviewed / approved i
Agreement between BEco and private providers for EP resources Communications / notifications Expansion of the EPZ E. Fratto Not Known Training of people within the EPZ Reception center improvements Traffic ennagveent plan T. Mathe s Department of Public Public health procedures Health l
I l
t l
ATTACHMENT 9 it e: $ LP Management Meeting i
oca on.
P1 peuth. Massachusetts Cate-August 25, 1988 Speater Position / Title EP !ssue /Reforene, Peter W. Agnes, Jr. Assistant Secretary of Major deficiencies entst in EP, Public Safety not complete, not an adequate plan Comonwealth of Massachusetts Full scale exercise needed Reference to SALP statement Re:
3 exemption for exercise on Page 37 1
1 1
l l
l l
1
ATTACHMENT 10 Meeting
Title:
ACRS Subcommittee Meeting Location:
Plymouth, Massachusetts Date:
August 26, 1984 Speaker Posi tion /Ti tle EP Issue / Reference Ron Varley BECo, Manager of EP Discussed BEco's involvement with the energency preparedness plan and the current status of the plan Samuel J. Collins Deputy Director Discussed FEMA and state coopera-Division of Reactor tion and outstanding issues Projects,NRC:RI J. Douglas Hatfield Plymouth Civil Defense Angry that team did not look at Director emergency preparedness or talt to nim Alba Thompson Chairman, Plymouth Board Don't allow restart without ade-of Selectmem quate emergency preparedness Peter V. Agnes, Jr. Assistar.t Secretary of 3 years since an exercise. We do Public Safety not have a revised emergency plan, Commonwealth cf but a totally new plan Massachusetts Lawrence Alexander Chai rran, Massachusetts Approved and tested emergency pro-Joint House Committee cedures prior to startup on Energy Ann Waitkus-Arrold Haedicapped Affairs Emergency planning is inadequate Concerning handicapped people Robert Read Town Administrator Opposes restart until approved and Kingston Board of tested emergency prepa/ednest plan Selectmen is in effect Diane Buckbee Citizens Urging Massachusetts has left her children Responsible Energy defenseless because of a lack of (CURE) an evacuation plan Joe Kreisburg Research Director Emergency evacuation plans are Massachusetts Citizens unworkable. NRC violation its orn for safe Energy resolutions or spirit of resolu-tions l
ATTACHMENT 11 Meeting
Title:
ACRS Full Committee Meeting Location:
Bethesda, Maryland Date:
September 8, 1988 Speaker Position / Title EP !ssue/ Reference Dr. Kerr ACR5 Chairman, NRC:HQ Unapproved emergency plan concerns of Dr. ;1weley and public Lack of emergency plan as it rs-lates to restart Samuel J. Collins Deputy Director EP deficiencies Division of Reactor Projects, NRC:RI Dutstanding EP issues E0P Rev. 4, containment vent hard-wire installations Responds te Mr. Carroll's ques-tions on energency exercise exemp-tion Discussion on FEMA withdrawal of approval of emergency plan and FEMA deficiencies Mr. Carecil ACR$ Coretttee, NRC:HQ Emergency esercise exemption Ralph Bird Senior Vice President-Ir;1eoentation of new E0Ps Nucleaa, BECe l
Roy Andersee Plant Manager, BEco use of simulator for EP drills and i
E0P training Mr. Vard ACR$ Cominee, HRC:HQ Discussion on restart without approved emergency plan Ron Varley EP Manager, BEto Clarification on FEKA deficiencies I
e I
1
ATTACmENT 12 Meeting
Title:
Pu'lic Meeting Location:
I /tauth, Massachusetts Date:
September 29, 1988 Speaker Position / Title EP !ssue/ Reference Peter W. Agnes, Jr. Assistant Secretary of Emergency planning not complete.
Public Safety Specifically, training, letters of Copenenwealth of M agreement, and reception centers.
Evacuation of Saguish area Kathi Anderson Representing Premature to be evaluating restart Seaator Kennedy without approved exercise offsite emergency preparedness plan Monica Conyngham Representing Issue of a workable evacuation plan Senator Kerry for the area has not been resolved Mary Lou Butler Rep re striting Don't allow restart until tested Congressman Studds evacuation plan has been completed Lawrence Alexander $ tate Representative Adequate and capable response plans are required prior to restarting Edward Kirby state Senator Quoted Mr. Russell as saying "these improvements sust addrent plans to evacuate school children and hand-icapped and other so called special needs people and should be completed before the end of the year.' Fault for plans not being ready 15 with the $ tate.
Vant eme gency response planning coe-pleted prior to restart, falted of the
'93" possibility of breaching containment or reltdcen Peter Forman
$ tate Representative Questioned authorizing resta t without emergency plant in ef fect.
Will the staf f recomend startup without an approved emergency plan in place 9
2 2
Speaker Position / Title EP !ssue/ Reference Senator Golden State Senator 2.206 Petition and why wasn't an emergency preparednes s plan a
restart itee Pat Dowd Chairman, Duxbury Board Finding several errors in draft of Selectmen plans as they are reviewed George Cameron Plymouth Board of No one from NRC or FEMA has visited Selectmen J. Douglas Hatfield Plymouth Civil Defense Discussed status of plans and Director problems with training, especially school coenittee Ann Waitkus-Arnold We The People Spoke on special needs, people evacuation Neal Johnson Chairsan, Duxbury Dunbury EOC dose reduction factors Nuclear Matters Corr.ittee David Quaic Citizen Talked on difficulty of evacuating beaches and lack of available protective clothing Shawn Dunsell Citizen Designed plan requires 80% of com-mittee to participation by pubite employees.
30% design evacuation of these tepicyee's have refused to plan for Plymouth participation Mary Lambert Citizen General cocoents on EP Rita Donahoe Presideet, Aingster Ces ents regarding evacuation of Education Association school children in Kingston (Mailed 9/23/85)
James & Lynn Abbott Citizens Comeents or EP covering the Cape (Mailed 9/23/88)
Cod area (outside EPZ)
JATACHMENT13 Meeting
Title:
Plymouth Board of Selectmen h eting Location:
Plymouth, Massachusetts Date:
October 4, 1988 Speaker Position / Title EP !ssue/ Reference Alba Thompson Chairsan, Plymouth Board NRC should not be asking BEco of Selectmen about EP at 10/5 meeting.
Lack of FEM involvement lack of direct NRC interface with Plymouth on EP satters Only drafts of basic plans Selectmen have M yet approved the drafts of:
schools, police and fire department procedures NRC is responsible if 6,ything goes wrong David Maliguti Selectmen Plans are only conceptual until proven in exercise Could NRC allow plant restart without fully apprend plans?
Gecrge Cateren selectmen All i ssues shou'.d be adjudicated Ann Vaitkus-Arnold We The People NRC does not care about special Connecticut plans, we needs approved, are unsatisf actory with respect to special needs popula-tion Die e Buckbee Citizen Unfair to reet in Rockville in-Stead of local area
REFERENCE:
R. Blough's netes -
Selectmen reetings are transertbed, but we don't get copies.
NOTE:
R. Blough appeared before Selectmen to provide an overvio of staff review and rec scendations on setting and technical issues, as folio.wp t,, 9/29/88 pubic eeeting, since 9/29 was inconvenient for most selectmen. About 2/3 of coments were on 2P; however, R. Blough provided only brief coceents and clarifi-cations (i.e.,
not corplete answers or explanations) on EP issues.
ATTACHMENT 14 Meeting
Title:
NRC Meeting with BECo and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Location:
Rockville, Maryland Date:
October 5, 19S8 Speaker Position / Title EP !ssue/Referance Peter W. Agnes, Jr. Assistant Secretary of NRC sore interesteo in views of Public Safety licensee on technical issues Commonwealth of Massachusetts NRC lets licensee make presenta-tion first in public meetings NRC never we n t to Massachusetts to invite State and locals to dis-cuss EP Expect to deliver results of 10/6 public meeting in Plymouth NRC emphasizes and spends more time on te:hnical and not EP t
issues No FEMA involvement since Fall 1987 Concerned about FEMA ef forts and I
self-initiated review ($1R)
Does not understand "objective measures" as applied to EP i
No plan in existence to provide reasonable assurance of pytlic health and safety Comments and concerns on sin FEMA i
identified issues of $1R:
a.
Evacuation plans for schools and day care centers not ade-quately addressed in an eier-cite b.
More
- people, automobiles; changes in response personnel i
Attachmeat 14 2
_5peaker Position / Title EP !ssue/Refe ence Peter W. Agnes (Continued)
NRC/ FEM say 2 reception centers adeqvate; Massachusetts needs 3 plus toprovements on 2 existing ones NRC aware of Sequish Gurnett area; locals think evacuation can't be carried out Agnes question of how bus drivers understand where they have to go No letters of agreement with bus compantes Bus driver training incomplete to W. Russell BEACONS system not coepleted All equipment requests not ad-dressed to all EPZ towns New evacuation time estimates and t ra f fic ranagement study incoe*
plete hR did not afford Massachusetts proper adjudicatery process Sumary of Issues:
Procedures incouplete, shelter utilizatter
- plans, local plan training needs to be
- finished, then condsct esercise
)
i i
1
Y.
\\
Meetings Involving Emergency Preparedness Between NRC and State / Local Officials and/or the Public Date Event 2/18/87 Meeting, Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency (MCDA) officials.
BEco and R. Bellamy (NRC).
I 5/27/87 Meeting, Plymouth Board of Selectmen with R. Bellag, W. Kane and W. McBridt.
7/14/87 Meeting with MCDA to discuss EP2 expansion.
7/23/87 Meeting between NRC and Corrnonwealth representatives.
- 8/14/87 Heeting in FEM 1 with BEco, hRC, FEMA and the Comonwealth to discuss FEM Self-Initiated Review issues.
10/7/87 Meeting between NRC and Comonwealth officials.
- 10/8/88 Meeting between NRC and Cormonwealth officials at NRC Region 1, 10/29/87 Pub 1tc meeting in Duxbury. Ma.
12/9/87 Pilgrim Exercise. Interface with Coerenwealth officials and at the EOF.
l 12/29/87 Meeting, hRC and Senator Kennedy's staff in preparation for 1/7/B' meeting, j
- 1/7/80 Strator Kennedy hearing in Plyrouth, hRC, State and Local t
officials and reebers of the public testified.
'2/9/85 Heeting between Cocronatalth and Massachusetts and hPC Restart Panel.
- 2/18/88 NRC public meeting to obtain public coments.
~
3/10/58 Petting, R. Bellany (hRC) and D. Quaid (Fesident) to tour Duxbury ceaches.
3/23/88 Meeting R. Bellamy and B. Hausner at MCDA to discuss Pilgrim status.
r
'5/11/88 hPC public reeting to provide hRC responses prior to I
public corrents.
- !dentified in 10/19/88 reecrandum W. T. Russell to J. P. Taylor.
- S/15/88 Meeting, Plymouth Board of Selectmen and NRC Pilgrim Restart Panel.
'8/22/88 Meeting, MCDA and W. Lazarus and C. Conklin to discuss offsite erwrgency preparedness.
8/23/88 NRC staff observed training for Irgle Bus Company.
8/24/88 NRC staff observed trained for Warrenton Bus Company.
'8/25/8S NRC Public SALP Meeting.
'8/26/88 ACRS subcomittee meeting in Plymouth.
'9/8/85 ACRS Full Cerrittee Meeting.
9/24/88 NRC staff observed training for Trans Network Ambulance Company.
'9/29/88 NRC Public meeting on restart recommendation.
- 10/4/88 Meeting with Plymouth Board of Selectman and NRC.
- 10/5/85 Meeting between BECO and NRR with Correnwealth participation.
~
10/6/86 Meeting, R. Bellamy and C. O'Neill, M. Dinan and K. O' Brian at Duxbury EOC.
1 10/8/85 NRC sta'f observed training conducted at Swansea 4tulance.
4 10/9/85 NRC staff observed training conducted at Stavis Ambulance.
10/10/83 LRC staf' observed training conducted at Rogers Bus Company (with so e Ingels Bus Corgany persennel also present).
[
2
g)-
UNITED STATE 8
4 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1
REG'ON I 478ALLEhDA y 4 1 1946 i
KING oF PRUS$1A, Pik,lt ROAD ggy LyANI A 1940s MEMORANDUM FOR:
Williar.L iT Chief, Emergency Preparedness Section, RSS SS FROM:
W W a g Conklin, Senior Emergency Preparedness Specialist, dEPS,FRS$5,DRSS
SUBJECT:
PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION MEETINGS REGARDING EMERGEN PREPAREDNESS The attached tables identify speakers, their affiliation and the general emergency preparedness sub.iect area discussed during meetin officials and the public, local and Comonwealth officials.gs between NRC A listing of tho',e meetings considered is noted below:
1.
Februar May 27,y 17, 1987 Comonwealth of Massachusetts 2.
1987 Plymouth Board of Selectmen, Plymouth, Ma, 3.
July 17, 1987 Comonwealth of Massachusetts Framingham, Ma, 4
July 23, 1987 Comonwealth of Massachusetts, Pilgrim Station, Plymouth, Ma.
S.
- August 14, 1987 FEM Region I Boston, Ma.
6.
October 29, 1987 Public Meeting,, Duxbury, Ma.
7.
December 9. 1987 Pilcrim Exercise, Plymouth, Ma.
S.
Dececber 29. 1987 Senitor Kennedy Staff Meeting, Washington, D.C.
9.
March 10, 1983 Private Resident Meeting, Duxbury, Ma.
- 10. March 23, 1988 Comonwealth of Massachusetts, Framingham, Ma.
- 11.
- August 22, 1988 Comonwealth of Massachusetts, Framingham, Ma.
- 12. August 23, 1988 Transportation Provider Training
- 12. August 24, 1988 Transportation Provider Training 14 September 2a, 1952 Transportation Provider Trainin
- 15. October 6, 1988 Duxbury anc CURE, Duxbury, Ma. g
- 16. October S. 1935 Transportation Provider Training 17 October 9. 1988 Transportation Provider Training
- 18. October 10. 1988 Transportation Provider Training Except where noted by an asterisk, this list is in addition to those noted in the October 19, 1988 Russell to Taylor memorandum.
2 Meeting
Title:
Cownwealth of Massachusetts Meeting Location:
Date:
February 17, 1987 Attendees Position / Title Peter V. Agnes Assistant Secretary of Public Safety, Comonwealth of Massachusetts R. Boulay Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency (MCDA)
J. Lovering MCDA G. Parker MCDA B. Hausner MCDA E. Fratto MCDA J. Dolan FEMA Region i R. Bellamy NRC Region I BEco Representatives Sumary of Meeting:
The purpose of the meeting 'vas to discuss outstanding emergency preparedness issues at Pilg'*im. Mr. Agnes stateo we must all work together, and no plans will go to FEMA until MCOA approval is given. Mr.
Agnes also indicated he wanted to arrange and attend all meettr.gs with local officials. Mr. Agnes stated he ' supports development of offsite plans *, and insisted an exercise is required prior to restart. He would net co mit to a schedule.
EPZ expansion was also discussed.
l l
3 Meeting
Title:
Plymouth Board of Selectmen Meeting Location:
Plymouth Ma.
Date:
May27,}987 Attendees Position / Title D. Malaguti Plymouth Board of Selectmen A. Thompson Plymouth Board of Selectmen R. Bellamy Chief, FRSSB Director, DRk,NRC Region I W. Kane NRC Region i M. McBride Senior Resident inspector Pilgrim, NRC Region i Sumary of Meeting Primary purpose of the meeting was to discuss hardware issues. Selectmen Malaguti and Thompson expressed their opinion that the status of emergency preparedness was not adequate to support restart.
j i
I b
r i
q f
4 Meeting
Title:
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Meeting Location:
MCDA Offices Framingham, Ma, Date:
July 17,198f Attendees Position / Title P. Agnes Assistant Secretary of Public Health, Commonwealth of Massachusetts R. Boulay MCDA J. Lovering MCDA
- 8. Hausner MCDA T. Rodgers MCDA j
A. Slaney MCDA W. Lazarus Chief. EPS, NRC Region 1 i
R. Varley BECo C. Fuller BECo R. Lewis BEco l
Surdary of Meeting l
Primary purpose of the meeting was to discuss the EP2 and potential i
expansion. FEMA was invited, but declined to attend due to conflicts, but suggested alternative dates at FEMA to discuss the issue, j
1 l
l Y
4 d
1 I
P d
{
i k
5 i
L Meeting
Title:
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Meeting location:
Pilgrim Station, Plymouth, Ma.
Date:
July 23, 1987 Attendees Position / Title P. Agnes Assistant Secretary of Public Safety, Commonwealth of Massachusetts R. Boulay MCOA I
R. Blough Chief, DRP Section 38 NRC Re ion I M. McBride Senior Resident inspector Pil rim, NRC Region I R. Wessman Licensing Project Manager, NR r
Summary of Meeting Primary purpose of the meeting was to discuss the NRC inspection process.
f l
v r
l l
l l
l l
l i
a i
l
(
I e
t 6
Meeting
Title:
Comonwealth of Massachusetts Meeting Location:
FEMA Region 1. Boston, Massachusetts Date:
August 14, 1987 Attendees Position / Title H. Vickers FEMA Re ion i Regional Director E. Thomas FEMA Re ion i RAC Chairman J. Dolan FEMA Re ion !
J. Quinlan FEMA Re ion 1 W. Lazarus
- Chief, PS NRC Region i P. Agnes Assistant $ecretary of Public Health, Comonwealth of Massachusetts J. Lovering MCDA B. Hausner MCOA Sumary of Meeting Primary purpose of meeting was to discuss judgements made in the FEMA Self Initiated Repnrt and to correct certain facts. Mr. Agnes sta.ted that he had been instructed by the Governor to develop the best possible plans without delay.
Mr. Acnes discussed a schedule that would complete all activities by 12/31/8).
Discussions were also held on an exercise and EPZ expansion.
- 1dentified in 10/19/88 re :randu-W. T. Russell to J. M. Taylor.
M
1 7
Meeting
Title:
Public Meeting Location:
Duxbury, Massachusetts i
Date:
October 29, 1987 Attendees Position / Title W. Kane Director DRP NRC Region !
J. Wlogins Chief,OkP,NkCRegionI l
R. Bellamy Chief FRSSB, NRC Region I
P. Agnes Assistant Secretary of kublic Safety, Commonwealth of Massachusetts D. Volger Duxbury, Board of Selectmen Chairman Sumary of Meeting Purpose was to discuss NRC activities. Other attendees included: BECo; Duxbury Emergency Response Comittee; and the Nuclear Matters Comittee.
The NRC, Comonwealth and BEco responded to coment on hardware, management and emergency preparedness issues.
1 l
l r
l I
?
I t
i t
Y i
1 l
i
8 Meeting
Title:
Ptigrim Exercise l
Location:
Plymouth, Massachusetts Date:
December 9, 1987 Attendees
_ Position / Title R. Bellamy Chief, FRSSB, NRC Region I l
W. Lazarus Chief. EPS, NRC Region !
C. Conklin NRC Region !
Various NRC Incident Response Team T. Matthews Massachusetts Department of Public Health D. Yaffe Massachusetts Department of Public Health Various BEco Emergency Response Organization Summary of Meeting Scheduled partial participation exercise at the Pilgrim Station.
Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH), T. Matthews and D.
Yaffe, participated for training and interface purposes. NRC Region !
Incident Response Team participated with the licensee and Commonwealth personnel. No observable problems with tne licensee /MDPH/NRC interface.
l I
i f
i
9 Meeting
Title:
Senator Kenned Washington, D.y Staff Meeting Location:
C.
Date:
December 29, 1987 i
Attendees Position / Title S. Collins Deputy Director ORP, NRC Region !
Chief FRSSB,NkCR lon !
R. Bellamy
- 5. Boge*
AssociateDirectorNRR R. Wessman ProjectManager.NkR F. Combs Office of Congressional Affairs M. Callahan Offi:e of Congressional Affairs B. Cimstead Office of Ceneral Council Sumary of Meeting Region 1 and NitR staff met with Senator Kennedy's staff in Washington, i
D.C. to prepare for the 1/7/88 comittee meeting.
Topic included:
technical issues; restart of energency preparedness:processt legal issues; safety guidelines; status FEMA's role; and progress to date.
4 f
i L
I I
i 10 Meeting
Title:
Private Resident Meeting Location:
Duxbury/Saquish, Massachusetts Date:
March 10, 1988 Attendees Position / Title R. Bellamy Chief, FRSSB, NRC Region I D. Quaid Resident Sumary of Meeting Mr. Quaid made a request at the 2/18/88 public meeting to have NRC officials tour the Duxbury/Saquish Beach area to of the emergency planning concerns for this area. gain first hand knowledge R. Bellam area with D. Quaid.
The Saquish area is accessible by four y toured this wheel drive vehicles only (permit required.
two days a month for two hours)a day, the Point can be isolated.During very high The only road fror the Point is narrow and floeds. There are no motels, restaurants or concession stands on this beach. Overnighters are limited to residents. The Duxbury beach is a public beach with a paved parking lot, approximately eight miles from Pilgrim. There is a paved road running from the Duxbury beach due north.
Both beaches would be closed at the Alert stage in the event of an accident at Pilgrim.
11 Meeting
Title:
Comonwealth of Massachusetts Meeting Location:
MCDA Offices Framingham, Massachusetts Date:
March 13,1988 Attendees Position / Title R. Stilarny Chief B. Hausner MCCA, FRSSB, NRC Region !
E. Fratto MCOA Summary of %eting Purpose of the meeting was to discuss the status of plans and impicmentir procedures for the risk and host comunities affected by Pilgrim Station.g l
i l
12 Meeting
Title:
Comonwealth of Massachusetts Meeting location:
M;DA Offices Framingham, Massachusetts Date:
August 22,l$88 l
Attendees Position / Title W. Lazarus Chief. EPS, NRC Region !
C. Conklin NRC Region 1 P. Agnes Assistant Secretary of Public Safety, Comonwealth of Massachusetts T. Matthews Massachusetts Department of Public Health R. Boulay MCOA B. Hausner MCDA
- f. Fratte MCDA A. $1aney MCDA Surrary of Meeting P. Agnes sumarized the Comonwealth and Local pro Self. Initiated Review and other identified issues.gress on both Additionally, he sumarized the Comenwealth position on restart and emergency preparedness as well as outstanding problem areas reeting, Mr., Lazarus and Mr. Conklin reviewed seve/ issues. After the ral documents that had beer, forwarjed to M;0A but not yet to FEM including the cceplete emergencyplanandimplementingproceouresforMarshfieldandTaunton,the shelter ieplementation preigram, for Marshfield and the Area !! plan.
FEKA I
Region I had agreed to a'. tend, but was prever.ted by FEKA headquarters.
i I
l 1
4 13 Meeting
Title:
Transportation Provider Training Location:
Ingle Bus Company Date:
August 23, 1988 Attendees position / Title W. Lazarus Chief. EPS, NRC Region !
C. Conklin NRC Region I R. Hogan NRR Summary of Meeting The training was conducted by BECo conrJ1tants. The trainig program and lesson plans had been approved by the Connonwealth. The training is quite detailed, and in fact included the actual running of bus routes by various drivers.
Formal classroom training is followed by hands on training including destr.etry and appropriate forms. Risk and consent, for both the drivers and company, were adequately covered.
1 4
i a
1 I
I i
i i
1
1 14 Meeting
Title:
Transportation Provider Training Location:
Warrenton Bus Company i
Date:
August 24, 1988 Attendees Position / Title W. Lazarus C h i r i'. EPS, NRC Region I C. Conklin NRC Region !
R. Hogan NRR Su m ary of Meeting r
The training was conducted by BEco consv',tants. The training program and lesson plans had been approved by the f,omonwealth. The training is quite detailed, and in fact included the actual running of bus routes by various drivers. Formal classroon, training is followed by hands on training i
including desitnetry and appropriate forss. Risk and consent, for both the drivers and company, were adequately covered.
i 1
l
)
i i
l
)
t i
l l
1 l
t i
l, l
t i
l
15 t
Meeting
Title:
Transportation Provider Training location:
Cresent Ambulance Company Date:
September 24, 1988 Attendees Position / Title j
C. Conklin NRC Region 1 t
Sumary of Meeting CresentAmbulance(TransNetwork). There were 13 attendees. All l
attendees were ENT s.
Training consisted of a combination of classroom 1ecture and actual performance of tasks. The lessons covered were:
Introduction to Radiation; Introduction to Emergency Response; Dosimetry; and leclementing Procedures.
4 Risk and consent, for both the drivers and company, were adequately covered. Hands on training included use of dosimetry and appropriate forms and actual running of routes. The routes were run on a sunny, ware Saturday late morning to early afternoon.
Maps and instructions were provided and a bus was run from Cresent Ambulance in i
l J
Carcinal Cus)hing Hospital in BrocktonBrockton to the i
(37 minutes, to the Baypath Nursing Home in Duxbury !his provide 22 minutes), to the normally have two EMT's in each ambulan(ce.46 minutes).
r will The caps and instruction provided were accurate and no problems were encountered running the entire i
route.
J r
l l
l l
l 1
i 4
l I
l l
l t
I l
1 i
l l
14 i
Meeting
Title:
Duxbury nd CURE Meeting location:
Duxbury, Massachusetts i
Date:
October 6, 1988 Attendees Position / Title R. Bellamy Chief. FRSSB NRC Region !
l C. O'Neill DuxburyCivilDefenseDirector R. Dinan Resident K. O' Brian Resident Sumary of Meeting A coment was made at the 9/29/88 public meeting that the Duxbury EOC would not be habitable in the event of a radiological emergency at Pilgrim.
In res NRC O'Neill, Duxbury'ponse to that coment, R. Bellarydhief,, met with C.
Civil Defense Director and Fire and CURE representatives.i. Dinar, and K. O' Brian at the Duxbury EOC.
The i
Duxbury EOC is a frame, two story structure t.onnected to the Duxbury i
j fire Station about eight siles from Pilgrim Station.
and Mr. O'Nelll discussed EOC habitability and Mr. O'Neill statedMr. Bellary that the Plan and l'rplementing Procedures address EOC habitability,
]
in Alternate E0; and relocation of staf f to that Alter: tate EOC.
1 1
i r
I k
l t
i l
l l
4 i
)
i i
l I
i
.m Attachmet 1 17 Meeting
Title:
Transportatior Provider Training Location:
Swansen Ambulance Date:
October 8, 1988 Attendees Position / Title C. Conklin NRC Region I Sumary of Mewting Swansea Ambulance.
There were 13 attendees. All attendees were ENT's.
Training consisted of a combination of classroom lecture and actual performance of tasks.
The lessons covered were: Introduction to Radiation; Introduction to Emergency Response; Dosimetry; and Implementing Procedures.
Risk and consent, for both the drivers and coepany, were adequately covered. Hands on training included use of dosimetry and appropriate forms.
Actual routas were not run however routes were analyzed and map reading techniques employed.,This provider will normally have two EMT's in each ambulance.
1 i
?
i l
i f
l l
l l
l l
I i
18 Meeting
Title:
Transportation Provider Training location:
Stavis Ambulance Service Date:
October 9, 1988 Attendees Position / Title C. Conklin flRC Region !
Sunnary of Meeting Stavis Ambulance Service. There were 5 attendees. All attendees were EMT's.
Training consisted of a combination of classroom lecture and actual performance of tasks. The lessons covered were: Introduction to Radiation; Introduction to Emergency Response; Dostoetry; and ImpleAnting Procedures.
Risk and consent, for both the drivers and company, were adequately covered.
Hands on training included use of dosteetry and appropriate forms and actual running of routes.
The routes were run on a sunny, cool sunday late morning to early afternoon. Maps and instructions were provided and a bus was run from Stavis Ambulance in Brookline to Silver Lake HS staging area in Kingston (he Cardina?,Ctshing H 65 minutes to the Sister Divine Providence Nursing Home in Kingston, to t Brockton (57 minutes).
This provider will normally have two EMT s in each ambulance.
'he maps and instruction provided were accurate and no problems were encountered running the entire route.
4 m, _. _. -., _ _ _..,. _, -
1 I
19 1
Meeting
Title:
Transportation Provider Training location:
Rogers Bus Company Date:
October 10, 1988 Attendees Position / Title C. Conklin NRC Region !
Sumary of Meeting Rogers Bus Company. There were 8 attendees.
Some attendees were froe Ingle Bus Company. All attendees were bus drivers. Training consisted of a cambination of classroom lecture and actual perforsance of tasks. The lessons covered were: Introduction to Radiation; Introduction to Emereency Response; Dosteetry; and Implementing Procedures. Risk and consent, foi-both the drivers and company, were adequately covered.
Hands on training included use of dostmetry and appropriate forms and actual running of The routes were run on a sunny, ware holiday monday late morning routes.
to early afternoon.
Maps and instructions were provided and a bus was run
}
fror Rogers Bus Company in Hanover to the Martinson Junior High School staging area in Marshfield ()12 minutes) and to Bus route M 4 and return to the staging area 50 minutes.
Bus route M 4 included Marshfield and Duxbury beaches. (This provider will normally have one driver in each bus.
l The raps and instruction proviced were accurate and no problems were encountered running the entire route.
l l